Not just him, but any foreign leader our Govt doesnt want to upset.
Top-Oil6722 on
The definition of “hate crime” is very lose, in some states. It also has no time limit, it is from the being of the group onwards. To the best of my understanding..
So, it seems as if by far the biggest offenders are groups that stole a whole generation of first nations people and introduced the white Australia policy. These groups have a proven history of serious offences, and it was done on a national scale.
If these laws are to be applied justly, it is the large political parties which will need to be banned first.
lithiumcitizen on
Benjamin Netanyahu, all I have is ridicule and contempt for you, and those like you.
GuyFromYr2095 on
Is criticising Albo an offense?
Is criticising Trump an offense?
Is criticising Netanyahu an offense?
If any of the above is an offense, we should be all on the street to dissolve the current government for passing this law.
No_Mercy_4_Potatoes on
That was the entire point of the push from ~~Israeli~~ Jewish lobby groups in Australia. They wanted to label criticism of Israel under the antisemitism umbrella.
Now we’ll get to watch the Israeli government and IDF slaughter innocent Palestinians in silence.
Zestyclose-Yam-4010 on
Can anyone with a legal background weigh in on this? It seems a bit farfetched and illegal under the UN Charter which Australia formally adheres to.
gosudcx on
if you want to know who controls your world, look at who you aren’t allowed to criticize. Emperor of Earth Netanyahu. Untouchable with unimaginable influence globally.
StoicBoffin on
That’s just great. Lese Majeste for non-royals.
IrreverentSunny on
That’s nonsense and of course such nonsense is coming from the Greens. Geez!
NNyNIH on
Netanyahu is a corrupt and despicable war criminal.
External_Celery2570 on
Greens going full Dutton “if you don’t know vote no”.
How intellectually disingenuous of Shoebridge to throw around so many “what if” scenarios that will never happen.
cytae99 on
> Constitutional expert Anne Twomey said ambiguity about the laws, including over the conduct that would be covered, risked having a chilling effect on free speech.
>
> “It seems that the implication is criticism of Israel, and the Israeli government, and suggesting it is engaged in genocid or something of that kind, would be enough to at least trigger the start of the process, by satisfying the provisions about inciting racial hatred.
Even Anne Twomey agrees with the Greens and criticizing foreign politicians can get you locked up. Insane.
Are they gonna ban the UN and Amnesty International who have called it a genocid?
> A group of independent senators, including David Pocock, sought to amend the bill to clarify that the new aggravated sentencing provisions did not apply to instances involving criticism of the policies, actions or institutions of a foreign state, or discussion of matters of international law.
>
> The amendment was unsuccessful.
So this is to protect Israel?
> The Australian Human Rights Commission president, Hugh de Kretser, said the new laws around banning hate organisations need stronger safeguards, including on the grounds of procedural fairness.
Why is HotPersimessage62, and the other defenders of the new laws, against procedural fairness?
> Burke told ABC radio any action under the new laws required a recommendation from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Asio).
>
> “There’s a first step from Asio and if they don’t open the door, there is nothing for a minister to do,” he said.
>
> “It is important that no minister, whether it is me or anyone into the future, is able to start using powers like this to try to make things difficult for political opponents and start playing legal games.”
False. ASIO is a government agency under the direct control of Minister Burke.
teambob on
Not with the updated wording. Now it is only here speech calling for violence. The Greens do a lot of good but I think they are incorrect (or outdated) on this one
PlanktonDB on
All the mega brain reddit constitutional law experts are crawling out from underneath their rocks to dive in on this one it seems
OldJellyBones on
The goal of these laws isn’t to stop hate speech. The goal is to make people afraid to criticise Israel because certain groups will use the *process* to punish anything said about Israel that they don’t like. These laws will be used to force people into legal proceedings if they criticise Israel. The end goal isn’t even the conviction, which they likely won’t get, its ti drag people’s names through the mud in the media, cost them a lot of money through legal fees, etc. and to scare them via court hearings, etc.
Most-Drive-3347 on
Fuckin insane that they were in such a rush to push *something* through that it didn’t occur to anyone to define hate.
Ovknows on
Nah but wishing them death and free free Palestine chant will.
alaynxx on
Interestingly an amendment in the Senate to prevent criticism of Israel as being flagged as inciting racial hatred for the definition of a hate crime was rejected overwhelmingly by Labor and Liberals.
The Attorney-General had also confirmed criticism is Israel could be classed as inciting racial hatred under the definition hate crime.
Emerita Professor of constitutional law Anne Twomey has also confirmed that criticism of Israel may satisfy the criteria for a hate crime.
So these concerns by The Greens are not unfounded.
But it is not hopeless as any attempts by Zionists to exploit this law to silence dissent waits on a High Court challenge to strike down said interpretations on the grounds it disproportionately infringe on the implied freedom of political communication.
naslanidis on
Well words are violence these days right? What did people who have been proponents of such a ridiculous view think was going to happen?
19 Comments
I though that was the point?
Not just him, but any foreign leader our Govt doesnt want to upset.
The definition of “hate crime” is very lose, in some states. It also has no time limit, it is from the being of the group onwards. To the best of my understanding..
So, it seems as if by far the biggest offenders are groups that stole a whole generation of first nations people and introduced the white Australia policy. These groups have a proven history of serious offences, and it was done on a national scale.
If these laws are to be applied justly, it is the large political parties which will need to be banned first.
Benjamin Netanyahu, all I have is ridicule and contempt for you, and those like you.
Is criticising Albo an offense?
Is criticising Trump an offense?
Is criticising Netanyahu an offense?
If any of the above is an offense, we should be all on the street to dissolve the current government for passing this law.
That was the entire point of the push from ~~Israeli~~ Jewish lobby groups in Australia. They wanted to label criticism of Israel under the antisemitism umbrella.
Now we’ll get to watch the Israeli government and IDF slaughter innocent Palestinians in silence.
Can anyone with a legal background weigh in on this? It seems a bit farfetched and illegal under the UN Charter which Australia formally adheres to.
if you want to know who controls your world, look at who you aren’t allowed to criticize. Emperor of Earth Netanyahu. Untouchable with unimaginable influence globally.
That’s just great. Lese Majeste for non-royals.
That’s nonsense and of course such nonsense is coming from the Greens. Geez!
Netanyahu is a corrupt and despicable war criminal.
Greens going full Dutton “if you don’t know vote no”.
How intellectually disingenuous of Shoebridge to throw around so many “what if” scenarios that will never happen.
> Constitutional expert Anne Twomey said ambiguity about the laws, including over the conduct that would be covered, risked having a chilling effect on free speech.
>
> “It seems that the implication is criticism of Israel, and the Israeli government, and suggesting it is engaged in genocid or something of that kind, would be enough to at least trigger the start of the process, by satisfying the provisions about inciting racial hatred.
Even Anne Twomey agrees with the Greens and criticizing foreign politicians can get you locked up. Insane.
Are they gonna ban the UN and Amnesty International who have called it a genocid?
> A group of independent senators, including David Pocock, sought to amend the bill to clarify that the new aggravated sentencing provisions did not apply to instances involving criticism of the policies, actions or institutions of a foreign state, or discussion of matters of international law.
>
> The amendment was unsuccessful.
So this is to protect Israel?
> The Australian Human Rights Commission president, Hugh de Kretser, said the new laws around banning hate organisations need stronger safeguards, including on the grounds of procedural fairness.
Why is HotPersimessage62, and the other defenders of the new laws, against procedural fairness?
> Burke told ABC radio any action under the new laws required a recommendation from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Asio).
>
> “There’s a first step from Asio and if they don’t open the door, there is nothing for a minister to do,” he said.
>
> “It is important that no minister, whether it is me or anyone into the future, is able to start using powers like this to try to make things difficult for political opponents and start playing legal games.”
False. ASIO is a government agency under the direct control of Minister Burke.
Not with the updated wording. Now it is only here speech calling for violence. The Greens do a lot of good but I think they are incorrect (or outdated) on this one
All the mega brain reddit constitutional law experts are crawling out from underneath their rocks to dive in on this one it seems
The goal of these laws isn’t to stop hate speech. The goal is to make people afraid to criticise Israel because certain groups will use the *process* to punish anything said about Israel that they don’t like. These laws will be used to force people into legal proceedings if they criticise Israel. The end goal isn’t even the conviction, which they likely won’t get, its ti drag people’s names through the mud in the media, cost them a lot of money through legal fees, etc. and to scare them via court hearings, etc.
Fuckin insane that they were in such a rush to push *something* through that it didn’t occur to anyone to define hate.
Nah but wishing them death and free free Palestine chant will.
Interestingly an amendment in the Senate to prevent criticism of Israel as being flagged as inciting racial hatred for the definition of a hate crime was rejected overwhelmingly by Labor and Liberals.
The Attorney-General had also confirmed criticism is Israel could be classed as inciting racial hatred under the definition hate crime.
Emerita Professor of constitutional law Anne Twomey has also confirmed that criticism of Israel may satisfy the criteria for a hate crime.
So these concerns by The Greens are not unfounded.
But it is not hopeless as any attempts by Zionists to exploit this law to silence dissent waits on a High Court challenge to strike down said interpretations on the grounds it disproportionately infringe on the implied freedom of political communication.
Well words are violence these days right? What did people who have been proponents of such a ridiculous view think was going to happen?