Australian Politics Forum - Australia bans Anning in Parliment

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #60 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:28am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:16am:

cods wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:11am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:01am:

Not really. You've fallen into the trap of thinking free speech has no consequences.

are you horrified seeing stoning in public by an chance..or do you think its justified?

this was our version of a public stoning...

I found it horrible....

You are drawing a long bow there. He made a dumb ass racist comment. As a MP he should be held to a higher standard.

What Anning said was probably correct. Where Islam goes it does bring baggage . And that violence leads to other problems like revenge acts. It's a fact and is happening in other places in the world. My problem is the timing. That's the issue. It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

he is a SENATOR... he had no right to say it, as it looks like he speaks for all of us and he doesnt..

these people who died had no more to do with terrorism

than you and I have anything to do with the TERRORIST who killed... Angry

its a stupid way to look at things.....Germans live all over the world do they try to take over wherever they go???????..

Angry

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #61 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #62 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:36am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:16am:

cods wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:11am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:01am:

Not really. You've fallen into the trap of thinking free speech has no consequences.

are you horrified seeing stoning in public by an chance..or do you think its justified?

this was our version of a public stoning...

I found it horrible....

You are drawing a long bow there. He made a dumb ass racist comment. As a MP he should be held to a higher standard.

What Anning said was probably correct. Where Islam goes it does bring baggage . And that violence leads to other problems like revenge acts. It's a fact and is happening in other places around the world. My problem is the timing. That's the issue. It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

At least we agree on something. I don't agree that Islam is an issue to the extent some do. The timing is poor plus his optics of being seen with Aussie neo Nazis like Blair Cottrell is a concern as well.

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #63 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:36am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

My recollection is that it was a series of tweets and a media release he put out rather than an answer to a questions=

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #64 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:37am

the Queensland senator said the "real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place".

he didnt say which Muslim Fanatics he had in mind...

seeing as how the Terrorist murderer is an Aussie it doesnt look as if he was up to scratch with it either.. Angry

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment Reply #65 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:39am We don't really need to worry though too much, in 6 weeks he'll be out on his arse.
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #66 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:53am

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:36am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

My recollection is that it was a series of tweets and a media release he put out rather than an answer to a questions=

Well if that is the case then he deserves what he gets. Leaders have to make rational arguments or they shouldn't be there. I want stricter immigration measures and it hurts my and others politics. We don't need people like him. It's a voice that needs spoken but in a better way. That's why they tolerate Pauline. Because she makes a very relevant issue seem like a joke because she is so stupid.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #67 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:58am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:53am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:36am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

My recollection is that it was a series of tweets and a media release he put out rather than an answer to a questions=

Well if that is the case then he deserves what he gets. Leaders have to make rational arguments or they shouldn't be there. I want stricter immigration measures and it hurts my and others politics. We don't need people like him. It's a voice that needs spoken but in a better way. That's why they tolerate Pauline. Because she makes a very relevant issue seem like a joke because she is so stupid.

I think the issue is those who make those highly simplistic calls about immigration that cut through to a lot of people are highly simplistic themselves. Voters, media etc don't like complexity even though this is a complex issue.

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

capitosinora Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2235 USA Florida Gender:	Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment Reply #68 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:18am Aussie racist British nationalists are mistaken if they think they can treat others like Australian Aborigines.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:27am by capitosinora » GOD BLESS AMERICA IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 49983
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #69 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:25am

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:21am:

cods wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 9:59am:

I am not sure where I stand on whats happening in Australia today... I am pretty sure I dont like what I see or read.. Sad

Like Anning or not.....

we do or did live in a Democracy...one that held FREE SPEECH for everyone...

even those you dont agree with....

sadly for us Anning is in the Senate he is there by default of an archaic system...

not because he was VOTED IN......please people remember that bit..he got 19 primary votes...

he does not speak for all Australians...

had his stupid comments been ignored they would have been forgotten instead we have now turned them into something... even MORE DEMEANING..

censuring OMG...

I was horrified of the attack on Anning by other senators....I admire Hanson for having the balls to refuse to join in that.............bullying stance...

sorry if that upset anyone but thats what it was....he sat there while they poured their vitriol over him... Angry

... and all it did was make him stronger in his beliefs....as I expected it would... Angry

they didnt change his mind one iota....

they tried to shame him into backing down....all it did was show them up as nasty gang like bullies...

now hes being banned by Qantas SNOB ROOM....... who gave them the right to pick and choose???????>....

sanctimonious ....much!

Cods you seem to be suggesting that a senate censure motion is tantamount to attacking free speech.

It is not. Anning was free to say his racist bile, and he continues to be free to say more racist bile. However much he likes.

All the senate did was to say that the senate officially condemns what Anning said, and to make clear that his racist bile should not be seen as reflective of the senate.

Again, that is *NOT* attacking free speech.

I agree with what you say Gandalf, as too with Cods and Bojack.
I'm no fan of Anning - but I didn't enjoy the way the Media promotes it as if all Australia should do what those Ministers did in return.
I understand the frustration of a nation that the Government gives allowance to the Moslem people to NOT take personal responsibility for their own kind's actions. It's like allowing Germans into Australia while NAZISM is running rampant around the world! You are only asking for trouble, especially if other Germans are not standing against Nazism on Australia's behalf.

So where are these Moslems in Australia that are standing up against the Moslem Terrorist movements?
And if Islam is a 'group mentality' - then they are all in the same basket and guilty by association.

Like I said. I'm no fan of Anning (or eggboy Roll Eyes

) - but I do understand why that Australian did what he did to that Christchurch Mosque. A case of fighting fire with fire.

I'm pretty sure that although many Ministers wish to 'wash their hands' of Anning and other Australians who voice similar views, and make themselves look clean and innocent in the eyes of the MEDIA (world).
But I can't help but think that there will be more violent attacks on Moslems soon - as more Australians feel the need to do the 'dirty work' that the Australian Government is incapable of doing itself or allows the dirt to come into this country with a 'cure' rather than 'prevention' attitude.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96880

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #70 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:28am

Aussie wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2019 at 6:56pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2019 at 6:32pm:

Anning is not banned as yet

and I don't believe any petition should be used to make that sort of decision.

He cannot be 'banned' or removed except via an election, the one in May. That 'censure' thing was just political posturing.....appropriate I hasten to say....but otherwise of zero impact.

Actually, I think he can, Aussie. The senate isn't representative. It's a House of Lords, presided over by the parties, not the Queen. Senators serve at the whim of the parties (or independents) with the most votes.

Hence, the ALP was able to sack Sam Dastyari for not towing the party line.

Fair enough too.

Your old party, the Palmer United Party, would have been perfectly within their rights to sack Jaqui Lambie when she quit the party. The reason they didn't, I believe, is Palmer didn't have the votes in his party, which by their own rules, required a vote by the majority of parliamentarians.

So yes, I believe One Nation could indeed sack Fraser Anning and appoint one of their own. I'm not sure why they haven't, but it probably has something to do with the rules of the current senate and members being sworn in for a particular term.

Back to top

IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 49983
Gender: male

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #71 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:33am

capitosinora wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:18am:

Aussie racist British nationalists are mistaken if they think they can treat others like Australian Aborigines.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJWwB5QWEAAkvt5.jpg

Australia's (Percivals) loyalty to the British (King Arthur) must really peeve you Yankees (Lancelots) off.
Is it because your nation 'poked the pooch' and are bombing out on the International scene?
Your nation is a Privatised Political system and is structured to politically empower only ONE person: The President, not the 'People'.

One day soon - it will be Australia who will raise the Grail for the resurgence of Britain, in its time of need. Not the USA.
Australia lives in the World, the USA lives in its 'own' little world. Roll Eyes

Back to top

percival.jpg (17 KB | 12 )

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96880

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #72 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:33am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

Look it up.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96880

Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment
Reply #73 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:36am

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:53am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:36am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:32am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 4^th, 2019 at 10:22am:

It wasn't the right time to make comments like that. It was disrespectful to the dead.

That was exactly as intended Hammer. Be as outrageous as is humanly possible.

The guy got 18 votes. He has a lot of ground to make. So many racists to court...

The one question I have is- did some journalist ask him a question designed to give that sort of answer. Maybe to line him up. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm a bit sketchy on what was going down at the time. The media love cutting out the context.

My recollection is that it was a series of tweets and a media release he put out rather than an answer to a questions=

Well if that is the case then he deserves what he gets. Leaders have to make rational arguments or they shouldn't be there. I want stricter immigration measures and it hurts my and others politics. We don't need people like him. It's a voice that needs spoken but in a better way. That's why they tolerate Pauline. Because she makes a very relevant issue seem like a joke because she is so stupid.

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

Back to top

IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 49983 Gender:	Re: Australia bans Anning in Parliment Reply #74 - Apr 4^th, 2019 at 11:36am Well, we know that you don't have to be the sharpest tool in the shed to work out that the Media is doing to the New Worlds, what Religion did to the Old Worlds... screw em over!
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged