In light of some comments which were well outside the comments policy in descending into vulgar and unnecessary personal abuse, I’ve closed the previous thread and am opening this general one where I have every confidence that the usual canons of LP debate - including good natured stoushes - will prevail.
One of the nice things about this blog - as noted by readers here - has always been the absence of bile and abuse. I’d like that to continue, and both regular and occasional commenters should take note.
I don’t want to have to delete comments or ban people from commenting, and will give warning if I’m considering it, but the comments policy exists for a reason and should be taken seriously by everyone.
I’d also suggest that comments on events at other blogs serve little useful purpose, and given the turn the previous discussion took, on reflection, I’m not prepared to allow them on this post.
So, that being out of the way, please enjoy this (relatively) open thread.
Mark, it would, perhaps, be appropriate for Chris Sheil to justify his comments - in a now closed thread - that I’m a “ring-wing-nutter” who lives “under a rock”.
Time to close this thread off Mark and start another.
Live and let live, J F. I’ve already said that I don’t think Chris should have taken issue with EP’s comment and the unfortunate coincidence of what happened on that thread and the earlier Saturday Salon one didn’t help matters.
All this was most uncharacteristic of LP and it ends now. Let’s move on. To aid this, I will apologise on behalf of everyone to everyone else.
Now I’m going to have lunch.
Mark, your gracious apology was neither necessary nor expected.
What Naomi said.
And I do apologise for not keeping a closer eye on what’s been going on - there is a life outside blogs - and normally I don’t have to, which is the way I like it.
Yes - here’s to a big “no” to bile and abuse.
Very happy that Sydney won the AFL. Although I don’t really care.
Communist.
Bigot.
All the excitement happens when I’m too hungover/busy enjoying the nice weather/participating in the black market economy to stoush. Typical.
Prong-merchant.
Clown.
(Not you, Fyodor)
Oh well. If you can’t beat ‘em…
Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!
An easily influenced bunch!
Unwisely, I point out that my thread aimed to highlight an apparent instance where women’s policy has been taken to the cleaners, and to ever so subtly contrast this with the Brogden harrassment matter. Next thing you know, reactionary trogs raise themselves up from their nineteenth century bogs and come in arguing against policies in favour of women’s equality in general. I mean … what’s the point? Surely they have another blog to go to.
Thudmunkle!
Chris, I don’t think further discussion on this is productive or helpful. I doubt that you’d have had the reaction you had if you hadn’t indicated you were putting EP on notice before he’d done anything but make his usual standard comment that he makes on any post mentioning feminism and/or women. It’s not particularly constructive - as we all know, but that’s life.
And it was unfortunate that it coincided in time with the Tim Lambert stoush on the other thread.
But all this has made what’s an already shitty day for me shittier, and everyone could make me much happier by getting over it.
I’ll announce in due course when the LP Truth & Reconciliation Commission will be sitting when all previous stoushes, perceived slights and uses of invective can be reconciled. Just as soon as I can find out what Archbishop Tutu’s schedule is.
Dog-botherer.
(not you Mark)
Fair enough Mark. I was encouraged by the fact that last time I deleted EP he promised to go away and not come back. This time I hoped that just the threat might be sufficient to achieve the same wonderful effect. I mean, why does LP have to put up with Evil’s well known position on virtually every thread? Can’t he just blog it everyday over at his place? But OK, fair enough, I agree. Further discussion is likely to be useless. Apologies.
Couldn’t we get The Currency Lass to sign on as Bishop Frou-Frou? Being of THE RIGHT, he’s notoriously impartial, and prone to the odd frock-up.
Or is that impartially notorious?
An very sensitive bunch!
Not sure if you want this in this thread, but there will be a 10-year sunset clause in the new terror legislation. Although this is a long time, it is a welcome development because the whole sunset clause issue was an uneccessary diversion from the main civil liberties issues.
Scrunty chuzzleknacker!
(not you, you old thudmunkle)
Oh look, Fyodor turned his name into “Fyodor the Krazy Klown”, “Lad” into “Lass”, “Tutu” into “Frou Frou” and “notoriously impartial” into “impartially notorious.”
He funny. Funny he.
Currency what’s with all the lemons?
Dont chuzzle me, you smirtling gurdle.
LC Hammer strikes again! Please, Hammer, don’ hurt ‘em!
Hah! You don’t really don’t have a furt to wangler with do you?
Ponoxed!
Most surreal notion I’ve heard about today. From Abbott backs Hawke on nukes:
Brilliant economic thinker is Bob. Dumps are now visionary?
Dirkdiggler.
Scozzle. Nothing but primpty scozzle.
Skez you, you bramptious fuddlestump.
OZO! WITC!
JHIGN, RULFQWA GUTD!
(not you, Haiku)
Gravatar!
Preprandial! Slivovitz! Shadazz! Morton Thiokol!
I liked the other threads better.
Where does Santa keep his Army?
In his sleevie?
Now where are my buccaneers?
Damn I missed all the fun….
Suffice to say, I was wangling furts when you were still in hotpants, Good Sir…
LE - I missed it too…
On a totally unrelated topic, what makes a good gravitar?
Well, you guys sure did have fun in my absence o_O
Aside from three a’s (’scuse mon pedantry), Mick, a gravatar generally requires Lord Byron, the Pope, or a charismatic, wacky cat.
Though palm-headed clowns, cocktail-wielding babes, and em-bereted leftists are also acceptable.
In short, I dunno. What image do you care to project?
Hmmm, does anyone know where I can get a picture of a Pope stroking a charismatic cat while accepting a drink from a cocktail-wielding babe?
Mark, I’m sorry that my trolls followed me here and caused you grief. I’ve found that quickly deleting their abusive comments keeps things on the level. Even normally civil commenters can start posting insults once one abusive comment is allowed to stand.
“Hmmm, does anyone know where I can get a picture of a Pope stroking a charismatic cat while accepting a drink from a cocktail-wielding babe?”
Yup, but the URL would never make it through comments moderation.
“Even normally civil commenters can start posting insults once one abusive comment is allowed to stand.”
Oh yeah, delete this stat boy!
Opps, I see what you mean.
*find a happy place, find a happy place, find a happy place*
Rejoinder Steve E—from the Bartlett terrorism Thread.
‘So, Peter, I take it you now admit that the Victorian RARTA is clearly not a case of “direct incitement to commit a criminal offence”, as you previously contended, given that:
a) the Act does not criminalise the incitement of a crime’
BS, I admit only that your legislative interpretation skills are minimal, and your ability to read the Act is also highly questionable for its selectivity. What is this from the Act if not criminalising DIRECT incitement TO CAUSE PHYSICAL HARM.
25 (1)(b) to threaten, or incite others to threaten, PHYSICAL harm towards that
other person or class of persons or the property of that other person
or class of person
‘b) the Act does criminalise the incitement of “hate” ‘
It criminalises the s 25(1) INTENTIONAL CONDUCT that the offender knows is likely to INCITE hatred. In law there’s a big difference and your ’summaries’ are grossly oversimplified, erroneous and dishonest.
‘That necessarily leads me to conclude that, unless “hate” itself is a crime, the Victorian RARTA cannot possibly have anything to do with “direct incitement”.’
REALLY, read s 25 (1) of the Act again, very slowly. CONDUCT IS THE KEY, NOT HATE PER SE.
‘(Of course, if you really want to make “hate” a crime, which I suspect the Left does, then be my guest - but don‚Äôt pretend to care about civil liberties in future)’
No, the conduct of incitment to hatred, (AND/OR) to threaten (or incite to threaten) PHYSICAL HARM, IS the crime. BTW– in civil law to threaten an individual with violence is called ASSAULT, and guess what, heavy breathing on a telephone HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ASSAULT.
The Vic legislation is not sui generis, it is CONSISTENT with civil law (assault) , and laws of incitement throughout all the criminal codes in all the states and the Race Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)
When it come to dishonesty, (I respect btw those who simply disagree with the Victorian legislation), let the BS splatter where it splatters. Primarily it splatters over absolutist, selectively reading, incapable statutory interpretations merchants like Steve E, as I have demonstrated conclusively.
(And I didn’t even get to the Vic equivilant of the Acts Interpretations Act (Cth) , s 15AA)
What can I say Pete K but nittydangered!
Heya Nabs, too ‘nakkered’, please elaborate!
We interrupt your regularly scheduled stoush to bring breaking news.
I just got a Google referral at 20:51:06:
is tracey grimshaw a lesbian
Mark, a new post on this issue if you please.
I just got: Is David Boon a highly trained wombat?
Pete, if you can’t dance, well then…you can’t snoorgie.
Tim Lambert sounds the bell for round two.
Which trolls would those be, Mr Lambert? Both CL and I commented in the prior thread long before you did, so, if anything, it looks like you followed us here. (There is a great temptation to call you a “crtn” at this point, but, despite the ample supporting evidence, I’ll resist the temptation.)
Perhaps you’d like to enlighten us as to my qualifications as an “attention seeker” and troll. You know, the number of comments I’ve made at your site, ever. The number of different threads I’ve commented in. The number of comments you’ve removed because of comments policy infractions. Perhaps you could even quote some of my inappropriate comments.
Are you going to back up your words this time around or are you going to do what you normally do and disappear so your like-minded lackies can draw attention away from you? You might want to email Ian Gould requesting emergency assistance.
C’mon Mr Lambert be brave.
“my qualifications as an “attention seeker” and troll.”
llort dna “rekees noitnetta” na sa snoitacifilauq ym
Mick, gravatars are best if they show your face. Or your face as you’d like it to be.
Hats, in gravatars as in real life, are always a good idea.
And in Mr Lambert’s corner we have Nobby standing in for Ian Gould.
Other than the past few days I haven’t commented at this site for quite a while because my comments seemed to upset you, Nobby. So, in order to not get you all upset I simply stopped commenting here. But, if you’d like to elaborate on my qualifications as an attention seeker and troll, please proceed. (At this point I’ll save you the effort: my blog has, and probably always will have, a very small readership. Perhaps I should take some attention seeking cues from Antony Loewenstein and post links in comments all over the net.)
Simply making comments that you don’t like doesn’t make me a troll. In any event, I’m mostly trying to balance things a bit after Jason Soon, Tim Lambert and Chris Sheil initiated the name calling and got free passes.
Oh yeah, could you please do some of your famous pirate talk? It’s so… entertaining. Really.
Yes, more pirate talk, please, and less trollish “Look at moye, Timmeee, look at moye!”
And while you’re up, Nabsy, mine’s a bone-dry gin martini with three olives. And more ox-flavoured crisps, if you would be so kind.
Amanda, your wish is my command.
Though I thought the question about Boony was also promising.
Who is JF Beck?
I says we keelhaul the blaggard seatroll, Cap’n.
Naaaaaaaaaarrr!
More importantly, do lesbians care if Tracy Grimshaw is?
Fyodor, Mr Lambert started with the name calling in the prior thread and continued with it here. He should either support his inflammatory and provocative nonsense or retract.
“seemed to upset you, Nobby”
You wish matey. I’m just poking fun at yer landlubberly ways, like how yer wrestle with yer bile while all at sea on a strange new vessel here.
Look Becky, yer one more figure of fun to me on the the merry blogosea. Just another cranky old bloke with a marlinspike up his poop deck, easily flogged into a rage by passing zephyers.
I would like everyone on this thread to accept their particular and general share of resonsibility for the crimes of Stalin. Freakin leftie commies!
Nice try, Peter.
That section 25 you refer to is a completely different offence to sections 7 and 8, and carries different penalties. That is the offence called “serious religious vilification” and not “religious vilification” - whereby “serious religious vilification” is defined as “incitement” that will not only likely cause “hatred” but also “physical violence”.
Sections 7 and 8 (the “crimes” of “racial” and “religious” vilification respectively, not “serious racial or religious vilification”) simply criminalise the incitement of feelings of “hatred”, not the “incitement to commit a criminal offence”. Indeed, incitement to commit a criminal offence already existed prior to the RARTA, seemingly making Section 25 redundant. Pastors Scot and Nalliah were of course convicted under Section 8, not Section 25.
As I recall, you defended the Act in its entirety, thus it necessarily follows that you defend a law that prevents “indirect incitement”. In conclusion, you have no grounds whatsoever to oppose Howard’s power grab, just as you are yet to explain why we shouldn’t have laws against vilification on the basis of wealth and political orientation (but of course, we know the answer to that already).
Having demonstrated yourself to be the most hypocritical commentator on the blogosphere, I would not expect you to appreciate the irony of Howard extending a precedent established on the exact same principles that you clearly support.
Not up to your pirate talk at Road to Surfdom in the recent past but not bad your Nobness. Maybe you simply need a bit more to drink.
David Heidelberg wrote: “Who is JF Beck?”. He obviously hasn’t run into my comments around the net because I seldom comment anywhere — I’m simply too lazy to bother. Thus, I’m hardly the attention seeking troll Mr Lambert makes me out.
Since Mr Lambert obviously wants to continue with the name calling he should justify his comments or retract them. (He found my one-sentence, four-consonant description of Ian Gould — “crtn” — so offensive he felt compelled to remove my whole comment. He’s so shy and sensitive.)
Yawn. Why not take this to Tim Lambert’s blog or email him, J F? I’m sure it’s of zero interest to most of us here.
“I‚Äôm hardly the attention seeking troll Mr Lambert makes me out.”
tuo em sekem trebmaL rM llort gnikees noitnetta eht yldrah m’I
So when did this thread become the cranky bitter white men hour?
Me, I’m off to flirt with the ladies and exchange repartee with fellow swordsmen. Beck and Black Helo Steve cnan hang around his thread profoundly agreeing with eachother’s stomach noises.
Listen,I know you blokes are trying to run a serious blog,but you’ve failed.But almost accidently its turned out to be great entertainment.Its just like the time someone was trying to invent a new rubber tyre and ended up discovering penicillin,hey it was good too.
Thanks, Larado, we’re glad we’re providing you with entertainment.
So when did this thread become the cranky bitter white men hour?
Nobby, I’m not bitter in the slightest. I’m quite happy to sit back in silence waiting for Lambert’s response. As a reactionary, it’s part of the job description.
Actually, it should be obvious to everyone that you’re the one making trollish comments in an effort to draw attention away from Lambert’s nonsensical allegations.
Welcome to the delightfully wicked and some times naughty,(but not to much)Larvatus Prodeo.Love the name.
?neht torrap yllop elttil evissesbo na s’ohW
Gee Naby baby,and I thought I had a drinking problem.
Yarr!! Three cheers far the swarthiest plog on the seven seas, Larvatus Prodeo!
What the hell,cheers.
Um, bad joke just trying to be swarthy… and failing…
I think it must be talk like a pirate fortnight.
Larado, we strive to please here at the Larva Rodeo.
Whereas lardo doesn’t have to strive to please himself.
It’s a bit better than a bad Irish accent fortnight…
Yes,Larva Rodeo,wow its sounds like Roman charioteering.Bring on the horses,wheres the preety girls.
“wheres the preety girls.
You mean “primpty slirks”, don’t you, you ole slerkenpucker?
I like it when they beat the horses.
Just don’t mention Jean Harlow, Nabs. We could be here all night.
I could handle all night with Jean. Or even better, on a slow boat to China.
Hmmm, gotta lay off the calvados and maryjane now or me ‘n’ Lardo will do a mind meld.
Now you’ve done it.Here I was comfortably talking about thrashing horses and you have to mention Jean Harlow.
Well, try not to thrash around too much, Larado, it has a tendency to splash those of us who’d like to lie back and relax in the spa sipping our cocktails.
Chill Lardo.
Richard Widmark Richard Widmark Richard Widmark Richard Widmark.
Go fetch!
Now where we? I’ll just put on Goldfrapp’s “Satin Chic” and fish black olives out of the spa vent while getting com and fortable.
You are a very bad girl Kim.I should put you over my lap and give you a good span,,oh wait a minute.This is a left wing site,women do the spanking aroud here,right.
Need to get my hands on that Goldfrapp album…
That’s right, Larado, when I’m dressed in my leather corset and gloves. Consider yourself spanked.
Listen you lot,the state of the world is a disgrace,with all these terrorists and lunatics,if you think that for one moment I am going to consider,”that woman,Kim”,all dressed up in nothing ,,,but,,,leather,,,,and the gloves thing,,,I wouldnt think,,no way,,,oh,,oh?Im in trouble here.Carnt we just exterminate all the horses on Earth?Hell we beat them enough.
Well, Larado, the state of the world is certainly a disgrace. We agree on that.
Now I’m off to bed.
So lardo, it’s just us in the spa now….say, are those real breasts?
I’m still here, but I just feel like watching.
All horses must die now.Its the road to our salvation.Damn the cavalry.
*Dive bombs in with huge splash*
…….What?
Yeah, the horses, thats fer damn sure…(*belch*) Whiskey?
Tequila…
Let everybody be warned,I play games gentlemen.And Im fearless,(mad).Horses have a deep worry over me,they should,(knowing the plans that I have for them).Im a Gary Cooper fan Naby baby.Although Dick Widmark was in some fine movies.
“I play games”
We already worked that out. But here’s a handy hint. If yer gonna draw on the floor where the special game places are, don’t eat the crayons first.
Dietry experts,ya all the same.I suppose you think salt is bad too.Your going the same way as the horses.
Steve E: You are down to the last sophistry sodden dregs. Wriggle and twist as you may, your dishonest misrepresentations of the Victorian legislation is in black and white for all to see. Fraud with fact renders your whole rant inconsequential.
While on the subject of rants and your self evident ideological demons, you really need a new straw man, Marx and the USSR is just getting a bit too old. Why not try Ho Chi Minh or even Mao Tse Tung? Surely they had some ‘black hole’ legislation that your world could fall into?
Devastating stuff Peter! See you next time…