Prior to this I discussed some issues with Australia with a lot of help from Ozboy and his blog and attempted to explain this so American’s could understand what is going on of course in said country.
But the story is not over. First things first, the story continues with the introduction of an official “climate bill” in Australia’s equivalent of the senate. The explanation can best be found here as to why it matters: http://libertygibbert.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/chutzpah-in-the-house/
To sum it up quickly, Julian of course campaigned and won the seat of prime minister by promising to never introduce a carbon tax and she for the reasons of keeping the job has introduced that same tax. Rather funny and the reasoning is that she is holding on by a twig to power and unless she does something like this to appease her supporters she could very quickly lose her position due to a vote of no confidence.
However, that is just a part of the story. As I also mentioned in earlier posts, Andrew Bolt, an outspoken journalist for the Herald Sun, is now in trouble for a rather interesting scenario.
apparently, some of his writings did the following:
“…reasonably likely that fair-skinned Aboriginal people (or some of them) were offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated…”
Ss such, he is being hounded for what in other words is nothing but an opinion of people who claim to be offended. This is rather major even in Australia. The precedent here means that it does not matter if someone really is racist or that their article that they right is actually racist (meaning the article is un-true or otherwise malicious), but if their remarks simply offend someone, they can get into trouble for this. This is rather major for any country that claims to be free and to give freedom equally to all. It is similar to some of the other stories I have done where as I say time and time again:
Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others. This quote comes from a quote in Animal Farm which I changed a little obviously, but the point remains. In this case, some people are allowed to get offended by things that are not malicious or un-true and others such as me and others are not given this freedom. I am not allowed to get offended at the New York Times for instance which posts articles that are misleading and rather offensive to anyone who dares to question that humanity is not 80%-120% responsible for climate change.
The timing is rather curious as well, to come less than a month after Julian attempted to kill a story that A. Bolt was writing. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/prime-ministers-hand-overplayed/story-e6frfifx-1226125924173
In other words, I am questioning the timing here. Perhaps it is just a coincidence to have this come down 3 weeks after the entire episode of censorship occurred, but on the other hand it is rather timely and seems to be setting a precedent where someone just has to offend the current PM of Australia and then they are guaranteed to have a court decision come against them to “Shut them up for good.”
Mark my words, any threats to freedom of press and speech should be fought. But on the other hand, Australia has been known for its stricter controls on freedom of speech in general. Another story goes towards less freedom of speech in computer games as well:
In other words, maybe this is just the way Australia is. Some countries are going to differ than others like the difference between the US and the UK with gun control and this might or might not be a bad thing, but the truth in the end is that limits on free speech are always going to be detrimental to society. The larger question of course is whether the court case mentioned is in fact “political pay-back” or whether it is just a coincidence to be decided when it was. Time will tell, but the long-term trend remains: Australia is going to be a hot-bed for a while politically.