Offence trolling

The evil and cruel Israel Folau has been up to his old tricks of being mean to people again, like the awful Christian he is:

“Attack”.

Where and when was this “attack“?

Israel Folau has launched another attack on gay people and also criticised young people being allowed to change gender during a sermon at his Sydney church.

Right, so if you didn’t go to his church on that particular Sunday for that particular service, you wouldn’t have heard this recent “attack” then?

It’s so good of the media to give this egregious behaviour the wider publicity it deserves and otherwise wouldn’t have received. I’m sure gay and transgender people are extremely grateful for being offered this service.

What did the hateful Folau preach to his sheep this time?

The former rugby union star described homosexuality as a sin and claimed the devil was behind primary school children being allowed to decide if they wanted to change gender.

Ok, so in line with the teachings of Christianity, Islam and Judaism then, or, in other words, what about two thirds of the world’s population believes?

Not exactly flat earth dogma, is it?

The statements that homosexuality is a sin and the devil is behind primary school age children “transitioning” genders are presented as being equivalent in their logic and level of outrage.

Perhaps we might not agree Lucifer’s hand is to be found behind “Mermaids“, but it doesn’t mean encouraging the proliferation of transgender children is biologically or morally correct either.

Here’s a fun thought experiment;

You’ve got tickets to see the last ever Rolling Stones’ concert and your babysitter just cancelled. It’s too late to ask any friends or family but both sets of neighbours have said they would help out. Do you ask the Folaus or the Salkilds?

By the way, a quick stalk through Emma’s social media suggests she’s pulled back a little on the “my son is a girl” bullshit and, in fact seems to have completely ceased from boasting mentioning it. Almost as if, I dunno, it was a phase she projected on the poor fucker. One assumes the lad and his dad are somewhat relieved no genitals were mutilated in the meanwhile.

Bills Opinion

It’s obvious that Israel Folau has been found guilty of wrongthink and, from now on, will be subject to this type of offence trolling.

Literally nobody would have known about the content of his sermon last weekend if the media hadn’t sought it out and presented it to the world. I’ve not been to Folau’s church but I suspect it doesn’t meet in a football stadium.

If a gay or transgender person is feeling any negative emotions today as a result of reading the reporting of his sermon, who is to blame?

Folau is being consistent to his beliefs. These beliefs are shared by billions of other people. If you agree he should be hounded out of his employment and to continue to be subject to scrutiny over the details of his religion, perhaps you should also consider where this leads and who the spotlight shines on next.

(We tried to contact Peter Fitzsimons for comment but he was unavailable)

Sheep are concerned by the dimensions of the pasture, wolves aren’t

Oh, this is just exquisite:

Australians are among the world’s most likely to share dodgy articles online at a time when almost half of Generation Z uses social media as their main news source and Google’s YouTube surges in popularity.

Says who?

Oh, The Digital News Report by the University of Canberra’s News and Media Research Centre.

The University of Canberra has a News and Media Research Centre?

When you get the call to evacuate Planet Golgafrincham, be very worried if you’re assigned a berth on the same Ark as anyone from that faculty.

This quote by Dr. Fisher is unintentionally hilarious:

“But consistently over the five years it also very much does depend on the source of news you use and those who rely on traditional – offline platforms, TV, newspapers – they have higher trust in news generally than people who rely on online sources,” she said. “That hasn’t shifted.”

Admittedly, without bothering to look at the same data as Dr. Fisher, I’d like to offer an alternate assessment and conclusion:

People who actively seek out information from diverse sources become very cynical towards the uniform reporting of the legacy media.

Bill’s Opinion

One wonders whether the good Doctor Fisher and her students have ever heard of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave?

Wouldn’t it be just so beautifully ironic if they hadn’t?

Allah enjoys a cold beer too

On a hot day, a palate-cleansing cold beer can be quite refreshing. I don’t suppose that’s the explanation for this though;

Terrorists linked to Iran were caught stockpiling tonnes of explosive materials on the outskirts of London in a secret British bomb factory, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.

Radicals linked to Hizbollah, the Lebanese militant group, stashed thousands of disposable ice packs containing ammonium nitrate – a common ingredient in homemade bombs.

Hizbollah. The “party of Allah”.

Lovely people, I’m sure. It probably means nothing important that they have a picture of an AK47 on their offical flag.

In unrelated news, the great de-platforming and de-monetising of non-Left voices on social media continues, with Stephen Crowder being the latest to feel the wrath of the tech company censorship.

Meanwhile, this account is deemed fine;

Presumably Hasanein died of an excess of Photoshop?

Anyway, there’s always a silver lining in every cloud, his lad gets free haircuts until he’s 16 years old or when he’s fitted with his first suicide vest, whichever is sooner.

You do have to love the Lóréal sheet as a nice touch, “…because you’re worth it“.

Bill’s Opinion

Jokingly referring to someone who describes themselves as “queer” by that name 7 times over the course of a 12 month period is beyond the pale and will see you thrown down the memory hole.

Being a organisation that actively targets the only functioning democracy in the Middle East, waging wars and planning terrorist attacks, and chucking gays off buildings? All good, apparently.

How interesting.

Free speech for me, but not for thee

Those readers not familiar with Australia’s iteration of Common Law might be surprised freedom of speech is not enshrined in the Australian Constitution.

Precedent case law is not particularly helpful either to those believing we should be free to say what’s on our mind, limited only by the restriction of not inciting violence.

In fact, Federal legislation takes things even further in the opposite direction, with clause 18.C of the 1975 Racial Discrimination Act legislating against “offensive behaviour” based on “race, colour or national or ethnic origin”. Note, religion isn’t currently in that list.

There are further restrictions in State laws, this being the NSW example. The term “vilify” is used a lot in these versions of free speech restrictive laws.

“Vilify” isn’t a verb we tend to use much in our everyday lives, so our common understanding of its definition might be a little shaky. The Victorian version of free speech restriction law defines it as conduct that ‘incites hatred, serious contempt, revulsion or severe ridicule’.

…which is, frankly, a blank cheque for any politically-motivated judge presiding over a case. “Severe ridicule“, for example, could be used to describe most comedy, particularly political satire. And what’s the standard separating “severe” from simply “mild” ridicule?

Note also how the standard for the definition is the reaction in other people. Most laws have a punishment for your direct actions, yet this legislation punishes for possible future actions of others as a reaction to your action.

We’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

Further evidence that this is not the place to look for brave defence and defenders of the freedom of speech is depressingly simple to find. Examples;

Queen’sland University students hounded by the press for Facebook comments they didn’t write.

Foreign entertainers Milo Yianopolous, Gavin McInnes and political activist Tommy Robinson banned from entering the country because of their speech.

Clearly we are playing in a different ball game to the USA’s First Amendment. A different sport on a different planet, in fact.

However, our brave journalistic class are currently twisting their pinafores in angst and distress over a recent raid of the state broadcaster by the Federal police following publication of leaked classified information.

Let me just run that by you again; the government police are investigating the government news agency.

Oh look, a squirrel!

Here were are though, in 2019, finally seeing our brave media types getting behind a moral cause they are prepared to die in a ditch defending.

Slow hand clapWell played sir, well played”.

Geoffrey Robinson probably makes the best fist of explaining why the raid was on shaky moral ground, why it wouldn’t happen in the USA and UK and a defence of the media’s right to publish military secrets but, frankly, he completely fails to mention all the reasons we’ve arrived here in the first place, such as the media and legal professions’ failure to defend the little erosions of free speech over the years.

By trying to invent a right to “not be offended”, we’ve reduced the right of free speech, the consequences of which are playing out every day as hate speech laws are subjectively enforced. How else can they be enforced but subjectively, when the definition of “offence” is such a personal one?

Bill’s Opinion

Defending free speech is pretty virtueless if you only ever defend the speech with which you agree.

There is no Morality Olympics Gold Medal for only speaking up when your team is attacked. Nobel Peace Prizes aren’t usually as easy as Obama’s was to attain.

I have two questions to all those in the media who suddenly think free speech is important;

1. Where the fuck have you been for the last few decades? And,

2. Do you really think fighting for your right to publish illegally-leaked military secrets is going to be the best test case to take to appeal to reverse free speech restrictions, compared to say, defending some camp clown who writes hurty tweets on the internet?

Irony is resurrected for Australian Rugby

The ARU are looking to renew their links to charitable causes and are seeking expressions of interest;

The photo above is interesting; last time I checked, there were 15 players in a rugby team, not 10. More if you count the match reserves.

I wonder why they’ve cropped the rest of the team and wider squad out of the picture?

Perhaps a clue can be found in the press release (highlighting mine)?

Rugby Australia said it is seeking a charity partner that aligns with the game’s core vision, which includes making rugby “a game for all” and igniting Australia’s “passion for the game”.

Right then, a game for all? That’s great.

Can we get a hint of what that might mean by looking at the current charity partners?

The charity will also link with Rugby Australia’s current community partners including Disability Sports Australia, Pride in Sport, the Australian Deaf Rugby Team and Our Watch.

Pride in Sport? I wonder what they’re all about?

Pride in Sport is the only sporting inclusion program specifically designed to assist National and State sporting organisations and clubs with the inclusion of LGBTI employees, players, coaches, volunteers and spectators. The world-first Pride in Sport Index (PSI) benchmarks and assesses the inclusion of LGBTI people across all sporting contexts.

Ah, because what one does in the privacy of one’s bedroom and with whom one does it is extremely relevant to kicking a ball or swimming in a pool, isn’t it?

I suppose there’s no point in the charity, The Australian Christian Values Institute applying then?

Bill’s Opinion

As this article points out (h/t Tim), the ARU is one of those organisations that has fully-embraced the current fashion for wokeness. The problem is, they haven’t fully-worked out the details of which victim credentials trump which others.

Hence a deeply religious rugby player is about to sue the arse off the sport for firing him for legally-expressing his views, fully in line with the recognised teachings of the religion, because they are at odds with the feelings of another one of the protected groups.

Unless the Australian judge presiding over the case decides to defenestrate Common Law precedent (which, to be fair, is not beyond the realms of possibility), the ARU are going to have to cut a considerable cheque.

The lesson is straightforward.

Go woke, go broke.

Nothing burgers for sale – $10 each

A reading of all 448-pages of the Mueller Report is taking place in Queens, New York on Saturday and Sunday.

Isn’t it always the case that we find out about events too late to buy tickets or to cancel other plans?

For example, U2 have just announced an Australian tour but, unfortunately, it’s too late for me to attend as the concerts coincide with a long-planned appointment I have with slamming my cock in a drawer.

But back to the performance art by people who are absolutely sane and in no way caught up in an echo chamber of views;

Beginning on Saturday evening, volunteers will read from the report over 24 hours. Music will play over some of the redacted portions.

Riveting stuff. I bet there won’t be a dry seat in the house.

Ticket sales must be huge, somewhere between the Alien Sex Fiend reunion and “T’Pau’s Greatest Hit rebooted” tour, I imagine.

“The American people paid for the Mueller Report and not a lot of people have read it,” Steven Padla, a member of New Neighbourhood, told Business Insider. “We want it to be heard by as many people as possible.”

“…..not a lot of people have read it”?

It’s not as if there’s a concerted effort to censor it; it’s a free downloadable PDF.

Frankly, if you’ve not had an utter gut full of CNN talking heads trying to find something, anything, of interest in the report for the last few months, can I suggest Rachel Maddow over on MSBC would welcome the extra viewing numbers?

Bill’s Opinion

The Kübler-Ross model is generally accepted as a good indicator of where people suffering from grief and loss are on their journey to some semblance of normality.

The stages are as follows;

  1. Denial
  2. Anger
  3. Bargaining
  4. Depression
  5. Acceptance

It would seem stages (1) and (2) are quite hard to leave for some folks.

Et tu, Tony?

It’s quite amazing this took so long:

It’s an utter non-story. Don’t take my word for it though, follow the link and judge for yourself.

What’s important is that the #MeToo movement is coming after Tony Robbins. Whether they are successful or not will be instructive, mainly because there were so many reasons to have taken Robbins down in the past, if this one is his nemesis, we now know where the power sits.

Let’s face it, the man has made an absolute fortune selling evangelical Christianity without the Christianity part. We’ve all met someone who’s got the religion at one of his $8,000 conferences and tried to make some massive change in their life… and usually failed.

He’s a snake oil salesman and has been for decades. If he was untouchable all that time but is taken down by an old video with few off-colour comments at a paid for conference, that’s very instructive.

Bill’s Opinion

It’s not clear what Robbins has done to become the next target. If you think the controversy is about the comments on the video, you’re being somewhat naive.

First they came for, ah fuck it.

Bill Pulver’s letter to Raelene Castle – exclusive

(from an anonymous source in the ARU)

Dear Raelene,

Kia-Sportage bro, as you and Jacinda say in the vernacular.

I hope you’re having fun in the not so new gig and the daily drive out to Olympic Park isn’t too tiresome. Strewth, it is truly a godawful place to have to work from, thank goodness the Wobblies only play there once or twice a year. I can understand why the fans prefer to stay at home and watch it on their sofas. Well, that and the fact that they can do something else with their time in the second half of the match, once the result has been decided.

Anyway, I digress.

I wanted to drop you a quick note to wish you the best of luck in the forthcoming World Cup in Japan and send my best wishes for the preparations. Hopefully Chek has got a great esprit des corps in the changing room now, with all of those unique characters working well together. I can just imagine the larrikins Quadey and Pocock must get up to, surely they will be great room mates in Tokyo.

I wanted to mention something I missed in the handover documents. In addition to the two envelopes, I thought you might want to consider some changes to the player contracts in the next round of contract extensions.

Increasingly, and as a result of our strategy to stop funding grass roots rugby and simply poach the better mungoes from Rugby League, you’ll need to have a strategy to deal with the God-botherers.

Obviously, the majority of these are Westies with apostrophes in their names, so any successful strategy is going to have to be reasonably unsubtle and articulated mainly in monosyllables. Try to pitch it at a level that an ABC for Kids viewer could comprehend.

There’s likely to a bit of a clash of cultures with that LBTQI+ptangyangkipperbang thing you and David Pocock committed the sport to in your pitch to the Board. Those happy-clappy types aren’t so keen on the shirt-lifters so you’ll need to reign them in on the old interweb thingy. Apparently, some of them have suggested that Caitlyn Jenner might not be completely female.

I know, madness, eh!

Some sort of contractual clause about not expressing religious or political views should do the trick.

The alternative is to do what the ABC do when one of their vastly more intelligent journalists tweet some extreme left wing opinion (i.e. always); state that their views outside of work are their own and they have the right to express them without any consequences to their livelihood of providing unbiased and objective reporting.

You’ll have to pick one of these approaches though otherwise you’ll be left in a terribly difficult and probably expensive no-man (or gender non-specific) land the first time one of them gets an injection of the Ol’ Time Religion one Sunday morning.

Actually, thinking about it, maybe you’ll be in such a mess if you don’t that you’d make my CEO term look halfway competent, which, let’s face it, would have been unthinkable a year or two ago.

On second thoughts, I think I won’t bother sending this letter after all.

Yours, in rugby,

Bill Pulver

Bill (Ockham’s) Opinion

It’s a funny old world when the European colonialists spend 200+ years telling Pacific Islanders, often at the end of a gun barrel, about the salvation of Jesus Christ and then sack them from their jobs for believing the message.

Pay the jizya for your dhimmi, Australians

On Thursday, two members of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) found the checkered headscarves used during the exercise were not necessary and would have been recognised by members of the public as keffiyehs, used by Palestinian and Arab communities.

During the exercise, the pretend offenders pointed their index fingers in the air.

The use of the headscarves had the capacity to encourage members of the public to believe that “Palestinians and/or Arabs were to be feared, despised, hated, and/or held in serious contempt as possibly or probably being terrorists“, especially given that it was NSW Police who used them, NCAT found.

Is a headscarf really likely to have that effect?

One of the officers was wearing a skeleton face mask. Do we expect Halloween celebrations to be subdued this year as people shy away in fear from skeleton images after this police exercise?

Unlikely.

But wait, go back and have another look at the screen grab image from the Sydney Morning Herald….

What’s the news item 2 down from the one about the gelding of the police?

Oh, just an Islamist stabbing a passerby. Nothing to see here.

To be balanced, the alleged attacker wasn’t Arabic or from Palestine, he was from Pakistan.

He knew enough Arabic to shout it at random strangers in the street in the months preceding the attack though (note to police; this is what might be called a “lead indicator“. You’re welcome):

And that Parramatta shooting he was so inspired by, what was that all about, who committed that act of terrorism?

A Kurdish Iranian. Let’s keep that balance; neither Kurdish or Persian Iranians are classed as Arabic.

Neither was the perpetrator of the Lindt Café shooting Arabic.

He didn’t have a skeleton face mask either.

These mentally-ill religiously evil idiots do have one common factor though, don’t they? One that Arabs and Palestinians also share. Perhaps it’s asking too much of Australian police to really analyse the cultural wardrobe distinctions between various ethnic groups in the Islamic diaspora when planning a terrorism response training exercise.

After all, it’s not the hurt feelings of those who share the religion of the perpetrators they are training to protect, but the lives of those targeted by the terrorists.

So, precisely how many people actually complained about this police exercise designed to keep us all safe?

Oh, just the one.

The racial vilification complaint was made by Sam Ekermawi, who identified himself as an Australian ethnic Muslim of a Palestinian national origin.

Is he a sensitive soul who is easily offended or is he perhaps trying to modify the definitions of what can or can’t be said or worn in public in a (previously) free country?

Well, he does have “previous” (in the police vernacular) against which we can judge this complaint:

He previously filed a racial vilification complaint against the Today show following comments from Sonia Kruger that she would like to see the immigration of Muslims to Australia “stopped now”. That complaint was dismissed in February.

Bill’s Opinion

This is surely a form of Stockholm Syndrome.

The police governing body, NCAT, has made the conscious decision to sympathise and prioritise the feelings of one man from a protected class over the operational duties of the police.

Someone might want to point out to the Australian police that they have a live hostage emergency incident to deal with; Sam Ekermaw has captured several national institutions and is forcing them to comply with his religious demands on the basis that the general public shouldn’t be afraid of people wearing keffiyehs.

Sure:

A voter exercises his democratic right

…to treat politicians with the utter contempt they deserve.

The problem with legally-compelled voting is the elected politicians can convince themselves they have a mandate.

The additional major problem with the Australian version of compelled voting is that one needs a PhD in Confusopoly to comprehend it. Frankly, you stand more chance of accurately comparing a Telstra mobile phone “dollar” with the Optus version than navigate this form;

(Excuse my handwriting; I am a medical doctor).

Here’s a scanned version for clarity, in case you are voting in New South Wales and wish to become more acquainted with the various policies on offer;

Bill’s Opinion

Changing government every 3 years and Prime Minister (by bloodless coup) every 18 months whilst fining those who choose not to engage in the voting process is not democracy.

Convince me otherwise and maybe you’ll get my vote next time…… Be ready to demonstrate that you’ve achieved something in the real world other than organising a union or working for a law firm, you useless and entitled twats.