Hypocrisy of The Left - part 2

[Mofra]

The abc was actively promoting pedastry in the 1970's

Evidence?

 

[Father Jack]

As always, I might be wrong here..

I don't like the 'phobia' added to the end of a group to describe the hate of something.

I feel like it is a term used to attempt to empower the victims of that hatred, by making their attackers come from a place of fear, an irrational fear. Nobody cowering showers themselves in glory.

But I think the range of dislike to hatred that comes out of things labelled homophobic or islamaphobic doesn't come from a place of fear, I think it comes from a place of ignorance.

Ignorance breeds fear, fear breeds anger and anger and fear leads to the dark side, um I mean conservative politics.

 

[Ripper]

Evidence?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...k=c721048a155cbf534c8cba25cd324011-1500009672

On 14 July 1975 ...[Allan] Ashbolt's department devoted Lateline ... to a subject never before discussed on the ABC and seldom, perhaps, canvassed in quite this way anywhere in the world except privately and in "alternative" media. As the ABC described the programme: "Pederasty, as defined by the Penguin English Dictionary, is the homosexual relationship of a man with a boy. The subject usually creates feelings of revulsion and disgust within most people. The issues raised by such relationships are discussed by three pederasts" [on the Lateline program].

And so they were, without any criticism beyond what the contributors offered of each other, as when two attacked the third for treating boys as mere sex objects.

ABC's chairman, Professor Richard Downing wrote to The Sydney Morning Herald on 19 July 1975 defending Lateline's pederasty program - in which one pederast essentially agreed with a second pederast who essentially agreed with a third pederast who essentially agreed with the first pederast who essentially agreed with himself that it was okay for adult men to have sex with young boys.

This is what Richard Downing (who was appointed ABC chairman by Gough Whitlam's Labor government) had to say in 1975 about pederasty and all that - as told to readers of The Sydney Morning Herald :

... the phenomenon of pederasty seems appropriate for public discussion in a society which, if it is to be open, democratic and responsible, needs also to understand the diverse natures of the people who compose that society ... The ABC does not seek to offend but only to enlighten. To quote from a report to the British Independent Broadcasting Authority: "Society may remain civilised only if the individual learns to abhor the results of uncivilised behaviour - even though the learning process can be upsetting to him."

 

[Mofra]

To quote from a report to the British Independent Broadcasting Authority: "Society may remain civilised only if the individual learns to abhor the results of uncivilised behaviour - even though the learning process can be upsetting to him."

You said "promote" - the report does nothing of the sort.
'Understanding' is not 'promoting', any more than an anti-terror expert seeking to 'understand' IS is not 'promoting' it.

Given this is Murdoch's private right-wing rag and the article repeatedly uses the term "leftist" (haven't heard anyone use the term who is actually capable of making a valid point) I can understand the desperate attempts to link the ABC to pedophiles (although Pell must be given the full benefit of the doubt, being Tone's mate) but a cursory proper read of the article puts paid to your claims.

PS - look up the definition of 'abhor', I think you'll be surprised.

 

[FredLeDeux]

You said "promote" - the report does nothing of the sort.
'Understanding' is not 'promoting', any more than an anti-terror expert seeking to 'understand' IS is not 'promoting' it.

Given this is Murdoch's private right-wing rag and the article repeatedly uses the term "leftist" (haven't heard anyone use the term who is actually capable of making a valid point) I can understand the desperate attempts to link the ABC to pedophiles (although Pell must be given the full benefit of the doubt, being Tone's mate) but a cursory proper read of the article puts paid to your claims.

PS - look up the definition of 'abhor', I think you'll be surprised.

Poor old Gerard Henderson, even by his abysmal standards this is an absolute mongrel piece of logic-chopping.

Mind you, as the last survivor (???) of the irrelevant DLP Catholic Cold Warriors, he'll grasp at anything he can to divert attention from the real pederasts in our midst. And we know who they are, don't we?

 

[Garlic muncher]

Ignorance breeds fear, fear breeds anger and anger and fear leads to the dark side, um I mean conservative politics.

I find it really odd that people keep repeating this Islamophobia stuff, common knowledge that Islamists have been using it to stifle debate and put people back in their box, least of all one Trevor Phillips who also used it to stifle debate in the UK in the 1980's whilst overseeing the immigration of millions of Muslims to the UK.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...s-chief-admits-wrong-muslims-wont-assimilate/

In one of the most extraordinary admissions of defeat in modern times, Trevor Phillips, the former chief of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), has admitted that the path that Britain has been on for years is a catastrophic failure. Muslims won’t assimilate and become loyal Britons.

Phillips wrote: “For a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape. I should have known better.” Instead, he wrote, Muslims are creating “nations within nations” in the West.

This admission of defeat is all the more remarkable coming from Phillips, who popularized the term “Islamophobia” in Britain.

It was popularized deliberately by a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT).

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...s-chief-admits-wrong-muslims-wont-assimilate/

It appears to me that the people using the term to describe other people are the ignorant angry and fearful ones here.

 

[kwikfix]

Google Mr. Robinson - Simon & Garfunkel parody - Tommy Robinson tribute

 

[Power Raid]

I wonder what the left feels about risk are they risk takers or adverse to risk?

 

[Father Jack]

I wonder how you can define something like that on a left/right basis

 

[Power Raid]

I wonder how you can define something like that on a left/right basis

I attended an interesting luncheon referring to risk and operating procedures.

Gina's mine had to write 40,000 operating procedures, BHP had to write a 33,000 page environmental report.

Have it a guess it would be right leaning people that are trying to launch businesses and left wing that likes big government and the regulations that result in these outcomes.

I wonder who puts their hands up and says "risk is bad and paperwork is a good thing"?

 

[Father Jack]

I attended an interesting luncheon referring to risk and operating procedures.

Gina's mine had to write 40,000 operating procedures, BHP had to write a 33,000 page environmental report.

Have it a guess it would be right leaning people that are trying to launch businesses and left wing that likes big government and the regulations that result in these outcomes.

I wonder who puts their hands up and says "risk is bad and paperwork is a good thing"?

That's just a simple weighing up of the costs of extra regulation vs the cost of loss of production (not to mention negative health or environmental outcomes) when accidents inevitably occur due to the inevitable corner cutting if said regulation is missing. Business owners aren't going to give a s**t about the environment or the health of their workers if they don't have to, we've seen that time and time again.

It's easy to be a risk taker if you don't stand to suffer the consequences if things go south.

 

[Jello_B]

That's just a simple weighing up of the costs of extra regulation vs the cost of loss of production (not to mention negative health or environmental outcomes) when accidents inevitably occur due to the inevitable corner cutting if said regulation is missing. Business owners aren't going to give a s**t about the environment or the health of their workers if they don't have to, we've seen that time and time again.

It's easy to be a risk taker if you don't stand to suffer the consequences if things go south.

As a business owner that's a sad position to take.

 

[Garlic muncher]

That's just a simple weighing up of the costs of extra regulation vs the cost of loss of production (not to mention negative health or environmental outcomes) when accidents inevitably occur due to the inevitable corner cutting if said regulation is missing. Business owners aren't going to give a s**t about the environment or the health of their workers if they don't have to, we've seen that time and time again.

It's easy to be a risk taker if you don't stand to suffer the consequences if things go south.

In fact businesses work better and are more viable and profitable if staff are looked after and happy, the opposite of what you claim business owners do.

If business owners cut corners, don't apply fair outcomes etc they go bust usually or are fly by night operators anyway.

Take the cray industry in WA for example, worlds best practice to enable a viable fishery, everyone is making good money.

 

[11sjw]

 

[WA ROO]

Take the cray industry in WA for example, worlds best practice to enable a viable fishery, everyone is making good money.

No where near the same amount of boats and people in the industry these days
The ones still in the industry are doing very well.As seen by the very smick new boats being built.All 70ft plus worth $3 mil plus
One I know just bought his old 70ft boat back from being an oil & gas tender boat and refitting to cray fishing again

 

[Bradesmaen]

You said "promote" - the report does nothing of the sort.
'Understanding' is not 'promoting', any more than an anti-terror expert seeking to 'understand' IS is not 'promoting' it.

Given this is Murdoch's private right-wing rag and the article repeatedly uses the term "leftist" (haven't heard anyone use the term who is actually capable of making a valid point) I can understand the desperate attempts to link the ABC to pedophiles (although Pell must be given the full benefit of the doubt, being Tone's mate) but a cursory proper read of the article puts paid to your claims.

PS - look up the definition of 'abhor', I think you'll be surprised.

Ripper doesn't have a grasp of the English language. This is now the 8th time I've seen him using words without knowing their meaning.

 

[kwikfix]

Ripper doesn't have a grasp of the English language. This is now the 8th time I've seen him using words without knowing their meaning.

 

[Farkern Hell]

The left is actually happy about it. Yet they'll say, "white genocide isn't a thing".

 

[Power Raid]

That's just a simple weighing up of the costs of extra regulation vs the cost of loss of production (not to mention negative health or environmental outcomes) when accidents inevitably occur due to the inevitable corner cutting if said regulation is missing. Business owners aren't going to give a s**t about the environment or the health of their workers if they don't have to, we've seen that time and time again.

It's easy to be a risk taker if you don't stand to suffer the consequences if things go south.

It's disappointing you think like that

 

[Bradesmaen]

It's disappointing you think like that

It's the truth though. Look at the US and what happens when legislation is peeled back.

 

[Father Jack]

In fact businesses work better and are more viable and profitable if staff are looked after and happy, the opposite of what you claim business owners do.

If business owners cut corners, don't apply fair outcomes etc they go bust usually or are fly by night operators anyway.

Take the cray industry in WA for example, worlds best practice to enable a viable fishery, everyone is making good money.

If businesses work better and are more viable in the long term if staff are looked after, then having regulations in place to ensure that shouldn't be a problem. As for environmental regulations, if businesses don't have to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions, instead having those consequences shouldered by the community at large, then they won't.

 

[Father Jack]

It's disappointing you think like that

It would be nice if I didn't have to, but remember businesses exist to maximise their profits, so they will do that in any way they can, therefore they require regulation to hold them to account. What's that line you often hear trotted out, about corporations being responsible to their shareholders?

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Yet they'll say, "white genocide isn't a thing".

It isn't.

 

[Bradesmaen]

The left is actually happy about it. Yet they'll say, "white genocide isn't a thing".

Where is this white genocide you speak of?

 

[Farkern Hell]

Where is this white genocide you speak of?

Just about every western country. Birth rates all below the replacement level and forced immigration and multi culti to make up for the lack of births. Literally, no other race teaches kids to hate who they are.