Vic Lidia Thorpe: Not the subject for every thread!

[Gethelred]

Seeing as Lidia discussion is cropping up across multiple threads, let's have us a thread for people who want to discuss her contribution to Australian politics.

It should go without saying but seeing as she's a bit of a beacon for controversy - for a variety of reasons - let's just remind ourselves what the board rules are around racism and sexism, shall we?

You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which:

• is dangerous to health, anti-vax, Covid denial etc,
• is hateful, including sympathetic discussion of far-right/neo-Nazi tropes,
• misinformation or disinformation,
• defamatory,
• threatening,
• abusive,
• bigotry,
• likely to offend,
• is spam or spam-like,
• contains adult or objectionable content,
• risks copyright infringement,
• encourages unlawful activity (including illegal drug use, buying, selling etc),
• or otherwise violates any laws,
• or contains personal information of others.

Standard board rules apply, but let's make this abundantly clear: let's play nicely in here.

Go nuts.

 

[Goroyals22]

Lots of qualifications there.

So where in her speech was anything racist mentioned? That’s what kicked it off so it shouldn’t be to hard to find if it existed anywhere outside of paymams mind.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Chief]

Perhaps less so I guess
But my point is she wouldn't have got into parliament without their badge.
Gralins point about treating individual v party is a fair argument.
I'm not sure if the AEC release statistics about what % of the population vote above the line in the Senate but I'd take a guess that it's the considerable majority. In other words people vote for the party and not tje individual

But they know which individuals will go in if their chosen party wins.

I don't think it is ideal, but the Greens should have stuck to their word. I think at that point it becomes the party itself which has failed to deliver on the deal and all Senators have the option to quit.

This might have cost her another term in the senate, so it's not like she is benefiting from following her values.

 

[faible]

Teeing off at Pauline Hanson and giving the finger to our parliament of children as she walked out is quite endearing.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Looks like your iphone has a virus mate, try deleting your cookies

 

[Chief]

Looks like your iphone has a virus mate, try deleting your cookies

View attachment 2178078

It's got fashpox.

 

[Kram]

Teeing off at Pauline Hanson and giving the finger to our parliament of children as she walked out is quite endearing.

I usually cringe at her methods but I'll make an exception for giving it to Hanson the clown.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Teeing off at Pauline Hanson and giving the finger to our parliament of children as she walked out is quite endearing.

Probably the only one there I'd enjoy having a beer with [emoji106] the rest are mostly scum

On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Reg Grundy35]

She actually threw the paper at Hansen after ripping it up which is a breach of standards in any work place and 9/10 see the person sacked…

Will be interesting to see her speaking through gritted teeth now she has been served with a notice to make an apology by Hansons solicitor for spreading mistruths on national television.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

ffs. Hanson has made a career out of being a POS in and out of parliament and youre losing it because someone threw paper at her.

 

[Gralin]

Perhaps less so I guess
But my point is she wouldn't have got into parliament without their badge.
Gralins point about treating individual v party is a fair argument.
I'm not sure if the AEC release statistics about what % of the population vote above the line in the Senate but I'd take a guess that it's the considerable majority. In other words people vote for the party and not tje individual

you can look up the number and they are small because most people just vote above the line and go with the order the party sets

meaning their vote was a vote for her to begin with


i think you should not have party tickets in the senate, make people pick but the parties don't want that because they like to keep control

its still a weird thing to get angry about when most of the people in parliament were not voted for by most people to begin with

we don't have a representative system, preferential voting might mine the 4th or 5th choice on my list is my member, but given they vote on party lines not for the benefit of their local constituents I don't feel particularly represented anyway

 

[Freomaniac]

Nah.

I dislike her because she is rude, a terrible role model for young Australians (girls particularly) in how she conducts herself, the language she uses in formal settings, how divisive and aggressive she is and how she misuses her station (regularly) for self interest. She longs for a divided country.

She only has to deliver her message differently and it would be a different matter. She loses her message constantly in her behavior.

The likes of Mandela, MLK, Gandhi, Chavez are legends of history, not solely because of their message, but in the way they delivered it and achieved it.

Lidia has dined out too much on the stories of Robert Mugabe, Che Guevara, Huey Newton I think…

Lidia Thorpe is bad but not Robert Mugabe bad LoL

 

[Leeda]

Tan bark....curiosity tells me they or she are pulling strings, but she is a liability...

 

[Chadwiko]

Cooker shit.

 

[Freomaniac]

Cooker shit.

So the Australian government is a corporation? Doesn't shock me

 

[Freomaniac]

But they know which individuals will go in if their chosen party wins.

I don't think it is ideal, but the Greens should have stuck to their word. I think at that point it becomes the party itself which has failed to deliver on the deal and all Senators have the option to quit.

This might have cost her another term in the senate, so it's not like she is benefiting from following her values.

I had to bump this thread as Lidia Thorpe made the news again.

She threatened to burn down parliament house apparently

 

[CM86]

I had to bump this thread as Lidia Thorpe made the news again.

She threatened to burn down parliament house apparently

Total bullshit.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...es-claim-she-would-burn-down-parliament-house

“We stand with you every day, and we will fight every day, and we will turn up every day, and if I have to burn down Parliament House to make a point … I am not there to make friends.”​

What does anyone actually think is being said here? Thorpe is saying 'I'm not there to make friends, I'm there to attempt arson and murder'?
Or it's a metaphor, like 'bring them to their knees' etc.

Thorpe is always being targeted in ways that no one else ever is.

Did the AFP ever investigate this from Joyce?
Was it ever treated as a threat?

“I just don’t want the government any more in my life, I am sick of the government being in my life.”​

With the camera pointing to the sky, the former deputy prime minister urges Australians to respect God.​

“There’s a higher authority that’s beyond our comprehension – right up there in the sky. And unless we understand that that’s got to be respected, then we’re just fools. We’re going to get nailed.”​

Of course not.


And what's the AFP said on Thorpe?
Oh... they make a point of saying they're investigating Thorpe... but also they can't say anything more...
Almost a perfect way of fueling it, and never diffusing it.

A spokesperson for the AFP said its National Security Investigations team in Victoria began investigating the comments “almost immediately”.​

The spokesperson declined to provide further details, and said it is “not the usual practice of the AFP to provide a running commentary”.​

Just total virtue signaling, pearl clutching bullshit.

Not a single person believes that Thorpe was talking about arson.

 

[JackFlash]

Should be thrown out of Parliament!

 

[Gough]

Architects of robodebt walk around on fat pensions like nothing happened but some will want the black woman kicked out of Parliament for saying a few words.

 

[Gralin]

Architects of robodebt walk around on fat pensions like nothing happened but some will want the black woman kicked out of Parliament for saying a few words.

that's because the government is fine with poor people dying but doesn't like people saying maybe the government should burn for killing poor people

 

[Carn The Berries]

Total bullshit.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...es-claim-she-would-burn-down-parliament-house

“We stand with you every day, and we will fight every day, and we will turn up every day, and if I have to burn down Parliament House to make a point … I am not there to make friends.”​

What does anyone actually think is being said here? Thorpe is saying 'I'm not there to make friends, I'm there to attempt arson and murder'?
Or it's a metaphor, like 'bring them to their knees' etc.

Thorpe is always being targeted in ways that no one else ever is.

Did the AFP ever investigate this from Joyce?
Was it ever treated as a threat?

“I just don’t want the government any more in my life, I am sick of the government being in my life.”​

With the camera pointing to the sky, the former deputy prime minister urges Australians to respect God.​

“There’s a higher authority that’s beyond our comprehension – right up there in the sky. And unless we understand that that’s got to be respected, then we’re just fools. We’re going to get nailed.”​

Of course not.


And what's the AFP said on Thorpe?
Oh... they make a point of saying they're investigating Thorpe... but also they can't say anything more...
Almost a perfect way of fueling it, and never diffusing it.

A spokesperson for the AFP said its National Security Investigations team in Victoria began investigating the comments “almost immediately”.​

The spokesperson declined to provide further details, and said it is “not the usual practice of the AFP to provide a running commentary”.​

Just total virtue signaling, pearl clutching bullshit.

Not a single person believes that Thorpe was talking about arson.

She applauded the doors of the old parliament house being set alight, so I don't think it can be categorically stated that she wasn't talking about arson...

 

[Gralin]

She applauded the doors of the old parliament house being set alight, so I don't think it can be categorically stated that she wasn't talking about arson...

I think I'm not there to make friends made pretty clear the context she was saying the words in

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Are there actual people arguing in good faith that she meant she was literally going to bring a jerry can of petrol and set parliament alight? Like are they arguing this with a straight face?

 

[Gralin]

Are there actual people arguing in good faith that she meant she was literally going to bring a jerry can of petrol and set parliament alight? Like are they arguing this with a straight face?

I don't know about good faith

but certainly with a straight face

 

[Carn The Berries]

I think I'm not there to make friends made pretty clear the context she was saying the words in

Then, at absolute best, it's a terrible choice of words given there has previously been a fire at parliament house that she made light of.

 

[Gralin]

Then, at absolute best, it's a terrible choice of words given there has previously been a fire at parliament house that she made light of.

you'd think in 2025 you'd understand the concept of burn it all down

but I'm sure you do, you'd just rather tone police a black woman because its easier right?

 

[geoffjennings79]

Then, at absolute best, it's a terrible choice of words given there has previously been a fire at parliament house that she made light of.

The fire was at old parliament house's wooden doors, where there is also minimal security presence. No one is burning down new parliament house, or even starting a small fire, so easily.

I don't have a problem with her choice of words, as I don't take it as a threat to the physical structure, more to the inherent cronyism.