That bow is so long that nobody can hold it. If every totalitarian regime that ever existed was "right wing" then how do you explain very strict censorship in Communist countries? A more reasonable person would have said that political censorship is a feature of all totalitarian regimes. The problem in western democracies at this point in time is that it is the left who are advocating political censorship. It is those ANTIFA brown shirt idiots who are running around on university campus's rioting and burning, and preventing right wing speakers from even speaking. It is left wing "debate" sites like your own who are banning right wing people from debating. It is the left wing HREOC mob who prosecute students who complain about being thrown out of "aboriginal only" study rooms because their skin colour is wrong.Briney wrote
The Right has been waging a war against free speech since the start of mankind.
That is called "free speech", Brian. Something that the left is afraid of at the moment and the youth of today are stating to figure it out. The left has a problem. It's arguments are so logically bankrupt that the only way it can keep pushing it's policies is through censorship. But the more the left demands censorship, the more the real smart people begin to realise that you are the new establishment oppressors. If you guys keep looking like fascists, talking like fascists, and acting like fascists, sooner or later the public will realise that you are fascists.Briney wrote
In the case of Climate Change, they have been attacking (verbally and in print) scientists who have been telling the truth about that and Global Warming.
The entire western world is turning to the Right, Brian. The left told too many lies. And people all over the western world are extrapolating forward and realising that accepting left wing multiculturalism will lead to the social suicide of their own civilisation.
Brian Ross wrote
They have been funding faux research to promote the continued use of fossil fuels - in exactly the same way that the tobacco industry attacked anti-smoking researchers.
Then you are admitting that science can be cornuted by vested interests. That works both ways. The question then begs just which side of the HIGW hoax question are the corrupt scientists?
The climate scientists at the CSIRO claimed that HIGW was real and "the science was settled." The federal government then replied that if the science was settled, then the CSIRO did not need the continued influx of research funds to find out if HIGW was true. The scientists replied, No! No! No! No! No! No! We still need the money! The whole HIGW hoax came about when climate scientists around the globe realised that it was in their collective interests to promote a theory they knew was not true. Their reward was increased funding and the elevation in status of the fairly obscure science of of climate science.Brian Ross wrote
Then you have the idiot politicians who have been attacking scientists, starving them of funds and so on.
Oh yeah?Brian Ross lies again.
This is not secret. It has been going on for at least the last 25 years. Ask any scientist - if you know any. If you were really concerned about the free flow of ideas, this should be your number one priority
It is the HIGW alarmists trying to shut up those climate scientists who oppose HIGW, Brian. Not the other way around.Institute of Public Affairs press release.
The Institute of Public Affairs has welcomed the decision of the Federal Circuit Court in relation to Dr Peter Ridd’s case against James Cook University.
Today, it was announced in the Federal Circuit Court that Dr Ridd will receive $1,219,214.47 in damages following the Court’s decision in April that Dr Ridd was unlawfully sacked.
Damages awarded $1.2 million is comprised of approximately $167,000 for past wages and superannuation lost, $835,000 for future wages and superannuation lost, $90,000 for general damages and $125,000 as pecuniary penalty.
“The sum awarded reflects the appalling nature of JCU’s treatment of Dr Ridd and vindicates Peter Ridd’s fight for academic freedom, free speech and integrity of climate science and peer review,” said Gideon Rozner, Director of Policy at the IPA.
“James Cook University must now rethink its stated plans to prolong this ugly dispute by appealing the decision. Dr Ridd won this case on all 17 counts. It is time for JCU to accept the decision and move on.”
“The very fact that an Australian university is willing to force the weight of an entire administration backed by taxpayer funds to stifle an academic’s freedom of speech sends a massive chilling effect to any academic engaging in public debate in Australia.”
“James Cook University’s shameful actions prove without doubt there is a crisis of free speech at Australian Universities. A freedom of information request lodged by the Institute of Public Affairs with James Cook University revealed that the University has already spent at least $630,000 on legal fees in the Dr Peter Ridd case.
“Dragging this matter to a higher court would be unfair not only to Dr Ridd, but to JCU’s students who expect the university to spend its resources on teaching and research, not pointless legal frolics.”
“It is time for JCU’s council to step in to restore sanity, and save the university from spending millions of taxpayer dollars to exert control over a fine and sincere 30-year employee.”
But you already knew that.
