The Australian Love Group
@richbrucebaxter
Followers
81
Following
9K
Media
163
Statuses
3K
#logophobia "Any entity (be it not for national security) that prevents freedom of speech is a terrorist organisation" 30/4/17. Nature sans "militant democracy"
Joined September 2010
@ajmackiel Kin sel requires detect and comm of gen dist (H: vis/ling sys). It depends on formulation of r. G dist/prox is a func of shared SNP variants between individuals; it is not a func of the prob of sharing identical genes. Will differ between ind in sep pops https://t.co/2nToqgO85X
0
0
5
All speech is hate speech from someone else’s perspective.
0
0
0
The defining feature of animal farm is that no one knows they are in it.
0
0
0
@LibertariansNSW Australia already has implied constitutional protections of freedom of speech, as necessitated in the definition of any democracy. The issue is that it could not envisage politicians so negligent as to import populations that would undermine its democratic principles.
0
1
6
@ausvstheagenda The Libertarians suggested it recently, but any explication of implicit democratic rights gives credence to communist terrorism. That said, what level of corruption would it require for someone to frame a referendum against anti-speech laws in democracy as self-interested?
0
1
0
@TruthFairy131 Anyone advocating for anti-speech laws in a democracy that does not have heritage status should have their citizenship revoked and be deported immediately for national security.
1
2
12
Declaring political opponents "hate groups" for the purpose of restricting their rights is a recipe for civil war. This is precisely why the subjective notion of “hate speech” is not a legally recognised construct, and law only ever targets violence (or its advocacy/support).
Pauline Hanson has spent decades demonising Muslims in the Senate with zero consequences, but put an anti-fascist poster on your bar wall and the AFP comes knocking. Labor's first scalp under their hate speech laws isn't a hate group and that says everything.
0
0
0
The purpose (and original definition) of terrorism is to control speech. https://t.co/6zaqakHwb6
freedom.gov
Something big is coming
0
0
0
@NoticerNews The reason why democracies do not criminalise speech (that is not a call for violence) is because there is a non-zero probability that a (future) identity group may comprise “the greatest enemy of a nation”. Speech evolved for this purpose. Civil liberties are not political toys.
1
1
7
BREAKING: Over 40 antifa members and Islamists beat a young French conservative to death in France.
554
3K
7K
There is an association between immigration and politicians telling people how to think and what they are allowed to say. Remigration/moratorium is a way of restoring their right to protest genocide (“intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial.. group”).
Regional areas most likely to vote PHON were least affected by recent surge in migration. Are oldest populations in OZ most likely to need health & aged care workers (increasingly immigrants). Never underestimate capacity of bigots to vote against their own interest (as in US).
0
0
0
When a house has a 7.26% probability of being in the process of burning down, the people who shout that the house is burning down are not a threat to house security, it is the people who silence those who are shouting.
0
0
0
This makes sense and is a completely reasonable and democratic requirement.
“If the Nationalist Socialist Network disavowed violence and stopped making references to Hitler, I can see a White Australia Party forming and allowed to establish themselves without falling foul of the prohibited hate group.”
0
0
0
@MarkRichardson2 Australia has always been multicultural, we have always been at war with Eurasia.
3
3
30
The irony of National Socialists having animosity against Ashkenazis when they are effectively a time capsule of Roman DNA.
0
0
0