Debating in bad faith
It’s one thing to disagree with your opponents, but it is characteristic of the Greens that they can’t just disagree, they must impugn the motives and morality of anyone who dares not share their world vision. With this attitude, it’s no wonder civilised debate in Australia is almost impossible, as Nick McKim illustrates:
Bullshit. Your fake compassion isn’t fooling anyone. If you care so much for the drowned why are you so hell bent on destroying the lives of those who survived? Fascist. https://t.co/0BmuivbAhA
— Nick McKim (@NickMcKim) September 1, 2019
For facts, read the judgment from the Federal Court, or just these sections:
- Also like the Minister, the Authority did not accept that the Appellant had, or would have, a profile of interest to the Sri Lankan authorities. The Authority observed that, despite any involvement of her brother and other family members with the LTTE, the Appellant and her family had been able to obtain passports and visas to depart Sri Lanka and travel to India. The Authority also noted that “over 12 years have passed since her brother left the LTTE and departed Sri Lanka”.
- The Authority also did not accept that the Appellant’s husband had “LTTE links that were of concern to the authorities, or would be of concern now”. The Authority noted that, despite his claimed involvement with the LTTE, the Appellant’s husband had “travelled to and from Sri Lanka for work on three occasions, to Qatar in 2004, to Kuwait in 2008 and to Qatar again in 2010” and had been able “to pass security checking at the airport in Colombo … on multiple occasions including during the civil war”. The Authority also observed that the family of the Appellant’s husband all continued to live openly in Sri Lanka and there was no indication that they had been the subject of adverse attention by the Sri Lankan authorities.
- The Authority did not therefore accept that the authorities had made inquiries about the whereabouts of the Appellant’s husband. Nor did the Authority accept that he would be detained or harmed on return to Sri Lanka. The Authority otherwise referred to country information about the changed circumstances in Sri Lanka since the end of the civil war and, in particular, the treatment of Tamils by the Sri Lankan authorities.
- In the circumstances, and given the Appellant’s ability to depart Sri Lanka lawfully and the passage of time since that departure, the Authority was not satisfied that the Appellant would be of interest to the authorities or would be imputed with a profile of support for the LTTE by reason of any prior involvement of her husband, her brother or other family members with the LTTE. The Authority was not satisfied that the Appellant would face a real chance of harm in Sri Lanka on account of, among other things, her status as a Tamil woman whose family members had had prior involvement with the LTTE. The Authority was also not satisfied that, as a failed asylum seeker, the Appellant would face a real chance of serious or significant harm on any return to Sri Lanka. The Authority therefore found that the Appellant did not satisfy the criteria in s 36(2) of the Act.
In other words, they lied.
Labor’s use of faith is bad faith
According to Kristina Kenneally, fighting for the Biloela 4 to remain in Australia:
“I don’t often like to mix religion and politics but the Prime Minister put his faith on public display during the federal election campaign.
“He made it a defining feature of who he is, the values he holds and what he stands for. What we are faced with in this circumstance is not a clear-cut question of law, it is a question of discretion, it goes to the issue of compassion, it goes to the issue of values and what a person holds in their heart.”
“I don’t often like to mix religion and politics”
The UK used to be a bastion of freedom
Protests in london at the moment accuse Boris Johnson of being a fascist for delaying parliament for five weeks over Brexit.
If they want to see fascism at play, they should look to their police:
A mumarrested in front of her kids for calling a transgender woman a man is to face court for trolling.
Kate Scottow, 38, is accused of making malicious communications on social media about campaigner Stephanie Hayden.
She must have said something truly outrageous. Threatened her life?
Earlier in the year the mum, from Hitchin, Hertfordshire, was detained at home and locked in cell after allegedly referring to Ms Hayden, a transgender rights activist, as a man.