Australian Current Affairs Thread (not a Politics Thread) lol

[wendybr]

And the winners were - in terms of dignity, thoughtfulness, consistency, intelligence, humility...etc Catherine McGregor and Jordan Peterson.

Won't say what I thought of the smug young woman who made an idiot of herself, and showed her rudeness in the audience...

Milo's question would seem to indicate that JP is no longer an inspirational figure to the Alt Right.

Anyway- an interesting panel - and interesting questions on tonight's Q&A.

[Cynth]

Well I think Jordan Petersen was rattled by Terri Butler and the smooth logic of Catherine McGregor. He got sooky towards the end and complained of being insulted which is hilarious for a free speech guy. Not the composed man he used to be. 

[Cynth]

Oh and lol to the Milo question. Clearly also out there to rattle JP. I think his response was actually poor to Milo’s ridiculous question. 

[Cynth]

Wow Wendy, I didn’t think he had his usual dignity and didn’t take well to people pointing out his own sometimes insulting comments. 

We saw it differently. 

[wendybr]

14 minutes ago, Cynth said:

Well I think Jordan Petersen was rattled by Terri Butler and the smooth logic of Catherine McGregor. He got sooky towards the end and complained of being insulted which is hilarious for a free speech guy. Not the composed man he used to be. 

Disagree that he was  composed early on.  He has always been both composed in the face of provocation, and very emotional.

I've seen him overwhelmed with emotion in clips from the start of his notoriety. In tears.

 

Terri Butler came across as a hypocritical bitch to me...and I wouldn't have answered the young woman in the audience's question either. 

[Cynth]

3 minutes ago, wendybr said:

Disagree that he was composed. He has always been both composed in the face of provocation, and very emotional.

I've seen him overwhelmed with emotion in clips from the start of his notoriety.

 

Terri Butler came across as a hypocritical bitch to me...and I wouldn't have answered the young woman in the audience's question either. 

Wow I beg to differ. I can’t see the hypocrisy in Terri Butler. 

[wendybr]

1 minute ago, Cynth said:

Wow Wendy, I didn’t think he had his usual dignity and didn’t take well to people pointing out his own sometimes insulting comments. 

We saw it differently. 

You're right - he totally did get offended - and let it show.

He got a bit caustic - as he does - but wasn't as rude as the questioner - who was disgusting in her contemptuous tone "My questions is to Peterson....can you come up with something that isn't your usual banal rubbish"

But in the face of that - and something from Terri Butler as well, he remained ….restrained. He would have thought to himself...."Here we go again."

I thought he did OK in the face of two very hostile questions from both sides of the millennial political divide...and the eye rolling from two of the three women on the panel. 

I liked that JP and CM were on the same side mostly.

[wendybr]

3 minutes ago, Cynth said:

Wow I beg to differ. I can’t see the hypocrisy in Terri Butler. 

Can't remember what she said at one point but it was disrespectful towards him - and it began the friction between them...and then later she wanted to pontifificate about how if we all come together, the world is a better place,...blah blah blah.

 

I didn't like her.

[Cynth]

Did we watch the same show?

Sure the girl was rude in her question but there were several “offensive” questions characterising feminists, socialist and unionists in unflattering ways. 

Nobody owes Jordan Petersen an easy road and he has the choice of his own responses. He himself would say they are his responsibility. 

I also don’t agree that CM and JP were on the same side. CM respectfully disagreed with him on many points and even corrected him on the forced speech issue pointing out the relevant history! CM has the remarkable ability to say kindly what others would say bluntly. 

[Cynth]

5 minutes ago, wendybr said:

Can't remember what she said at one point but it was disrespectful towards him - and it began the friction between them...and then later she wanted to pontifificate about how if we all come together, the world is a better place,...blah blah blah.

 

I didn't like her.

He also made a  remark about how there was no such thing as altruism and that it was all to impress our neighbours after something she remarked about contributing to the debate around equality. Could easily be taken as an insult. I did. 

[wendybr]

6 minutes ago, Cynth said:

He also made a  remark about how there was no such thing as altruism and that it was all to impress our neighbours after something she remarked about contributing to the debate around equality. Could easily be taken as an insult. I did. 

I was always going to want to see him dealt questions that were respectful.

That was all I saw last time he was here - respectful interviewers - who hadn't made up their minds that he was automatically in the wrong, and none of them really had no idea what he was on about.

I was always going to feel hostile towards...those I ended up feeling hostile towards. 

Not sure he would have intended to say that (what you said above)...and I don't remember it - but the hostility between those two was palpable. And I thought she started it! 

 

But you and I have had some  differences around issues like gender quotas...and feminism... so it was likely that we wouldn't have read some of the issues the same way. 

[wendybr]

42 minutes ago, Cynth said:

Did we watch the same show?

Quote

Sure the girl was rude in her question but there were several “offensive” questions characterising feminists, socialist and unionists in unflattering ways. 

But not directed to one panelist in such a rude  and personal manner.

Quote

Nobody owes Jordan Petersen an easy road and he has the choice of his own responses. He himself would say they are his responsibility. 

Of course.

And he often gets too emotional - and acknowledges that he makes the wrong responses.

Quote

I also don’t agree that CM and JP were on the same side. CM respectfully disagreed with him on many points and even corrected him on the forced speech issue pointing out the relevant history!

Really?

I thought CM agreed with him far more than she disagreed with him.

Re the pronouns - whilst she said she had been personally hurt by deliberate misuse of pronouns, and she said that there WERE already restrictions on what people could say (eg the bomb on the plane joke) she didn't seem to agree that the govt had the right to legislate/dictate what people had to say.  

Quote

CM has the remarkable ability to say kindly what others would say bluntly. 

Ah-HA!

We agree! 

[Cynth]

I was thinking this morning that there is either a contradiction in JP’s message or his audience misconstrue him. 

He talks about “cleaning your room”, that is stepping up and taking responsibility for yourself in life, being the master of your own destiny, changing your mindset, having goals etc. A positive message, filled with self-determination. 

And yet there was not one question about this last night. The questions that were “pro JP” focussed on, IMO, victimhood. That the big power structures they see in society like feminism and socialism were affecting their lives. That men were affected by equality issues more than women and that Marxism took away their individuality. 

How is it, that JP can have one message in his book and yet his followers spend their time whining about how they have been wronged??

[Zelinsky]

So, JP is a psychologist, and from North America on top of that. No surprises that he looks at the world through the lenses of individualism, function, and behaviour. That's the philosophies both North American politics and psychology are standing on. Frozen in time. 

If he sees patients: he shouldn't. He talks too much stuff that is hard to understand, and he gets irritable and emotional way too quickly and intensely for comfort. How he reacted to provocative questions (which are "business as usual" at Q&A) was quite telling.

Rumour has it that the garbage collectors are still busy removing from the studio all the rubbish the liberal guy was leaving behind. To think that he is employed by the public as a federal minister is quite disturbing. 

[Paul01]

Facebook on a par with Russian hackers. Title is incorrect and should be Australian Electoral Commission (AEC)

Government contacts Facebook over mysterious political ads http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-26/facebook-electoral-commission-emails-reveal-political-ad-concern/10834736

[Neverbloom]

12 hours ago, wendybr said:

And the winners were - in terms of dignity, thoughtfulness, consistency, intelligence, humility...etc Catherine McGregor and Jordan Peterson.

Won't say what I thought of the smug young woman who made an idiot of herself, and showed her rudeness in the audience...

Milo's question would seem to indicate that JP is no longer an inspirational figure to the Alt Right.

Anyway- an interesting panel - and interesting questions on tonight's Q&A.

its funny how much we agree on

[sonar]

George Pell found guilty...........

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/26/cardinal-george-pell-vatican-treasurer-found-guilty-of-child-sexual-assault

 

[Neverbloom]

20 minutes ago, sonar said:

George Pell found guilty...........

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/26/cardinal-george-pell-vatican-treasurer-found-guilty-of-child-sexual-assault

 

good i hope he rots in prison but somehow i think he will get away with no prison time

[sonar]

2 minutes ago, Neverbloom said:

good i hope he rots in prison but somehow i think he will get away with no prison time

The consenus is he will go to prison.....as he should. That is the minimum the victims deserve,

[Carns]

Pell deserves to ******* rot. Hope the **** lives a long time to make the suffering last longer. Scum of the ******* earth that ****.

[Zelinsky]

The figures that come out of social work suggest that sexual abuse of children in Australia is frightfully high. As significant as the Pell case is: the vast majority of abuse happens in family environments, not in schools or organisations. And that is something that goes well beyond a royal commission. 

[Neverbloom]

2 hours ago, sonar said:

The consenus is he will go to prison.....as he should. That is the minimum the victims deserve,

i agree he should go to prison for the rest of his natural life, boy he will be popular in prison but i have pretty much zero faith that he will get what he deserves, hopefully i am wrong though

[hawks2767]

Protective custody, he'll be in with other undesirables.

The only real time someone like that is at risk is when they come up for a parole hearing, they go from whatever cushy hideout they have and get moved to general population whilst the parole hearing is on.

That's why most choose to serve out their full sentence.

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by hawks2767

[hawks2767]

*undesirables

[sonar]

42 minutes ago, Neverbloom said:

i agree he should go to prison for the rest of his natural life, boy he will be popular in prison but i have pretty much zero faith that he will get what he deserves, hopefully i am wrong though

And when he has completed his sentence he should be deported by the govt ....He holds a Vatican passport.

[Carns]

If you ever need further proof that these are partisan rags:

Admittedly, much of it is that ****wit Andrew Bolt.

[Cynth]

7 hours ago, FCB said:

So, JP is a psychologist, and from North America on top of that. No surprises that he looks at the world through the lenses of individualism, function, and behaviour. That's the philosophies both North American politics and psychology are standing on. Frozen in time. 

If he sees patients: he shouldn't. He talks too much stuff that is hard to understand, and he gets irritable and emotional way too quickly and intensely for comfort. How he reacted to provocative questions (which are "business as usual" at Q&A) was quite telling.

Rumour has it that the garbage collectors are still busy removing from the studio all the rubbish the liberal guy was leaving behind. To think that he is employed by the public as a federal minister is quite disturbing. 

He is not a psychologist in the true sense, he is an academic. The fact that he spruiks evolutionary psychology and philosophy as the basis of his theories is telling. 

He has some good stuff but yes he is individualistic. Not good at systemic stuff, attachment, trauma or neurology. 

[Zelinsky]

If there is a suspicious individual lurking around a school someone will call police to have him checked out. Teachers are not allowed to touch kids any longer. 

At the same time kids have been herded into the chambers of the paedophile network going by the name of "Catholic  church".

Pauline Hanson asked to having investigated if Islam is actually a religion. Could we have a royal collision please to clarify how exactly the Catholic Church differs from the Sicilian Mafia? 

[Davo]

Here's one of the replies below that tweet. Rather than concede it looks like Bolt has doubled down.

 

[Zelinsky]

And then there's Mark Coleridge, Archbishop of Brisbane, and president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference . A few days ago, in the Vatican, he had this to say:

"I think the Church has failed lamentably and therefore we have to cop whatever criticism comes our way, deal with it in a way that doesn’t cause paralysis and paranoia but does prompt us to action. I bring to the meeting my experience of meeting with victims over about 25 years which has been one of the most decisive and difficult experiences of my life, and it’s convinced me that until you’ve sat across the table from a victim of abuse and copped the rage and the grief … you don’t know what you are talking about.”

http://catholicleader.com.au/slideshow/archbishop-mark-coleridge-under-a-global-media-spotlight-in-rome-as-abuse-summit-begins

 

Today the media reports that "A complaint against Archbishop Coleridge was made by a Canberra woman who said she had a meeting with him in 2006 when he was Archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn about child sexual abuse allegations." And: "When the complainant was invited to cooperate with the independent investigation, she chose not to engage with the process. She has instead chosen to take these allegations to the media, which is deeply disappointing."

Independent investigation by the Church? Sounds a bit like the Nazi party investigating war crimes committed by the Wehrmacht. I think it is not "deeply disappointing" but "very understandable" that she went to the press, and didn't want to sit down with these guys.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/catholic-archbishop-mark-coleridge-investigated-over-handling-of-child-abuse-allegations/ar-BBU53El