Bold words.
Got anything to back that up? Because if it's just your opinion, that counts for two fifths of five eighths of fuck all.
Bold words.
I’ll pull my head in as soon as you pull yours out.Nathan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 3:10 pmHonestly Rev, pull your fucking head in.
You're more focussed on barracking for a team and "getting one over the lefties" than wanting people effectively run the country to the benefit of everyone. A centre-left party and a moderate-left party are not even close to "socialist" and Di Natale was barely in parliament, let alone in a leadership position within the Greens during Labor's second spill in 2012 (he entered July 2011).
This isn't about Labor or the Greens, no amount of whataboutism or hypotheticals can distract from the shitshow that was the Liberal party this week. I want to see decisions made that are good for everyone, not made to troll people on the other side of the fence.
From what I gather rev wants no shit. We seem to get too much of it in Australian politics from all sides. So let him exercise his right to free speech. If anyone doesn't like it (including you [Shuz]), they can stick it.
Shuz & Nathan, are more interested in attacking people for their views/opinions/beliefs, then having a discussion.
Pretty sure the right to free speech isn't a defence against defamation suits. I'm no lawyer, however Rev might like to re-phrase his comment out of consideration for that as the publisher can be held liable I believe.
I'm not going to rephrase a thing. What he's accused of is in the public domain.shiftaling wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:31 amPretty sure the right to free speech isn't a defence against defamation suits. I'm no lawyer, however Rev might like to re-phrase his comment out of consideration for that as the publisher can be held liable I believe.
Yes but you stated an allegation as fact.rev wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:15 amI'm not going to rephrase a thing. What he's accused of is in the public domain.shiftaling wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:31 amPretty sure the right to free speech isn't a defence against defamation suits. I'm no lawyer, however Rev might like to re-phrase his comment out of consideration for that as the publisher can be held liable I believe.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests