Unhinged Vitriolic Speech

[silverfaun]

This disgusting swan song from a Green was lauded on here as a milestone and a rival to Gillards misplaced misogyny rant.

The people who support this type of hate speech are not indicitive of the wider Australian people and to applaud this type of hate  is appalling.

I will stand up to this type of thing and so will the majority of Australians. This person is not fit to be in parliament and he should be rejected wholeheartedly by everyone, which he will be come the WA re election, and good riddance to him and his ilk:

SPORTING dark suit and speaking in a calm, measured tone, Scott Ludlam is the acceptable face of the Greens.

He has spoken out previously against the “people’s revolt” against the carbon tax that sparked the “Ditch the Witch” nastiness.

Ludlam’s style is the antithesis of histrionics such as the current appalling rock concert concoctions of a fake prime ministerial beheading.

This week the West Australian senator rose to a near-empty chamber and delivered a prepared speech without raising his voice and with no one around to interject. Later, the 7 1/2-minute speech went viral on YouTube, a hit with the young Green Left crowd, attracting 400,000 hits within a few days.

But forget the style of the speech; it merely disguised a message that was divisive, vindictive and in the end subversive.

“We want our country back,” he said, just six months after a federal election. This is a senator who, with his colleagues, holds the balance of power in the Senate on about 10 per cent of the vote.

Yet he told supporters they were somehow disenfranchised.

Ludlam spoke of “predator capitalism” and a “murderous horror unfolding on Manus Island” as he launched an attack on the Prime Minister and his government. He suggested Abbott treated WA as a “caricatured redneck backwater” and that it was “kind of revolting” that the Prime Minister consulted with “mining billionaires and media oligarchs on the other side of the world”.

Ludlam provided no serious evidence or justification for his slurs. He even talked about Abbott - who I first met 20 years ago through a mutual gay friend and who has been publicly loving and supportive of his gay sister - as “waving (his) homophobia in people’s faces”.

We know the Greens are a party of protest but this invective was simply hateful.

“Prime Minister,” said Ludlam, “you are welcome to take your heartless and racist exploitation of people’s fears and ram it as far from Western Australia as your taxpayer-funded travel entitlements can take you.”

So Ludlam used the Senate to denigrate a freshly elected Prime Minister who is implementing his agenda - to the extent that he isn't blocked by Ludlam’s party - as racist, cynically manipulative, heartless and exploitative.

On what evidence?

This vitriol is subversive because it suggests a democratic government has somehow stolen the country. If Ludlam and his supporters want their “country back” surely the way to do it is through fair-minded criticism and a viable alternative.

No matter how calmly it is presented, unhinged hatred can’t help anyone.

[freakiness]

He wasn't cowering on the video I saw.

Why do you expect him to turn up for someone who had attacked him and called him vile moments before the invitation?

[silverfaun]

---

@izabsmiling wrote:

---

@silverfaun wrote:

As much as I'd like to reply to all responses I'm sure you can understand that to do so will prob result in a slap, so keep replying I'm enjoying all your responses.

---

I'm glad that you are enjoying all of the responses... though I  hope that posters will post regardless of your own personal enjoyment (or not ) of their posts.

---

Soooo, you hope posters will still post but you  hope I won't enjoy reading them????? is that what you are trying to say, lol Have I got that right or woould you rather post again and clarify exactly what you meant

[silverfaun]

I meant inconsequent, I made it up as an adjective but it fit so well

[lakeland27]

well i wouldn't criticise that, i invent terms and words. a bit of license is OK with me.

[freakiness]

---

@silverfaun wrote:

I'm glad that you are enjoying all of the responses... though I  hope that posters will post regardless of your own personal enjoyment (or not ) of their posts.

---

Soooo, you hope posters will still post but you  hope I won't enjoy reading them????? is that what you are trying to say, lol Have I got that right or woould you rather post again and clarify exactly what you meant

---

No, you have not got that right.   

There is no way that can fairly be interpreted as she hopes you won't enjoy reading the replies.

[silverfaun]

---

@freakiness wrote:

---

@silverfaun wrote:

I'm glad that you are enjoying all of the responses... though I  hope that posters will post regardless of your own personal enjoyment (or not ) of their posts.

---

Soooo, you hope posters will still post but you  hope I won't enjoy reading them????? is that what you are trying to say, lol Have I got that right or woould you rather post again and clarify exactly what you meant

---

No, you have not got that right.   

There is no way that can fairly be interpreted as she hopes you won't enjoy reading the replies.

---

I'm sorry, did you mistakenly think I directed my response to you? or have you taken to answering her questions? it's very confusing that's all, because I was expecting a response from the person I responded to.

[freakiness]

Why?

It's a public forum.

[izabsmiling]

That's right it is and the OP isn't the only one who may be uninclined to post for fear of slaps.I can't do the pro Liberal vitrioic political posts.The invite was unneccessary really as is the need for posters to please other posters.

but because it was issued and  with the mention of slaps after a thanks to a mod ...things got unnerving to say the least.

 .Knowing that my posts don't really please some  simply as I do not support the things our Current Government says and does......I felt like a fly close to a spider ,

[izabsmiling]

The song 'Things that make you go hmmmm' came to mind 

[silverfaun]

I do understand the fly on the fly paper feeling as well. If you scroll through this thread you'll see only one other poster on here who was not of the left out of the 79 responses.

So you can imagine all the provocative replies and baits was unnerving to me and that's why I think  the mods came in.

If a person can't post their opinions and views without getting an extended holiday or even a full retirement then it's a sad day for the political fora on here.

If you don't like an opinion isn't it better to put up an some debatable argument rather than snipes, goads, baiting questions ( a favourite of some)  and making it personal that could see a person taking a long trip or full retirement.

This is not gladiator, its political debate and bound to heat up if you don't agree but that's no excuse to shut that poster down by multiple reports or get the thread locked by deliberately antagonising, derailing and disregard for cs guidelines that sees the thread removed.