Robert Inglis wrote:
Well, this has been some day!
As a result of my posting I have received some interesting, to say the
least, responses.
Unfortunately, some of those responses have made unpleasant reading.
More fool me for thinking I could have a reasonable discussion about
such a topic on this forum .
I don't want to add to the detritus other than to point out to those
people who may be having difficulty understanding what I have
previously written in plain, simple English:
- no where in my posting or anywhere else have I said I agree with
Miranda Devine;
- no where have I said that anyone should accept as truth what Miranda
Devine has written;
- no where have I said that every one should not read what Miranda
Devine has written;
- no where have I said that I object to other people having a
different opinion to mine;
- no where have I said that anyone or everyone should have the same
opinion as mine;
- no where have I said that I favour prescribed burning;
- no where have I said I don't favour prescribed burning;
- no where have I expressed an opinion on prescribed burning;
- no where have I said that greenies are to blame for the fire
disaster of Black Saturday;
- no where have I said anyone is to blame for the fire disaster of
Black Saturday;
- no where have I claimed to know anything about bush-fires,
prescribed burning, the dangers of living in fire-prone areas.
Anyone who claims the contrary is simply being mischievous.
What I have said is that I believe people should listen to all of the
arguments and points of view before rushing into a hasty conclusion.
If people don't want to do that, then that is their problem.
I have no more to say on this subject on this forum.
Bob Inglis
Sandstone Point
Qld
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
Bob Inglis said:
"What I have said is that I believe people should listen to all of the
arguments and points of view before rushing into a hasty conclusion.
If people don't want to do that, then that is their problem."
Yes, its reasonable to suggest that we consider all points of view. But
there are two strands to this discussion. The strong offence taken
Divine and her ilk is not to do with their belief in
this-that-or-the-other cause of the bushfires. I dont think anyone in
this discussion, apart from perhaps the Diva herself would advocate
restrictions on freedom of speech. But freedom of speech is not
unlimited. The offence I have taken is to the calls to single out
particular groups of people for violent, vigilante treatment, for
political purposes. Divine is free to think what she wants about
conservation, backburning, fuel reduction, or anything else. She is not
free to call for lynchings, irrestpective of the serious consequences
and suffering caused by the bushfires. Advocating violence against
people is illegal, and for someone in her "profession" it is a breach of
ethical conduct. Using the suffering of people who have been affected
by the bushfire to illicit an irrational, populist response is gutter
journalism. For all of us, it should be treated as morally reprehensible
and unacceptable. People should not have to 'listen' to anyone
advocating hate. Call me hasty if you want, but I don't need to give
this aspect of the issue any further consideration before deciding what
I think of it.
Scott O'Keeffe
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
