Must Watch Video On Free Speech

As Free Speech continues to come under attack in Australia, this short YouTube is not only a must watch, but it’s a must to send out to all your friends:

h/t Jo Nova

46 Replies to "Must Watch Video On Free Speech"

  • Wendy
    5 June, 2012 (3:40 am)

    I am thankful you guys are fighting back. I am losing respect for Australia… not the people but the country. Although I am “working class” I absolutely hate the Labor Party. There… I used the word “hate”… and guess what? It felt good.

    • Noel Tiplady
      5 June, 2012 (6:46 am)

      Totally agree with you Wendy. I would normally just keep my head down and get on with life, not cause any waves, but with this ALP/ Greens/ Independent minority government and their attacks on our freedoms I can no longer remain a part of the silent majority.
      This blatant attempt to take away our Freedom of Speech has got to be stopped. For the first time in my life I am prepared to take to the streets and march against this oppressive regime in Canberra. Enough is enough, time to stand up and be counted!
      Freedom of Speech is our right and should not be taken from us!

    • John W
      14 June, 2012 (5:31 pm)

      Your heart is in the right place, Wendy, but it’s a bit unreasonable to lose respect for an inanimate object, even if it is a country.
      Have the courage to go the whole hog and admit that it’s it wishy-washy-woosy mealy-mouthed apologetic people we have become that you have lost respect for. Me too!!!

    • John W
      14 June, 2012 (5:33 pm)

      I forgot to click on ‘notify me’ squares.

    • Deeba
      16 July, 2012 (8:26 pm)

      You tell ’em girlfriend!

    • Jenny
      19 July, 2012 (10:32 am)

      i am with you Wendy! I am sick of both parties if only there was an alternative.

      • Heike Jindra
        23 July, 2012 (6:20 pm)

        Re “SICK OF BOTH / ALL THREE PARTIES”. I made effort some years ago to inform myself of Independent candidates via the governmental website which presents candidates (can’t remember the proper name). Well, I could not find useful information. No phone, e- or other address to contact them. This site was (and probably is) all but show.
        For change to occur, we have to remove the money aspect from all candidates. It has to be a public website which enables all voters to find solid information of candidates, not the candidates spending their money in order to be known. As it stands now, it’s the money of the parties which makes candidates known to us – the same picture as in business: mono- or duopoly!
        Then – we have to pray that they DO stay independent!

  • Robert
    5 June, 2012 (7:46 am)

    Great video presentation, how true all what you say here is , we watch and read daily of new suggestions to curtail our freedoms and rights, the media should be belting these totalitarians with a sledghammer.
    This should be compulsory watching in schools

    • Kathi
      10 July, 2012 (11:57 am)

      You’re quite right, Robert. This video should be watched in all schools – the trouble is, most teachers vote Labor or Green and are so biased that they are against freedom of speech themselves. They are one of the main forces responsible for teaching children what to think, rather than how to think, and they are indoctrinating them to believe that capitalism is evil and “democratic socialism” is the way to go. We need to totally de-politicise the education system and its biased national curriculum.

  • Louis
    5 June, 2012 (8:52 am)

    Thanks to you guys we have half a fighting chance against this Facist Neo Socialist Dictatorship under they yoke of Comrade Gillard and her Communist Clown Circus. God bless you guys.

    • Allan
      28 June, 2012 (11:38 am)

      Here, here…
      Next she will stop genuine Australians from having more than 1 child, so the others can out number use more quickly. (I can’t mention race or religion for fere of being locked up by Comrade Gillard)
      Keep up the good work.

  • Gederts Skerstens
    8 June, 2012 (4:37 pm)

    All true. But the problem in dealing with the Left is they put no value on truth, since doing so would put them at a disadvantage. They mean to win and their main advantage is exactly in routine, unmoderated Lying, while Conservatives hold Truth as the greatest good. We spend a lot of energy pointing out their untruths to people who don’t care for the idea of Truth at all.

    The philosophising has to be replaced by simple, clear statistics: who migrates from where to where, why, and in what numbers; how many Cambodians in Melbourne shopping-malls remember accurately what the Western withdrawal from South-East Asia meant for them or why anyone from Eastern Europe wants to vomit if they hear ‘Comrade’.

    Those fundamentals have to be publicised and made clear, as often as possible, while urging anyone interested in the ultimate results of Leftism to ask a Pole, Balt or Cambodian, rather than the yappers on The Drum or Crikey.

    (Could be a great site. However, the first click that leads to it has to go straight to commentaries. That’s what draws interest and can keep it snowballing.)

    • Heike Jindra
      13 July, 2012 (9:04 pm)

      My husband grew up in Communist Czechoslowakia. He says: the propaganda raging in this country outdoes that of communist Czechoslowakia – except no one can see it. (We’re the best, the greatest, best economy, the support of sports (just like there), we’re doing well – and on it goes.) There, the people mistrusted everything the Gov said. Sadly, some things about the West were actually true as my husband NOW finds out!

  • Jo
    8 June, 2012 (6:38 pm)

    Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001 – SECT 14

    Immunity from liability

    14. Immunity from liability

    A person who makes a protected disclosure is not subject to any civil or
    criminal liability or any liability arising by way of administrative process
    (including disciplinary action) for making the protected disclosure.

    • Gederts Skerstens
      8 June, 2012 (7:17 pm)

      What’s a ‘Protected Disclosure’ as distinct from a garden-variety Disclosure?

    • susan
      28 June, 2012 (12:27 pm)

      How is that concept working for Kathy Jackson? the whistleblower in the Craig Thomson sounds to me as though she’s getting a pretty hard time from the Labor Government over this. 🙁

    • Michael
      22 July, 2012 (10:43 am)

      I’m afraid that the whistleblowers Protection Act2001 – SECT 14 does not work and no one takes any notice of it not even the Lawyers will use it. My wife made a protected disclosure about a dirty filthy chef, old foods and left over dinners of 2 weeks and beyond were served to residents of an elderly nursing home, when she told the location manager he responded “that’s nothing to do with me” then the nursing home started to fabricate reports against my wife they had a few meetings even with the HSU present and made my wife the culprit till the nursing home got rid of her, Fairwork Australia sided with the nursing home’s HR in that she lied very well to the FW and got away with it. Today the same chef works in the nursing home and God knows what he is feeding the elderly residents

    • Tony Ryan
      9 August, 2012 (7:17 am)

      What the hell does that mean, Jo?

  • Greg Short
    10 July, 2012 (11:38 am)

    The Thin edge od the wedge is inserted, it just depends on your view as to how far!!!!!!!!

  • Tony Ryan
    10 July, 2012 (12:32 pm)

    While I regard the points made as unarguable, I wonder about what was not said; and why it was not said. Of course the media must be free, and we must be free to speak our minds and to present empirical data without fear of vilification or arrest (as was Hanson), but when 70% of the media is owned by Rupert Murdoch, and is 100% controlled by him, including the ABC and especially SBS; how is this free?

    For example, I have written articles that tell the evidential proof about how the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody actually found against itself, while the Government and Murdoch media present the opposite outcome. That the Stolen Generation was no such thing… having read every single NT file on the subject and knowing the families of many claimants. That every worker in a succession of jobs is paying multiple life insurance premiums without his or her knowledge or consent. And so on; but not one of these articles that should be front page news can ever be published. Why? Because we do not have a free press.

    An elite runs this country, which in turn marches to a tune played by Frank Lowry and Rupert Murdoch, and above them, David Rockefeller and the Rothschilds. And the journalists who call so courageously for protection of free press, all work for News Ltd… Rupert Murdoch. None of this was said, and this is why I choose my allies carefully.

  • TruthPrevials
    10 July, 2012 (12:33 pm)

    So true!!! And the media already censors things like anti-abortion or anti-homosexual marriage speech big time anyway. It will just be much much more difficult to say anything through MSM that is not politically correct … like ‘Burn the witch’ Gillard.

  • Boyd Murray
    10 July, 2012 (12:52 pm)

    Wow – clear, concise, and hard-hitting!! I will pass this on to my friends.

    Many thanks must go to the film creator Chris Topher Field.

  • Boyd Murray
    10 July, 2012 (1:06 pm)

    Tony Ryan said: “when 70% of the media is owned by Rupert Murdoch, and is 100% controlled by him, including the ABC and especially SBS; how is this free?”

    Tony, it is hard to believe that the ‘left-wing’ ABC is controlled by ‘right-wing’ Rupert Murdoch. At least now, we can hear opposing views from different sources. If Labor’s Finkelstein has his way, the opposing views would be silenced (by intimidation) and the media would revert to the ‘fairness’ of the former Soviet news agency Tass.

    • Tony Ryan
      10 July, 2012 (2:06 pm)

      Good point, Boyd. Actually, Left and Right were concepts that emerging in the 1793 part of the French Revolution but have since become misinterpreted. The Right believes power should only be in the hands of those equipped to use it; hence plutocracies, theocracies, monarchies, oligarchies, dictatorships, and so on; regardless of whether these hierarchies are self-appointed or elected.

      The Left believes all power should be in the hands of all of the people; as proselytised by Thomas Paine in those times. Note that electing people to do our thinking for us was not a part of this philosophy; and this was made abundantly clear by Thucydides of ancient Greece when he said: “Even though we business people are fully occupied with commerce we have a sound understanding of politics, and we regard a man who does not contribute in this way as a worthless person”. In other words, Thucydides, Thomas Paine, Abraham Lincoln (government of the people, by the people and for the people), and Lord Acton; probably the finest political minds of all history, all agreed that power corrupts and all leaders accumulate power and are thus corrupted. Their conclusion was that power MUST be in the hands of the people; which in todays context means all policy must be formulated in the electorate through engagement of consensus protocols (the 1976 referendum was the perfect example of how easy and workable this is). Paine reinforced this view with: “All authority derives from the people”.

      Now, to answer your implied question, for the past century the Rothschild/Rockefeller Alliance has, through certain media owners and hundreds of think tanks and NGOs, promoted the view that Left represents the socialist/communist viewpoint. We should note that all right wing AND socialist/communist regimes turn into dictatorships, which is inevitable considering they are all elitist and hierarchical. Ergo, both are right wing. The ABC and SBS are elitist and hierarchist in philosophy, and you will note that every event is responded to with interviews with ‘left’ and right; and with their choice of ‘people’ ie refugee advocates, gay advocates, Aboriginal advocates, and never any of us ordinary dudes… who are in fact The People. And, you will note, that in spite of minor policy differences, the major parties are Tweedledum and Tweedledee in action. In politics, Boyd, this is called political fraud. I wrote an e-booklet on specifically how Australia was globalised by stealth, if you are interested, and also on the stark difference between democracy and representation.

  • M Lewis
    10 July, 2012 (1:09 pm)

    Thank you for the Video .
    I saw this happening in the Hawke and Keating years , where freedom of speech was slowly being eroded .Where it almost was a sin to even mention that you were an Australian .I use to hear whilst standing at a bus stop in Sydney old people whispering to each other that they were not happy to what is happening in Australia . When John Howard won Government people started to breath again and felt Freedom of Speech has returned and they could speak what is on their minds .
    This time it’s worse than those years because we have a Labor Government and the radical Greens who are intent on silencing anyone who wants to voice an opinion .We must fight to retain freedom of speech before it is completely taken away from us and we become ruled by a KGB type Australian Labor Goverment .
    I believe we all should be worried , we cannot sit around and permit this to happen .

    • Tony Ryan
      10 July, 2012 (2:25 pm)

      It was John Howard who launched the bi-party campaign of vilification and persecution of Pauline Hanson, whose maiden speech was polled the next day as supported by 94% of the national electorate. And was there anything in that speech that anyone would argue with today? Both the ALP and Coalition hated that speech, as did the Greens. And it was John Howard who introduced the crime of Sedition… speaking out against the government. M Lewis, in seeing the guilt of only one party you assist the real elite in playing divide and rule.

  • john swinkels
    10 July, 2012 (4:48 pm)

    thank you so much chris you are the only person that has given me some form of hope.australia is such a great country but we are governed by so many idiots who are hell bent on destroying our way of life.
    we all know or do we, that socialism does not work.
    mate you have my support i am doing what ever i can to get the word out

  • Terry Farrell
    10 July, 2012 (4:55 pm)

    Congratulations on a great hard hitting truthful presentation of how we are loosing our freedom of speach. Why is it that the multitude are not protesting what is happening? I note particularly the potential for a $1.1 Mil penalty for speaking against the carbon tax. How can this be allowed to happen. What is the oppostition saying about it?

  • Karen Ward
    10 July, 2012 (5:09 pm)

    Authority, arrogance, delusions of grandeur, thumb screws on the heads of many, mean that what we recognise as Free speech no longer exists – or won’t if this reports recommendations take hold. People like Abe Lincoln, Mandela, helped sow the seeds of a modern democracy – this serious threat to our’s in the establishing of this dangerous council is real. How much longer do we stand impotent and “let it happen?”..come on people. Start bombarding the polies on all sides – don’t allow them to breathe fresh air! It’s okay to blog, etc….but you need to commit to taking yourselves beyond the comfort zone, and DO MUCH MORE. Thanks so much Tim and Team

  • Charles Mollison
    10 July, 2012 (5:34 pm)

    A really good video. I would like to see Topher make one on restoring Power to the People. I will be donating to his fund.

  • Dallas Beaufort
    10 July, 2012 (6:42 pm)

    Green Labor’s policy equates to No CO2 = no plants = no humans

    • Tony Ryan
      10 July, 2012 (10:30 pm)

      You are so right. CO2 is aerial plant food and, it appears we have removed so much flora our oxygen levels are falling. What we need is more plants, and more CO2. I wonder idley if the proselytisers of AGW do not have this in mind as part of their Agenda 21.

  • Doug Harrison
    10 July, 2012 (9:03 pm)

    Very interesting. I am a lateral free thinker so this sort of discussion seems obvious to me.

    Please contact, I have much to discuss re your efforts. Have been studying effort re a better Australia for over 20 years.

    Can contact 03 5983 6550
    Doug Harrison
    so help me God.

  • Phil Maguire
    10 July, 2012 (9:07 pm)

    Free speech has to be balanced by responsibility.

    It’s when we fail to be responsible that we open the door to people like Gillard and Conroy who would silence us if they could.

    There’s an old saying about making sure your brain is engaged before you open your mouth. It’s good advice.

    I haven’t always practiced what I preach, but I do believe in the principle and try to live by it.

    Having said that I’ll continue to say what I like and keep telling everyone else to shut up, including Gillard, Conroy and Finkelstein. :))

  • John
    10 July, 2012 (10:04 pm)

    I too am what would probably be considered a ‘left winger’, and it’s actually because of that I’m opposed to these ever increasing laws against free speech. What are people so afraid of when their only response to somebody saying something disagreeable is to threaten them with fines or jail ? Their true fear may be that they know they’re wrong and can’t handle this being proven. Freedom of speech is worth fighting for.

    • Tim Andrews
      10 July, 2012 (10:05 pm)

      Agreed – free speech isn’t a left/right issue, it’s a right/wrong issue!
      If you have nothing to fear, then you should not oppose free speech!

  • jonah stiffhausen
    11 July, 2012 (5:44 pm)

    Great stuff.
    Finklestein is just another tedious lawyer.
    Lawyers are no friends of freedom.
    It’s about time we started jailing legislators, judges and magistrates who openly defy the Constitution.
    Jailing people without jury trials is an example that immediately springs to mind.
    Proposing tyrannical legislation deserves similar consideration. Restricting people’s freedom of movement, association and speech is an abomination.
    This is what occurs now, under the guise of “Intervention Orders”
    The language has been Orwellianized.
    Wake up People!
    Finklestein, Bromberg etc all deserve the opprobrium of their fellows. Spit in their faces or at the very least, laugh hysterically whenever their names are mentioned.
    Power freaks don’t like being laughed at.

    • Tony Ryan
      11 July, 2012 (9:13 pm)

      Jonah… you are no simple disgruntled Aussie. More like a revolutionary tactician. Good to know there is your calibre around. Your talents will be needed sooner rather than later, methinks. Australian fury is more intense than most people realise, but it becomes apparent if you do the right kind of surveys.

  • Stuart
    13 July, 2012 (11:43 pm)

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Australia is a signatory has this to say in Article 1:

    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

    and in Article 7:

    All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

    Maybe it’s time to lay claim to our human rights and hold those accountable who trespass against them…top video Topher!!

  • TV
    15 July, 2012 (1:04 am)

    I think the whole production lost credibility in your credits once bolts name appeared. Andrew bolt, is about taking people’s freedom and dignity from his definition of free speech. I don’t mind our ability to speak out against government, but to personally attack and vilify people personally is a totally different story. it is a shame you added his name in the credits, it changed the whole context of it for me.

    • Tim Andrews
      16 July, 2012 (12:06 pm)

      To clarify: the fact that Andrew Bolt supported a project in favour of free speech means that you no longer believe free speech is worth protecting and will not support the video (even though apparently you agreed with it up until watching the credits)

    • aussiegtrl
      8 August, 2012 (5:25 am)

      Funny that! it had the opposite effect on me, Bolt speaks out on freedom of speech issues, ,amongst his many other views on democracy and politics, that takes guts, so what have you done in the defense of free speech lately?
      lets focus on the issues, and be less critical, we are all in the same camp I hope

    • aussiegtrl
      13 August, 2012 (2:58 pm)

      I think Andrew Bolts name added credibility to this article. I greatly respect those who speak out regardless of being criticized..I am soooo fed up with the PC Brigade , and the perpetually offended….sometimes the TRUTH does hurt, but has to be said anyway… BTW loved this video.Freedom of Speech is worth fighting for.

  • Gederts Skerstens
    16 July, 2012 (5:51 pm)

    A repeat, but worth repeating: While a democratic majority ultimately calls the shots, everything’s fixable.
    The upcoming election will provide the new government with a decisive mandate and several terms. This can’t be squandered on simply budgetting – the fundamental cultural changes mentioned by the posters above have to get equal attention. A type of “Parallel Government” has been allowed to operate for forty years in every institution. This has to be stopped and is quite stoppable.
    All the things that need fixing have to go on the election platform. All of them, clearly and in detail.
    Once a large majority endorses the platform, action can be taken immediately, decisively and full-blast.
    Close off the money-siphons to the Left. The university endowments, prizes and grants. Close political departments like ‘Social Inclusion’ and ‘Climate Change’ outright. Not amalgamate or absorb. Close. Restore the Curriculum to a previous one, that pursued education and not re-education, using sustainable indigenous parameters.
    Make it clear to the judiciary that they’re employees who ultimately do as instructed by the guys that pay them: Us. First time a parliament-approved law is rejected as unconstitutional have the argument include what constitutional change would be required – then put it to a referendum. The cash cost is trivial compared to the cultural cost of having a few guys with special wigs override the wishes of millions.
    This isn’t some long-term strategy. The cash stuff can be done in one sitting and the rest within a term or two. The chance is coming up.

  • Ivan Wainwright
    24 July, 2012 (6:14 pm)

    Sorry to be picky, but I assume the ‘John Mills’ to whom you refer was in fact John Stuart Mill (Mill singular) who was born in London in 1806 … etc.

  • Nanna
    9 August, 2012 (1:37 pm)

    The pendulum has to swing back, we all have had enough.

Got something to say?

Some html is OK