In Australia - Moira Deeming defamation trial now on

[TheSandgroper]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-17/moira-deeming-john-pesutto-defamation-trial-day-two/104360100

This is from our very TRA ABC. Please note the comment from “Mr Southwick, a Jewish MP re Angie Jones’ tweet”. Well, Angie Jones is as Jewish as they come but they don’t say that.

Also, for, those who don’t know, see Angie on m.youtube.com/@TERFTalkDownUnder, though she hasn’t posted for a while. Some really good interviews.

Got to laugh at your source there Cassie.

The interpretation is likely to be biased .., you don’t say! 🤣🤣

Id rather stick to neutral sources rather than some bloke who has the trans flag in his profile and ‘trans rights are human rights’ as their tag line.

Ooh, it doesn't look good.

That Moira Deeming, amiright?

For people who are interested in how Moira Deeming actually became a Liberal, she explains it herself in her maiden speech. Start watching at 6:30 if you're in a hurry Video | Facebook

😂😂 Priceless.

@Helleofabore

Do you believe that Moira Deeming was acting within her mandate?
No, I don't. She was counselled by the Leadership team previously, a number of times.

What are these beliefs that you believe put her on the ‘edge’ of the Liberal Party?
For example - pro-life, climate skepticism, Covid skepticism, Trumpism.

Because you referred to the meeting notes which don’t give the clarity that you seem to think they should. I am not the only one asking you to list or copy and paste where you think she deviates so I assume I am not the only one confused.
I gave the page numbers and the columns where the information could be found. This is because the information wasn't confined to one area only on the page, but a few areas. I'm sorry if a few people couldn't follow such instructions.

Are you confusing the Victorian Liberal Party Leadership election strategies for their policies and beliefs? Or was there something else in that meeting that was supporting and clarifying what you have been trying to say.
I'm not confusing anything, thanks.

Because that meeting was a mess of inconsistencies and contradictions. If you had said that Moira Deeming was acting contrary to the Victorian Opposition Leadership team’s election strategic plan, yes. Plainly from that meeting she is. But of course, that strategic plan is not guidance to the personal beliefs that are acceptable in elected members of the Liberal Party.
I found the meeting transcript quite revealing actually. Before I read it, I thought Deeming was somewhat of a scapegoat of the Liberal Party's problems in Victoria at the time. To some degree, Pesutto was in damage control. But I think Deeming did not consider the problems the rally might cause, and that shows in the meeting. She repeatedly deflects.

Feel free to link a different live tweeter that people not on twitter can read. I couldn't find one.

I tend to go on substance not source - have ignored all her personal interpretation but the factual statements speak for themselves (and check out if you cross reference to others).

Same question to you. If you can find a GC account live tweeting it with threadreader let me know. I couldn't.

I want to discuss the case so the live tweets are very helpful

Same
I found the audio quite illuminating. Also Collins Cross exam of her affidavit yesterday, where she basically had to walk back from nearly everything she said in her claim because it was contradicted by the audio.

Also WTF was she thinking leaking/getting advice from a journalist. It looks terrible.

Gosh Cassie , I’m not so obsessed with a case in a continent that I don’t live in that I want to follow every word that’s spoken.

And as for your comment ‘it doesn’t look good’, there will be parts of a trial where depending on which sides lawyer is questioning which witness , things will be said that might appear to support the other sides case. That’s the nature of an adversarial legal system, later in the day on cross examination things might look different.

That’s why looking at transcripts as a whole and the final judgement is preferable to obsessing over every word. But then I don’t have your obsession over KJK so you do you I guess!

It’s a shame for you if there isn’t an Australian version of Tribunal Tweets because that unverified account you are relying on is clearly biased and could actually be making stuff up, how can you know he’s reliable?

Not even trying now. Posting they/them trans activists as a “source” 🤣🤣

It's just plain old mud-slinging. As I keep saying, if there were any cogent arguments they would be used but there's not. Just lies and mud-slinging and guild by association.

For anyone interested in interesting facts about what is actually happening If you would kindly look at my link you'll see that Jesus did actually consort with dinosaurs.

God Bless America, an Original Hand Cut Art Collage Show off Your Patriotism, Dinosaurs, Jesus and Love of Historical Accuracy 'MERICA - Etsy UK

Will Pesutto take the stand, does anyone know?

But Messina doesn’t this all boil down to the fact that fundamentally you don’t think that women with different views to yours should be given a voice.

Because if the problem was her views on the edge it would have been safer / less risky to expel her for that rather than reason she was expelled.

I would imagine so because he’s a key witness.

I will definitely try to tune in to see that.

It’s a shame for you if there isn’t an Australian version of Tribunal Tweets because that unverified account you are relying on is clearly biased and could actually be making stuff up, how can you know he’s reliable?
Yes it is a shame. Still better than expressing very strong opinions about the case based on no real knowledge at all.
And yes that account is biased. I said it was. It is not fair for posters to say I'm "not even trying" when they haven't suggested an alternative to look at.
I can look at alternatives on twitter, the only other I could find was "vexatious litigant" but they aren't on thread reader and also seem quite biased. But their tweets cross reference so 🤷
And it all matches what news sources are reporting.

you don’t think that women with different views to yours should be given a voice.
You are doing it again.
Ironically your behaviour is shutting down women with "different views to you".
Maybe take what she says on face value and try to understand why shes said it, rather than mind read and argue with your assumption.

Yep, I would agree.
I've posted here for YEARS. Posters on this thread are well aware of that. I'm a GC feminist who is comfortable criticising the actions of non-feminists, when they harm women.

Stop implying I'm some sort of troll or bot. It is highly offensive and untrue. If you have concerns I'm trolling I suggest you email MNHQ and take it up with them. The way you are behaving is against talk guidelines

Also WTF was she thinking leaking/getting advice from a journalist. It looks terrible.

@CassieMaddox Do you realise that Peta Credlin isn’t just a journalist? She used to be a very close staff member of the then-PM Tony Abbott.

Being pro-life isn’t controversial for a Liberal Party member. Former PM Tony Abbott was very pro-life/anti-choice, and spoke out about it. He was also very publicly Catholic. He’s the one who kept being photographed in his budgie smugglers on the beach. 🤮

So bad biased sources are better than no sources.

And reading someone's posts, understanding what the poster is saying and paraphrasing is shutting down women.

Asking a question is not shutting anyone up. But you copied and pasted so it didn’t look like I was asking a question!

that started with. ‘Don’t you think’ I would like to engage in a conversation with Messina about that.

This is useful.
https://deadwildroses.com/2019/10/07/handy-venn-diagrams-the-radical-feminist-position-on-gender/

I'm a second wave feminist, I will criticise people who have come to a GC position from a conservative/religious perspective where their beliefs harm women.

I'll also be critical of "activists" where their actions hinder progress on sex based rights rather than help them.

Considering how much time posters on here spend discussing the concerns around other religions, it is really remarkable that we are expected to ignore the concerns around the practices of very devout Christians and pro lifers 🙄

As I said unthread your definition of feminism is different to mine (and I suspect others on here)

Your intentions are very clear from the years of posts we’ve all been able to read.