Moira Deeming defamation trial - Thread 2 from Australia

[TheSandgroper]

Thread 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5167282-in-australia-moira-deeming-defamation-trial-now-on?page=40&reply=138525746

Tribunal Tweets Substack https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/moira-deeming-v-john-pesutto-a-case?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share. Thanks to @BezMills

Thanks to everyone on thread 1. I am pleased it generated such interest and conversations. I have learnt a lot from many very bright women.

The people standing on the steps on a weekly basis are having a 'rally'.

And they get a permit from the Victorian Government each time to do so.

'Similar people/groups' have been given the microphone.

Perhaps to be very clear, posters who wish to make such accusations need to not make vague accusations and list who these 'similar people / groups' are so that we can address each accusation. Including, what it was that those people said and what posters disagree with in those speeches.

Thanks for clarifying this so explicitly, I think it's getting lost in the vagueness.

Why? We've done this on numerous threads now, people can just go and read those.

Although every time I end up discussing it the repeated denials of what's obvious lead me somewhere new.
Here is someone who's put a lot of time into KJK summarising what has happened. He's not a fan of GC feminists fair to say

If you listen at 16.50, he has an audio of KJK specifically being warned Nazis will turn up in Australia (before Melbourne) and saying she doesn't care.

Her own words, out of her own mouth, are quite damning. As they often are I find.

If you listen at 16.50, he has an audio of KJK specifically being warned Nazis will turn up in Australia (before Melbourne) and saying she doesn't care.
Her own words, out of her own mouth, are quite damning. As they often are I find.

So you agree that women should run away when they see Nazis appearing? And that even the threat of them should be enough to silence women?

Civil rights marchers would have been aware all sorts of people turn up. Doesn’t stop the courage of the marchers or the importance of the cause for their civil rights. And, the Victoria issuing permits on a regular basis to a Nazi group(s) to hold a rally/protest, with the police giving them an escort to their pitch has nothing to do with a women’ civil rights rally. Take it up with the state of Victoria. Somehow, I rather suspect the point of bringing up the Nazi group in this way is not a problem with the Nazi group per se. Otherwise, the topic du jour would be the avalanche of protest to the Victorian parliament about their rallies. Is Pesutto et al hopping up and down in parliament about the Nazi group(s) in their midst, and which they issue permits for and escort to their destination(s)?

Also, I certainly don’t think @CassieMaddox is being in the least bit vague about her false accusation that Moira Deeming was attending the same rally as the Nazi group. Literally says it

@CassieMaddox “I'm baffled how Moira Deeming thinks its defamatory for people to raise concerns about Nazis being at a rally she attended”

Despite the fact that even the Nazi group said they were there to ‘support’ the women who also hold a protest there against paedophiles . Not the LWS rally which was organised by KJK and attended by MD.

Despite the fact you don’t even have to take their word for it. It’s on record if they repeatedly get permits, along with many witnesses to what happened (backed up by video), and the letter to the Australian Jewish Association from the LWS women.

Now, I could understand if there was confusion about the Nazi group being associated with the thugs in the TRA protest/rally who were violently assaulting people.

What is the word for trotting out the same smear based even though it has shown to be false?

Why should she care if NNs turn up? Is she their mother?! TRAs can punch a horse, police can ignore the NN’s but MD and KJK are the font of all evil

it’s facile nonsense - PPs (I don’t mention names for a reason, as I don’t have the patience to engage with the batshittery direct) want it to mean what they want it to mean so badly it’s pathetic, embarrassing etc etc

Presumably one reason she wouldn't care is that the Aussie police would naturally do their job and remove them.

Until...of course they didn't. Didn't they fist bump them?

I see. So readers are just to take a poster’s word that ‘similar people/ groups’ have been given the microphone, and they should also then expect that those people giving a speech with the microphone are saying things that they, the readers, will find abhorrent.

Good to know so that those reading can make their own conclusions. I personally, cannot remember having been on threads where these people being given the microphone have been named and details given where I can hear or read for myself what they said.

So, personally, I find those types of accusations are just more in the line of guilt by association again.

Yes, who would have thought the Victorian Police would let neo-Nazis through into the centre area? And who would have thought that Victorian Police would allow those men to antagonise ANTIFA, the Victorian Socialists and transgender rights activists?

Now, if a neo nazi just turned up in the crowd and listened as is what I could actually imagine happening, listening and not contributing, not making a scene, not doing anything but listening, who would know and how would you stop them?

Civil rights marchers would have been aware all sorts of people turn up.

They had to run the gamut of the KKK who turned up every time, also with police approval, also known about beforehand, presumably they should have stayed home and not said We don't care, we will march, we will rally, we will make our voices heard.

So what happens to everyone who listens / reads something that they agree with, even just in part, that has been written or said by a Nazi or white supremist?

Do people go and research everyone they read or listen to before agreeing? Or is a general denouncement to be said or written before any agreement?

Is this where we are in the world that even acknowledging someone has a valid point or that we agree with someone’s speech on one topic means we are aligned with that person? And that every other person who has spoken at an event run by the same organisers, ie not the person who spoke, is then aligned with that person?

And has it got to the point t that women should run as soon as someone who they don’t know personally turn up at an event? Or can we just acknowledge that in the free world, an unticketed, open to anyone event may have people who are abhorrent turn up but that doesn’t mean that anyone at the event is aligned with that person unless they are knowingly aligned with the person.

Yes, it is all aunt Sally to deflect from the issue of women’s rights and protest against this pure misogyny in motion. And child abuse. To deter and intimidate women organising in their interests.

Not the false smearing though. That is designed to stir up ‘burn the witch’ sentiments.

You know it is interesting about ‘association’. I usually wouldn’t have much time for Andrew Bridgen. But he (amongst others) supported sub postmasters and the inquiry into the Post Office, and the Horizon IT scandal. I have respect for him for that. I suppose the inquiry is to be tainted now, if some people with self identifying ‘good’ would have it. The sub postmasters who suffered injustices to be abandoned and thrown on the rocks of tainted ‘association’.

I probably need to make it clear that I am not lumping Andrew Bridgen in with any grouping. I am just making the point that you can agree with people on one or some issues without having to be a disciple of their stance on everything.

Really Cassie - an hour long video by some nobody called Shaun. How the hell have you found him and why give him credence?

Keep banging your head against the wall. I don't agree with you and I won't no matter how many times you repeat the same puerile arguments.

I suggest you watch the film. It's quite long, and difficult in places if you are a GC feminist but also factual and quite eye opening.

I found him by (as usual) looking up the answer to someone's assertion that there's nothing to see here.

I'm not too bothered about purity of source, more about if people reference and are factual in what they say. So I listened.

That audio shows KJK was explicitly warned Nazis would show up, and either didn't warn Deeming or did and Deeming didn't care. Its a bit damaging to the idea that noone could have known they would show up.

It's not a "smear" if it's supported by evidence.

https://www.afr.com/politics/neo-nazis-boasted-of-protecting-rally-deeming-helped-plan-court-told-20240918-p5kbfq

Thomas Sewell said the group were there for LWS.

Having listened to KJK say on that video she will support whoever turns up,man or woman , and platform them regardless of their views, its entirely possible the neo Nazis told the police they were there to speak. Which is their democratic right and the police can't stop them.

Who knows. I wonder why the police haven't been asked about it in the trial. One would have thought it could be useful to Deemings case.

Well looking at his twitter feed he's obviously as obsessed with her as you are.

Just to get it clear if you found out nazis were following your posts would you shut up? After all we all think JKJ the Nazi sympathiser is the bees knees, why are you still associating with us.

Yes, who would have thought the Victorian Police would let neo-Nazis through into the centre area?

If you look at Moira Deeming's comments after the event, it is quite clear to me that she was shocked by this.

By the way, I watched that video a year ago and if people are convinced by that male person's commentary, then they have a rather low bar.

How the hell have you found him and why give him credence?

He's quite well known as a YouTuber. He's a misogynistic arse, he certainly doesn't confine his criticism of women speaking about their rights to KJK.

By the way, I watched that video a year ago and if people are convinced by that male person's commentary, then they have a rather low bar.

Quite.