https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/m...0e52a9708fc529

Mayalsia's Madhatir is back. This man has incited Muslim violence again and he does it like the coward he is, because he is far from the action and unlikely to suffer consequences. When he was PM he incited Muslim violence and now he is doing it again. You expect people who had some power to exercise restraint, well what I say is may 1,000 asian elephants shlt on his lawn

An Australian PM once called this man recalcitrant but my name for him is stronger, he is a typical Muslim dickhead

did he incite or was he just flapping his gums ?

What I find more disturbing is Twitter's consistent double standard when it comes to monitoring it's site and it's decision about who and why someone's posting should be deleted . I give great credit to the administrator of this site for the wide latitude given to freely express an opinion . That is not the case on Twitter ,which has a near monopoly to the point that news outlets will frequently use that platform to introduce news items .

Ted Cruz in Senate hearings on big tech selective censorship ripped into Twitter owner Jack Dorsey about this issue .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSd2NKT_otQ

Twitter claims it censors death threats ;and routinely censor Trump because his tweets could “inspire harm,” . But when the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called for the genocide of Israeli's on Twitter ,they claimed that his tweets pass as “commentary on political issues of the day”.

Doesn't take much to get a nutcase excited. They tend to be already excited. Does the internet need clear rules of the road? Definitely, as obviously self policing isn't a great idea, but it has to be a global thing. Then there is that dark web where the nuts actually hang out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I give great credit to the administrator of this site for the wide latitude given to freely express an opinion .

---

That was not true when a moderator here deleted a post I made because the mod was "suspicious" of what I wrote. Yes, the word he used was "suspicious". This moderator later deleted other posts of mine simply because they were in disagreement with his religious beliefs. I notified management and they were upset and would "immediately" look into the problem.

That was a long time ago and I'm still waiting for the management person to "immediately" look into the problem.

The site itself, developed by Roel, is excellent and one of the best to navigate in to ensure accuracy of questions and answers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

obviously self policing isn't a great idea,

---

Self-policing is NEVER a good idea - whether accountants or law enforcement.

what?

Big Brother, Clete. We need Big Brother looking over our shoulders at all times. A large, mighty, well financed, all-wise central gov is the key to policing.

what you need is someone watching the politicians

Quote:

---

what you need is someone watching the politicians

---

Yep. And we need many fewer of them.

politicians or watchers?

Politicians, or at least that's true in my view. The press should be the watchers, but over here they are largely so politically biased that it simply doesn't work well.

no you need something more effective than the press, a judicial body separate from the courts

Quote:

---

a judicial body separate from the courts

---

Who would appoint them, the politicians?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

no you need something more effective than the press, a judicial body separate from the courts

---

A judicial body separate from the judicial body now? How/where does it end? Are there turtles all the way down? (That's a famous answer to the origin of the universe. It fits here).

Quote:

---

A judicial body separate from the judicial body now? How/where does it end? Are there turtles all the way down?

---

Well said

Quote:

---

(That's a famous answer to the origin of the universe. It fits here).

---

Famous answer indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Who would appoint them, the politicians?

---

We have some here called the Crime Commission and the Independent Commission against Corruption they are set up under legislation with Parliamentary inquiry powers and completely independent of the judiciary. They investigate cases of corruption referred to them by parliament or the public and have been instrumental in bringing many corrupt politicians to justice. you might say they are a local version of the FBI but don't have federal jurisdiction

Who appoints them?

The parliament, in fact, a federal body is being considered on the heals of signs of corruption in the public service and no doubt it will look at the role of some former politicians in deals with China. some very embarassing facts were recently disclosed in a senate hearing

An independent commission which has the job of overseeing the people who appointed its members?

Yes but once set up is independent and can only be removed by act of parliament which is very hard to do. What happens is a member of parliament, etc, is stood down during the enquiry. If found guilty there would be criminal proceedings