Sunday, March 29, 2009

If you've been defamed, seek legal advice

From ABC online news:

Hanson to take on News Ltd papers

A lawyer for Pauline Hanson has confirmed the former One Nation leader
wants to start legal action against several News Limited newspapers.

Ms Hanson alleges she was defamed by the recent publication of explicit
pictures of a woman that wrongly purported to be her.

Ms Hanson is being represented by Sydney based Kalantzis Lawyers.

Stuart Littlemore QC has been hired to act as her barrister for any court
proceedings.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/30/2530165.htm

If you assume that there’s no hope,
you guarantee that there will be no hope.
If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom,
that there are opportunities to change things,
there’s a chance you may contribute to making a better world.
That’s your choice. - Noam Chomsky

3 comments:

  1. This article is marred by the Noam Chomsky quote. In reality, Chomsky is on the same side as Murdoch.

    In the 1960's and 1970's he told the world that their was nothing suspicious about the assassinations of JFK. Malcolm X, MLK and RFK. In 2001, he rushed to pronounce that George Bush's account of the September 11 terrorist attack was to be accepted uncritically and savagely attacked anyone who suggested otherwise as 'conspiracy nuts'.

    This caused great confusion to Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker, who had been a great admirer and protege of Chomsky.

    I earnestly urge you to view some excellent YouTube presentation by Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker "The Shame of Noam Chomsky & left gatekeepers" and a longer interview with Barrie Zwicker at "http://ningens-blog.blogspot.com/2006/12/sacred-cow-noam-chomsky-gored-by-barry.html" to learn more.

    In fact, the 'bait and switch' technique that Chomsky employs to get his followers to accept ideas that serve the interests of the US rulers is also employed by the Murdoch press.

    On some days it is possible to believe that of Murdoch's publications are fierce defenders of free speech and democratic freedoms. They are actually capable of very good journalism.

    They have excellently exposed through the years in many ways the atrocious mishandling of Telstra (although only to twist that around to argue that the only remedy is full privatisation).

    Even their truly good journalism is only calculated to provides a facade of credibility to make it easier to sell its more reactionary underlying message (and judging from conversations I have with some otherwise intelligent people, it seems to work to some extent).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I know all of that about Chomsky - I just liked the quote!

    What you say about the Murdoch press is so true. To have stuff quoted back at you that you know the person has unquestioningly taken from a Murdoch rag, and which you know to be false, can be depressing. It happens on a daily basis, but this particular example was a classic. A couple of years ago, I was passing through Maleny and stopped at the IGA. The IGA was flat out busy with many local customers. Out of interest, we checked out the new Woolworths, and it was dead - the carpark was empty. Later that day in Brisbane, I mentioned this to an avid 'Courier-Mail' reader, only to be told: "That's not true. Woolworths is doing really well despite the opposition." He had read a column by one of the usual Bowen Hills suspects, that while lamenting the loss of habitat for the poor little platypus and extolling the power of community protest against the supermarket chain, concluded by saying that the Woolworths was doing well despite the controversy.

    It is the faux lefty/progressive hacks up at Bowen Hills who have the most to answer for.

    It is sad that people still clamour for Murdoch coverage of their pet issue - only to have it co-opted, twisted and then buried.

    See: Shingle Inn, Yungaba, public transport....

    ReplyDelete
  3. BTW the page "Sacred Cow Noam Chomsky gored by Barry Zwicker", referred to above has been somewhat spoilt by images with captions that imply that Flight 175 which struck the South Tower was a not real, but rather some kind of holographic image.

    This hypothesis is rejected by nearly all of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The planes which struck the Twin Towers were real enough,just not capable on their own of having caused the spectacular and devastating collapses.

    ReplyDelete