Debunking Dreyfus on Free Speech and Freedom
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Disclaimer : Nothing in this letter should be construed as threatening nor advocating unlawful acts. Suspects are innocent until the facts against them are proven and convicted in a court of justice. This does not discuss the contents of the current super-injunction. Debunking Dreyfus on Free Speech and Freedom Author: Brendan Jones Brisbane, QLD, Australia E-mail: [email protected] Being an Open Letter to ALP Shadow Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus MP QC regarding his speech to the HRC Free Speech 2014 Symposium Cc: Director-General of Security – ASIO, David Irvine (pp. 62-65) Online at: http://victimsofdsto.com/debunking-drefyus/ Page 1 of 66(218) September 10(11), 2014 NoFibs Journalist: “I’m a strong free speech advocate ... So I’m thrilled that shadow Attorney General Mark Dreyfus QC has taken a stand and wish him success in the long hard climb ahead.” 98 Brendan Jones: “Mr. Dreyfus is no advocate for free speech, but the fact that he has convinced you he is – and in just one short speech – has persuaded me he’s a first class barrister.” 98 Journalist Martin Hirst: “I loved that he rubbed their pretty little noses in it. He made the point strongly that the so-called “marketplace of ideas” is a conservative myth that bears little relation to reality.” 98 133 Brendan Jones: “All Dreyfus did was say he rejected it. He never explained why. Google "Sophistry"” 98 131 US Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo: ‘Freedom of expression is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom.’ US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: “Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the State was to make men free to develop their faculties, and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. They believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth ... Believing in the power of reason as applied through public discussion, they eschewed silence coerced by law the argument of force in its worst form. Recognizing the occasional tyrannies of governing majorities, they amended the Constitution so that free speech and assembly should be guaranteed.” The UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Heiner Bielefeld: “Accordingly, the guarantees of freedom of expression as enshrined in article 19 of the Covenant can never be circumvented by invoking article 20” Page 2 of 66(218) September 10(11), 2014 Samuel Adams: “It does not take a majority to prevail...but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Thomas Jefferson: ‘The Declaration of Independence is the declaratory charter of our rights, and the rights of man.’ John Hancock (upon signing the Declaration of Independence): “There! His Majesty can now read my name without glasses. And he can double the reward on my head!” Page 3 of 66(218) September 10(11), 2014 Summary The Free Speech 2014 Symposium was a farce. It pursued a limited agenda. It was over-represented by lawyers who have a conflict of interest; They make money out of defamation and litigation. Free speech is bad for business. It means less work for lawyers. Not a single journalist spoke. And although the audience prided itself on inviting the brother of a journalist jailed in Egypt, they failed to acknowledge the fundamental hypocrisy that in Australia we have jailed journalists too; Where were Tony Barrass 61 and Joe Budd? 62 You delivered your speech to the symposium using a lawyer’s speech patterns: 105 You would say you rejected something, but without explaining why. You would give examples which supposedly made your point, but without explaining why they were relevant. Between these you rambled, 1 and so the audience assumed you had made your point, even though you hadn’t. Nevertheless, it worked wonders with your audience. No one seemed to notice. When you condemned George Brandis for not living up to Voltaire’s principle, no one seemed to notice you didn’t commit to it either; 100 And that far from defending free speech, you argued overwhelming against it. 101 You hypocritically criticised the Liberal Party for laws to jail journalists, even though while you were Attorney-General you did the same thing. 488 489 You said you rejected the marketplace of ideas. Like everything, the marketplace of ideas has its weaknesses, but it works. But your alternative is to let politicians and lawyers control which ideas can be discussed, or even determine which of those ideas are right or wrong. This gives you the power to silence any ideas you disagree with, or which challenge your government's grip on power. Although the Labor Party claims to be the party of social justice and the defender of rights, its record is far worse than that of the Liberal Party. The Abbott and Gillard governments failed to defend the rights of myself and citizens like me. Worse; the Gillard government stood by and did nothing while those abuses took place. 2 508 Political philosopher John Locke, the founder of the theory for liberal democratic government, said a government which does not protect the rights of its citizens loses its legitimacy and the people are no longer bound to obey it. 536 Having exhausted all the avenues available, including the courts and the Governor-General, I no longer recognise your government; It is a lawless gang. 54 533 Unfortunately 8 out of 10 Australians will vote only Liberal or Labor, no matter what. 569 I have thus decided to emigrate due to your draconian Defence Trade Controls Act 3 and my lack of faith in your government; the Labor/Liberal duopoly, 4 and the federal public service. 5 I encourage Australian journalists and citizen journalists to work with Americans who can safely report the criminality within the Australian government under the US SPEECH Act.657 658 I encourage all Australians to become active participants in the political process. Page 4 of 66(218) September 10(11), 2014 Table of Contents Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................................................6 The symposium shunned 200 years of American expertise in favour of our own ‘instant experts’ ...............................................8 I strongly disagreed with (almost all of) your speech. ......................................................................................................................10 In this letter I shall debunk your speech............................................................................................................................................10 Your own potential conflict of interest...............................................................................................................................................11 Your ‘absolutist free speech’ straw-man ...........................................................................................................................................12 Your rejection of the Marketplace of Ideas.......................................................................................................................................12 Your claim existing restrictions on free speech are a justification for even more restrictions......................................................13 The Great Defamation Myth ..............................................................................................................................................................14 The threat of defamation has a chilling effect on free speech .......................................................................................................15 The media is reluctant to speak to whistleblowers..........................................................................................................................15 Media self-censorship..........................................................................................................................................................................16 The ABC is not a public interest safety valve....................................................................................................................................18 4 Corners’ coverage of the Defence Abuses ...................................................................................................................................18 4 Corners’ coverage of Government Corruption............................................................................................................................19 Fairfax appears to be outperforming the ABC on reporting federal corruption...........................................................................20 The ABC web site gives more coverage to Holocaust deniers........................................................................................................20 Defamation law has a chilling effect on the free speech of ordinary people ...................................................................................21 Your claim: “The courts squarely grapple with the boundaries of lawful