Saturday, August 01, 2009



Australian Islamic spokesman found to have incited racism but no penalty even considered

We read:
"Keysar Trad, the longtime spokesman for Muslim cleric Sheik Taj bin al-Hilaly, has been described as "racist" and "offensive" by a judge who today rejected his defamation claim against radio station 2GB. Mr Trad sued the top-rating Sydney station in the NSW Supreme Court after presenter Jason Morrison described him "gutless" and " just trouble" for his conduct at a rally after the Cronulla riots in December 2005, The Australian reported. Mr Trad's comment about the "shame of tabloid journalism' caused the crowd to boo and harass a 2GB journalist near the stage.

The reporter told Mr Morrison he feared for his safety, prompting the presenter to deliver his tirade the following morning, in which he also described Mr Trad as "disgraceful and dangerous individual who incited violence, hatred and racism."

In August 2007, a jury found Mr Morrison had defamed Mr Trad but Justice Peter McClellan found for 2GB in the second - or defence - phase of the trial that was heard in May, saying the statement were true and also protected as comment based on fact. "There is little doubt that many of the plaintiff's remarks are offensive to Jewish persons and homosexuals," Justice McClellan said in his judgment. "Many of his remarks are distasteful and appear to condone violence.

"I'm satisfied that the plaintiff does hold views which can properly be described as racist. "I'm also satisfied that he encourages others to hold those views. In particular he holds views derogatory of Jewish people.

SOURCE

And that it all well and good but it would seem perfectly clear that in his remarks the judge found Mr Trad to be in breach of Section 20C of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act of 1977 as amended, which holds racial vilification to be unlawful. So why was there not the slightest hint of prosecuting him for that? That good ol' Muslim freedom to do and say as you like, I guess. One law for Muslims and another for us peasants. Sharia has triumphed already in some ways, it would seem.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Or then the judge is one of the good guys and would, if given the chance, do the same for everyone else. All in all a good decision. At least better than sentencing someone for speaking his mind.

Anonymous said...

If they're still prosecuting others with that law then it is strange they won't use it against a Muslim but if they have started ignoring that law because they realize it's an affront to free speech then I can understand their not using it.