Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "" video.

Tongues, that’s hilarious.
2
Perfectly reasonable comment.
1
@PJRayment Free to air and ABC News services continue to significantly out rate Sky news and particularly the Skynews after dark comedy set. While I may not agree with this original comment it is in fact quite reasonable, but mostly because it is the opposite of your comment.
1
@PJRayment The original comment was just that, opinion, there was no or need for any factual justification, it was just their opinion. It does however have a certain amount of truth to it as Skynews compared to many other news services doesn’t actually attract that many viewers, but again because it annoyed you it interested me.
1
@PJRayment My motives are always bad. Honest but bad, as opposed to your motivation which is to deliberately misinform. I always ignore your crap.
1
@PJRayment You continue to deliberately misinform, I seriously doubt you have posted a single honest comment.
1
@PJRayment Phil, Phil, Phil, yes I maintain nobody could honestly believe the crap you put out. Not all of it, as there must be some sort motivation .
1
@PJRayment No, factually incorrect, laws on person and property existed long before any form of christianity. In fact the christian bible still allows and advocates for slavery. Secular laws made slavery illegal. For over 2000 years the bible allowed slavery and for 1900 years christians did absolutely nothing about it. Your claim is just deliberate misinformation commonly spread by christian fundamentalists.
1
Yes there was nothing even remotely christian about Robodebt.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z Yes it must have been speaking in tongues when he lied straight to the face of the French government as he dumped their SSN contract.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z Macron in answering a journalists question said Morrison had lied to him in discussions about the DCNS sub deal.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z You asked the question. At the COP26 conference in Glasgow in 2021 Morrison lied about Australia’s emission targets.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z That’s a wonderful and interesting philosophical question, are there good lies and bad lies. In your view lieing is OK as long as the lie is in line with your politics. Nice moral stance. Is there anything you wouldn’t compromise?
1
@PJRayment Morrison has publicly admitted he kept discussions about the SSN deal with the US and UK from the French government and DCNS. The Australian government agreed DCNS had complied with all its contractual obligations. Morrison has a extensive history of lies while in government, which you choose to ignore as he is one of your happy clamper mates.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z Don't feel bad, you aren't defending Scotty from marketing you are attempting to justify one of the worst government decisions of all time. Morrison and the LNP (Labor are complicate as well) sold our nations sovereignty off. Australia now effectively has little control over our greatest strategic asset. We are at the whim of the US congress. All you saw was a big shiney SSN and you lost all rational thought. It's obvious from your reply in your description of DCNS.
1
@JamesDelaney-z9z Don’t feel bad, you’re not defending Scotty from marketing you are justifying the idiocy of choosing to lose sovereignty of the defence of Australia to the US congress. Our most significant strategic weapon asset is no longer in our control. The 12 “Attack class” SSK we’re more than adequate to handle our defence needs, and capable of launching cruise missiles. So deliberately being deceptive is fine by you and lieing for national interests sake is OK. So we have established he lied. Sweet.
1
@PJRayment Scotty from marketing’s extensive history of lies is well documented. You choose to ignore it that’s your issue.
1
@PJRayment The “Attack” class submarine Was to have a range of 33000km, capable of remaining submerged for 3 months and of launching missiles, torpedoes, and mines. It was the universal choice of defence officials and was ordered by the LNP government. More than adequate it would have been an excellent strategic platform. 12 of them would have provided all the capability required of numerous defence white papers and defence reviews. Is a SSN better, yes, but that’s not my argument. A SSN comes at great cost in $ and in loss of national sovereignty.
1
@PJRayment Scotty from Marketing’s history of lies and deceptions are well documented. If you choose not to acknowledge that, fine by me, it makes perfect sense.
1
@PJRayment Jimmy has already admitted that lies and deceptions are perfectly OK in dealings of national security and that Scotty did both.
1
@Ozcrazy49 Stalin, Hitler, PolPot, Putin,
1
@Ozcrazy49 It’s as if a god really has it in for us.
1
Good point and spot on accurate.
1
@PJRayment Said with such sincerity and naivety as a small child learning its way in the world. Of course Paulie speaks for himself, he would never parrot Murdoch talking points, never, it is utterly unthinkable.
1
@PJRayment Accurate perceptive observation can't possibly be considered an insult. I assumed you would take this onboard as a valuable criticism and adjust you diabolical behaviour accordingly. That's hilarious, using Andy as a reference in a comment about journalistic ethics (a convicted racist). Phil you are a master-class in chutzpah.
1
@PJRayment Of course when you are an Andy Bolt lickspittle all the world is against you. No evidence has ever been presented that has reversed the Federal court decision. It was just a Freudian slip but you might want to edit the bit where you tell me I have shown your behaviour to be diabolical. Crazy funny stuff. Langstons apology was unrelated to the court case where he was convicted in a federal court of breaching 18c of the racial discrimination act. A conviction that stands to this day, never overturned. Langstons apology related to an episode of Q&A and was later retracted in an essay she wrote. I am not surprised however that you use Andy as a source of inspiration.
1
@PJRayment Crazy stupid funny, but you might want to edit the bit in your reply where you tell me your behaviour in your opinion isn’t diabolical but I have now shown that it is. I couldn’t even invent something that funny.
1
@PJRayment Andy was convicted in a Federal court of breaching 18c of the racial discrimination act. He remains convicted and no bias has ever been proven. The apology you mention was unrelated to the court case and was later retracted publicly in an essay.
1
@PJRayment OK so we agree your behaviour has been diabolical, I’m mean I was just taking the piss but if that is how you self identify who am I to argue. No bias was presented before the courts and Andy remains a convicted racist. What apology are you specifically referencing from which individual. I know of only one and this was unrelated to the court case and was retracted.
1
@PJRayment Once again there is no evidence of bias in regards to the judgment against Bolt. Unsubstantiated allegations are not evidence of bias. Cole admitted to the duality of her ethnic origins. She was a witness not a claimant and her testimony was not recanted or shown to have had any particular influence on the judgement. Once again the Federal court judgement found Bolt breached 18c of the Racial discrimination act. His use of the 18d defence failed because he was found to have made numerous errors of fact. In typical fashion you cling to the tiniest sliver of doubt in defence of a completely unreasonable opinion. An open mind is fine until your brain leaks out.
1
@PJRayment Unsubstantiated allegations of bias is showing nothing. Bindi Cole admitted to merely having dual ethnic backgrounds and her witness statement was not influential and was not retracted. Cole was defending her character which she didn’t apologise for she apologised for any free speech implications that may have flowed from the judgement. Of which there has been none. Bolts defence via 18d failed because of numerous factual errors he made in his article. She wasn’t a claimant she it had nil effect on any judgment, which again has not been questioned or appealed.
1