正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

When hate speech cases were already being addressed under existing laws, the need for a separate Hate Speech Bill raises serious questions. The Indian Constitution and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita already provide safeguards while guaranteeing the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a). The concern is... show more

Meenakshi Sehrawat

36,702 subscribers

11,441 次观看 • 9 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Karnatka's Hate Speech Bill: Congress government in Karnataka has tabled a bill that claims to curb hate speech, but it attempts to risk free speech! The wording of the bill is vague and open to interpretation, which means even ordinary statements could be judged as ill will and lead to serious criminal action. India already has laws to deal with hate speech, and even the Supreme Court has said that the real problem is weak enforcement, not the absence of law. When the line between free speech and crime becomes unclear, people begin to self censor out of fear rather than responsibility!

Karnatka's Hate Speech Bill: Congress government in Karnataka has tabled a bill that claims to curb hate speech, but it attempts to risk free speech! The wording of the bill is vague and open to interpretation, which means even ordinary statements could be judged as ill will and lead to serious criminal action. India already has laws to deal with hate speech, and even the Supreme Court has said that the real problem is weak enforcement, not the absence of law. When the line between free speech and crime becomes unclear, people begin to self censor out of fear rather than responsibility!

Praffulgarg

11,269 次观看 • 9 个月前

Hate Speech laws were never designed to deal with the radicalised hate in our community, because it's Labor's voter base. Hate Speech laws were designed to silence critics and opposing political ideology. "Will new hate speech laws be applied to radical Muslim clerics in Western Sydney?" Deputy PM Richard Marles stammering and stuttering his way through his reply by avoiding giving an answer. Hate Speech laws must be repealed and replaced with nothing!

Hate Speech laws were never designed to deal with the radicalised hate in our community, because it's Labor's voter base. Hate Speech laws were designed to silence critics and opposing political ideology. "Will new hate speech laws be applied to radical Muslim clerics in Western Sydney?" Deputy PM Richard Marles stammering and stuttering his way through his reply by avoiding giving an answer. Hate Speech laws must be repealed and replaced with nothing!

The People's King Elvis

103,376 次观看 • 9 个月前

Zali Steggall voted for Australia's new over-the-top hate speech laws and now here she is getting all hot under the collar and arguing about the importance of freedom of speech 😂

Zali Steggall voted for Australia's new over-the-top hate speech laws and now here she is getting all hot under the collar and arguing about the importance of freedom of speech 😂

Francynancy

46,767 次观看 • 8 个月前

Hate Speech laws were never designed to deal with the radicalised hate in our community, because it's Labor's voter base. Hate Speech laws were designed to stifle dissent, silence critics, and quell opposing political ideology. Reporter: "Is radical Islam, in your view, the greatest domestic security threat Australia faces?" Albo: : "I'm concerned, I'm concerned about Neo-Nazis..." They keep telling us what they're planning to do. They're not interested in radicalised hate, they want to silence Australians with opposing political ideology. All roads lead to Rome, and in this case Rome is those on the "Far Right!"

Hate Speech laws were never designed to deal with the radicalised hate in our community, because it's Labor's voter base. Hate Speech laws were designed to stifle dissent, silence critics, and quell opposing political ideology. Reporter: "Is radical Islam, in your view, the greatest domestic security threat Australia faces?" Albo: : "I'm concerned, I'm concerned about Neo-Nazis..." They keep telling us what they're planning to do. They're not interested in radicalised hate, they want to silence Australians with opposing political ideology. All roads lead to Rome, and in this case Rome is those on the "Far Right!"

The People's King Elvis

74,741 次观看 • 8 个月前

Free speech is a core value of our civilization. We need to stop Bill C-9. This bill is designed to limit your speech by labeling you as an Islamophobe or racist without any specific definition. We don’t lack laws in Canada. If the authorities do not enforce the existing laws against jihadists, and if the RCMP and CSIS receive advice from Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups, it does not mean that a new law will stop the hate rallies and the glorification of terrorism in our streets. If Bill C-9 passes, I can say: welcome to the Islamic Republic of Canada.

Free speech is a core value of our civilization. We need to stop Bill C-9. This bill is designed to limit your speech by labeling you as an Islamophobe or racist without any specific definition. We don’t lack laws in Canada. If the authorities do not enforce the existing laws against jihadists, and if the RCMP and CSIS receive advice from Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups, it does not mean that a new law will stop the hate rallies and the glorification of terrorism in our streets. If Bill C-9 passes, I can say: welcome to the Islamic Republic of Canada.

Salman Sima

23,574 次观看 • 6 个月前

Today the Federal Government in conjunction with the Coalition and with no resistance from One Nation passed a bill against Hate Speech. They gagged debate again and rammed the laws through with no scrutiny where we could ask questions. This is a direct attack on Free Speech. For the third parliamentary week in a row the major parties have devoted Parliament to controlling you, not serving you, by shutting you down. The Misinformation Law, the Online Safety Bill and now Hate Speech are all designed to censor people and push back on government overreach. The hate speech law is dangerous because it threatens freedom of speech by allowing the government to censor or punish individuals for expressing opinions that might be deemed offensive. Such laws are often vague and subjective, leading to potential abuse and selective enforcement. This creates a chilling effect where people fear speaking openly, stifling debate and free expression. Instead of combating hate, these laws can be weaponized to silence dissent and suppress unpopular viewpoints, ultimately undermining democratic values and individual liberties. People First stood in defence of open discourse, free speech, and the democratic principles that underpin our society. Upholding these values will foster trust and preserve the liberties that Australians hold dear. I am disappointed that One Nation did not stand with me on this issue. These laws extend to all people including children. When a motion was moved to exclude children under 14 from these laws, Malcolm Roberts voted against it. Children should not be penalised for the actions or thoughts of their parents. I challenge Malcolm and Pauline to debate me on the reasons why they support this law. It is government overreach plain and simple. There are already state laws against violence and inciting violence. Under the constitution, the States are responsible for policing crime not the Federal Government. There is no need for these laws. They will only be used to censor you. #auspol

Today the Federal Government in conjunction with the Coalition and with no resistance from One Nation passed a bill against Hate Speech. They gagged debate again and rammed the laws through with no scrutiny where we could ask questions. This is a direct attack on Free Speech. For the third parliamentary week in a row the major parties have devoted Parliament to controlling you, not serving you, by shutting you down. The Misinformation Law, the Online Safety Bill and now Hate Speech are all designed to censor people and push back on government overreach. The hate speech law is dangerous because it threatens freedom of speech by allowing the government to censor or punish individuals for expressing opinions that might be deemed offensive. Such laws are often vague and subjective, leading to potential abuse and selective enforcement. This creates a chilling effect where people fear speaking openly, stifling debate and free expression. Instead of combating hate, these laws can be weaponized to silence dissent and suppress unpopular viewpoints, ultimately undermining democratic values and individual liberties. People First stood in defence of open discourse, free speech, and the democratic principles that underpin our society. Upholding these values will foster trust and preserve the liberties that Australians hold dear. I am disappointed that One Nation did not stand with me on this issue. These laws extend to all people including children. When a motion was moved to exclude children under 14 from these laws, Malcolm Roberts voted against it. Children should not be penalised for the actions or thoughts of their parents. I challenge Malcolm and Pauline to debate me on the reasons why they support this law. It is government overreach plain and simple. There are already state laws against violence and inciting violence. Under the constitution, the States are responsible for policing crime not the Federal Government. There is no need for these laws. They will only be used to censor you. #auspol

Gerard Rennick

177,814 次观看 • 1 年前

The Muslim community did not deserve this. This is not freedom of speech or protest but freedom of hate. Families in Dublin brought their kids to pray and feel safe only to be met with a shower of hate-filled goons. Shame ! Shame !

The Muslim community did not deserve this. This is not freedom of speech or protest but freedom of hate. Families in Dublin brought their kids to pray and feel safe only to be met with a shower of hate-filled goons. Shame ! Shame !

DOZA🧐

492,343 次观看 • 1 年前

A few weeks ago the Irish government informed the EU that they would not go along with demands to force hate speech laws on the people of Ireland. Today, the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance has once again urged Ireland to implement hate speech laws. But even regime friendly media is reacting negatively to this news. There will never be hate speech laws in Ireland, it's time for the tyrants at the European Commission to accept that.

A few weeks ago the Irish government informed the EU that they would not go along with demands to force hate speech laws on the people of Ireland. Today, the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance has once again urged Ireland to implement hate speech laws. But even regime friendly media is reacting negatively to this news. There will never be hate speech laws in Ireland, it's time for the tyrants at the European Commission to accept that.

MichaeloKeeffe

167,756 次观看 • 11 个月前

Bill C-9 isn’t about fighting hate - it’s about giving Ottawa more power to silence our voices. Existing law already criminalizes genocide, hate propaganda, symbols, and vandalism (Sections 318, 319, 423, 430). C-9 removes Attorney General oversight, replaces objective “hatred” with a vague emotional test, and risks criminalizing dissent. This isn’t protection — it’s politicized power. Canadians need real protection — NOT laws that weaponize free speech. #cdnpoli

Bill C-9 isn’t about fighting hate - it’s about giving Ottawa more power to silence our voices. Existing law already criminalizes genocide, hate propaganda, symbols, and vandalism (Sections 318, 319, 423, 430). C-9 removes Attorney General oversight, replaces objective “hatred” with a vague emotional test, and risks criminalizing dissent. This isn’t protection — it’s politicized power. Canadians need real protection — NOT laws that weaponize free speech. #cdnpoli

Dr. Leslyn Lewis

109,494 次观看 • 1 年前

Is this hate speech? Or is it speech that is the truth, that they now want to create a law that defines it as hate speech? Thoughts?

Is this hate speech? Or is it speech that is the truth, that they now want to create a law that defines it as hate speech? Thoughts?

BroBro🇦🇺🏇🏻

14,644 次观看 • 8 个月前

Hate is subjective. To a radical activist, failing to use a preferred pronoun is “hate.” To others, refusing to bow to lobby groups is “hate.” When the definition shifts with ideology, “hate speech” laws become nothing more than tools of control, and have no place in a truly free society.

Hate is subjective. To a radical activist, failing to use a preferred pronoun is “hate.” To others, refusing to bow to lobby groups is “hate.” When the definition shifts with ideology, “hate speech” laws become nothing more than tools of control, and have no place in a truly free society.

Senator Babet

11,157 次观看 • 5 个月前

Australia's new hate speech laws are causing concern, but many are willing to fight it. A convoy to Canberra is planned. The bill may protect radical Islamists, worsening antisemitism. #Australia #FreedomOfSpeech

Australia's new hate speech laws are causing concern, but many are willing to fight it. A convoy to Canberra is planned. The bill may protect radical Islamists, worsening antisemitism. #Australia #FreedomOfSpeech

Monica Smit / Reignite Democracy

13,508 次观看 • 8 个月前

Sadly, Bill C-9 has passed. The only amendment was to add the noose as a hate symbol. Nothing was added to protect freedom of religion or good-faith religious expression. Bill C-9 is not a serious effort to combat hate. It is a tool to enforce Liberal DEI ideology while leaving fundamental freedoms dangerously exposed.

Sadly, Bill C-9 has passed. The only amendment was to add the noose as a hate symbol. Nothing was added to protect freedom of religion or good-faith religious expression. Bill C-9 is not a serious effort to combat hate. It is a tool to enforce Liberal DEI ideology while leaving fundamental freedoms dangerously exposed.

Brad Redekopp

75,159 次观看 • 3 个月前

Bill C-9, the Liberals’ hate-speech bill, would fundamentally change the relationship between the state and religious Canadians. Laws once served as a shield, protecting religious institutions and individuals from government power. Now, the government seeks to sit in judgment of good-faith religious belief and expression. C-9 isn't about stopping hate. It's about giving the state power to decide which beliefs are permitted. Join us in standing up for religious freedom. Sign here:

Bill C-9, the Liberals’ hate-speech bill, would fundamentally change the relationship between the state and religious Canadians. Laws once served as a shield, protecting religious institutions and individuals from government power. Now, the government seeks to sit in judgment of good-faith religious belief and expression. C-9 isn't about stopping hate. It's about giving the state power to decide which beliefs are permitted. Join us in standing up for religious freedom. Sign here:

Dr. Leslyn Lewis

32,237 次观看 • 9 个月前

The Holocaust was a genocide based on Jewish blood, not belief. Even Jews who were secular or converted to Christianity were murdered under antisemitic regimes like Nazi Germany. Antisemitism has always treated Jews as a race, even when Jews did not define themselves that way. Antisemitism laws were created not to shield Judaism from theological criticism, but to prevent racial hate, incitement, and genocide. Islamophobia includes criticism of Islamic doctrines, political Islam, Sharia law, and jihad. Labeling this criticism as “racism” is a way to conflate legitimate scrutiny of ideas with hate. This approach erases the difference between attacking Muslims as people (which is wrong) and critiquing Islam as a political ideology (which must remain free and open). Antisemitism laws protect people, not theology. No one is being arrested for criticizing the Torah or disagreeing with Jewish views. The move to racialize Islam and pass “Islamophobia” laws isn’t about protecting people from harm, it’s about protecting an ideology from examination. That’s dangerous. It allows Islam to advance unchecked, shields oppressive ideas from being challenged, and weaponizes tolerance against open societies. It cheapens real anti-racism efforts, by making criticism of a powerful, global religion into a hate crime.

The Holocaust was a genocide based on Jewish blood, not belief. Even Jews who were secular or converted to Christianity were murdered under antisemitic regimes like Nazi Germany. Antisemitism has always treated Jews as a race, even when Jews did not define themselves that way. Antisemitism laws were created not to shield Judaism from theological criticism, but to prevent racial hate, incitement, and genocide. Islamophobia includes criticism of Islamic doctrines, political Islam, Sharia law, and jihad. Labeling this criticism as “racism” is a way to conflate legitimate scrutiny of ideas with hate. This approach erases the difference between attacking Muslims as people (which is wrong) and critiquing Islam as a political ideology (which must remain free and open). Antisemitism laws protect people, not theology. No one is being arrested for criticizing the Torah or disagreeing with Jewish views. The move to racialize Islam and pass “Islamophobia” laws isn’t about protecting people from harm, it’s about protecting an ideology from examination. That’s dangerous. It allows Islam to advance unchecked, shields oppressive ideas from being challenged, and weaponizes tolerance against open societies. It cheapens real anti-racism efforts, by making criticism of a powerful, global religion into a hate crime.

Dan Burmawi

30,883 次观看 • 3 个月前

Watch former Prime Minister Tony Abbott speak about existing hate speech laws: “There’s been a double standard enforcing hate speech laws. If you or I say something which is offensive to Muslims, for instance, we’re likely to be in all sorts of trouble. But radical Islamists can say what they like — in terms of “globalizing the intifada,” “murdering the IDF,” “f*** the Jews,” “gas the Jews,” etc. — and nothing happens. So there’s nothing wrong with the laws as they stand; they just need to be enforced equally, as opposed to partially.”

Watch former Prime Minister Tony Abbott speak about existing hate speech laws: “There’s been a double standard enforcing hate speech laws. If you or I say something which is offensive to Muslims, for instance, we’re likely to be in all sorts of trouble. But radical Islamists can say what they like — in terms of “globalizing the intifada,” “murdering the IDF,” “f*** the Jews,” “gas the Jews,” etc. — and nothing happens. So there’s nothing wrong with the laws as they stand; they just need to be enforced equally, as opposed to partially.”

Osher Feldman

93,225 次观看 • 9 个月前

🚨🇬🇧UK’s FREE SPEECH IS AT STAKE❗️ The shocking TRUTH about the UK riots is being kept from the public with biased media bashing against the “far right”. But if you dare to speak up, YOU MIGHT GET ARRESTED UNDER “HATE SPEECH” LAWS! This is tyranny.

🚨🇬🇧UK’s FREE SPEECH IS AT STAKE❗️ The shocking TRUTH about the UK riots is being kept from the public with biased media bashing against the “far right”. But if you dare to speak up, YOU MIGHT GET ARRESTED UNDER “HATE SPEECH” LAWS! This is tyranny.

Naomi Seibt

670,440 次观看 • 2 年前

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke says he is not concerned about the chilling effect the hate speech laws may have on free speech, arguing the laws are needed to stop racist bigotry and that the so called "free speech brigade" simply needs to get over it.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke says he is not concerned about the chilling effect the hate speech laws may have on free speech, arguing the laws are needed to stop racist bigotry and that the so called "free speech brigade" simply needs to get over it.

Anthony Khallouf

78,125 次观看 • 8 个月前