A movie made for the benefit of those people who weren’t paying attention back then when he was organising that illegal war so his company could make billions from it.
3 Likes
Hmm, that is a better strategy than Gofundme - supporters get an immediate tax deduction from their $$$.
“Blessed be the donors, for theirs shall be the Kingdom of tax breaks”
1 Like
The Christopher Pyne story that’s brewing should be really big, but it won’t be. Total gloss over.
4 Likes
Can you give us the espresso version before the gloss?
The Labor Party are officially dead.
What will they capitulate on next.
3 Likes
Essentially he just got a stupidly high paying job (advisory, Judd Visy style) at a defence company he handed out 377m to when he had the defence portfolio
3 Likes
I thought that was forbidden…for 18 months.
Meanwhile, at the Australian War Memorial, Brendan Nelson hands out naming rights to arms companies. He is a consultant for one of them. Donates his fee to the AWM but like Pyne would have his next job lined up
FFS
It seems like we are living in an alternate reality.
1 Like
No, we just live in a county where people worry about the ramblings of moronic rugby players, their dividend imputations and the Islamic boogie man more than they do about stuff that should really concern them. Such as political corruption, climate change, etc.
10 Likes
You miss the point and are shooting the wrong messenger - Folau rightly or wrongly chose to use Go Fund Me to raise money for his legal fees - Somehow one day Folau’s add met the guidelines while the next day it failed to meet the guidelines - So either Go Fund Me don’t properly vet applications or they bowed to public pressure - And of course once this was over-publicised and SENSATIONALLY so by the media,the obvious happened that Folau found a different website and is receiving far more donations for his causee - And the latest irony is the groups that are criticising Folau’s wife are in effect claiming she is an appendage of her husband - And this is a simple case of employment contract law.
You honestly think someone sits there and approves every gofundme before it shows up?
There are many websites of various types where there is an approval process before your profile/add is approved and then listed - One hopes there would be some type of rigorous vetting process, especially for one where donated money is involved - Go Fund Me is commonly used by people raising money for their day in court, so one hopes this furore doesn’t affect too many - At the end of the day, Blind Freddy could see that by Go Fund Me withdrawing Folau’s add it would leave him to attract more money from another funding source - A big fail by Go Fund Me.
You can hope all you like but it doesn’t make it a reality does it?
What makes you think there are many who do vet every single thing that turns up on their website?
With online these days it’s easier to take your customers money first. If someone complains later we just reverse the whole thing. If no one complains we keep what we keep. The occasional reversal is cheaper cause you don’t need a team of people going over every detail.
It would be like @DJR vetting every post before it appears here!
Marketing wise no one cares about go fund me losing this one. Do you even know who number 2 is in this market?
Mate, don’t get “yacco’ed”. 
2 Likes
Yeah that’ll be the argument from their end, but ultimately it’s probably going to fall on deaf ears from a legal perspective because this is contract law. There’s no laws around freedom of expression so they’re going to have to shoot for compassionate grounds (I forgot the legal term for what I mean here so I’m guessing).
There’s no approval process at all for GoFundMe. The labour required to do that for every single thing posted there makes the whole concept completely unviable.
At a guess, there’d a trigger point (probably a $$ amount or page visits) where someone manually reviews the post against terms and conditions.
-edit- if you go down this path then we should be blaming Instagram for the whole mess in the first place
Think there are, and Contract Law is subservient to other Laws
“There is no Commonwealth legislation enshrining a general right to freedom of expression.”
There’s a few charters and whatnot applicable in state legislation but they pertain to criminal prosecution only.
But there are State and Federal Laws that pertain to rights of individuals in our Common Law rights.
And if all Parties agree to clauses in a Contract they can be deemed not enforcible.