[-empyre-] Re: empyre Digest, Vol 15, Issue 2
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: [-empyre-] Re: empyre Digest, Vol 15, Issue 2
- From: email@example.com
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 19:49:39 +1100 (EST)
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <20060204010003.8A6EA141E2BF@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
- References: <20060204010003.8A6EA141E2BF@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
- Reply-to: soft_skinned_space <email@example.com>
- User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a-0.f0.9.6.legacy
<I am responsible for putting together the list of guest this month and
understand where you are coming from.
I dont think you do. I think it is extremely insulting to the members of
this discussion list that you can bring in two foreigners as "authorities"
on Australian legal issues. How patronising can you get?
>A number of people from the organisations you mentioned were invited to be
guests but did not commit to the discussion.
Why not? Are they concerned about making public statements regarding the
>Initially, I was wanting a
discussion that had an Asia Pacific focus - seeing that I am the
this region. Sedition was a topic that I thought was a hot issue, and that we
could start from the new Anti-Terrorist laws and then push out to look
relevant international cases.
Before the list can address the international situation, a thorough
overview of the Australian law is required.
Even though our guests are not predominately Australian, they are well
to discuss the topic of sedition. It is my hope that the guests this month
engage interested people from Australia to participate and the discussion can
develop from there....
I cant see it, sorry? Neither of the americans have any background in
Australian law and I am completely disinterested in anything they have to
say about american sedition when there is so much to discuss about
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and