Mark Latham settles law suit

Lawyers Maurice Blackburn (who ‘fight for fair’) recently produced a statement about the settlement of one of their high profile reputation-boosting cases. They announced:

A settlement has been reached in the case of Osman Faruqi v Mark Latham, with Mr Latham removing offensive statements made about Mr Faruqi as well as agreeing to pay him damages plus legal costs…

Mr Latham made the offensive comments about Mr Faruqi on 2 August 2017 in a video posted to Mark Latham’s Outsiders Webpage, YouTube, the Rebel Media webpage, and a post on Facebook.

After Faruqi brought an action for defamation against him, Mark Latham protested in a way most Australians would understand. He reproduced the allegedly anti-white comments he alleged Faruqi made about white people. The allegedly anti-white comments are in the edited posting. Latham:

We know how the left in Australia hates free speech.They can’t win arguments on the merits so they use political correctness, censorship and the outrage industry. And there’s a fourth tactic: lawfare.

I know all about lawfare because Osman Faruqi started a defamation action against me in the Federal Court for comments I made about his anti-white comments.

Faruqi is notorious for denigrating white people for no other reason than they are white. Some of his appalling Twitter comments include:

Mediocre white people: they should be in the bin but instead they own everything and are every f***ing where”

“I have a rule of using all media appearances to make fun of white people.”

“The number of white people desperate to wear blackface shows that darker skin is objectively better”

“I love debates about sunscreen. Just more evidence that white people don’t belong in Australia”

“Half this country is named after racist, genocidal maniacs, just sit down for ONE SECOND white people”

The above comments by Faruqi are offensive enough, but then on the 27th July this year he had a Twitter exchange with Yasmin Abdel-Magied (you know the one: “Islam is the most feminist religion!”). She asked what was happening with Senators Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters who resigned from the Senate for having dual citizenship. Faruqi replied with the tweet (note: we blanked this out, not Faruqi): 

The white people are getting f***ed. It’s happening.

Imagine if someone said this about black people: ‘the black people are getting f***ed. It’s happening’. That is, the black people are getting wiped out of the political system. And Osman Faruqi is approving of this happening for white people.

These comments above are outrageous and unacceptable. So I condemned it on my program, Mark Latham’s Outsiders. That is what he is suing me over. If he wanted to debate the issues I’d invite him onto my program. He can answer all the questions. He can have the last word. But that’s not their tactic. Instead of debating an issue they would prefer to sue to try to destroy our free speech and send a warning to others.

Latham described Faruqi as a ‘left-wing Muslim with close associations with the Greens and fundraising organisations like GetUp, and supported by the left-wing, national law firm Maurice Blackburn, [who] is not cheap.’

Lawyer Josh Berstein of Maurice Blackburn (‘who fight for fair’) gave a little invigorating speech about defamation and the law, and Faruqi’s pious devotion to free speech and respect for others. He added this about Faruqi’s alleged anti-white racism: ‘Mr Latham had suggested that Mr Faruqi had made numerous attempts to vilify white people, a suggestion ridiculed earlier this year by the Federal Court when it struck out Mr Latham’s first Defence.’ Fighting-for-fair Bornstein handed over to devout muslim Osman Faruqi to continue the sermon, parts of which were:

This case has always been about reaffirming the principle that all Australians should be able to participate in public debate without being denigrated and accused of supporting heinous crimes like terrorism because of their background…

I hope that this settlement sends a message to other members of the community that while robust debate is part of a healthy democracy, using your platform to harm the reputation of individuals comes at a cost.

I strongly believe that our community would be better off if Australians from all backgrounds were able to participate in public life while feeling confident that they won’t be publicly denigrated.

Hopefully this result helps and encourages Australians with diverse backgrounds to speak up and participate in democratic debate.

Let me proceed in the abstract. If a member of group A calls members of group B low-down dirty dogs by virtue of being members of group B it does not logically follow that a member of group B is justified in calling the member of group A a terrorist. Deductively such a claim is not warranted.

However, if members of group A are observed to continually express aggression and contempt for members of group B and, moreover, are observed to initiate terrorist actions against them, it is reasonable for a member of group B to call a member of group A upon the utterance of a series of comments of contempt a confounded terrorist. That’s inductive logic.