Saturday, 20 February 2016

Andrew Bolt's Blog,20/2/16; Peter BH doing Bolt's work; Repitition Section 18C; Bolt's Doctor's dilemma that's not; Pell and the Catholic Police were they berayed?; Repitition QUT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Media Left continue to desert Turnbull ship. Morrison tossed overboard

Another long winded blog filled with myths distortions and deflections who said he wasn't into blogging anymore as he didn't have a dog in the race. Well his dog is back and it seems with the collar of Rupert around his neck and Bolt dutifully aroused. Bolt has never and I say never been able to match Waleed Aly in any reasoned argument  other than abuse. Aly and and real media report news and opinion today and that surprisingly can change over a period of 5 months  reassess and move on. It's informative. Bolt on the other hand neither reports or informs he dutifully misinforms and that is his job because he plays for a side. So he's repetitive Aly's not. He's not invetigative because doesn't have to be Aly is on a broad range of topics. Others can write Bolt's blogs and often do Peter BH is an example and they will be published because they are formulaic. Aly's can't because they all have Aly's uniqueness.

Michelle Grattan gets a serve from Bolt. Grattan is the doyen of the press gallery with more experience than Bolt has in a toenail. He however needs people of repute to bounce his spin off. How come Grattan didn't notice Turnbull did or didn't look side ways "Morrison seem overruled and without authority." to whom Mr bolt his hairdresser?

Well all you have to do is go to the bottom of the page and you arrive at the Knowledge that tis long blog requiring some time and effort wasn't written by Bolt but his troll Peter BH. Peter BH is generally there for those blogs that sound like Bolt tend to be more connected than Bolt and less hysterical but are never the less just formulaic and repetitive but then I've already said that's what Bolt does. Misinforms roots for his dog and team and offers no more. I began writing this having read the first paragraph of Bolt's blog but realized moved past Gratten I was repeating myself apologies I was trapped in the web of long winded crap

We should be free to discuss this

 It is obscene that our laws make it so dangerous to discuss these matters. Repeal 18C now.  It's not Mr Bolt feel free go to speakers corner and discuss it all you like. Your accusation of it being dangerous comes from News Corp broad caster. If you were an Indigenous person the law would apply equally so it's got nothing to do with color but it does have a lot to do with access and equality. So test it out speak out fight for what you believe in and don't be so gutless. Does the News Corp legal team hold you back? The indigenous don't have your access or the equality of resources to command a response to hate and vilification. Why are there so few cases prosecuted yet it takes up so much of your energy?

 "Oh, and no to the tribalising of our nation. If we did not reserve funds, jobs and prizes for people of certain “races” there would be no need to fuss over who belongs to which of them." What are the Races plural you are referring to and who are the people concerned Andrew Bolt? Anti- positive discrimination is what Bolt is about underpriviledge is a myth spread by blacks, women the handicapped the unemployed immigrants etc etc according to Bolt. Positive discrimination might work for the 1.1 billion people in India but not in Australia. Didn't Abbott want to positively discriminate and pay for the nannies of the wealthy?

 

 

The baby Asha standoff:  what about my own child, Australian mother asks

Bolt actually believes  a "detention center " is the equivalent of " home". That doctors are threatening the health of Australian children by not treating them as equivalent. I've always wondered if Bolt lost his child to social welfare and it was placed in an indigenous foster home or welfare centers whether he'd find that equivalent to indigenous being placed in white foster homes and centers. Would he complain of his child being stolen?

 

 

 

Demand police be investigated for this sliming of Pell

Yes a long blog generally when they are long they tend to be filled with red herrings and dead moggies all deflection from the issue at hand the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse. I'm not sure of why Bolt has taken up the cause celebre on behalf of Pell against the Royal Commission and those being called to testify when he himself championed the one against the Trade unions. Never suggesting innocence unless needing to as a get out against slander. 

The process is the same here and strictly played out in the law.  The circus if there is one is played out by the surrounding audience. " Of course, the police must investigate and I cannot swear that Pell is innocent and the claims have no substance."  This Bolt's get out in case his faux outrage lands him in trouble. But yes it's an opportunity to remind us of Bill Shorten and also self promote and state that "I'm holier than thou" about the media bruha. Pell is just the tool.

"Having asked that, let me remind you of the Victoria Police’s ugly record in accusing the Catholic church:"In this statement and this alone Bolt who goes back 50 + years to defend Pell shows his ignorance about the history of policing in this country. The police and public service history in Australia was Catholic. WASPS ruled Catholics served. The Police force like America was bog Irish maybe some felt betrayed by Pell. However Bolt's suggestion that the police are somewhat anti-Catholic is fantasy. "I wonder only at the culture of the police that could produce false evidence against the church, and now this unforgivable leak."

 Bolt does have a habit of protecting himself." I am not for one second suggesting Ashton knew of or condoned this latest leak. I cannot and do not believe he would do such a thing." It seems to me that a Royal Commission held to clear up all this confusion and what Bolt calls unsubstantiated evidence is a good thing not what Bolt accuses it of being a star chamber to get Pell. If it's so bad why yet another get out clause Bolt?  Isn't Pell doing what Shorten was doing when he was being accused of everything under the sun and you were doing the cheering against him and Gillard? "Those who don’t speak against it are complicit in it." I can't recall hearing a plea from you on either of their behalfs back then. 

"I am not for one second suggesting Ashton knew of or condoned this latest leak. I cannot and do not believe he would do such a thing.

"I wonder only at the culture of the police that could produce false evidence against the church, and now this unforgivable leak."

The church is a global organization whose administrative practices are based on the same model worldwide. The film Spotlight shows parallels about what happened in Boston  could and did probably happen here. In other words what happened in Boston didn't stay in Boston. The Archbishop of Bostonwas kicked upstairs and sent to the Vatican

 

The church is a global organization whose administrative practices are based on the same model worldwide. The film Spotlight shows parallels about what happened in Boston  could and did probably happen here. In other words what happened in Boston didn't stay in Boston. The Archbishop of Bostonwas kicked upstairs and sent to the Vatican

  The Catholic Church Archbishop George Pell with Catholic Priest and child rapist Gerald Ridsdale. New claims against paedophile Catholic priest Gerald Ridsdale.Police are interviewing one of Australia's worst paedophile priests over new abuse allegations. Former Victorian Catholic priest Gerald Ridsdale is eligible for parole from late next month after serving a long prison sentence for abusing thiirty boys between 1961 & 1987.:

 

 

 

Why is Dalley so hostile to a student fighting racial division?

Bolt really doesn't deal with too many issues does he. Climate a once favoured topic has been put on the back burner along with marriage equality ,ISIS  and home grown Terror. Turnbull, the ABC, race,  free speech and immigration seem to be the rut he's made for himself in 2016 . The core arguments are the same but only dressed in different clothing.

QUT is a continued repetition of "reverse racism" & "free speech" so to once again I will repeat myself  "reverse racism" does not exist and "free speech" does. The core elements remain the same. We do legislate against hate speech in a civilized society. In any society with an unequal social hierarchy and limited access to equality racism can and does exist but only in one direction from the top down. Again any society were access to equality is limited by the differential power structure free speech can only be obtained by putting the brakes on hate speech . 

 Bolt represents a minority of extreme right wingers for whom any attempt at positive discrimination to enable access and equality to those who currently don't have it is an anathema an existential threat to what they believe is their natural god given birth right to be at the top of the pecking order in our current and taken for granted social hierarchy. A white male Christian society where wealth income and status are distributed unevenly is normal.

For them the historic social construction of reality simply does not exist. Bolt put it very succinctly when he said publicly "history started with my birth" therefore I'm as much a first person in this country as any one born after me" There are no first persons and we are equal. The stupidity of Bolt's logic simply reveals the values of extreme conservatives and right wingers who believe they have inherited the earth. Any form of positive discrimination enabling access and equality needs to be protested and stopped in it's tracks.

So " I am surprised that presenter Helen Dalley monstered student union leader Jack McGuire for attacking racism and defending free speech." of course he is and note the posturing tone.
" Dalley expresses unquestioning support for “the law of the land” determining “what you can and can’t say” and preventing you from saying “what you want” 

No positive discrimination allowed it's reverse racism and  threatens us  and stiffling  the freedom of hate speech by those already with cultural capital  is restrictive of our verbal rights to grind them into the ground. It's the cry of the poor little rich boy isn't it?

 

 

No comments: