Andrew Bolt's Blog,13/11/18; You can't save us from what doesn't exist; However you can use it for personal advantage and both Pollie and Media do; When Morrison is doing it wrong he asks for more;

 

POLLIES SAY THEY CAN'T SAVE US FROM SUCH TERRORISM. WRONG

 A refugee we saved from Somalia rewards us by trying to blow up his car with gas bottles in Melbourne's busy Bourke St before stabbing three people, stopping only when police shot him. This is  now our fifth terrorist attack by refugees. What are we doing to ourselves? My editorial on The Bolt Report.

5m

  This is now our fifth terrorist attack by refugees. What are we doing to ourselves? My editorial on The Bolt Report. Bolt's ad for Bolt himself.

What a prick Bolt is. Understanding is not at all a necessary goal for him.
 Ali had been here for over 2 decades and was a Naturalised Australian he wasn't a "refugee" any longer but an Australian according to each and every definition of what it means to be a citizen. He was as much an Australian as Andrew Bolt is.
 3% of us suffer from the severe mental health conditions and less than 1% are at times are certified as involuntary patients when considered a danger to themselves or others. Mentally ill Australians generally aren't referred to by their previous Nationalities or their religious affiliations. Dimitri Gargasoulos the Bourke st mass murderer is an example and he killed 6 people and wasn't referred to as the Greek Orthodox or as a terrorist. We know he was in a psychotic state and claimed to have been hearing voices at the time. His defence will be his psychiatric condition at the time. Bolt fails to make reference to the fact that a far greater number of people were killed in the past 5 years by Australians in psychotic states far, far more than just his 5 Muslims grouped from very different origins and cultures. For him being a Muslim is central tenet despite the fact that the statistical significance 5 in 10 million or even if only Muslims are considered 5 in some 300 000.
Bolt's the son of immigrants who his hero Trump gives him no birthright claim to citizenship so Bolt's suggestion 'we' saved Ali as if Bolt has some significantly different status to Ali in being an Australian Ali was as much a part of Bolt's 'we' as Bolt. To say he wasn't amplifying Bolt's exclusiveness, racism and his denial of our Constitution. The fact that Ali had a mental illness was really the only distinguishing difference between them. However many would believe Bolt also has a serious issue with delusion as well. The proof can be found in his opinionated narratives that have little or no relevance to the socially shared reality in which we live. Andrew Bolt has been witnessed to have committed attempted GBH on two pranksters who practically joked him in Carlton. A video showed he could be as much a danger to others too he simply wasn't charged.
 So 5 cases over a 5 year period shared between two cities regarded as the most livable in the world with a combined population of 10 million people stand as Bolt's statistical evidence that we as a country is in dire threat of domestic terrorism by the Muslims we have allowed into the country. Anyone of them without certainty could be our next attackers. If that's not deluded paranoia I don't know what is? Three of the cases if not all of them revealed a severe degree of mental impairment Haider, Man Monis and Ali were by definition ill and certifiable. Furthermore, Bolt never mentions that far, far more cases of murder and violence have been committed by people in mentally psychotic states in the same period and weren't Muslim who have been ignored by Bolt, a high degree of Christians among them.  In Ali's case, there wasn't even a cry of Allahu Akbar yet Bolt hasn't a problem suggesting the primary cause of murder in this instance was radical Islam. Why isn't radical Christian if the shoes on the other foot after all murder is radical if intended and we hear of it happening daily.
If there's a lesson to be learned from this tragic circumstance it is our approach to mental illness hidden in most part from us all. An illness unlike any other that has family and friends witness it for some time even years but without reporting it until it breaks out in a cathartic event for all to see. What we do know is Media and Politicians declare themselves the owners of the narratives in these moments particularly when the need to understand what happened is abandoned for use. Use it can have often for profit and or politics which is evident at the moment. 
Matthew Guy is immediately advertising fake statistics on crime I might add. Bolt is declaring the nation's faux danger anger and necessary Islamophobia and Morrison is back to dividing Australians with Abbott's divisive Team Australia catcall of them and us. While an Italian not that long ago regarded a wog, a dago lies dead and is about to be given a State Funeral for being unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Everybody seems to find a pot of gold in this event that is a tragedy to two families. All, however, if seen through the prism of self-interest makes Kafkaesque use of Ali rather than attempt any forensic empathetic effort to understand Ali and what happened. Accompanying this failure is to proffer only negative opinions and generalisations of the whole of those who practice and even don't practice Islam grouping some 54 plus different cultures and tarring them with a single brush. Declaring "them" really ordinary Australians as potentially dangerous to a mythical "us". The challenge for Victorian politicians in wake of Bourke Street tragedy

 

Morrison wants Muslim leaders to do more to prevent terrorism, but what more can they do?

There is an election around the corner just watch Andrew Bolt go tooth and nail in vilifying Islam as the fundamentally most dangerous system of belief in this country. The same was once said about the Catholics as their loyalty couldn't be guaranteed to Australia before the Pope and the Vatican. That was proffered back then by the ultra-conservative ruling elite to ensure they can turn traditional left-wing voters by nothing else but a sense of fear. Bolt's not original we have seen it before and it was disgusting and cowardly then and it is just as cowardly today. The conservatives have even taken us to war to retain power wars that we have all lost and left to the Labor Party to pull us out of. Andrew Bolt is parroting the right-wing movements elsewhere and in the English speaking world he's been employed and given the platform by Rupert Murdoch to do it. What relief, only the right-wing is listening to him.  Australian Muslims should be aware of how dangerous Andrew Bolt is he's, in fact, searching jabbing insulting in the hope of pushback in the form of sensation from anywhere he might generate it. In this case what he's promises isn't original it's been shown before but Bolt with his production team will do everything to sensationalise it.

• Q&A: Gillian Triggs says Scott Morrison 'foolish' and 'unhelpful' over Bourke Street  

   In a response to a questioner, Triggs also criticised the prime minister, Scott Morrison, for his response to the Bourke Street attack and his dismissive attitude to mental illness.

  It emerged on Sunday that Hassan Khalif Shire Ali believed he was being chased by “unseen people with spears” and was abusing substances in the lead-up to Friday’s fatal terrorist attack.
  On Monday Morrison said referencing these delusions was “a lame excuse”. Terrorism experts and lawyers responded, saying his comments were “simplistic” and that better mental health access could prevent violence.
  “The perpetrator intended to terrorise, that meets the definition of terrorism,” Triggs said. “[But] so many of these acts are by people with profound mental disturbance or substance abuse. I think to ignore that reality is very foolish indeed.
                                        ------------------------------------
  When strategy takes the place of ideals and values we simply witness and avalanche of heartless hopelessness, harm, no service and Australian shame (ODT)
  
  

   Divide between government and Islamic leaders deepens over Bourke Street attacker

   A 2018 U.N. report highlighted this trend of branding human rights defenders, activists, and experts as “terrorists,” in Algeria, Egypt, the Philippines, and elsewhere. The Center for Strategic and International Studies has also noted that several countries besides Nicaragua have used compliance with FATF counterterrorism measures to justify passing restrictive laws in recent years.
  “From Brazil and Nicaragua to France and the U.K. to Kyrgyzstan and Australia, we’re seeing clampdowns that make it all too easy to label protesters, journalists, activists, political opponents, and others that the authorities want to neutralize as ‘terrorists’ and ‘extremists,’” said Letta Tayler, a senior researcher on terrorism at Human Rights Watch. “We’ve seen a dangerous global spread of draconian counter terrorism laws since the September 11, 2001 attacks. … Because the word terrorism is associated with atrocities, it’s now easy to get public buy-in to responses that break the law in the name of security.”
  

   

  THE PAGE THAT MAKES A FOOL OF THE RACE DISCRIMINATION COMMISSION

  The Age makes a fool of the Race Discrimination Commissioner with its story placement. Chin Tan: "It is... highly misleading and counter-productive, to frame Melbourne’s problems with crime as a problem with African Australian communities." Next to this report are ones on Africans bashing a teenager and killing a restaurateur.

  2mLink

  
  
  

    What some have said, however, is the truth: that Sudanese and Somalis have a very high rate of offending, which raises the question: why bring in so many as refugees when some Australians then pay such a high price? According  to Bolt

  What's with this man who can't say the words "I have said" who is his authority when police and experts have denied this very statement. 100 people of interest in a population of over 50,000 do not constitute a statistically significant issue. The majority of these are kids ranging from 13- 17 and still in school. What is significant is some media personalities have carved a name for themselves printing statistically significant bullshit and Andrew Bolt is a gang leader. 

  
  When Andrew Bolt cobbles cases together we see he's stuck trying to impress us with his laser vision of 5 cases among 10million people as being the reason we need a multi-billion dollar National security task force instead of money poured into mental health and our education about it. 

  The only reason Bolt doesn't print all the information available to him from the police is if all the information were laid out Andrew Bolt wouldn't have a leg to stand on and would be shown up to be the racist he in fact is. Police and Bolt's statistics can't differ that significantly and Bolt certainly isn't the specialist he makes out he is so if the denial of Bolt's claims is so strong the only real gap is who publishes the information is it correct anis the person publishing it of high repute. Well, Bolt is none of those and the Police and ABS are all of those. Bolt cherry picks and even when he does the numbers aren't that significant. No more significant than the drugs, violence and hidden crimes that went on in the private schools he sent his children.

  As for the race commission being called fools why is it racists like Bolt always claim they, in fact, are the victims of racism a concoction that bullies use to claim they are only trying to defend themselves. If Bolt had that much popular support you'd think he would be seen meeting and greeting his fans in public but no he will no doubt fly out of Australia to holiday because Amsterdam has an even larger community of Muslims and coloured folk which Bolt says are of such bad character 3 million in fact.

  
  
  

  IMAGINE A BRUSSELS WITH GUNS

  From the continent that gave us World War 1, World War 2, the Holocaust and colonialism, this bright idea: "France's finance minister has called for the EU to become a powerful new 'empire' to rival the US and China... Le Maire controversial calls for a new superstate came as he backed Emnanuel Macron’s call for a 'real European army'."  

  29m
  No this isn't a new response which Bolt seems to make out it is. It's in response to Trump's threat to pull US forces out of the EU rather than be reliant on the threats of a POTUS that can't be relied on for anything.
  " Macron is a xenophobe. Or maybe just paranoid." Bolt
  Bolt's ignorance is like a Jack in the Box it just reveals itself whenever it wants without hesitation. France and Germany have the greatest multicultural populations in the EU the very opposite of what Bolt calls Xenophobic. They are hardly the hardcore Nationalists that Bolt is coupled with the Xenophobia he shows when talking Immigration in Australia. Bolt like Trump is openly paranoid xenophobic nationalists with their ideas of a forced assimilationist heaven in the Pacific and Trump in the USA. The French and Germans are the very opposite. When Bolt tries to be smart out pops his dufus in a box.
  Bolt keeps talking about the civilized Western Culture well the Dutch his heritage wasn't highly regarded. They were so disliked they drove the Indonesians to Islam. Their religion leads them to believe they were God's chosen elect. So much so they readily shipped more Dutch Jews to the death camps than even the Germans did. 80% of Dutch Jews never survived. They readily bragged about Anne Frank hiding the reality of their persecution The British hated the Dutch so much they had an encyclopedic set of words phrases and jokes about them that can be heard still today. It could be said that revelation in the 80s was a Liberating moment and made them more Socialist and accommodating to foreigners today. It seems, however, Andrew Bolt was raised in the traditions of the Dutch inglorious past with it's holier than thou attitudes that made them seem to the Jews Xenophobic Nationalist Radicalised Christians all of the traits Andrew Bolt carries with him today.
  

  
  

Andrew Bolt on Climate change Ignorance shows exaggerated confidence in his abilities, whereas experts are unduly tentative about their performance because they know what they are talking about. Dunning-Kruger effect.

 The  Dunning-Kruger effect.  published in 1999.Appliesdirectly to the Andrew Bolt's of this world when it comes to the denial of Climate change in particular those employed by Fox News and News Corp.

"Ignorance is associated with exaggerated confidence in one’s abilities, whereas experts are unduly tentative about their performance."

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wvVPdyYeaQU

Confidence and credibility

 Unfortunately projected confidence as the most important determinant in judged credibility.
Does this mean that the poorest-performing — and hence most over-confident — expert is believed more than the top performer whose displayed confidence may be a little more tentative?
 In contested arenas, such as climate change, the Dunning-Kruger effect and its flow-on consequences can distort public perceptions of the true scientific state of affairs, yes.
To illustrate, there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions. This consensus is expressed in more than 95% of the scientific literature and it is shared by a similar fraction — 97-98% – of publishing experts in the area.  Research has found that the “relative climate expertise and scientific prominence” of the few dissenting researchers “are substantially below that of the convinced researchers”. In other words Bolt and his denier sources are not only a minority but are below par when it comes to research. Those 'for' are counted in the 1000's whereas those against wouldn't fill  a small room. What News Corp and Bolt fail to recognize is the false balance they present is actually bias.
 recognise (false) balance as (actual) bias?

‘I’m not an expert, but…’

How should actual experts  deal with the problems that arise from Dunning-Kruger, the media’s failure to recognise Bolt's lack of “balance” as bias, and the fact that the public uses projected confidence  of commentators as a cue for credibility?
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dsjEN5lN_JQ
1 The pervasive scientific consensus on climate change IPCC report based on 100's of the top climate scientists  In the same way as there is a consensus that smoking causes cancerThe public has a right to know that there is a scientific consensus on climate change.
2That the public wants scientists to work closely with managers and others to integrate scientific results into management decisions. This opinion appears to be equally shared by all stakeholders, from scientists to managers and interest groups. That decisions aren't made on Bolt's notion that "I'm not an expert but think of the economic harm therefore....."

Advocacy or understanding?

Given the consensus “the only unequivocal tool for minimising climate change uncertainty is to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions”. In the same way that given the consensus on smoking and cancer quitting will minimise the risk of cancer.It is not advocacy.
  Both statements are true. Both identify a link between a scientific consensus and a personal or political action.Neither  advocates any specific response or non response.— but both require an informed decision based on the scientific consensus.
 Spurious accusations of advocacy which Bolt uses is merely a ploy to marginalise the voices of experts.removing their opinion from public debate. The consequence is that scientific evidence is lost to the public and is lost to the democratic process.Sober policy decisions on climate change cannot be made when politicians claim that they are not scientists while also erroneously claiming that there is no scientific consensus which immediately shows their advocacy and conservative bias.