ANDREW BOLT: GUILTY OF RACISM!

In a landmark victory for multiculturalism in Australia, a Melbourne court today found Murdoch propagandist Andrew Bolt guilty of breaching the racial discrimination act.

While many, including those who detest Bolt’s ideology and writings, have stated that the decision is a blow against freedom of speech, the reality is that it’s actually more of a blow to those that abuse the freedom of speech in order to peddle their scaremongering extreme right-wing ideology of hate and racism.

People like Bolt and his other racist cohorts at the various Murdoch publications including Tim Blair, Piers Akerman, et al, are going to have to think twice before hitting the keyboards to spout their hatreds.

BOLT THE POLLUTIONIST OR BOLT THE MINERS LOBBYIST

Andrew Bolt prefers this:

To this:

Or this:

He either has disgusting taste or someone's paying him big bucks to lobby for them. I wonder who that could be?

MORE OF BOLT’S RACIST HYPOCRISY

Just a quick observation that highlights Andrew Bolt’s racist hypocrisy. In his column today he writes in one of his posts:

Britain’s riots show what happens when we underestimate the underclass. Or when we even more stupidly import one. Three days of arson, looting and violence started, not surprisingly, in Tottenham, coyly described as “very diverse”. That means it has a large population of people of African and Caribbean descent, and is poor, crime-riddled and sullen.

This time the flashpoint was the shooting by police of Mark Duggan, which led family, friends and locals to protest outside a police station.

There they were joined by yobs summoned by SMS and Twitter, the technology of the mob.
Duggan actually best symbolised fault lines which have yawed open in Britain. He was black, although barely a single report dared say so, so irresponsibly timid has been the reporting.

Later on in the day when a newspaper does indeed mention the ethnicity of participants in the rioting, Bolt writes another post in which he says:

Only one ethnic or religious group involved in London’s riots was singled out for mention by the otherwise fashionably blind Guardian’s reporter - and it’s the only one the Left feels licensed to vilify.

The ‘ethnic or religious’ group Bolt was referring to were Hasidic Jews.

Bolt moans when the ethicity of those he hates don't get mentioned but then moans when others he does support do get mentioned. Such hypocrisy!

It’s apparently OK to vilify blacks or Muslims – it seems working for the Murdoch press gives you the licence to do that – but if you mention Jews then, as Bolt sees it, you’re an anti-Semite.

MURDOCH JOURNO, ANDREW BOLT, DEFENDS THE ‘CREED’ THAT MOTIVATED ANDERS BREIVIK

In his column today, Murdoch journalist Andrew Bolt defends the creed of hate that motivated the killing of more than 90 people in Norway.

In his article, which he titles ‘Look not at his creed but at his wounds’, Bolt attempts to excuse the actions of Breivik by portraying him as being deeply frustrated by a sense of “powerlessness” which Bolt suggests is bought on by being engulfed by Islam, and “rejection” because of coming from a broken family.

While Bolt has used various superlatives to describe what Breivik had done including ‘murder’ and ‘atrocity’, etc., Bolt has consistently failed to wholeheartedly condemn the crime or the ‘creed’ that motivated it.

Fortunately, apart from a few of Bolt’s regular far-right Islamophobic supporters, most comments, even from some who often support Bolt, are critical of him for taking this stance.

After a careful read of Bolt’s post one can only conclude that Bolt is actually supportive of the reason why Breivik committed this crime. Certainly Andrew Bolt and his Islamophobic supporters in Australia are on exactly the same wavelength as Breivik. It was only a matter of time before Bolt's influence manifested itself in this type of violence.We have Murdoch to thank for the part Bolt has played in bringing the kind of hate-filled thinking Breivik has displayed to Australia.

Murdoch should immediately sack this hate-monger before his Islamophobic nonsense gains a foothold in Australia and culminates in the same kind of tragedy that happened in Norway.

MURDOCH’S AUSTRALIAN HATE MERCHANTS

Whereas in Britain Murdoch’s journalists revel in tabloid sensationalism utilising various nefarious methods of gaining material for their non-stories, Murdoch’s Australian journalists tend more to specialise in ultra right-wing racism. This includes cultural and religious racism directed mainly toward Islam, as well as blood and colour racism which is directed particularly toward Australia’s own Aboriginal people and also toward black Africans that have sought refuge in Australia.

At Melbourne’s Herald-Sun newspaper, Andrew Bolt, the ultra right-wing blogger-columnist, almost daily lays bare his racist credentials for all his followers to see. Today, for example, he tells us that the ‘underclass are stirring’. For Bolt the underclass are the whites of Australia who are lashing out against African migrants. In a futile effort to distance himself from the activities and violence of the underclass that he has stirred up by writing articles designed specifically to influence such perpetrators of violence and hatred, Bolt calls his post about the stirred underclass; ‘White trash’.

Meanwhile, at Murdoch’s Sydney newspaper, The Telegraph, another ultra right-wing blogger-columnist, Tim Blair, showed his Islamophobic colours when he made the same knee-jerk call as Bolt when the Norwegian atrocity story broke; he blamed Muslims.

The other blogger-columnist at The Telegraph is the all round racist Piers Akerman. Writing, thankfully, only intermittently these days, Akerman’s latest offering, ‘What a pack of Burqas’, was apparently written in France where he has been touring. The article covers the whole gamut of Akerman’s lunatic rantings (he once actually attempted to blame Muslims for causing the 2009 Black Sunday fires in Victoria) ranging from protecting what’s left of Murdoch’s credibility in the UK to Muslim immigration in Europe and back again.

The propaganda at Murdoch’s – and Australia’s – only national newspaper, The Australian, is only marginally more sophisticated than his regional tabloids. Greg Sheridan, Dennis Shanahan and Janet Albrechtsen, the Ann Coulter of the Australian loony right, are among the most prominent racist ultra right-wingers that Murdoch employs. Naturally, they all also happen to be climate change denialists and supporters of pollutionists. Currently, most of them are busy trying to isolate Murdoch’s Australian propaganda machine from the fallout from the misdeeds of his UK propaganda machine.

The aims of the two arms of his propaganda empire, the UK and Australia, are the same; its just that the UK arm tends more toward using underhand means of pushing their message while the Australian arm uses blatant fear-mongering racism and lies about climate change to get to its objectives of ‘regime change’ in Australia.

Murdoch’s merchants of hate in Australia have played down the events that occurred in Norway two days ago. Few have condemned the atrocity and have only reported the facts. Nor have Murdoch’s propagandists properly condemned the reactionary violence against African immigrants by racist white youths who clearly have been influenced by the likes of Murdoch’s Australian propagandists.

BOLT THE ISLAMOPHOBE FAILS TO CONDEMN FAR-RIGHT KILLINGS AND BOMBING IN NORWAY

Murdoch journalist and extreme right-wing Australian racist, Andrew Bolt, is always quick to condemn Islamic terrorism wherever it may occur. Of course, all terrorism needs to be condemned but for Bolt, such condemnation is also seen as an opportunity to push his hate spiel against Islam for his racist followers to feed on.

Yesterday, as news came in that bombing and shooting atrocities had occurred in Norway, Bolt was quick off the mark to blame Islamist extremists saying “Once the identity of the attackers becomes known, the consequences for Norway’s immigration policies could be profound”.

Well, the identity of the attackers did become known and it seems at least one of them, who has been arrested, is actually just like Bolt and his crew of haters – an Islamophobic far-right racist.

Once Bolt realised that the attack had not been perpetrated by Islamic terrorists, he began to report only the bare facts in a series of updates to his original post. All of the updates were noticeably devoid of any condemnation. To date there have been no further posts on the attacks at Bolt’s blog.

This is part of the Murdoch style of journalism in Australia. Whether or not there is phone hacking going on in Australia is as yet unknown, but certainly there is a distinct pattern of anti-Islamic and anti non-white racism running through most of Murdoch’s publications in Australia particularly in Sydney where another Murdoch racist, Tim Blair, operates, and in Melbourne which is Bolt’s hate base.

BOLT ON THURSDAY, 21 JULY 2011

BOLT THE POLLUTIONIST

Andrew Bolt is now taking a new tack in his role as a champion of the polluters by saying that anti-pollutionists that use the term ‘carbon’ or ‘carbon tax’ are being ignorant because, he says, carbon is a solid and has nothing to do with climate change and can hardly be taxed.

This is a patently transparent and crude, if not desperate, attempt to deceive – and, as can be seen at his column, many of his followers have fallen for his nonsense.

The reality is somewhat less prosaic. When using the word 'carbon' within the context of the climate change debate, almost everyone is aware that the reference to 'carbon' refers to the various gaseous forms that carbon may come in and not the solid form.

When the word 'carbon' is used in the climate change debate it is used as a form of abbreviation to mean carbon dioxide and to a lesser extent carbon monoxide, both of which, when over-abundant in the atmosphere to the point where it is detrimental to the environment, can become and are considered as pollutants.

To attempt to belittle those that use the term 'carbon' when they are clearly referring to it in its gaseous form by suggesting they are ignorant because carbon is actually a solid, is thoroughly disingenuous and highlights only your own ignorance - and desperation.


BOLT THE RACIST

In this post at his column today Bolt highlights a story of a recently converted Muslim man who received 40 lashes to his back from other Muslim men supposedly for drinking alcohol. If anyone other than Bolt had highlighted this story then there would be no problem but Bolt has brought this story to our attention for one purpose and one purpose only and that is to yet again demonise Islam by deliberately inferring that this is how immigrant Muslims behave in Australia.

The title of his post alone, ‘Who let them in?’ frames the perpetrators as immigrants. Yet, when one reads the article Bolt cites and links to, one finds that only one of them is identified as an immigrant but has been here since he was two-years old; hardly the image of a militant Muslim in Australia for the sole purpose of bring Sharia law here which is the image that Bolt would like us to have, and is a follower of a Sydney-born, not immigrant, imam. Where Bolt gets the ‘them’ from in his article’s title is not explained.

Bolt compounds the intent of his post by omitting any sympathy for the victim of this assault by his fellow Muslims.

BOLT THE RACIST, BOLT THE HYPOCRITE.

In his rush to demonise Islam, the racist Islamophobe Andrew Bolt forgets how similar Islam is to Judaism in many of its practices. In his column today he does his usual lazy journalist stunt of cutting and pasting other people’s work to create a post that is totally bereft of any of his own words. In this case Bolt cites fellow Islamophobe Mark Steyn from his blog in order to project his own view.

Basically, the piece attempts to belittle Islam by highlighting the Islamic practice of not allowing menstruating women to worship in their mosque and being made to sit at the back of the place of worship during this time. Bolt and Steyn infer that the practice is both sexist and archaic. Another Islamophobe, Kathy Shaidle, reinforces this notion in her article which Steyn and then Bolt quote: “…and the year is 2011” implying that this sort of practice isn’t appropriate in this day and age.

The problem is that all of these Islamophobes have been so busy trying to demonise Islam in this way that they’ve not realised that some sects within Judaism have very similar laws about menstruating women with some synagogues not even allowing menstruating women into the synagogue let alone make them sit at the back.

All Bolt, Steyn and Shaidle have demonstrated with this piece of attempted hate-spiel is their own hypocrisy and utter ignorance – not to mention their Islamophobic racism and contempt for the Islamic religion. Their hate-spiel goes to the heart of Islamic religious practices, practices which also happen to be shared by other religions, and has absolutely nothing to do with Islamic extremism which they claim is their only objection to Islam.

Freedom of speech is one thing; Bolt’s brand of hate-speech is something else. The quicker this sick racist is shut down the better for Australia and the better for the planet.

ANDREW BOLT: THE ‘JULIUS STREICHER’ OF THE AUSTRALIAN EXTREME RIGHT

Andrew Bolt, Australia’s most notorious racist and Islamophobe, like the Nazi Jew-baiter Julius Streicher before him, continues to relentlessly pursue his program of hate against Islamic and non-European immigrants to Australia.

His almost daily attacks (here’s today’s) against Islam at his on-line column at Rupert Murdoch’s Herald-Sun newspaper are designed to demonise the entire Islamic community. Bolt does this by cherry-picking the misdeeds of a very few and inferring that whatever offence has been committed by an Islamic person was done because they are Muslims and that they are representative of what the whole Islamic community are like. In other words, Bolt misrepresents the values of the Islamic community claiming that Western values are different and, therefore, are better than those of Muslims. It is exactly the same propaganda technique that Julius Streicher used in his Der Stürmer newspaper in Germany during the Nazi era to demonise the Jews of Germany and later throughout Europe.

Like Streicher, Bolt hopes that his relentless propaganda demonising Muslims and Islam will influence public opinion to the extent that the Australian people will eventually hate Islam and Muslims as much as he does and that the government will then deport those that are here or, at least, not allow any further Muslim immigration to Australia.

The problem is; it never just ends there. Streicher started his hate campaign against Jews in much the same way. At first he demanded that Jews should be expelled from Germany. Over time, as the Nazis and other extreme right-wing groups coalesced and became increasingly more influential politically, so the persecution against Jews went beyond mere words. Eventually, as the Nazis moved into power, so the persecution of Jews increased. They were shunned by their fellow Germans and then excluded from certain professions. As Hitler’s expansionist dreams became reality so the persecution of Jews was taken a step further and they were put in camps and then later deported, mostly to Poland. As Hitler marched further east into Russia so the final plans that became the ‘final solution to the Jewish problem’ were put into effect. The rest of the story is all too well known.

Yet there are some among us that never learn and others that seem to have forgotten about the horrors of the last century. In more recent history, as we have seen in Bosnia-Herzegovina where over 7000 Muslims were murdered simply because they were Muslims, history does repeat.

The Jews of Germany and Europe, whilst aware of the anti-Semitism that was pervasive, not just in Germany, but throughout Europe and the US during that period, never in their worst nightmares as the war approached imagined that Germany would actually attempt the wholesale slaughter of every one of Europe’s Jews. But in just a very short time it went from abusive harassment in Streicher’s Der Stürmer newspaper to what ended up being the deaths of millions. And one of the reasons so many did die was because they simply did not believe that such hatreds could lead to slaughter on such a massive scale.

We should not allow the abusive harassment against Muslims that we see in Bolt’s column of hate to continue. While Bolt continues to claim his rights to ‘freedom of speech’, his abuse of those rights to harass and demonise Muslims should be stopped in its tracks. His column of hate should be shut down. This meme about ‘freedom of speech being a cornerstone of democracy’ is simply being used by people like Bolt as an excuse to pedal their hatreds.

Freedom of speech is one thing; the abuse of it in order to pedal hatred is something else.

ANDREW BOLT AND THE NAÏVETÉ OF THE ‘FREEDOM OF SPEECH’ DEBATE

There are some on the Left that seem to be extremely naïve when it comes to considering certain aspects of free speech. Paul Howes, the national secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union, seems to be a prime example of this type of naïveté. In an article in today’s The Australian newspaper, Howes defends Australia’s most obnoxious racist, Andrew Bolt, on the grounds that freedom of speech is essential for a robust ‘democracy’. Howes reckons:

Andrew grabs an idea and often follows his logic to wherever it may lead him; God help those who stand in his way!
Now while I really can't accept some of this stuff I will - unsurprisingly - defend to the death his right to run a hot-headed, half-cocked argument where he says he is now putting into his crosshairs all sorts of political, academic and media grandees. It is the Voltaire in me that says I don't like what you're saying - or about to say - but sure as hell I reckon you have the right, in our democracy, to run that argument.

Why would anyone want to die defending Bolt’s right to foment hatred in the world? Because that is exactly what Bolt is doing. For centuries there have been propagandists like Bolt that seem to see it as their life’s work to insult, demean, belittle and ostracise those who are different from them solely because they are different.

Just as Julius Streicher, the Nazi propagandist proprietor of the anti-Semite newspaper Der Stürmer, fomented hatred of Jews throughout Germany and Europe which ultimately led to the attempted extermination of European Jewry that resulted in the deaths of millions, so Andrew Bolt is subtly doing exactly the same as Streicher did by fomenting hatred of all things that are not a part of a Europeanised Judeo-Christian Australian society.

I wonder, though, if Paul Howes would defend Julius Streicher ‘to the death’.

Bolt’s disgusting views about Aborigines and the plight of indigenous peoples which he carefully cloaks in patronising rhetoric are well known. They are views that have now seen him before the courts as he attempts to defend himself against charges of defaming people who identify as Aboriginal by accusing them of defrauding the Australian people on account of them not being black enough for Bolt’s liking. But Bolt's racism doesn't stop at Aborigines. It goes beyond skin colour and physical differences; it also extends into other peoples cultures and religions.

Bolts paranoid detestation of Islam is well known and in many ways even more fanatical than his very public written and verbal assaults on Aboriginality. The reason for Bolt’s appearance in the courts is just the tip of the iceberg as far as the legal aspects of Bolt’s racism are concerned; it doesn’t even begin to address the real potential consequences of his racism.

Hatred of Islam, Islamophobia, is sweeping the Western world thanks to the likes of Andrew Bolt and his so-called rights to ‘freedom of speech’. We should all bear in mind the consequences of such hatreds as we approach the anniversary of the July 1995 massacres of Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina who were murdered by Serbians who had been taught to hate by people just like Andrew Bolt; murdered for no other reason than they were Muslims.

Defend the right to free speech that helps progress society by all means, but the likes of Julius Streicher and Andrew Bolt don’t use that right for progress; they abuse it to foment hatred and disharmony that ultimately lead to terror and death in once civilised societies.

That’s indefensible.

ANDREW BOLT: THE DECEITFUL RACIST

In his column today, Andrew Bolt, Australia’s most outrageous racist, attempts to deceive his detractors by pretending he actually cares for the plight of those boatpeople in Australia who may be sent to Malaysia where refugees are kept in appalling conditions. The government’s proposed five-for-one deal with Malaysia whereby 800 asylum seeking boatpeople in Australia will be sent to Malaysia in exchange for 4000 refugees currently being held there is at the core of Bolt’s deceit. The problem for Bolt isn’t really the well being of the 800 that may be sent into horrendous conditions but, rather, the 4000 non-European refugees that could arrive in Australia for settlement.

In the event that Gillard is forced to abandon the plan because of the appalling conditions in Malaysia, it will be a win-win for racists like Bolt because they will have stopped an extra 3200 non-European refugees from having the opportunity of coming to Australia as well as having scored a propaganda victory against their political enemy.

The ideal situation now is for Australia to take 3200 refugees from Malaysia and keep the 800 that were to be sent there. That way 800 will not be sent to suffer and 3200 will be relieved of their suffering. All should then be released into the community.

It’s a win-win for refugees and lose-lose for racists!

MURDOCH JOURNALIST, GREG SHERIDAN, DISPLAYS HIS RACIST CREDENTIALS.

In a lengthy article last Saturday in The Australian titled ‘How I lost faith in multiculturalism’, Greg Sheridan finally showed himself to be the racist that we always knew he was. Of course, having ranted against Islam in the past, usually when discussing the war against terrorism, we already knew that he was a racist. But in those circumstances he usually denied being racist by saying that his rants were directed against extremist Muslim, not moderate Islam. But now he has finally come out against Islam generally thus displaying his true racist credentials. At one point in his article Sheridan relates how he witnessed a white Australian women being verbally abused and then spat on. He explains that the men who abused this woman were of ‘Middle Eastern appearance’ inferring that because they were Middle Eastern they must have been Muslims and so, therefore, were behaving offensively because they were Muslims. As historian Robert Manne pointed out in response to Sheridan’s hate piece, if Sheridan had replaced the words ‘…of Middle Eastern appearance’ with ‘…of Jewish appearance’ then one would have a quote worthy of something that may have been found in Julius Streicher’s Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer. With this disclosure of his racist attributes, Sheridan now joins the ranks of those other leading Murdoch racists; Andrew Bolt of the Herald Sun in Melbourne, and Tim Blair and Piers Akerman of the Daily Telegraph in Sydney. Andrew Bolt, Australia’s premier racist, couldn’t help himself but pass comment over Sheridan’s racist rant and Manne’s response. Bolt called on Manne, who also happens to be Jewish and who is also Bolt’s arch nemesis, to apologise to Sheridan saying Manne ‘demeans’ both Sheridan and the Holocaust. As it happens, while Sheridan deserves to be ‘demeaned’ on the basis of his declaration of being a racist, Manne actually didn’t mention the Holocaust. In the course of his racist rant, Sheridan mentioned that many of the Right wing parties in Europe that were now anti-Islam had in the past been anti-Semitic but have now changed their stance. He says, for example, the French National Front party had “recently ditched the anti-Semitism and now stands primarily against Muslim immigration and Islamic influence”. The reality is that many of those white European Australians that are now opposed to Islam were once also anti-Semitic themselves like their peers in England. One wonders if the likes of Murdoch’s journos in Australia weren’t once amongst them. Like in Orwell’s 1984, for the likes of Bolt, Sheridan, Blair, Akerman, et al, they occasionally need to change their enemy but they always must have an enemy. The right-wing in the post war years still hated Jews even in Australia but, like leopards, they can never change their spots but the can attempt to hide them. Once a racist, always a racist.