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?
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
BOLT THE POLLUTIONIST OR BOLT THE MINERS LOBBYIST
Andrew Bolt prefers this:
He either has disgusting taste or someone's paying him big bucks to lobby for them. I wonder who that could be?
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)