CONVICTED AUSTRALIAN RACIST ANDREW BOLT WANTS TO STOP BLACK AFRICAN IMMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA

In his online blog today at Murdoch’s Herald-Sun newspaper, Andrew Bolt, a well known convicted Australian racist, has suggested that Australia stop allowing black African migrants into Australia.

The article is probably the most blatant piece of racism yet from Bolt who usually attempts to avoid being so obvious about his racism.

Bolt uses an article in the Age newspaper as an opportunity to peddle his hatred. The article tells of a group of Australian students who happen to be black who are complaining of police harassment when they visit the inner city in Melbourne. They have said that many of them are getting fed up with this harassment and, if it continues, there could possibly be a backlash such as there was last August in the UK when Londoners rioted over the death of a black Londoner who was shot to death by the police.

Racism, sponsored deliberately by the likes of Andrew Bolt and his fellow Murdoch so-called ‘journalists’ like the Islamophobic Tim Blair, Piers Akerman et al, is marginalising black youth in Melbourne who, in turn, look to each other for socialising and studying whilst readying themselves for work – if they can get it.

It’s time to end racism in Australia. Bolt’s blatant racism should never be allowed to take hold in Australia.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMERICAN NATIVE IDENTITY RACISM AND AUSTRALIAN NATIVE IDENTITY RACISM

White ultra right-wing racists in Australia and neoconservatives in America have both adopted a propaganda line which seeks to vilify people who identify as having native heritage. The racists of Australia and the neocons of America do this by claiming that some people who identify as having native heritage but who have lost much or all of the physical features associated with the native people of Australia or America respectively are using their racial identity for purely pecuniary reasons. However, while both propaganda memes are racially based, the reasons why Australian natives are abused in this way and the reasons why American natives appear to be abused similarly are quite different from each other.

In Australia, the ultra-racist Murdoch journalist, Andrew Bolt, was recently found guilty of racial vilification in an Australian Federal Court. Judge Mordy Bromberg found Bolt guilty of vilification by virtue of Bolt’s claim that the Aboriginal people he was referring to were not really Aboriginal and only claimed to be Aboriginal in order to gain certain financial benefits. Judge Bromberg found for the plaintiffs based on the fact that the plaintiffs, all with Aboriginal heritage, had, despite their lack of Aboriginal features, identified as being Aboriginal and had always been accepted as Aboriginal by Aboriginal people for all of their lives and long before they had any knowledge of awards or grants being available to Aboriginal people. Judge Bromberg found that Bolt had failed to support his claim that those Aboriginal people concerned had claimed Aboriginality solely for the purpose of gaining a pecuniary advantage and that, in accusing them of fraud, Bolt had racially vilified them. For Bolt the intent was to vilify Aborigines that were fair skinned and had lost the Aboriginal features of their ancestors. The accusation that they had defrauded the Australian taxpayer by claiming Aboriginality was merely an excuse that provided Bolt with yet another opportunity to push his racist propaganda in his online column at Melbourne’s Murdoch-owned Herald-Sun newspaper. Judge Bromberg saw through Bolt’s deception and found for the plaintiffs.

In America, the neoconservatives are currently pushing a similar line about racial identity against a candidate for the US Senate, Elizabeth Warren. Needless to say, Professor Warren is a Democrat and she will be running against the Republican incumbent, Scott Brown in the upcoming elections.

As seems to be the norm in American politics these days, especially during election seasons, both sides tend to dig up as much ‘dirt’ as possible about their adversary and sling it at each other in the hope that some might stick thus giving the other some kind of advantage. Usually, the kind of ‘dirt’ dug up tends to be about the honesty and integrity of the other and thus goes to credibility.

In the case of Elizabeth Warren, it appears that at some stage in her career she had claimed American native heritage by virtue of her great-great-great-grandmother being identified as a Cherokee Native American. Warren’s neoconservative detractors claim that she made such a claim in order to gain a benefit in her academic career. Following typical neoconservative propaganda practice, the author of The Weekly Standard article, Michael Warren, (presumably no relation!) isn’t quite game enough to out-rightly state that Elizabeth Warren was flat out lying about her heritage, so instead, he quotes someone else who is game enough to say she is lying and, in this way, projects his endorsement of the idea whilst avoiding any potential legal action against him for defaming her.

While the accusations made by Andrew Bolt in Australia are the same as the accusations made by the Republicans and their neoconservative supporters in the US and which are as despicable as each other, the motives for Bolt’s accusations against the Australian Aboriginals are completely different from the neocon’s accusations against Elizabeth Warren. For Bolt the motivation was quite simply to racially vilify Aboriginal people generally, while in the US the neocons were simply attempting to defame a political adversary for political reasons though, in the process, they have also managed to vilify a person of native heritage.

Bolt is complaining that he is being denied his freedom of speech by being ordered by Judge Bromberg not to vilify in future. He points to the same accusations being levelled freely against Elizabeth Warren in the US as an example how the right to freedom of speech should be applied in Australia. But this, again, is just a propaganda ploy Bolt is using. Judge Bromberg has not deprived Bolt his freedom of speech as he claims, but rather Bromberg has merely found Bolt guilty of vilification and has warned him against re-offending.

Conversely, in the US, while the neocons accusations are despicable and may be considered bordering on vilification, the accusations were made primarily and deliberately to defame Elizabeth Warren for political reasons. Warren may or may not find that she has reasonable grounds to take her detractors to court but, if she does, it will be to sue them for defaming her whereas the Aboriginal people who took Bolt to court did so because they were vilified by him. His defaming them was as a result of his vilification of them, but in the case of Elizabeth Warren, her vilification is as a result of the neocons defaming her.

The two cases have similarities but have very different motives. Bolt cannot claim they are the same and hold the US up as a shining example of free speech.    

ANDREW BOLT THINKS AUSTRALIAN NATIVES ARE LIKE AN ‘ARMY OF GIANT RATS’

In his column today at the Herald-Sun, Andrew Bolt wrote the perfect metaphor that reflects his loathing and contempt for native Australian people.

In his article, Bolt describes how native Australian Possums in his neighbourhood are eating out the tops of the trees that have been planted down his street and have now moved into his garden. Never mind, of course, that it was he that had actually moved into their garden in the first place – a garden that they had occupied for millions of years before Bolt’s family arrived there. But that wouldn’t worry the likes of Bolt who now looks upon all of Australia’s natives, human or animal, that impinge into what he now thinks is his world, as ‘an army of giant rats’.

It’s his metaphor for describing what he feels about those that are different from him. His contempt doesn’t stop at native Australian Possums and Australia’s native peoples.

Just because he is Australian-born, he truly believes that he is a ‘native’ himself and that Aboriginal people, therefore, should become as he is – Australian.

The problem is; Bolt is not a ‘native’ as he likes to think he is. Being born here doesn’t make you a ‘native’. He is – like most who call themselves Australian – an introduced species. The word ‘Australia’ itself is a non-native construct that’s barely just a few hundred years old. The natives called their lands by other names – they still do. None of them were ‘Australia’.

(When one sees it like that, then I’m wrong in calling Aboriginal people; ‘native Australians’. I’m even wrong in calling native Possums; ‘Australian’ native Possums. More correctly I should be referring to them as being native to a land we – we who are not native to – call ‘Australia’.)

But, as I said, it doesn’t stop there for Bolt. His new-found nationalistic arrogance about being ‘Australian’ is so powerful that he now resents not just Possums living in his street but any person new to Australia who is not like him. Just as Possums and Aboriginal people are alien to him, so too are Arab, Central Asian and African people, and especially if they are Islamic and dress differently from him and what he perceives as an ‘Australian’ way of dressing.

Recently Bolt was taken to court for vilifying Aboriginal people. He was found guilty. Now Bolt is playing his conviction for all it’s worth in order further push his racist agenda.

Bolt denies that he vilified Aboriginal people claiming that he was only pointing out that some people are claiming to be Aboriginal in order to gain some kind of pecuniary advantage. He supported his accusations by saying that these people were so un-Aboriginal looking that they couldn’t possibly really be Aboriginals and that they, therefore, were frauds. Fortunately, Judge Mordecai Bromberg was able to see right through Bolt’s ploy and saw it for what it really was – blatant lies designed to specifically vilify Aboriginal people. Bromberg then ordered Bolt not to repeat such vilifying lies. Bolt has since responded by claiming he has lost his freedom of speech.

So now, instead of saying exactly what thinks, he uses metaphors as above and links to other racists writings who say what he is unable to. Despite all his denials, Bolt remains an outrageous racist. One day Murdoch will wake up to the fact that Bolt is not doing the image of Australia any good at all and shut him down. Australia will then be a far better place for everyone to live in – native or otherwise.

And even a better place for Possums to live in.

ANDREW BOLT ATTEMPTS TO SMEAR ISLAM – AGAIN

Last week in his column at Melbourne’s Herald-Sun online blog, Andrew Bolt posted this disgusting article inferring that Muslims are able to practice necrophilia upon their dead wives provided they do so within six hours of death.

The story was based on some unsubstantiated story from Al Arabiya which Bolt knew was probably false and even said so in his piece quoting a Huffington Post piece that supported that idea.  

But that didn’t stop Bolt from taking the opportunity to jump on his anti-Islam bandwagon and posting the disgusting smear piece anyway.

I posted a comment in response that went thus:

Another sick piece of opportunistic journalism from Bolt designed specifically to smear Islam as part of his Islamophobic propaganda.

Needless to say, Bolt didn’t allow it to be published.

Today, Bolt, realising he was way out of line with his original post (or, more likely, told by his editors and legal people to at least tone it down) wrote a follow-up piece titled, ‘The making of the dead wife smear’ that almost – but not quite – comes across as a correction.

Again, I posted a comment in response. It went thus:

A smear indeed it was, Bolt - and one that you were prepared to perpetuate. Back-peddling furiously now will not relieve you of the responsibility of the part you played in this outrageous smear.

Again, of course, Bolt refused to publish it despite me sending it off several times.

The quicker this disgusting racist and Islamophobe is shut down the better for Australia – and it would even be better for Murdoch as well!

BOLT BRINGS OUT HIS SUPPORTERS TRUE COLOURS

In an unusual post today, Andrew Bolt actually came out in support of the AFL devoting some rooms at the MCG for use as prayer rooms for Muslims – and any other religion that wants to use them. (Presumably coaches of teams that aren’t doing too well are also included in this group!)

Bolt’s stance, however, seems to have upset many of his supporters who have commented against Bolt’s unusual position, and in doing so, they have shown their true Islamophobic colours.

‘homer of act’ writes:

Your [sic] proposing we go down exactly the same ill thought out road the poms did 20 years ago. You prattle on about press freedoms and freedom of speech. But setting people aside as special cases which is what prayer rooms do is the first step the stupid poms took. And now if you pass a comment on a blog over their [sic] that wouldn’t raise eyebrows here you risk a prison sentence because muslims their now have special dispensation and protection under wide ranging laws. And this hasn’t protected them form vilification but made the matter a whole lot worse. Sorry but this is the most stupid column I have ever read of yours.


While ‘k1w1 of Brisbane’ says:

I don’t see too many chapels at Australian sporting venues. This is just one more step toward the islamification [sic] of a western culture.

‘Matthew of Melbourne’ reckons:

What tripe Andrew. And then well have to make all outlets Halal certified. And then special areas for Islamic women so they aren’t at the mercy of prying eyes.

And all the while, canceling of Christmas celebrations, Halal food everywhere. Segregational swimming pools, and I could go on with acts of tolerance.

And tell me Andrew, how many Muslims do you see praying in the Multi-denominational prayer room at The Womens ? .... None, they’ve taken over the room next to it.


Dont be dumb. It’s marketed as multi-denominational, but we know whs [sic] been pushing it and who will use it.


And finally, it’s the footy. Won’t someone just say it .... It’s the footy, for gods sake, if you can’t pay for 3 hrs, you’re in the wrong country.

‘Rilivon’ apparently seems to think that Muslims are demanding non-Muslims pray with them:

No Andrew, they should pray at home or in their Mosque’s.
It’s their religion, not ours.
They are in our country.
If it doesn’t suit them, then they should go to a country where they can pray all day.
I’m sick to death of the Muslim’s demanding we change our ways.
I’m fed up with it.

Bolt clearly has rubbed ‘Gobsmacked of Gippsland’ up the wrong way:

Mate, I find myself furiously agreeing with you in 99.9% of the issues you raise - but I completely disagree with you on this one.


I don’t care if the AFL says the rooms it shall make available are multi-religious, pertaining to the needs of all faiths.


The reality is that only one faith - islam - shall use them, and these rooms will become de facto mosques. And that means they shall very quickly become “no go” areas for anyone but muslims.


Mark my words very carefully - within a year or so of these rooms being established (and I will include the room you say currently exists at the MCG, because nobody knew it was there), these rooms will be islamic-only enclaves in each of our sporting arenas. They will give islam exactly the opportunity it seeks on every occasion - the capacity to establish an exclusive (in the full sense of that word) toe-hold in an area where it currently has but the merest of presences.


Islam has little interest in AFL - but islam has a great interest in spreading its presence into and over every aspect of Australian cultural and social existence.


Andrew, on this issue, you could not possibly be more incorrect.


Many of the ideas expressed by those that are usually Bolt’s supporters are exactly the same as those that are expressed by anti-Islam extremists like Norwegian right-wing monoculturalist and mass murderer Ander Breivik. Is Bolt merely trying to put distance between himself and his kindred spirit Breivik?

ANDERS BREIVIK AND ANDREW BOLT: THE SWORD AND THE PEN OF KINDRED SPIRITS

At his blog today Andrew Bolt tried desperately to spin his way out of being put in the same ideological frame as Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik.

Bolt writes:

You will remember how eager were many on the Left to use the horrific crimes of Anders Behring Breivik to smear mainstream conservatives.

He then goes on to quote an ABC article as though it was the ABC that was trying to smear ‘mainstream conservatives’. But what the ABC piece actually said was:

Accused Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik praised four Australian conservative leaders - including former Prime Minister John Howard - in his 1,500-page manifesto.
and:

In a manifesto posted online under the Anglicised pseudonym Andrew Berwick, the killer quoted Mr Howard, former treasurer Peter Costello, Catholic Cardinal George Pell and conservative writer and historian Keith Windschuttle.

It wasn’t the ABC smearing ‘mainstream conservatives’, the ABC was merely quoting Breivik himself. What Bolt has actually attempted to do is smear the ABC.

There should be no misunderstanding here – Bolt has no choice but to condemn Breivik for what he has done, but beneath the surface of that condemnation lurks the real Bolt who has exactly the same nationalistic and Islamophobic aspirations as Breivik. But where Breivik had a gun, Bolt has a weapon far more dangerous - he has access to the mainstream media with which to peddle those aspirations.

Bolt is peddling as hard as he can to put ideological distance between himself and Breivik but the more he tries, the more he places himself in the same pigeon-hole.

IS ANDREW BOLT SUFFERING FROM ‘BOLT SYNDROME’?

Bolt Syndrome is a condition whereby sufferers delude themselves into believing that all the peoples of Australia should be just like them; same colour; same culture; same language; same political ideology – in other words they want a monoculturalist society where non-Western cultures, religions, heritage and identity are swept aside so that all Australians can be just like Bolt.

Other symptoms of Bolt Syndrome include an obsessive need to insult and vilify against whole groups of people that are different from Bolt. Sufferers also display signs of paranoia such as claiming that their right to insult and vilify are a denial of their right to ‘freedom of speech’. Sufferers also have an abnormal fear of the ‘other’ which usually presents as chronic Islamophobia and xenophobia.

The most recognisable symptom that sufferers present with and which invariably clinches the diagnosis of Bolt Syndrome is their denial that they are themselves in any way racist. Indeed, in many cases, sufferers of Bolt Syndrome not only deny they are racist but actually accuse those that expose their condition as being the ones that are racist.

Bolt Syndrome has been around since the year white Europeans first arrived in Australia. One would have thought, however, that we would have found a cure for it by now. A diverse multicultural Australia should unite to rid this nation of the destructive potential of the Bolt Syndrome.