Andrew Bolt: his rights, our freedom

Café Whispers

In an address titled “Freedom Wars”, Tony Abbott has declared that it is his intention to repeal s18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, claiming that this section of the Act impacts upon Freedom of Speech. This ideal of freedom of speech is that which we should all aspire to, however is it as our friend Aquanut once stated: You mean the freedom to be an asshole.

The text of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) can be found via Austlii.

Section C18 of the Act, that being which Tony Abbott so vehemently opposes concerns offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin. That’s correct it’s offensive behaviour, with the specifics being:

For an act to be unlawful it must fulfill the following criteria:

• that the action causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public; or that it is…

View original post 479 more words

More From the Protectionist Pathetics

Peter Hinds describes Australia’s skills shortage as a myth, while Darrin Hodges explains that any migration to Australia should be for non-blacks only, based on… um…

Jack Stone tries to comment on a specific event by intimating that Aboriginals in general are over-compensated, criminal scum, while Nicholas Folkes talks about his poo stains while simultaneously eluding to the fact that white people are the ‘normal’ people.

Nicholas Folkes focuses on a singular ethnic group while talking about over-population in a country that ‘struggles’ with 2.66 people per every square kilometre. Krystal Lee throws in an irrelevant comment about another country’s immigration needs while Paul Hayman strokes her ego.

No wonder this ‘political party’ can’t find a foothold in parliament. Their smartest are thicker than our society’s thickest.

“Racism against Strayans”

Recently the Australian Human Rights Commission announced a number of initiatives for public consultation on strategies for the promotion of anti-racism.

Here’s the Australian Pathetic Protectionist Facebook group Party in full chorus.

And not to be outdone, of course Facebook hate group Australia IsDying was right onto it as well, urging its members to send their privileged self-centred whinges and moans grievances to Canberra.

We are sure that amongst the ensuing correspondence will be an outline of the sort of “final solution” the bogots favour – accompanied by the usual flurry of finger-pointing at all their favourite hate targets.

And we think that the AHRC may be having an uphill battle if this Q&A question is going to be typical of public understandings and perceptions. Though it is good to know that the need to support and promote the languages of Indigenous Australians was felt to be so important…oh wait…

And here’s Scott Pengelly adding his two cents’ worth

Mistaking the many who ignored his dumb comment as signalling agreement, he then continues

Yawn…

A year ago serial whinging blog troll Niqi “Grant” made the following observation

Anyone with any personal ethics or feelings of self-worth would have ceased visiting this blog after that if it were such an affront to their beliefs. Not so “Grant”, since he possesses neither. He keeps coming back, just like virulent herpes or a persistent and odorous fungus.

And it’s not just on Facebook where you can find hard-done-by downtrodden white Strayans complaining about all that racism supposedly directed at them and their kind.

Note the standard line taken by “Robert”. He raises the spectre of a rash of race-based crime against white people but tantalisingly offers absolutely no evidence. As usual.

Back to Facebook for a minute where Christine Bailey and someone we assume is really called Kim Gibb are moaning and whinging about the mythical benefits supposedly paid to asylum seekers. As usual facts are not allowed to get in the way of yet another Strayan myth. At this rate the bogots will be rivalling the Greeks and the Scandinavians in the sheer volume of their fairy tales – except ancient mythologies are far more interesting.

And it looks like the bogots have even strayed over to that excellent Australian site Whirlpool Forums in order to share their tantrums with an unwilling audience of tech-heads, who in this instance were discussing the SBS reality show Housos.

Bogots have even managed to infiltrate the Fairfax parenting blog Essential Baby, specifically a forum discussing the recent ABC-TV series The Slap.

Who’d have thought that Mumma Bogot would actually have read an acclaimed Australian novel – though we best warn her that it was written by a gay man of Greek background before she plunges too enthusiastically into the heady waters of moaning about immigrants analysing contemporary literature.

We will let Angry Aussie have the last word, as he highlights Straya’s Whinger in Chief and steel-jawed inspiration for hate-mongers and whiney bogots everywhere – Andrew Bolt.

Elsewhere

This Blog is Racist Against Whites… Or Is It?

Uluru Nonsense

(Tall) Tales of Hoffman

Otto Hoffman was an obscure American B picture film actor who died from lung cancer at the age of 65.

His namesake is an obscure apparently Australian Islamophobic B grade bore who unfortunately is very much alive.

Note his lovingly assembled collection of fellow phobes such as the Muslim hater “Robert Spencer”, “Spencer”‘s paymaster David Horowitz, batshit crazy US blogging bimbo Pam Geller and dodgy far right Dutch politician Geert Wilders.

Normally Otto confines his inanities to a ragtag collection of anti-Muslim sites where he is welcome and comfortable with his own sort.

For instance if you are keen to follow Otto on Yahoo! here he is

And just take a look here! Not content with being a Muslim-hater and Christian Talibani, our Otto is also a birther (*snigger) and is happy to admit it

For those who fortunately have not yet encountered the birther myth, it’s the one that casts doubt on the veracity US President Barack Obama’s birth certificate which states clearly he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii and was therefore constitutionally eligible to be a candidate for the Presidency.

What the birther myth actually was about was racism – the horror amongst white exceptionalists that an African-American should dare run for the Presidency and actually win office.

Now watch Otto try and tell us he is not racist even as he approvingly quotes another racist poster on this topic despite his fellow poster “Peter” on the Andrew Bolt blog trying to put him right.

Guess what Otto, everybody’s birth certificate is now computer generated in this country and in the US, including ours.

And not content with infesting the print media blogs, Otto then heads over to Sydney radio station 2UE to let its audience know how much he hates and fears Muslims.

Now since Muslim hating site Australian Islamist Monitor collapsed into irrelevancy Otto has been lonely and craving an audience so much he has been lately infesting this blog with his unwanted musings, despite it being largely a gathering place for the people Otto hates most – left wingers, socially conscious Christians and Muslims.

Otto has some education and a certain amount of literacy which distinguishes him from the usual mouth-breathing illiterate xenophobes. However we are not easily fooled and Otto’s arguments have all the authenticity of  the cacophony described in Corinthians 13:1.

Otto specialises in collecting fatwas the way other men collect stamps. No matter if the fatwa comes from a semi-literate desert Imam or from a descendant of the Prophet, Otto collects them assiduously and gives them all equal weight. Similarly with hadiths (Qur’anic commentaries), where he carefully cherry-picks those which best suit his self-image as a Hollywood movie crusader heading off to save “Western civilisation” from “teh_Mooslems.

How Hollywood and Otto see Crusaders

And how the late Professor Norman Cohn on US Public Radio sees the Crusades.

Otto argues the way Christian Taliban exceptionalists always argue

A: There is a God who looks just like mine does.
B: Prove it.
A: No.
B: Why not?
A: I don’t have to

Otto thinks his version of God should take precedence over everyone else’s

A: My God is the correct one
B: Prove it.
A: No.
B: Why not?
A: I don’t have to

Otto thinks he has the right to promote his god exclusively among vulnerable children

A: Only my God should be taught in schools
B: Why?
A: Because I said so
B: Why does your God have to be taught
A: Because he stops terrorism
B: How?
A: Because I say so.

Spiritual grooming going on here?

Otto argues in the same way most illogical defenders of religion would argue.

A: There’s a God.
B: Prove it.
A: No.
B: Why not?
A: I don’t have to.
B: Why not?
A: Prove there is NO God then.

To quote our admin:

By the way Otto has been provided with excerpts from the Qur’an and fatwas which state the Muslims can be friends with non-Muslims, visit churches, adopt new traditions in non-Muslim countries, give eulogies at non-Muslim funerals at non-Muslim places of worship, attend weddings and give wedding gifts to non-Muslims. He has been provided with Qur’an excerpts, hadiths and fatwas that state that Muslims may fight back but are unable to strike the first blow, and can make alliances with non-Muslims. Non-Muslims are not prevented from building places of worship in Muslim countries and Muslims are allowed to migrate to non-Muslim countries.

In fact Otto’s god looks very much like the one he admires in the mirror each morning – as is always the case with these obsessive exceptionalists

Otto is a staunch supporter of the Burqa Centipede. So if you have a strong stomach and are up to it you can read Otto’s rants at these links

More on Niqab Folkes and friends – ‎”it’s a front (sic) to a civilised country like Australia”

Six Bogans Wear Burqas to, um… Prove A Point

Senator George Brandis wants you offended and insulted

From the comfortable, well-paid and powerful position he holds in the Federal Parliament, Senator George Brandis, Coalition Shadow Attorney-General, Senior Counsel (SC) and long-serving Parliamentarian intoned:

“Offensive and insulting words are part of the robust democratic process which is essential to a free country.”

Source

Now we know that Parliament is a tough and robust environment in Australia. We know that both sides attack each other with vigour in the Parliament and expect the other side to respond in kind. That’s why both Houses have presiding officers and Standing Orders to ensure that debate does not descend into defamation. We expect our Parliamentarians to both strongly represent us and to be thick-skinned enough to withstand a fair amount of invective, often confected.

However the situation enjoyed by the privileged men and women who sit in Parliament does not represent the situation faced by vilified minorities out in the community, who have neither the platform to speak out from nor the public reach of their vilifiers.

Hence, up until the Bolt case provided a (temporary) pause, shock jocks, trash media and tabloid TV have been able to create an environment where it seems any idiot can get into the comments section of newspapers, onto talkback radio and into social media and parade their hatred and freely defame Indigenous people, ethnic and religious minorities, refugees and asylum seekers, as well as GLBTI people and women.

Perhaps as George Brandis enjoys his comfortable office, his generous salary and working conditions, his ability to have his views readily heard and published and his community respect and prestige he may like to ponder the following – just a small sample from our files:

Uplifting stuff for sure…

Nazis, AntiAntibogans and Protectionist Pathetics Get Off On Each Others’ Bullshit

 

Anti-Antibogan Mike Allen should love the Government, working for Aussie Solar. But no.

Serial pest/Victorian Nazi Josh Alderton picks up on a hoax that even Andrew Bolt laughs at and runs with it, claiming that Julia Gillard is a lesbian and that her marriage is a sham. Unusual, coming from a man who reportedly only has a relationship with Mrs Palmer and her five daughters.

Here is that hoax about Gillard, as dribbled over by members of the Australian Protectionist Party including repeat-offending angry old fuckwit Paul Toohey:

They’re all made for each other. Pretty gay really.

Look At What the Mining Giants Have Planned For Our Media!

Australians need to know what the mining giants have planned for our media. Can you share this with your friends?

Read first:

Gina Rinehart:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/shes-a-billion-dollar-mystery-but-gina-rinehart-is-here-to-stay/story-fn7j19iv-1226262272806

Lord Monckton:

http://www.news.com.au/national/lord-christopher-monckton-and-dr-richard-denniss-address-national-press-club/story-e6frfkvr-1226097675186

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2011/07/bbg_20110717.mp3

 

https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/mining/monckton/monckton-speaks-to-mining-industry-share-this-video

 

 

Bolt: I want marriage equality for all

Crikey

Tuesday, 13 December 2011

by Stephanie Bolt

Last Monday, my brother Andrew Bolt published a column presenting his views in opposition to same-sex marriage. I belatedly attempted to post a contribution to the lively blog debate. When it wasn’t published, I knew I didn’t want to leave it there — being a lesbian in a committed relationship I want to participate in the conversation happening across the country, tell my story and, in doing so, hopefully make even the smallest difference to the long-running campaign for marriage equality.

As my family will recall, I came out when I was 21 years old. Like many in the GLBTI community, I was awash with the relief and joy of recognising and expressing such a fundamental part of who I was. Again, like many, I experienced much uncertainty about my value to the community and the fear of rejection.

For the most part though, I feel fortunate to have received respect and love from people important to me as I made those first tentative steps out of the closet. That, of course, is not everyone’s experience. Rejection by parents, siblings and peer groups is not altogether uncommon and low self-esteem, anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and suicide can be the terrible result.

Even with my good fortune, I have felt the effects of ignorance, fear and hate by others: fearing for my life, I was chased down city streets one night by a group of drunk teenagers for holding hands with my girlfriend; I have been verbally abused and taunted about my sexuality when playing sport; and I have felt on social and work occasions the discomfort or disapproval of others upon hearing the word “girlfriend” or “she” in relation to my partner.

Some gays and lesbians view their relationships as equal to those of straight people. But I know of others who would admit to feeling “lesser” or, even if they don’t, are fed up with receiving negative physical, verbal or other signals from the world around them.

Offering civil unions seems a reasonable compromise from the position of any straight person who has not ever had to question for a single moment others’ acceptance of their relationship or their right to choose to marry the person they love. Offering civil unions sends a signal that, to me, says I am lesser.

I’m then told that civil unions are in a legal sense similar to marriage and, therefore, why should it not be embraced by same-sex couples? If it’s such a palatable alternative it’s then fair to ask why it’s not embraced by many more heterosexual couples?

To point out the blindingly obvious, many of us regardless of sexuality want to get married; we want the ceremony that is such a significant marker in life’s journey. There may be little that legally separates the two, but socially and culturally there’s a chasm.

Marriage is touted as one of our most enduring traditions. Traditions are organic; their foundations are laid in the past but they grow and evolve over time. Granting me and my partner the right to marry — to have our loving and committed relationship recognised in law and by the community — doesn’t erode that tradition; it builds upon it.

My partner and I celebrate two anniversaries. We first held a “commitment ceremony” at home witnessed by many of our family and friends on a stormy Adelaide spring day. It was the day I told the world I would love my partner forever. It was the best day of my life.

However, it wasn’t until we married in the simplest of ceremonies one month later in Canada that I sensed a legitimacy and belonging I wasn’t expecting to feel. I think that’s because I have built a layer of protection against judgement and negativity for many years around my sexuality, my relationship and, now, my young son.

It may seem naive, but having that certificate in my hand made me untouchable, secure, normal, and for those wonderful few weeks, I could drop the shield. It’s disappointing beyond measure that my brother and others who share his views don’t wish that for me and everyone else like me.

I want marriage equality. At the very least, I wish for a rational and respectful debate.

I trust that more thoughtful consideration of this issue will prevail and, whether under this government or another in the future, my wife and I will finally see our relationship legitimised.

 

Source

The politics of race go beyond black and white

Tory Shepherd

by Tory Shepherd

04 Oct 05:55am

You don’t often hear people challenging someone’s claim to be Italian. Or Swedish, or American. Generally you accept what they say even if they don’t have an accent, or a funny surname, or blond hair.

[/caption]

Aboriginality, on the other hand, apparently remains a contested field.

The Federal Court last week decided that high-profile and controversial columnist Andrew Bolt had breached the Racial Discrimination Act in his columns ‘It’s so hip to be black’, and ‘White fellas in the black’, which questioned why nine prominent ‘fair-skinned Aborigines’ identified as Aboriginal.

Bolt has (loudly and publicly) claimed that the decision is an attempt to silence him and muzzle debate on race – and indeed the court’s decision will make some people more hesitant to speak or write frankly.

Bolt says he writes in order to unify, rather than divide people.

But the court’s decision and the renewed prominence of those articles have sparked more malignant and divisive chatter about whether people ‘choose’ to be Aboriginal when it suits them – what Bolt called a ‘popular’ choice.

Why would you accuse someone of choosing to be Aboriginal just to get some hazy, occasional benefit? Identity is a deeply personal thing, not a whimsical choice that happens in a vacuum.

Anyone who thinks someone of mixed genetic heritage would elevate their Aboriginality for personal gain wilfully misunderstands humanity in general. That many can feel proud of their heritage rather than ashamed as they may have in times past is a triumph.

To think this is a ploy is utterly arse-backwards.

It’s a symptom of this strange but creeping belief of some that the most disadvantaged are in fact unfairly advantaged.

These little Aussie battlers see their hard-earned money propping up the welfare system, and it fair makes them see red. Why should they work their gnarly fingers to the bone so people can sit around on their arses all day?

With their overblown sense of entitlement they’ve lost sight of what it means to live in a society; a society that has an obligation to the less fortunate.

They think people who have been sideswiped by colonisation, sent into a tailspin of poverty, ill health and despair, people who suffer appalling health outcomes, shorter lifespans and intergenerational unemployment, are somehow better off than they are.

The same people look at refugees making a new life for themselves and forward fraudulent emails claiming they take home huge amounts of cash in government benefits.

They probably think people choose to be disabled just to get the good carparks.

In Australia we prize individuality, we celebrate the ‘battler’ eking out an existence to keep his family fed, and in doing so we seem to have eroded the higher purpose of being a good group; a functioning civilisation.

The ‘tribe’ has shrunk from being a community of people to being a household of people, with many sure that their obligations end at the front door.

People see the distinct welfare for Aboriginal people – Abstudy, for example, or dedicated scholarships or housing – as favouritism, or misplaced atonement.

It’s a hard-hearted, self-interested bunker mentality.

Put aside the judge-a-society-by-how-it-treats-its-most-vulnerable platitudes, and look at the pragmatics.

Breaking the cycle of disadvantage through offering extra opportunities is a way to end the welfare dependency. Give people a leg up so they no longer need a hand out.

It worked for girls – who have come from behind on academic achievements but thanks to extra support are now in front; so it is now boys who are behind in school.

To all those who envy the ‘advantages’ of the vulnerable, one can only hope you one day enjoy them.

Source

Nuts come out after the truth has bolted

October 1, 2011

The usual reactionaries have risen as one in defence of Andrew Bolt, the Melbourne columnist and village idiot, convicted on Wednesday for breaching the Racial Discrimination Act. An attack on freedom of speech, they howled. A dark day for democracy.

Since the verdict, Bolt himself has played the martyred victim, drenched in self-pity, a sickening spectacle.

His fellow Murdoch hack, Miranda Devine, invoked the spectre of Nazi concentration camps, thereby immediately losing the argument. The shadow attorney general, George Brandis, blathered about George Orwell’s 1984.

Most ludicrous of all, one Sinclair Davidson, a Melbourne economics professor and, predictably, a “Senior Fellow” at that sink of right wing propaganda, the Institute of Public Affairs, wants to scrap the law altogether and let “market forces” punish discrimination. This is not satire. He meant it.

What these savants ignore is that Bolt just got it wrong. That’s W-R-O-N-G. As Justice Moredecai Bromberg found, the columnist’s two offending emissions in the Murdoch Herald Sun were shot through with “gross errors”.

The bottom of Bolt’s rant was that pale-skinned Aborigines were more white than black, and should behave that way. Instead, they had decided in adult life to become “official” or “professional” blacks, thus muscling in on “other people’s glories” – jobs, preferment and prizes that should be reserved for proper Aborigines.

He sprayed special venom upon the academic Larissa Behrendt who, he claimed, had a German father. “Which people are ‘yours’, exactly, mein liebchen?” he sneered. Bolt clearly prefers his darkies dark.

In fact, Behrendt’s father was a black Australian. She – and the other eight plaintiffs in the case – were raised from infancy in Aboriginal culture and society. Given that crashing blunder, the rest of his stuff falls in a heap, exposed for the racist garbage it was.

The judge did not smother free speech. He skewered dud journalism.

Bolt’s parents were from Holland. If he believes that freedom of speech carries a licence to spear people for their ethnicity, he will not then object to me suggesting he would do better to quit the media and take up growing tulips and making cheese. Wearing clogs. Ah, the Lying Dutchman.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, Mynheer.

Mike Carlton is a columnist with The Age

Source