Category: LIES

Why do our brains believe lies even when we’ve been told the truth?

Former Australian prime minister Scott Morrison and former US president Donald Trump both had trouble with the truth.


It’s been election cycle after election cycle packed with misinformation and conspiracy theories. So why do so many people believe the lies?

Source: Why do our brains believe lies even when we’ve been told the truth?

Trump’s Excuses for Hoarding Classified Documents Are Getting More Absurd – Mother Jones

But the most absurd feature of Trump’s excuse could be its ham-fisted attempt to relate to the everyday person working from home. “Everyone ends up having to bring home their work from time to time,” the statement via Solomon read. “American presidents are no different.” Add that to the even more unbelievable assertion that Donald Trump works at all—and you’ll be left wondering, once again, how did things get this stupid.

Trump’s Excuses for Hoarding Classified Documents Are Getting More Absurd – Mother Jones

Why we are calling out Prime Minister Scott Morrison

A Dossier of Lies and Falsehoods Archives

‘Without truth, no democracy can stand’: why we are calling out the prime minister Today Crikey publishes an uncomfortable but important investigation that exposes the prime minister as a systemic, consistent and unremitting public liar.

Listed here are 50 Lies and Falsehoods attributed to Scott Morrison. 32 Lies and 18 Falsehoods

Source: Why we are calling out Prime Minister Scott Morrison

ABC cuts: had Abbott been honest about his true agenda, he would have been unelectable

Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull

Privatisation and cuts to respected public services might be the agenda of the Coalition government, but it’s certainly not that of the Australian people

My dad used to make us watch the ABC news every night. As a child, I hated it. It was always with a certain amount of resentment that I watched afternoon cartoons give way to the “youth programming” I could bear, if not understand. But the news was a step too far into a bleak space. Dad was stern on this point. “If you don’t watch the news, Van,” he’d admonish me, as I wriggled and whined, “you don’t know what’s going on”.

In the wake of the extraordinary cuts to the ABC and SBS this week, I can only imagine that the architects of this savage attack on our national broadcasters – the Coalition government, its supporters in the Murdoch press and the conservative “free market” think tanks – were told by their own ideological papas the exact same thing.

My dad plonked me in front of the unbiased, articulate and meticulous news reporting of the ABC because he was educating his daughter in how to be a good citizen. By closing ABC news outlets, firing journalists and nobbling independent journalism, the Coalition affirm not only their preference for corporate news but destroy alternatives to the corporate news worldview. Citizens “knowing what’s going on” in the era of climate change, expenses scandals and “on-water matters” is precisely what the Coalition are trying to head off.

Independent and autonomous by charter, the ABC is consistently recognised as a trustworthy brand. Relentless academic scrutiny of the national broadcaster shows that, even with former Liberal party staffer Mark Scott as director, its journalism is balanced and responsible. The Coalition’s neurotic sensitivity to political criticism have tempted them to believe their own propaganda, decrying responsible journalism as “ABC bias”.

Their language game is the dead giveaway that this is no mere budget cutback: according to Malcolm Turnbull, ABC journalists “who work hard every day to report the news objectively and without partisan bias or self-interest will feel very let down” by Quentin Dempster’s appearance at the weekend’s rally to defend those very journalists’ jobs. Andrew Robb chipped in, too: “The ABC … has been a protected species for a long time, has to make its share and its contribution”.

Their rhetoric is so egregious because they know the ABC can’t engage in its own political defence.

Of course, the Murdoch papers are cheering on the Coalition’s attacks: Rupert Murdoch’s media baron father Keith was complaining about the competition a national news service provided to his corporate interests as far back as the 1930s. Corporate media serve corporate interests, which are indivisible from the Abbott government’s interests under their “open for business” mindset. They’ve been happy to shed the Australia Network to create a market for a new Sky-owned “Australia channel”, because national broadcasters – like state enterprises, welfare, environmental protection, universal healthcare or accessible education – are founded in community values the Abbott government doesn’t share and is isolating, starving and weakening.

The “budget emergency”, like so many other Coalition campaign slogans, was long ago exposed as a fairytale. The Coalition flagrantly spends on its own preferences: the useless Direct Action pay-the-polluters scheme, the derided school chaplains program, the diesel rebate to wealthy corporations. All are of greater priority to this government than autonomous journalism and sanctioned, independent critique.

It might be the agenda of the Coalition, but it’s certainly not that of the Australian people. Australians oppose the privatisation of services like the ABC. The Coalition’s work is not popular: as we watch the shredding of beloved programs and the sacking of trusted journalists – let alone what’s happening in healthcare, climate policy and universities – the internecine carnage of the Gillard and Rudd years will increasingly look like a bygone golden age.

Bill Shorten needs to articulate the rage and betrayal felt in the electorate. If Labor and the Greens can rise above their inner city gang wars and share a respectful stage the way that Shorten and Adam Bandt did at the weekend’s “save the ABC” demos, there is a chance not only to remove Abbott’s government at the next election, but to serve the interests of the vast majority of Australians. At this point, Shorten barely needs to get out of bed in the morning to provide a more cohesive alternative to the government. With a policy platform that articulates what the Australian community actually wants, he’d be unbeatable.

Abbott lied about cuts to the ABC, SBS and everything else because he would have been unelectable had he campaigned on his true agenda. To pretend otherwise is as disingenuous as the prime minister himself. Save the ABC.

MERRY CHRISTMAS – Tony Abbott’s new NBN tax for new houses

Thursday, 11 December 2014 13:31
Fresh from its new Petrol Tax and GP Tax, the Abbott Government has today quietly announced a new $900 NBN Tax as part of its “proposed approach to the provision of telecommunications infrastructure in new developments.”

On page five of the Government’s policy document released today, it has announced that new home owners will now be hit with a new $300 NBN connection fee, while developers will also be charged a new $600 deployment charge for homes which they can pass on to home buyers.


Telecommunications infrastructure in new developments – page 5

This $900 tax will be even higher in areas where NBN Co has no ready access to backhaul. Merry Christmas new home buyers.

No wonder the Australian people don’t trust Tony Abbott. Since the election he has broken promises like they are plates at a Greek wedding. This is just the latest.

Home prices are already very high. This tax will hit those who can afford it the least—young families just starting out. The last thing new home buyers need is a new NBN tax.

This tax is also unfair. It means that if you buy an existing home you don’t have to pay anything extra for the NBN. Your taxes pay for it. But if you buy a new home, you have to pay for it twice.

In his first press conference as Prime Minister Tony Abbott said: “I don’t intend on making promises that I won’t keep.” That turned out to be the lie that laid the platform for more and more lies.

For more information on the Abbott Government’s broken promises visit

Abbott is Telling Lies About Lies Already Told.

abbott lying

When I reflect on what I have written this year it is abundantly clear that the center of my attention has concentrated on two issues. Firstly the subject of lying, or more accurately the Prime Ministers lying, and secondly the state of our democracy. But of course the two go hand in hand.

On the first issue I am wholeheartedly sick of writing an ongoing commentary on the lying of Tony Abbott. I have become frustrated and aggravated by the consistency of his untruth. But it must be revealed.

In the past few weeks he has resorted to telling lies about lies already told in a manner in which one has to question whether he is actually conversing in English or just corrupting it.

In the first instance the best way to turn the profession of politics on its head in this country and create a new democracy would be to demand they tell the truth.
You can shape truth by telling lies for your own benefit and you can use the contrivance of omission to create another lie.

However, the ability to admit you are wrong is an absolute pre requisite to discernment and knowledge. It requires truthfulness. If we are to progress as a country we must accept that there can be much pain in admitting we were wrong but there is no harm in it.
And if humility is the basis by which intellectual advancement is made then it is only on the basis of truth that we attain human progress. Telling the truth should not be delayed simply because we are not sure how people might react to it. It is far better to be comforted by truth than to be controlled by lies.

It is often difficult in politics to distinguish a broken promise from the convenience of a change of mind, but with Abbott there are no shades of hue. It takes courage to change one’s mind for the greater good. It requires the telling of truth. I see no capacity for it in our Prime Minister.

It seems so ingrained in his persona that distinguishing between truth and lies is beyond his private and public morality. He has little trouble merging his faith into his political philosophy but eliminates a cornerstone of his faith, ‘’truth’’, when applied to his politics.

Some recent examples.

Prior to writing this I was watching the ABCs morning news service. The PM was asked about his changes to his Medicare policy.

‘’Did you consult with doctors before making the changes’’

Without blinking (or was that winking) the PM answered ‘’Yes of course’’

It turns out that they were told of 20 minutes prior to the announcement.

But let’s take a step back in time.

In an astonishing feat of deceit and denial Tony Abbott insulted the intelligence of every Australian voter by insisting his GP Tax was not a broken promise.

Tony Abbott – ABC AM – 8 December 2014

Abbott: Well the GP co-payment was very extensively talked about in the lead up to the Budget.

Uhlmann: Not before the election.

Abbott: Well look it certainly wasn’t ruled out before the election.

In fact the GP Tax, and every other tax increase was specifically ruled out by Tony Abbott on numerous occasions.

“The only party that will raise taxes after the election is the Labor Party.”

Tony Abbott – Sydney – 11 August 2013

Even when news leaked the Government was considering the GP Tax Tony Abbott continued to lie, to deceive voters in both the Griffith by-election and the Western Australian Senate election re-run.

Journalist: Mr Abbott, can you guarantee there won’t be a Medicare co-payment?

Tony Abbott: Michelle, nothing is being considered, nothing has been proposed, and nothing is planned.

Tony Abbott – Doorstop – 1 February 2014

Tony Abbott now insists his repeated denials he was planning a GP Tax are evidence it was “extensively talked about”.

At other times he stands before the camera and unequivocally tells the people that every family has benefited by $550 of their power bills with the repeal of the carbon tax knowing that it is a blatant lie.

The other method of lying of course is not to tell, or to lie by omission. The government before the election gave a promise that they would be more open and transparent. A decent leader shouldn’t have to promise something that should be an enshrined component of any democracy’s moral compass.

Not so. Instead of being open about what our politicians spend they are refusing to release ministerial travel costs because it could damage our international standing.
Yes that’s right. The Abbott government is refusing to release documents detailing the cost and purpose of overseas travel by Coalition ministers, claiming they could “cause damage to Australia’s international relations” if made public.

That sounds like an admittance of guilt.

And of course it is pressing ahead with changes to the Freedom of Information regime that will make it much more difficult to access government information.

On top of that the government is now authorised to secretly collect vast amounts of information about its citizens under the new data retention laws passed this year.

And to finish, we find that Christopher Pyne was planning an advertising campaign in support of deregulation of university fees since October. Christopher Pyne says it was a suggestion of John Madigan. Madigan refutes it. Who would you believe? The ad is full of lies or at best misleading information.

If all this means I am saying the Prime Minister and his ministers are pathological liars then so be it. I am. It’s not a nice thing to say about people but we are dealing with truth here. It’s not so much that the PM is a serial offender, he is. I think the electorate has finally woken up. It shows up in the polling. It is why his polling is so poor.

The fact that he lies is easily supported by volumes of readily available, irrefutable evidence. (I can provide it if need be).
And after a long period of protection from the main stream media (the so-called fourth estate) the supposed people’s custodian of truth, it could be that some have seen the light of truthful examination. Could it be that they have realised that telling the truth and reporting it should be more important than creating a narrative where controversy matters more.

In any worthwhile and truly representative democracy truth should, together with governance for the common good, be a first order principle. In fact the first priority in the restoration of democracy in this country should be to insist that our politicians tell the truth.

I would like to think that this is the last piece I will write on this subject but I know it won’t be.
And that’s the truth of it.

Having said that if you believe the polls 48% of the population would still vote for his party and him as leader.

Pundit Fact: Focuses on Fox News and it’s reliability to tell the truth. Low Low For Truth

Protests erupted across the country after grand jury verdicts in police killings of Eric Garner in New York and Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.

PunditFact is a project of the Tampa Bay Times and the Poynter Institute, dedicated to checking the accuracy of claims by pundits, columnists, bloggers, political analysts, the hosts and guests of talk shows, and other members of the media.

We define a pundit as someone who offers analysis or opinions on the news, particularly politics and public policy. One can engage in punditry by writing, blogging or appearing on radio or TV. A pundit is not an elected official, not a declared candidate nor anyone in an official capacity with a political party, campaign or government.

PunditFact is funded in part by $625,000 in grants over two years from the Ford Foundation and the Democracy Fund. Seed money for the project was provided by craigconnects.

Check out new After the Fact responses.

Co-operative, consultative and collegial

 east=west link

  • December 1, 2014
  • Written by:
  • “I certainly think it’s important that we try to ensure that over time all levels of government are sovereign in their own sphere,” Mr Abbott told Sky News.  “And we shouldn’t be bound by commitments that the former government made that were never affordable.”

    Of course, when Tony Abbott made these comments, he was referring to the slashing of government funding for health and education.

    But it’s a different story when it comes to the East-West link in Victoria.

    After declaring that the weekend’s election would be a referendum on the East West Link, Abbott maintains he is determined to see the East West Link finished – no matter what – and is threatening to withdraw $3 billion of federal funding unless he gets his way.

    To satisfy Tony’s wish to be remembered as the Infrastructure Prime Minister (though I suspect there are a few other things that will stick in our minds), he is bribing the states to sell off publicly-owned assets in order to be given billions in co-funding to build his “roads of the 21st century” (finger number 4).

    Similarly, Christopher Pyne said the coalition will seek to amend school funding legislation to remove parts that allow the Commonwealth to dictate to the states.

    “We’re not for taking over anyone or anything and we don’t subscribe to a command and control philosophy,” he said.

    Unless we are talking about school chaplains of course, in which case you won’t get the funding unless you employ religious counsellors as opposed to people trained in welfare and youth counselling.

    While Abbott can’t tell the states he is going to raise GST, ripping $80 billion out of agreed future funding and then saying “we don’t run schools or hospitals, it is up to the states to fund them” is a crass attempt at starving them into submission.

    Abbott swept to power assuming everyone would just go along with his plans unquestioningly with Coalition governments across the country and a compliant media.

    What he didn’t reckon on was people power as a growing number of the electorate are shaking off the political apathy that our easy life has lulled us into.

    Abbott’s promise to lead a “co-operative, consultative and collegial” government is proving more ludicrous every day.

Series: Katharine Murphy: Dispatches Previous | Index ABC, climate change: the Coalition is drowning us in nonsense

Australian Broadcasting Corporation ABC

This morning, on the wireless, I heard the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, say the government wasn’t making cuts to the ABC.

The day before, I heard the communications minister, Malcolm Turnbull, say Tony Abbott hadn’t actually promised before last September’s election not to cut the budgets of the ABC and SBS. If Abbott had said something like that, then he didn’t mean it; and more likely, we’d all just misunderstood what the prime minister had said.

Also on Wednesday, I heard the prime minister tell the French president, Francois Hollande, that part of the Australian government’s policy arsenal to combat the risks associated with climate change involved funding an agency called the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

What he didn’t tell the French president was the government intends to abolish the CEFC.

In politics at the present time, we are drowning in nonsense. The nonsense waves are not only lapping, elegantly, at our ankles, they are picking us all up and dumping us head first into the sand.

The Abbott government is performing so many contortions, and running so rhetorically ragged, it’s hard to see if anything coherent is actually going on.

The maximum self-harm you can inflict on yourself in politics is to obscure your substance with abject nonsense, and yet federal politics has been seemingly locked in this cycle for the past couple of terms. Labor deadweighted itself with kindergarten intrigues and dysfunctional personality conflicts.

This government is seemingly intent on deadweighting itself with evasions and too-clever-by-half constructions that can be ripped apart comprehensively in about a minute-and-a-half.

You cannot, as Tony Abbott did in opposition, make a virtue of authenticity and truth-telling in politics then break promises and spout nonsense from the moment you take the prime ministership. By Abbott’s own measure, this behaviour is immoral; and if politics is too flawed a business to apply morality, then from a self-interest perspective, it’s a recipe for self-destruction.

It is death by a thousand cuts.

Let’s be clear on the examples flagged at the start of this dispatch. The government is cutting the budgets of the ABC and SBS. It doesn’t matter whether you call the cut an efficiency dividend because it sounds kinder, or if you call it an interpretative dance – it’s a cut.

Abbott made an unequivocal promise before the last election not to cut the budgets of the public broadcasters. There were no underpants on what he said – it was black and white. So no, Malcolm, we did not misunderstand what the prime minister said, and you really insult our collective intelligence (and your own) by suggesting otherwise.

As for the CEFC construction – well, that kind of takes the cake. Abbott is sounding increasingly defensive and sensitive on climate change, which he should.

The government has taken a carbon pricing scheme that was rational and functional and replaced it with a scheme that most sensible analysts think is an absolute dog. To dress up clear policy regression as action is an absurdity – absurd enough to be seen for what it is in far away capitals of the world.

On Wednesday in the Senate, two newcomers to Australian politics did a very simple thing. Jacqui Lambie and Ricky Muir got to their feet and said, effectively: we screwed up, we are sorry. We made the compromises and engaged in the sheep-like behaviour that institutional politics seems to demand. It delivered a poor result, and we are going to try very hard not to do that again.

Rather than sneering at the newbies, some of the old timers in Parliament House could stop for a minute and have a good, hard think about that gesture of atonement.

Truth-telling and humility are powerful things.

And as bankrupt as things currently are in Canberra, it is not too late for politics to learn that basic lesson.

The new act in the Question Time pantomime: Federation and the GST

The Abbott Government has finally revealed what it has long denied: the Plan B to its savagely unfair Budget raising the GST.

As I predicted in a remarkably prescient piece written within three days of the Abbott being elected, a rise in the GST was always coming. Despite being a clear broken election promise and still a vicious attack on the poor and underprivileged, it will nevertheless be used by Abbott as political camouflage as he works towards being re-elected in 2015.

But now Credlin has, almost mercifully, added a new act.

Now, in response to questions about the Government’s obvious plans to raise the GST, Tony Abbott has this week arisen to intone solemnly about the need for a new debate about “reforming the Federation”. Something this 56 year-old man child says should be done “constructively”, in a “mature and measured fashion” and in a “spirit of bipartisanship”.

Yes, anyone who saw Abbott as Opposition Leader knows just how constructive, mature and bipartisan he can be.

The truth is, this has nothing to do with the “future of our Federation” ‒ Abbott couldn’t give a rat’s clacker about states’ powers, except insofar as they limit his own ‒ but rather is a cynical ploy to raise revenue and put pressure on the Opposition.

It is passing ironic that a PM who, as opposition leader, derided the then Government for a carbon tax, which he described as a “great big tax on everything” ‒ and which was anything but, given it only applied to big polluters ‒ to hike up an actual great big tax on everything that was implemented by a government in which he was a cabinet minister.

To raise the GST, Abbott will first blame the Opposition for not passing the Budget. He will then gain the rubber stamp approval of the states – who will, of course, jump at any proposal to rescue their uniformly parlous financial positions – and which he will hide behind, claiming the decision was an act of inclusive “federalism”.

This proposal he will take this into the next election, claiming it is necessary to solve the debt that is ballooning under his profligate, war-hungry Government — but which he will, of course, all blame on the Opposition.

The tactics are fairly obvious.

And the electorate may well buy it at the next election, because a 2.5% rise may not seem to them so much — not when compared, say, against losing their dole, or paying a GP tax, or losing their disability support. And it will be accepted by Australia’s dull, complicit mainstream media and policy commentariat as the “least of all evils” and not a broken election promise at all.

Creative Commons Licence

Fact check: Health Minister Peter Dutton misleading on Red Cross Ebola funding No money has been recieved

Peter Dutton misleading on Red Cross Ebola funding

“There’s $18 million… that we’ve provided to try and provide help to services like the Red Cross that are delivering services, delivering support on the ground in Africa,” Mr Dutton told John Laws on 2SM on October 8.

The Australian Red Cross has told Fact Check it has never received any money from the Federal Government specifically earmarked for its Ebola operations and relief effort in West Africa.

The verdict: The Red Cross has not received specific funding from the Federal Government to support its Ebola program in West Africa. The Federal Government has provided $2.5 million to four Australian NGOs: Caritas, Plan International, Save the Children and World Vision.

ABC television channels may be axed if budget cuts too savage, says Mark Scott

Mark Scott, ABC

Savage budget cuts to the ABC would mean not only axing some television and radio programs but potentially reducing the number of ABC television channels, managing director Mark Scott said on Tuesday.

Scott told ABC radio in Melbourne that the impact on programs depended on how big the cuts were and, just as critically, when the cuts came into effect. He said coverage of local sport was under scrutiny and he confirmed that local versions of 7.30 were also being looked at.

“If the government cuts money this financial year or next financial year we would have to cut some commissioning of some of our television services [and] radio, and if the cuts were too dramatic we’d have to look at how many channels we’re offering,” he said.

The ABC currently runs five channels: ABC, ABC2, ABC3, ABC News24 and iView. It is believed ABC2, an edgier channel launched in 2005, would be most vulnerable.

Scott’s remarks follow a defiant speech on Monday night, in which he expressed frustration that five months after the May budget, the national broadcaster still did not know what cuts it was facing.

The ABC’s funding was cut by 1% in the budget – or about $120m over four years – which was described as a “down payment” for more savings yet to be announced.

The government’s expenditure review committee is expected to decide on ABC cuts in mid-November. During last year’s election campaign, the Coalition ruled out any cuts to the ABC.

Scott made clear that the ABC would continue to invest heavily in new online and digital services, even if the government made deep cuts and despite organisations such as News Corp arguing it should limits its online expansion because it harmed for-profit providers.

Scott said that in the past, the ABC had found efficiencies which were used to fund innovations such as the catch-up service iView. But if the government essentially pocketed any further savings, the ABC would cut TV and radio programs to continue to invest in digital offerings, because that’s what modern audiences demanded.

Scott was cautious about which programs were vulnerable, saying the ABC was looking at “where we may overservice or we spend a lot of money and the audience is tiny”. Programs mooted include Lateline, local editions of 7.30 and radio programs such as the World Today.

Asked whether the ABC should be covering live women’s soccer, for example, he said local sport “would be hard for us to do” with significant budget cuts.

He also made clear that state-based editions of 7.30. which run on Friday nights, are also likely to change.

“I can’t rule anything in or out, we do have to have everything on the table,” he said.

“Whether it [local television current affairs] can only be delivered in that program or there are other ways we can deliver that, that’s something we are looking at now.”

Answering questions from the audience on Monday night, Scott said there was no guarantee that existing media organisations would manage the dramatic transition underway, and new players often had little concern with public interest beyond their “narrow commercial interests”. This made maintaining funding to the ABC vital.

“That’s a very conservative, sensible thing to do. Why would you weaken the ABC at a time when the rest of the media is in turmoil?”

Let me explain.

I am not sure that my childhood prepared me to deal with this government.

I never broke my toys. I would tell on people rather than hit back.  The only thing I threw was a ball.  I would play the piano and sing loud, though I did learn to shout during adolescence.  Swearing is something I try to avoid, without success lately.

I have this primeval feeling welling up inside me. I need to release it somehow.

I could scream but that would only vent temporarily.

What I really want to do is have a chat with Tony Abbott, in person.

My first step would be to physically usher Peta Credlin out of the room. I cannot tell you how much it makes my blood boil to see her seated at the table in all our negotiations with world leaders.


My next step would be to shove Tony into a chair while I stood over him and explained.
























And most of all Tony……


You need to expand your circle of advice and stop neutering those who try to tell you the truth like the Climate Change Authority and the Human Rights Commission and the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO and ACOSS to name a few.

Divine inspiration belonged to the job you decided not to pursue. Recall how Judas has been remembered?  He betrayed someone he loved for money.

The only surprise we need to face is why did we allow this to happen to us? If it behaves like an arse, walks like an arse and makes noise like one it is one.

Self-belief is no substitute for accountability

Self-belief is a powerful tool in achieving success and there is no question that Tony Abbott has it in spades.  But does he have the substance to justify it?

After average results at university and an uninspiring football career, with the help of the Jesuit network, Tony headed off to Oxford to take up his Rhodes Scholarship. It only took a couple of games for him to be dropped from the rugby team with suggestions that his prowess had been somewhat exaggerated.  Tony was strong on physicality but short on speed or finesse.

Student politics at Sydney University saw Tony, a callow youth straight from a Catholic boys’ school, given a platform to preach loud and long in his opposition to homosexuality and feminism. Further, he denounced contraception, labelling it part of the “me now” mentality.  Ironically, whilst eschewing the use of contraception, Tony was an avid partaker of “me now” activities, if not the responsibility that went with them.

Tony has displayed this absolute certainty that he is right all his life so, when he was elected leader of the Liberal Party in return for becoming a climate change denier, I started getting concerned. When he became Prime Minister I felt alarmed.  Twelve months in and I am horrified.  I am afraid for the present and for the future.

Tony Abbott is only one man, but this man’s unwavering belief in his own judgemnt has seen him surround himself with advisers who tell him what he wants to hear. Experts are sacked, independent advisory panels disbanded, oversight and freedom of information curtailed, journalists and the National Broadcaster threatened.

In the space of a year we have gone from world leaders in action on climate change to being called the “Saudi Arabia of the Pacific”.

‘In the year since they took office, Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Liberal-led coalition have already dismantled the country’s key environmental policies. Now they’ve begun systematically ransacking its natural resources. In the process, they’ve transformed Australia from an international innovator on environmental issues into quite possibly the dirtiest country in the developed world.’

Instead of looking forward to every home being connected to the NBN and school funding bridging the gap of disadvantage and inequity, we have record numbers of new coal mines to enjoy. Instead of universal healthcare and unemployment benefits, we see people on pensions feeling very afraid about their future.  Instead of affordable tertiary education and housing, we see places being sold to the highest bidder.

We have moved from bringing our troops home from Afghanistan, to a war in Iraq and Syria that will inevitably lead to civilian casualties and destruction of homes and infrastructure, a move that has seen us specifically named for revenge attacks. The “humanitarian mission” line has been exposed for the lie it always was.

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie, who formerly worked in intelligence, has accused the federal government of exploiting fears about terrorism to rush through new national security laws that push Australia towards a “police state“.

“It is clearly overreach by the security services who have basically been invited to write an open cheque. And the government, which wants to beat its chest and look tough on national security, said, ‘We’ll sign that’.”

The laws include jail terms of up to 10 years for journalists who disclose details of ASIO “special intelligence operations” and provide immunity from criminal prosecution for intelligence officers who commit a crime in the course of their duties.

“The government of a democracy is accountable to the people. It must fulfil its end of the social contract. And, in a practical sense, government must be accountable because of the severe consequences that may result from its failure. As the outcomes of fighting unjust wars and inadequately responding to critical threats such as global warming illustrate, great power implies great responsibility.”

Tony has great power but no sense of responsibility. He has confidence but no conscience.  He has determination but no commitment.  He is willing but lacks the skills.  He attacks and blames but resents oversight and has never accepted accountability, and this is what scares me most.

The consequences of being wrong could/will be catastrophic and I don’t share Tony’s confidence that he, Maurice Newman and Cardinal Pell have all the answers.

“A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.”

― Thomas Paine

Tracking Abbott’s Wreckage ”October Update” ..Sally McManus is the Secretary of the Australian Services Union in NSW and the ACT.



285. Signs a deal with Cambodia to accept Australia’s refugees for a payment of $40 million over 4 years – 26 September, 2014

284. Breaks an election promise to a publish a proposal for constitutional recognition for Indigenous people and establish a bipartisan process to try to bring about recognition as soon as possible within the first 12 months of Government – 19 September 2014.

283. Breaks election promise to  build replacement submarines in South Australian shipyards, spending more than $20 billion on Japanese submarines instead – 8 September, 2014

282. Fails to provide adequate medical care to asylum seeker Hamid Kehazaei who died after developing an infection from a cut on his foot – 5 September 2014

281. Delays superannuation increases for seven years costing workers thousands of dollars in retirement savings2 September 2014

280. Kills the Low Income Super Contribution payment and the Superannuation Guarantee which aimed to boost the retirement savings of 3.6 million workers who earn $37,000 per year or less2 September 2014

279. Repeals the mining tax on the profits of big coal and iron ore companies – 2 September 2014

I know this is a 2007 case but has ASIO changed that much? They were doing this in 60s and 70s. Why do we belive they have changed?

Terror case thrown out

Terrorism charges against Izhar ul-Haque have been dropped.Terrorism charges against Izhar ul-Haque have been dropped.
Photo: Dallas Kilponen

Justice Michael Adams said one ASIO officer had committed the crime of false imprisonment and kidnap at common law

ASIO becoming unaccountable: watchdog

Tom Allard
November 12, 2007 – 2:19PM

A high profile terror case was abandoned before it got to trial today after a judge found that two ASIO officers had kidnapped and falsely imprisoned a young medical student, Izhar ul-Haque.

Mr ul-Haque’s lawyer, Adam Houda, later accused authorities of launching a politically motivated and “moronic prosecution” against his client.

In a scathing judgment, NSW Supreme Court Justice Michael Adams found that two ASIO officers had broken the law in a deliberate attempt to coerce answers from Mr ul-Haque.

“I am satisfied that B15 and B16 [the ASIO officers] committed the criminal offences of false imprisonment and kidnapping at common law and also an offence under section 86 of the Crimes Act,” the judge said.

He said this misconduct meant subsequent police records of interview with Mr ul-Haque were inadmissible as evidence.

The judge’s findings forced the Crown to withdraw its case against Mr ul-Haque, just before a trial jury was to be empanelled.

Mr ul-Haque had faced charges of training with the Pakistan-based terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Toiba since April 2004.

He was accused of receiving weapons and combat training from the organisation during a visit to Pakistan in January and February 2003.

“This is reminiscent of Kafka,” Justice Adams said in a lengthy judgment in which he derided the misconduct of both ASIO and Australian Federal Police officers.

He detailed how ASIO officers had confronted Mr ul-Haque, forced him into a car and then taken him to a park where he was threatened with serious consequences if he did not co-operate fully.

Justice Adams said Mr ul-Haque rightly believed had no choice but to comply with all their demands.

The student was taken to his home where as many as 30 plain-clothes intelligence officers and police conducted a search while his family watched.

Mr ul-Haque was then interviewed again amid continuing threats against him, even though ASIO only had a search warrant.

It was a “gross breach of the powers given to the officers given under the warrant” Justice Adams said, adding later that at least one ASIO officer had broken the common law and legislative protections against false imprisonment.

He also heavily criticised two AFP officers who had demanded Mr ul-Haque become their informant against Faheem Lodhi, a Sydney architect who was found guilty last year of terrorism offences. That verdict is now subject to appeal.

The police officers also threatened Mr ul-Haque with adverse consequences if he didn’t comply.

However, Mr ul-Haque refused to wear a wire and to spy for the authorities, and was charged three months later with a single terrorism offence.

Justice Adams detailed evidence of how law enforcement authorities had told Mr ul-Haque all along they accepted that his brief training with Lashkar-e-Toiba was linked to the Indian presence in the disputed state of Kashmir and had nothing to do with Australia.

Mr ul-Haque declined to to comment to the waiting media after today’s case ended.

However, Mr Houda said his client had been unfairly persecuted.

“This has been a moronic prosecution,” Mr Houda said. “From the beginning, this was no more than a political show trial designed to justify the billions of dollars spent on counter-terrorism.”

Andrew Bolt believes he is wiser than Anthony Byrne, Deputy Chairman of the Joint Committee on Intelligence.

Anthony Byrne

“The Islamic Council of Victoria’s reaction yesterday is a disgrace and only too typical of the Muslim leadership that has so betrayed Australia.”……Andrew Bolt

Column – Blame Islam before you blame Australia

Anthony Byrne

“we’ve had communications with Islamic community leaders in my electorate. They are doing everything they can to help. They’ve met with AFP officers. There’s a meeting at the Hallam North mosque tonight. I’ll be meeting with them on Friday. They are doing everything they can to get to the bottom of this as well.

Ask Bolt what he knows about Endevour Hills

I know lot about Endeavour Hills and its people. They’re a great people. They’re a people that are filled with resolve and purpose and they’re people that come from all walks of life, all races, colours and creeds and they live together in harmony.

I could tell you about, in my experience, Leigh, of a young Afghan man of that age was a young man that lived next door to where I used to live in Endeavour Hills, and when I used to fly to Canberra, one of the things that I was very heartened about was the fact that that family, including that young man, would be keeping an eye on my family.

But I do think that what shouldn’t happen is that those wonderful people that I know, whose mosques that I walk into, that lived next door to me, shouldn’t be demonised, they shouldn’t be – and they shouldn’t be – you know, your story had a comment made by a senator, who I didn’t know was an expert on security, talking about burqas. Ill-informed comments don’t add to either the investigations that are taking place at this point in time or the very community harmony that we need in my area at this point in time.

I think if there’s one thing that I would say, Leigh, is that we’ve got to do – rather than pull ourselves apart, which is what ISIS wants us to do, we’ve got to come together, and if there are any further programs that we can develop to encourage and include people, regardless of what faith they might be, that is going to significantly reduce the chance of radicalisation.

You never listen to these people do you Andrew Bolt? No time for being inclusive.



What we know about Tony Abbott, that is what should terrify us.

Terrifying Tony’s war on unpopularity


‘Terrifying’ Tony Abbott is using the politics of fear to bully the Australian people into liking him and letting him to take away some of their rights and freedoms, writes Lyn Bender.

With each new threat from ISIL, Prime Minister Tony Abbott is shamelessly fanning the fires of terror in the hope we will forget his shortcomings blunders and buffoonery.

In Abbott Land — security has become insecurity.

 Fear is the weapon of choice, of those seeking to gain and maintain power. Frightened people can be manipulated and subjugated.

But, nevertheless, now a reactive, fearful and fear-manipulating leader is now catapulting us into war. Tony Abbott struts ‒ or more correctly frets ‒ on the world stage: a small frightened man, determined to hold onto his fifteen minutes of fame.

Is western involvement in another war the answer or the problem?

Even Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has said that ISIL is an ideology that cannot be defeated in the battlefield alone.

But things could always be worse. Remember when Abbott’s alpha male posturing to ‘bully’ Putin and his threats to send in armed troops for ‘Operation bring them Home’.

Abbott’s idea of sending an armed defence force to Ukraine was branded as insane in a Fairfax headline:

He has now moved on to the more fertile field of homegrown Muslim terror.

Abbott is widely acknowledged as a serial liar.  And the lies and broken promises continue.

The latest lies relate to what is being dubbed as ‘operation mission creep’.

At first, it was a humanitarian mission to deliver aid to besieged Iraqis. Now it has morphed into a mission to destroy the death cult” of ISIS and to “respond with extreme force”.

When it comes to understanding and responding to ISL in Iraq, it’s complicated. When it comes to Tony Abbott’s ability to comprehend the global political sphere, it’s simplistic.

Remember his description of the situation in Syria just prior to the last Federal election:

“It’s not goodies versus baddies but baddies versus baddies.”

In Abbott’s black and white world there are no shades of grey.

Except when defending baddies as being goodies.

Abbott has excused Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s appalling human rights record.

Justifying torture, he explained:

“Sometimes in difficult circumstances difficult things happen.”

As Rodney E. Lever points out:

‘It is difficult to believe that Tony Abbott knows what he is doing in committing Australia to a third war in Iraq.’

But there is method in the synchronising of fear announcements and photo shoots.

Tony Abbott’s September fear diary

  • Abbott urges everyone – especially Muslims – to be on Team Australia and put this country first.
  • Departing ASIO chief, David Irvine, declares that Australia could soon raise its terror threat from medium to high.
  • Terrorism threat level is raised from medium to high. Tony Abbott stresses that no terror attack is imminent.
  • Abbott announces deployment of 600 troops to the Middle East.
  • Abbott is pictured heroically running the nation from a tent in Arnhem Land.
  • More than 800 ASIO and Federal Police, accompanied by the media, conspicuously raid suspected terrorists in Queensland and New South Wales
  • Abbott declares from Nhulunbuy, regarding the raids: ‘This is not just suspicion, this is intent’
  • Abbott leaves Nhulunbuy days short of his belatedly delivered promise to spend a week in Arnhem Land.
  • Abbott farewells the troops.
  • Abbott tells the media that any random person could have been seized. All that is needed is an iPhone and knife. A statement the media reports repeatedly. and uncritically
  • Abbott confirms a threat to Parliament House.
  • Man is removed from plane and questioned by police for doodling satirical notes on terror.
  • Abbott dismisses Muslim protests at anti-terror raids, saying “have a good, long, hard look at yourselves”
  • Operation Sovereign Borders ‒ hitherto secret on water matters ‒ are announced to convey an image of strong tough mean leadership-keeping those Muslim-refugees out
  • New anti terrorism laws to be tabled to Parliament, that could place journalists under threat of 10 years imprisonment, for publishing details about national security operations.
  • Under pressure from crossbencher David Leyonhjelm “torture is explicitly forbidden”, but not defined.
  • Abbott shifts focus in Question Time in Parliament from scrutiny of the Budget to elaborating on the terror threat to all Australians.

Abbott’s mentor, former Prime Minister John Howard, has allegedly lied on national television on Sunday about leading us into Iraq on false intelligence and by ignoring expert weapon’s inspector Hans Blix.

There were no weapons of mass destruction and Howard allegedly knew this for two years prior to the invasion.

Tony Abbott ‒ like his father-figure, Howard ‒ is again leading us into dangerous waters and setting Australia up as a terrorist target.

Australia is now named on the hit list in a video believed to be from ISIS. It exhorts the killing of infidels in countries including Australia who have joined the Coalition to attack ISIS. Abbott is seeking greater powers, with limited scrutiny.

The fusion of passion for military adventures, and the political exploitation of fear, is a dangerous mix. Abbott may be creating the terror he is claiming to lessen.

Disturbingly, he is now saying we may need to give up some of our rights and freedoms to lessen the terror threat.

“…for some time to come, Australians will have to endure more security than we’re used to, and more inconvenience than we’d like. Regrettably, for some time to come, the delicate balance between freedom and security may have to shift.”

Even more worrying, Abbott flags discriminating against certain sections of society — presumably Muslims:

“There may be more restrictions on some so that there can be more protections for others.”

He is asking us to let him persecute certain members of our society for the greater good. That is not democracy.

Moreover, he is asking us trust him to act honestly and decently in the national interest.


View image on Twitter

Team Bull you are either against us or with us in the shoot!

From the mouth of Melbournes worst vilifier government supporter and Abbott’s mate…. Andrew Bolt.

“I say “myth” because of one telling fact above all: this country actually has as many Buddhists as Muslims. Yet where are the Buddhist terrorist plots? Where are the angry complaints about “alienation”? Where the warnings to change our foreign policies … or else?”

The buffoon opens his mouth and out come the flies so filled with Islamic hate he must have a gut full of maggots. Andrew Bolt this government isn’t waging war in any Buddhist,Hindu,Sikh or Confucian country. The last time we did we got into a lot of shit and lost. It was called Vietnam and you would have rushed in if you wern’t too young wouldn’t you. Europeans were at risk sitting in public places and soldiers took off their uniforms then in Saigon. A young Mike Carlton was and  experienced the brutality of war up close and personal, unlike you. How do you think we’d go if we entered the fight in Punjab ,Amaritsar  at the Golden Temple and we started taking out the rebel Sikhs that were crying out for independence?

“It is that belief which has already landed 21 Muslims in jail for previous terrorist plots against Australians.”

You make thing up  as you go along its bullshit. Who are the 21 convicted persons in jail cretin are they some of the ones found  not guilty Mr Bolt. As for deaths caused by these conspirators none. Maybe you need to be reminded of Andrew Knight  he was not a Muslim. He was a trained cadet though from Melbourne High who knew the meaning of alienation.

With regard to 1000 bombs a man like yourself calls Obama piss weak and Abbott strong a true blue world leader  who you openly encourage to humanitarian bomb (an oxymoron) another nations citizens in the hope of degrading a criminal element without UN sanction. Bombing in itself is indiscriminant and your up for it. Your  far more dangerous because you incite a mate who has the capacity however you wont do it in public  will you only behind the security of locked doors.

You accuse  the multitude of critics of the terrorist raids as being conspiracy theorists. What a lode of cock  and it’s all in your mouth. It’s common sense  when you give a government department $650 million  that it’s going to be eager to show that spend was justified. If that justification seems like an overkill in the secret operation of 800 personnel raiding Australian citizen houses in a public televised and photographed event 3 days after the PM announced “we have no specific intel”. The questions are reasonable. Particularly when the Murdoch Press falsely headlined plots of beheadings when there were none. That the raids were instigated on one phone call the information withheld due to “operational matters” and more so  that the departments running the gig have fucked up so badly in the past. How Dr Muhummed Haneef at the behest of Kevin Andrews under the Howard government was put under control in jail. How Kevin Andrews refused tell where his information was sourced from. Tht the court findings revealed that ASIO and the AFP had given Andrews contradictory reports due to the cock up of an over zealous agent wanting to please. Then yes Andrew Bolt we are entitled to ask questions and make suggestions on how this all seems to fit so well for the government. Andrews thought it did back in 2007 as well.

Climb back under your rock Bolt. Why doesn’t this government lay Section 18C charges against you? That’s every days question


Chatter is a means to guage to what degree your opposition can be confused, manipulated and divided. It serves a purpose.


Abbott cites ‘chatter’ of attacks on govt, Parliament

 SYDNEY: Intelligence “chatter” has revealed that militants plan to attack Australian politicians and government buildings, the prime minister said on Friday, a day after hundreds of police carried out a sweeping counter-terrorism operation.

“Beheading was not specifically mentioned in the one phone call between Barylei & Azzari

News Ltd’s Simon Benson “assumed” the plot involved beheadings. Here he is with his “Canberra source”:

View image on Twitter

The Chicken Little-in-Chief’s big beheading scare

Bob Ellis 20 September 2014, 4:00pm 26
The new Yellow Peril? (Image via

Shouting ‘fire!’ in a crowded theatre is frowned upon in most societies and thought an example of a limit on freedom of speech we can all agree on. Tony Abbott did something far, far worse yesterday. He told an entire nation they could be randomly beheaded at any moment.

He then told us to calm down, and behave as if he hadn’t said it.

He added to the usual terrors female shift-workers endure on late night buses, late night trains and the long walk from a railway station home at 1.30 a.m. — the ultimate horror of having your head cut off.

He did it by adding the word ‘random’: by not even implying, but saying straight out that you didn’t have to be famous, or politically connected to a particular cause, or a prominent member of a particular faith. You could be an ‘innocent bystander’, beheaded.

He then said it was very easy to do. All one needs, he said, is a knife and cell-phone, and an accomplice with a car.

Is this responsible? Is it the act of a nation’s leader, or a cyberbully? It seems to encourage terrorists, implying they can’t be easily detected and it doesn’t matter who they kill.

Forty-six people ‒ Australian people ‒ died from cigarettes yesterday, none from decapitation.

Three or four motorists will die this weekend, in car accidents.

Before Christmas, two young men will die in pub brawls.

‘Domestic’ terrorism will occur — a father kidnapping and threatening his estranged wife or children once or twice this fiscal year.

I will bet a lot of money no-one will be beheaded here in Australia.

It is because it is not a very Australian thing to do. People who live here don’t do that sort of thing and thereby imperil their families, and the livelihood of their parents, brothers and sisters. It is a long way from the battlegrounds of Baghdad, Mosul, Gaza, Donetsk, where such ‘terrorist’ things do happen lately — incidents in war.

And this is why it hasn’t happened in ninety-nine years and nine months here, since the Battle of Broken Hill in January 1915. It is not a particularly Australian thing to do.

And frightening old women with it is, I think, unbecoming for a prime minister. And possibly illegal, as it ‘encourages the terrorists’.
If the Prime Minister were serious about it, the two big football games this weekend in Sydney would have been cancelled, along with the opening night of The King And I. If he were serious, there would be random body searches of Middle Eastern women entering the Sydney Art Gallery. Most art galleries, given ISIL’s hatred of art, would be closed for six months.

But he isn’t serious, he’s making mischief.

He’s lost most of the policy battles of his first year and he’s thought a joke by many people, by many others a disgrace, and he’s embarked on the biggest ‘scare campaign’ since the Yellow Peril.

He’s become what I call the Chicken-Little-in-Chief. And he shouldn’t, any more, be given the time of day.

And he should be asked to resign by his colleagues (as Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond was a few hours ago and has done), or by the Senate, or by a poll of public opinion.

He’s blown it. May the sky come falling down

View image on Twitter

I DIDN’T even finish my arts degree, but I still say that the Chief Scientist and two Nobel prize winners should pull their heads in.

The ABC and staff  are so above Newscorp and Andrew Bolt


“If you think arguments on global warming are best settled by credentials, then don’t read another word. I’m an idiot.”

Even Andrew Bolt get’s it right sometimes. He certainly didn’t finish his Arts Degree he barely started it and merely deprived someone else of the opportunity. It’s the idiot aspect that reveals itself and the lack of either rationality or balance.

“Viewers would have concluded no scientists question that the world is heating dangerously and man is to blame. The sceptical scientists I know personally must just be hoaxers.”

He sounds like a child ready to throw a tantrum not an adult open to a discussion.  On this topic it is  precisely what he is a moron.

Bolt doesn’t prove or disprove anything he merely states the obvious that there is a minority of scientists that don’t necessarily agree with all the results put forward by the majority for a case of Global Warming. But that’s the nature of science disagreement. You could argue because all the scientific errors made throughout history is the reason science and the world progressed.  Bolt offers no alternative to progress and investigation. The majority of climate scientists seem to believe there is a necessary reason to move foward.

Bolt the self-confessed idiot only believes in  incontrovertible laws of which there are very few. Not Newton, Not Einstein, Not Quantum Physics so the idiot is simply asking for the impossible. If one believes money and power influence science then  the skeptics certainly exemplify the conservatives, much the same as flat earthers did in their day. The majority of scientists are progressives as their results demand a necessary change foward  which however sits against the financial interests of Capital. Why would the most rational thinkers of the world ask the most wealthiest to change? After all isn’t that where their finance ultimately comes from?

Bolt doesn’t broach the question  he merely uses it as a vehicle to have ago at the ABC as a leftist organization with some bias against his  fatuous  conservative position. The man failed his Arts degree he didn’t just  finish it.

His side of the capitalist ledger always turns to the maintenance of profit  to justify  reasons not to change. The ABC in 1984 had a budget of approx $900 mill today it’s $800 mill and has 84% support of the Australian population. More importantly 80% believe in its integrity. That alone places it so far in front of  Newscorp and Bolt it’s lickspittle



Rulz is Rulz whether you are Joe Blow, Jill Dill or PM of Australia!

I am starting to think that when Mr Abbott promised us a “grown up” government, instead of “responsible adult” government he actually meant he would treat us citizens like children, responding to unwanted scrutiny with that most hated parent refrain, “because I said so…” that will drive a kid to their bedroom in fury and frustration, normally with bonus door slamming.

That is just not good enough. It is not “ridiculous” to want proof and be assured that our Prime Minister – be it this one or any MP in future who aspires to the top job in our nation while Article 44(i) of the Constitution is on the books – is a “law-abiding” citizen who legally deserves to be in the position of Prime Minister of this nation.

I might be only a punter but I try to teach my kids that Rulz is Rulz! — whether you are Joe Blow, Jill Dill or Prime Minister of Australia.

Not in Andrew Bolt’s World

Multiculturalism is alive and well in the UK

Shepparton, City of Harmony

BENDIGO Festival of Cultures


Capitalism is an idealised  concept that attempts to describe the way we  behave economically and structure our lives. Some individuals break the rules commit crimes, sometimes in association with like-minded others. CBA financial planners, Wall st, etc. Mainstream media doesn’t cry “We were raped by Capitalism”. No we call them  rogues, crooks,  gangs & misfits.

Crime occurs in all communities of various description  Communist,Democratic,Assimilated and Multicultural. Each has different approaches to policing and dealing with crime but crime occurs. Andrew Bolt is specifically opposed to multi-racial communities as they promote diversity as opposed to homogeneity and according to him encourage deviant behaviour. He believes in Assimilation. Rotherham  this morning’s blog had a headline ‘Raped by Multiculturalism’  What went on was in Rotherham for Bolt is a direct consequence of Multiculturalism and the  weakness of  the Left, He has cherry picked to prove  his retarded point.

Bolt doesn’t raise the issues of sexploitation of women on a large-scale such as  by the Russian & Italian Mafia by white christian ‘civilized’ Europeans.  He doesn’t examine sexploitation in Britain as a whole  the scandals at the highest levels of Tory politics.  That’s of no use to him. But a badly run orphanage in  Rotherham suits him down to the ground. It’s not about lack of funds under staffing or just poor welfare support it’s a direct result of Multiculturalism.

Bolt shows us a bylaw indicating  the word ‘Asian’ not to be used as an identifying term when talking about suspects of anything in Rotherham. However strikes me that bylaw supports everything Bolt claims to be an anti-racist, that colour and ethnicity are irrelevant when it comes to law and that’s why he proudly says ” I am not a racist.” He is however a hypocrite and totally two-faced.  Bolt infers the leftist council in Rotherham were ‘sacrificing the young girls  on the altar of ‘political correctness’ for not allowing suspects to be called ‘Asian’ or ‘Muslim’. Bolt  the non racist agrees with the bylaw. Australia should not be differentiated by colour either. Colour does not exist.

There was an orphanage in Brighton some 50 + years ago a very conservative WASP suburb  like Malvern where Bolt lives. It wasn’t a secret that young testosterone & alcohol fueled  young men  would come from all directions to scale the fence at night like tom cats to dally with those  state wards in their dorms. Multiculturalism wasn’t an aspect of that suburb Mr Bolt. Lack of supervision and underfunding certainly was. The Brighton police were aware of it nobody was charged and it wasn’t just an urban myth. Multiculturalism wasn’t a driving force back then Mr Bolt. Doesn’t suit your argument does it Bolt.

Importing a cherry picked example is Bolt’s way of disproving any Multicultural Policy. One could argue that Rotherham is the exception that proves the rule and exceptions do exist. It’s far more persuasive  than saying  multicultural societies have a tendency to drive young men into illegal gang activity and in Bolt’s case Muslims.

One has to doubt somebody who denies  any history prior to his birth in 1959 to try to win a point.On the Bolt Report the man said indigenous Australians today were not the first arrivals in this country therefore have no right to be mentioned in our constitution. He agrees with Tony Abbott that the defining moment in the history of  this country was white settlement not invasion. The other 60,000 years is  irrelevant. Therefore  no mention of persons prior to settlement need be mentioned ‘Terra Nullis  is ok. It seems to me that’s what the Rotherham bylaw is trying to achieve. There are no ‘Asians’ in  Rotherham. But here Bolt want’s them named and shamed  Pakis are Pakis , Muslims to boot and should be identified not protected by ‘political correctness’?He is a RACIST

Trying to understand  Bolt’s ideas is like herding cats. He’s a one-eyed extreme conservative  with a collection of arguments selectively picked  to support a moral framework which he treats as some universal given . He is an elitist of the worst kind. The only reason Rotherham is of any use to him  at the moment is to indulge in his favourite pastime of Muslim bashing.

Bolt doesn’t raise the issues of sexploitation of  women on a larger and more brutal scale than Rotherham all by white christian Europeans. He never really says anything about the Italian & Russian Mafia or sexploitation in Britain in general. He doesn’t raise the scandals at the highest levels of Tory politicians, paedophilia ,rent boys & prostitution in Westminster these are of no use to him. But a badly run underfunded orphanage in  Rotherham suits him down to the ground it’s in his cross hairs and suits his Labour vs Conservative debate in Britain. Bolts just copied and pasted  it because he’s a lazy mother.

Nature Or Nurture of a Moral Bankrupt

A loner who always wanted to be a winner but afraid of venturing off  the straight & narrow path. A simple lad who loved boxing tulips in that infamous Nazi town Aalesmere. A young man who found no adventure in India non reportable. He would have preferred the Delhi diplomatic enclave I think. It was safer than being out amongst the hub bub of daily life.

Uni  was just too big full of ideas that  challenged him. Who was that guy Che Guevara  student’s had on their walls what band did he play for?Bolt was a hero in his own mind the minder to a belly dancer except the dancer said he was more like her  son Oedipus. She did all the supporting of an egocentric child. He apologised for his self aggrandisement.

The question of nature  or nurture doesn’t apply to Andrew Bolt because he got a double dose of right and thus there’s nothing left in him. The man presents like an over pancaked Thunderbird puppet on the Bolt Report head and hands bobbing away trying to impress his guests with his one way moral politic. Michael Kroger looks so bored trying to stifle  yawns because it’s so one-dimensional.

Any society, any family (a concept Bolt dismisses) expects the younger generation to challenge the status quo. Like Don Quixote fight injustice to create a better world. There is not an ounce of that in Bolt and it seems never was. The elect are duty bound to preserve and protect not change things. Put the joker in the box never let him out, don’t rock the boat. He can’t for one minute consider a 19-year-old Islamic kid been drawn to ISIS. If we were back in the 60’s Bolt would never have marched against the Vietnam war. In the 30’s never gone to the Spanish War.

He is the morally strict dad who raves on about individualism within his narrow moral parameters. Talking is his bent but has a tin ear which is the hallmark of a fascist. Win arguments at all cost because to lose ,say sorry or have second thoughts is existential death.Just read his blog it’s self-evident. I doubt if he ever had the courage to stand up against his mother & father. He’s the guy you’d never see at a protest meeting. Polite but removed extremely ambitious to succeed. He wanted to take a shot at the “greasy pole” of success promised by the hierarchy of the day. There’s was never any place for idealism or questioning the status quo a true blue one-dimensional man.

His presented to his peers as friendly enough but not really on any intimate level. If they played “Truth or Dare” it would be too much of a challenge. His modernity only superficial because he wasn’t modern at all.  Cool on the outside anal on the in. He didn’t develop his own values or rethink what he’d been told by his parents, never questioned their values. He was after all the headmaster’s son he didn’t embrace equality or question his position in small town country Australia. The idea of equality never crossed his mind he simply never saw past the moral circumstance handed to him.

He was a confused young man for christ sake. His CV says he worked for Labour how confused is that given his background? No how detached is that! It shows he worked for himself and was disingenuous about what it was he was doing. This man can publicly say  on national TV”Aborigines weren’t here first” because history has no relevance for him everything started  at birth 54 years ago  as far as he is concerned. Like Margret Thatcher there is no society only individuals competing in god’s democracy where winners are grinners because their position is  rightly deserved by their hard work and graces.Cream always rises to the top. Is this his Christian way of saying ” Allah Akbar”?  No he says he’s agnostic, my arse!

Andrew Bolt frames everything within the narrow confines of  his moral  superior framework. Conservatives act according to their god’s own moral political view of the world. If they happen to get rich, and make their friends rich in the process, that is just the unbidden consequence of wealth being the natural reward of the righteous, in their moral universe. The fact that those at the top are conservative just proves his point and justifies it’s maintenance. To Bolt life is what it is and should be policed, protected, maintained not socially  engineered by government. After all look what Castro and Che did for Cuba it’s never progressed, they are poor.

I won’t deny he’s all right but morally he is all wrong. I hope with the natural order of things his kids will challenge the sanctimonious prick.



Andrew Bolt on 2GB’s Steve Price show groveled.

Ramjan was the young woman who in 1977 enraged Tony Abbott and his band of university bovver boys, when she beat him in the election for the post of president of the University of Sydney’s student representative council. A witness said that Abbott’s gang was screaming “commie” and “poofter” as they barged in to make their threatening protest to Ramjan.  Abbott approached her. “He came up to within an inch of my nose and punched the wall on either side of my head. It was done to intimidate,”
Abbott has variously said that “it would be profoundly out of character had it occurred” and “it never happened”. Melbourne’s conservative pin-up boy Michael Kroger was laying into Ramjan, so was Alan Jones, so too The Australian and more recently Bolt on 2GB. Bolt on 19 May told 2GB’s listeners that: “Tony Abbott was falsely accused of punching a wall next to the head of the student official when he was at university…”Bolt went on:

How many interviews did David Marr give about his book about Tony Abbott hitting a wall? I mean, on the ABC it was wall-to-wall. You couldn’t turn on the ABC without it. If that is such a terrible thing – and he [Abbott] denied it and there are no eye witness accounts of him actually doing it that are credible. If that is such a germane thing, something that happened 30 something years ago, why is there zero, zero condemnation [of Bishop being jostled], it seems to me, from the usual mouthpieces of the left? What’s happening to Liberal politicians today?

That woe-begotten spray contained a crucial error. There were two credible eye witnesses, one of whom had made a sworn statement about what happened in 1977.
Patrick George, Ramjan’s lawyer, quickly dispatched a letter of demand to Bolt, pointing out that his remarks gave rise to the imputation that his client had lied and there was a witness to say she had not lied. Bolt had nowhere to go, except to broadcast this grovel on Monday night:

” On 19 May, I made some statements on air concerning an incident involving the prime minister which took place at the University of Sydney approximately 30 years ago. I have been told by Barbara Ramjan that my statements might have been understood to suggest that her evidence of the incident was not truthful. I have never accused Ms Ramjan of lying in giving her evidence of that incident. In referring to the incident I did not intend to suggest that she was a liar or that she had acted dishonestly and if anyone understood my statements to suggest that, then I apologise to her unreservedly.”
 Bolt has become increasingly gun shy  over the years having been convicted of defamation of Jalena Popovic which cost  $246,000.On 28 September 2011 he was found to have contravened section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. His ex fiance had him apologise for suggesting she’d lied. She countered with signed stat dec after he’d publicly fantasized ” I was a minder to a belly dancer” when it was she that was his minder. He holds sway over a cut and paste bloggsite and never really put’s his name to anything allowing his followers to do his dirty work. An advocate for free speech the site is heavily moderated against opposing views.
 Ramjan sued over vehement remarks made by Kroger on The Bolt Report on 23 September 2012, an interview he gave to Alan Jones on 2GB, and two articles in The Australian.
Among Kroger’s claims was the allegation that she is a “serial fabricator of false complaints”. Ramjan pleaded four imputations: she is a left wing lunatic, she is a disgraceful nobody, she fabricated the Abbott allegation, and she told a vicious lie about Abbott as part of a campaign to damage him.By August 2013 The Australian and Kroger had settled and the newspaper published an apology for saying she had lied. Channel 10 had also apologised.
  Jones went on air with a long explanation and apology, which concluded: “So if anything I have done had led to discomfort and concern for Barbara Ramjan then I do apologise.
Tony Abbott does seem out in the cold and alone with his “It never happened”story.