Reprint edn. Update: Reuters reports that “Facebook says 126 million Americans may have seen Russia-linked political posts” By Juan Cole …
By freef’all852 To “proscribe” a thing or person is to forbid, blacklist, deny to, and/or disallow actions or substances to be given or taken by persons or person for their use or benefit. So here we are suggesting a methodology to “proscribe” those Murdoch media personalities, backers and supporters who continue to promote hate and…
Rupert Murdoch’s longest-serving editor-in-chief has claimed the News Corp boss was upset by the alleged “closeness” between his ex-wife Wendi Deng and the former Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Saturday 12 March 2016. I really don’t know that I am qualified to write this. I know little of science. In fact, I often laughingly joke that I have enough trouble with our pop up toaster. Therefore, it goes that I cannot explain how many things function or occur. I simply know that science through…
It was announced yesterday that 21st Century Fox and the National Geographic Society are creating a for-profit, commercial company that will encompass all National Geographic properties, including its magazines, websites and television channels. Fox will own 73% of this new company.
After a string of ghoulishly inappropriate tweets it seems the irrepressible Rupert it is at it again. With very own his media empire poised and ready to dedicate swathes of precious air time to his every hashtag, it’s no surprise that the man cant keep his hands off his twitter account.
But given his latest round of tweets one has to wonder what on earth is Murdoch up to?
First he blasts Abbott for knighting that shining beacon of misogyny and casual racism that is Prince Phillip, and now he is saying Abbott needs to sack Peta Credlin?
I’m no great fan of Peta Credlin but blaming her for Abbott’s woes is like blaming a creme cake for Boko Haram. Admittedly she could have kept him on a tighter leash, but the reality is that Abbott is her boss, not the other way around, and if he is determined to go off like a loose cannon there isn’t really a lot Ms. Credlin can do about it.
While Murdoch’s call for Credlin’s scalp is understandable on one level, after all there is a well set precedent in Australian politics that powerful women are expected to clean up the messes made by the boys, and then thrown under a bus for their efforts, (Just think Joan Kirner, Julia Gillard, and more recently Sussan Ley, who – after Dutton’s abject failure- has been handed the delightful task of destroying Medicare… I guarantee you, give it 18 months and Ms Ley will be road kill), it is still a somewhat curious manoeuvre.
We all know that Abbott is Murdoch’s boy, bought and paid for, and no one would be surprised if Murdoch was suffering a touch of buyer’s remorse where Abbott is concerned. I for one would not be shocked if Murdoch, much like anyone else that buys a lemon, is desperately searching for an exit strategy that won’t leave too much egg on his face. But why would he slap Abbott down one day, and blame Credlin the next? Are we simply witnessing the random #’s of man who is getting on a bit and losing the plot, or does Murdoch have some kind of cunning plan?
Riding on the back of his media empire Murdoch currently enjoys great sway with the Australian voting public, but even he knows that in this social media age you can not take anything for granted. With the disgrace that was the phone hacking scandal in the UK, and the utter derision with which most of the USA views fox news (when Fox news can’t even raise enough votes in a racially polarised America to keep Obama out of office, you have know it’s a spent force), Australia is possibly the last place on earth where Rupert wields the kind of political influence he so clearly craves, and he certainly doesn’t want to blow it.
Murdoch has now quite rightly assessed the public sentiment, and realised that sticking up for his man Tony is only going to erode his social and political capital. So what to do? Abbott is now so toxic, standing by him is clearly not an option, but who can Rupert turn to to be his new man in Canberra?
Trouble is, in setting a such a hideous policy agenda Abbott has managed to turn each and every portfolio into a poison chalice that is guaranteed to cruel the chances of any potential successor.
It is unlikely Scott Morrison will ever recover from his stint in immigration, George Brandis has been eternally lumbered with the racist tag (courtesy of the ill advised attempt at 18c amendments), Joe Hockey is forever blighted with his budget opus, Julie Bishop is a woman so forget that, and let’s face it Christopher Pyne was never going to be a saleable option.
What about Andrew Robb or Peter Dutton? Really? I don’t think so! And then of course there is the ever popular Malcom Turnbull, the only one who could probably save them, but Turnbull is way too much of centrist for Murdoch’s purposes, and he isn’t supported in the party room anyway.
So what is poor Rupert to do about toxic Tony, he can’t side with him, and he can’t find a suitable successor?
This is where the attack on Credlin starts to make sense. From Rupert’s point of view, (as the undisputed emperor of his very own personal 24 hour news cycle), it’s not hard to see how Credlin could make a credible scape goat for all Abbott’s stuff ups. She is powerful, she is a woman, she is unelected (which means no messy bi-election swings to have to explain away), and as she is largely attributed with Abbott’s successes surely it wouldn’t be too hard to spin her into the cause of his failures as well.
Will Murdoch be able to successfully to transfer Abbott’s stench onto Credlin, (because if his tabloids are anything to go by, he is certainly having a red hot go at it)?
To me it looks like Murdoch is throwing Credlin to the wolves in one desperate last ditch attempt remediate Abbott’s image. The question is will the electorate buy it?
I’m thinking probably not.
First Dog On The Moon wrote that Tony Abbott was beyond satire. My immediate thought was it’s a bit like masturbation – if you think it’s impossible to do it to him, he’ll probably do it to himself.
This isn’t meant to be a criticism of masturbation, by the way! I’ve always thought of it as a bit like writing poetry. Most people will do it at some point in their life, but doing it in public and expecting people to admire your unique technique and your use of rhythm, requires either extraordinary self-confidence, or a special type of insanity. Or perhaps, in the case of certain public figures, a little of both.
As for Rupert Murdoch’s demand that Abbott sack Credlin, we have a strange diversion. (As an aside, I find it strange that Murdoch said “Leading involves cruel choices”. “Cruel” not strong or difficult. There’s a whole book there for some psychiatrist. As for “Tough to write”, I guess that’s why he become an owner rather than a journalist.)
The conspiracists among us will suggest that this is Murdoch’s way of saving Abbott. Abbott will surely refuse and by standing up to a dictator and supporting his woman (er, only in terms of being his Chief of Staff, we know that he has more than one woman in his marital home, which is what qualifies him as a feminist) Abbott is showing that Rupert isn’t pulling his strings and that he’s his own man, and that this a clever plan that they probably worked out while Abbott was on his way back from Iraq when he stopped off at a destination that none of us know about to meet Rupert, Peta, Wendy, Tony Blair and Elvis for lunch.
The other responses will be more confused. Some will argue that Credlin shouldn’t be sacked on Murdoch’s say-so and argue that Abbott should stand up to Murdoch. Others will argue that this is a distraction, it doesn’t matter what anyone does, we need to complain because Bill Shorten didn’t say anything about this, and Labor should change leaders. Others will say that there’s no basic difference between Liberal and Labor. A small number will say that Murdoch has it right for once. A couple will say that none of this matters and that the world is doomed and renewable energy won’t solve anything. One Abbott supporter will start talking about something even more irrelevant to any of this, like debt or climate change in the hope that he/she attracts all the comments like a chip to a bunch of sea-gulls.
But to me there’s only one clear, intelligent response to all this. That’s right – only one! Certain people (the names Tony, Peta and Rupert may spring to your mind, but if anyone adds Rossleigh, I’ll be very, very annoyed and you’ve blown your chances of a knighthood when I become supreme ruler) are starting to think that their opinion is the only one that counts. And that tends to piss people off, eventually. It’s fine when the opinion is that you deserve something far better than what you’ve got. However, once it morphs into I said you deserve better and you picked me, I’m it, so shut up, people tend to reassess a whole lot of things. I mean, whatever happens in the Queensland election this week, I’d feel pretty safe betting against an increased majority for Campbell Newman.
Whatever your views, I think you should petition Abbott and demand that I get the next knighthood. Tell him that this his best chance of survival. Yep, it’s not likely that he’d do it. It’s almost as unlikely as him surviving the year as PM. But it’d please my mum and she’s even older than Prince Philip. And if we’re talking about unlikely things, I think we could create a fairly long list if we started just three years ago, so anything’s possible.
Rupert Murdoch’s Media Abuse
Have a look at what some silly sausage posted here. The FURPHY that Ordinary Australians are somehow Communists has been trumpeted by The Conservatives for a Century.
The Filth currently in charge of Australia has succeeded in their plan to create a Divisive Society that is in a perpetual State of Fear, Anxiety, Depression and Anger.
This time they are using Religion and Terror as their ammunition. Back in the 70’s they used “Communism” as an excuse for the Vietnam War.
Oil in Iraq and the ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ gave us the ‘Be afraid of Muslims’ campaign that is currently still in vogue. It has been twenty years in the planning and the LNP have pulled it off to perfection.
But they could not have completed their hoodwinking of the Australian people without their greatest ally Rupert Murdoch. He has spread their messages of Fear and Hate brilliantly, ably assisted by John Singleton’s 2GB and Macquarie National News, which is syndicated Australia-Wide. Add to this, Andrew Bolt on Commercial TV, and you have a winning formula.
*** Time to turn off Commercial TV.
*** Time to ditch your Foxtel.
*** Time to stop reading Rupert Rags.
*** Time to stop listening to 2GB and Macquarie National News.
TIME TO WAKE UP!!!
Where would we be without the ABC.
ON THE WEEKEND, I saw something on television that I found quite disturbing.
It was not the fake enthusiasm of an X Factor judge, nor was it the announcement of yet another NCIS — as show that will have a gazillion spin offs just like CSI (maybe they should just do one called WTF).
What disturbed me was, in fact, a commercial.
We all hate to see our taxpayer money wasted, particularly on commercials. However the commercial I’m referring to was not a government commercial — although some have commented that the company being advertised could be confused for the Coalition’s marketing department.
The commercial that disturbed me so much was the current commercial for News Ltd’s Sydney tabloid the Daily Telegraph and can be viewed below:
And I know what you may be thinking, but it was not the sight of Andrew Bolt and Miranda Devine that made me uncomfortable — although it’s true I normally do find them and their extremist far-right views rather disturbing.
It was actually the guy sitting opposite them who really disturbed me.
It would seem that while the taxpayer pays his wages, the NSW Premier is off filming commercials for News Ltd.
Frankly, I have significant reservations about whether that is a good use of taxpayer funds. Then again, Baird is the guy that, as NSW treasurer, managed to misplace a cool billion dollars, so I guess he probably considers donating his taxpayer billed time as a political favour as small change.
For years, there have been theories about how News Ltd is biased towards the Coalition, now News Ltd have embarked on an advertising campaign that seems to be suggesting Premier Baird is of their team.
If anyone ever needed confirmation of News Ltd’s bias — this is it.
Also alarming is who they have Mike Baird associated with in the commercial — Miranda Devine and Andrew Bolt. Andrew Bolt has already been found by a court to have breached the law in his racial vilification of a minority group and Devine is also known for her anti-Islamic scare mongering and angry rhetoric.
If they had sat a woman in a burqa near that particular group it could have ended in one of those racist rants that keep coming out on YouTube. It must comfort Tony Abbott to see one of his Party’s premiers sitting there smiling with a couple of the country’s finest “preachers of hate
News Ltd and the Coalition are making a mockery of the public and have formed the assumption that the public are too stupid to realise it.
Nauru child sex abuse allegations to be examined in new inquiry…..Andrew Bolt
Because Morrison wants to stop the “chatter” Not mentioned in Andrew Bolt’s Blog.
This is the source and the bullshit attributed to the lies Bolt gets paid to distribute and why his lawyers are paid hefty amounts to protect Newscorp from conviction.
- theguardian.com, Friday 3 October 2014 10.13 AEST
Scott Morrison says reports charity workers helped children protest against offshore detention policy will also be investigated
The federal government has announced a further inquiry into children in detention on Nauru,
The immigration minister, Scott Morrison, confirmed 10 employees of Save the Children, a non-government organisation contracted to provide welfare, education and protection for children on Nauru, had been told to leave the island.
Morrison has appointed former integrity commissioner and acting department head Philip Moss to head the wide-ranging inquiry investigating “all of these matters”.
The 10 staff members told to leave Nauru are not alleged to have engaged in misconduct against children, but are accused of encouraging protests, complaints of abuse and even of coaching self-harm.
The chief executive of Save The Children, Paul Ronalds, rejected the minister’s allegations and said the governmement had not provided his organisation with any evidence of staff wrongdoing before the claim was leaked to the media, or since.
Nor had it received the report cited by Morrison.
Five Save The Children staff were suspended in August over allegations they had supported a detainee protest by giving a “thumbs up” sign to demonstrators.
“In that case, all of the allegations against Save the Children staff were found to be unsubstantiated, and all of the staff returned to full duties,” Ronalds said.
Save the Children said in an earlier statement instances of child self-harm were “a reality that has been well-documented”.
“The evidence is very clear to us: the long-term and prolonged detention of children has a devastating impact on the mental and physical well-being of children. This can no longer be denied.”
Morrison said he would be appalled if accusations of sexual abuse proved true, but that the fabrication of allegations to further a political agenda was also serious.
Guardian Australia has published extensive evidence of child abuse and instances of self-harm on Nauru, including:
- pictures and video of children with their lips sewn shut in protest
- internal reports from centre managers Transfield detailing allegations of sexual misconduct by staff against children
- detailed descriptions from staff about violence against child detainees by guards employed by Wilson Security.
Australian federal police confirmed to Guardian Australia it had received a referral from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. It had not started an investigation.
Multiculturalism is alive and well in the UK
Shepparton, City of Harmony
BENDIGO Festival of Cultures
HUMANITY DENIER ANDREW BOLT
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.
Tony Abbott’s preacher in the tent of Murdoch
Ros,Packer. Macquarie Group, Australian Hotels Association, Pratt Holdings, Steve Nolan Constructions, Woodside Energy, Crown, Westfield, Yuhu Group were just some Liberal party donors in 12/13 which in total provided the coalition an election war fund of $ 82mill.
Big money backed this government’s election drive and brought them to office. It’s now pay back time. US style free market system where government minimises its involvement The greatest beneficiaries of Abbott and Hockey’s policies are their their largest financial backers, the financial industry, the mining and energy industries, gambling interests and real estate companies. The clearest examples of this is the winding back of the Labour governments Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) Reforms. Corman has ensured banks will continue to profit from ripping off their customers.
“We know that many financial advisors have been preying on their clients. They make use of clients’ lack of understanding of complex investing and other financial options to direct them to financial products that are not in their interest, but rather in the interests of the advisor. This has been costing consumers huge sums of money, which primarily flow into the hands of the banks.”
Warwick Smith 23/7/2014
The same applies to the removal of the Carbon Tax and climate policy. You can’t find an independent economist who thinks the government’s “direct action” plan for tackling climate change is more efficient or effective than a carbon tax or trading scheme. Who likes direct action? The polluters of course. Instead of paying to pollute, they get paid 2.5bill not to pollute
The Age recently conducted its annual economics survey of 25 prominent economists. They select economists from a broad range of backgrounds across the spectrum of economics and their views vary widely on almost all issues. None of them agreed with the government on any of the above three topics.
1) There is a budget emergency
2) The federal government has a debt crisis
3) Carbon pricing is an economic wrecking ball
Saul Eslake, chief economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, said
that to call the Australian debt situation a crisis was “to abuse the English language.”
Nobel prize winning US economist Joseph Stiglitz used terms such as “absurd”, “crazy” and “a crime” to describe some of Hockey’s budget measures, and dismissed the perceived debt and deficit problems, noting that any Australian who worries about debt “must be out of their mind.” Richard Holden, professor of economics at the Australian School of Business, put it this way: “First, Australia does not have a debt crisis. Or, to put it another way, Australia does not have a debt crisis.”
This government are just puppets dancing to the tune of those pulling their strings