January 11, 2015

Bolt picks the small target

In today's Herald Sun, Andrew Bolt mocks and dismisses peaceful marchers against terrorism who hold up the 'I am Charlie' sign.  No, no, absolute bullshit says Bolt.  They're not Charlie, because they are gutless. 

Bolt offers up politicians and the media as the main culprits in the rest of his little rant, but fails to recognise that the people who are NOT 'Charlie' are his managers and colleagues, and yes, politicians, and that 700,000 people marching in France yesterday were NOT the media and NOT politicians, and therefore don't deserve his utter disrespect.

Bolt needs to do better with picking his targets, and if he is so outraged, why isn't he ranting and rallying his newspaper and every newspaper in the world to defy terrorism by printing the satire that so offends the barbaric and brainwashed?  It's easier to diss and mock the people who want this to happen, who are marching in support of this very thing.  Bolt should redirect his energies, unless his rant is all guts, no spine.
And when SBS filmed the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Hilaly, praising suicide bombers as heroes in the Lakemba mosque just days before the September 11 attacks, it refused to air the footage for fear we might get the “wrong idea”.

This will go on. Be sure of it. Your ruling classes will not easily admit to having made an error that cannot now be fixed. It will prefer oppression to freedom, if that brings at least the illusion of peace — and many may even think they are right.

Hear already the lies.

You are told Muslim groups condemn the killings as unIslamic. Yet the Koran and Hadith preach death to unbelievers who mock Islam, and tell of Mohammed killing poets, singing girls and others who made fun of him.

No greater authority than the Ayatollah Khomeini, the then spiritual ruler of Iran, ordered the killing of writer Salman Rushdie for making mock of Islam in his The Satanic Verses.

We are also told the pen is mightier than the sword, but tell that to the people in the Charlie Hebdo office who found their fistfuls of pens no match for two Kalashnikovs.

Tell that now to even the brave leaders of Jyllands-Posten, who, after years of jihadist plots against their staff have had enough, refusing now to republish cartoons from Charlie Hebdo for fear of yet more attacks.
“It shows that violence works,” it admitted.

Everywhere you will find other papers making the same call.

We are all Charlie?

Bull. Absolute self-serving rubbish. The sell-outs are everywhere and will grow stronger.

The West’s political leaders have already told Muslim leaders they agree that mocking Islam is a sin, and have even passed laws — in France, too — making it unlawful.

They have attacked the very few journalists and politicians who dared warn against the Islamist threat.
Some now back Muslim demands for a boycott of Israel or at least greater recognition for the terrorists who run large parts of Palestinian territory.

Anything for peace, even if it means submission.

And for all the protests this past week, submission is what you must expect.
Are we really all Charlie? No, no and shamefully no

4 comments:

  1. Bolt is a fuckwit! Sick and tired of his holier than thou attitude.

    Gutless. ..

    The Charlie Hebdo victims were fearless and honest.

    Stuck to their principles..

    If only others had taken up the cudgels in support of Charlie Hebdo, then those poor victims might still be alive today.


    "Bull. Absolute self-serving rubbish. The sell-outs are everywhere and will grow stronger."

    Yes indeed!

    "The West’s political leaders have already told Muslim leaders they agree that mocking Islam is a sin, and have even passed laws — in France, too — making it unlawful.

    They have attacked the very few journalists and politicians who dared warn against the Islamist threat.
    Some now back Muslim demands for a boycott of Israel or at least greater recognition for the terrorists who run large parts of Palestinian territory."

    Fawning appeasers.. Makes me sick to the stomach, Caz





    ReplyDelete
  2. He is hitting the wrong target. People were not marching to show that they're out there exercising their freedom of speech, they were marching peacefully, out of respect for the dead, out of respect for the work and beliefs of the murdered men and women, and to show that they are united against these barbaric acts and the people behind them. They were marching to show that they too have a belief system, a set of values that they won't surrender. The display of signs or pens or drawings was symbolic and a gesture or respect for the dead. Not one of those people thought they were out there in the streets putting their lives on the line the way the murdered cartoonists and editor had done. That's what Bolt didn't get, that's why his article was insulting.

    Haven't seen him putting his life on the line for his beliefs lately, but his beliefs change with the wind, so it would be hard for him to nail himself down.

    A letter in the Sunday paper also complained about the marches, and related it back to the public mass mourning (what I call the hyper hysterical mourning for a stranger) that took hold and has become fashionable since Diana was killed in a car accident. The writer insisted that this sort of thing needs to stop, and all of those people in France didn't know the dead people and should go home.

    Yes, there really are lots of people out there, not only Bolt, who are utterly, gobsmackingly, missing the point. Willfully missing the point. There's no criminal or moral or emotional equivalence, and certainly not the hysteria, between marches in response to an act of terrorism and 17 dead and the death of Diana in a car crash. And yes, that letter writer REALLY pissed me off!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like Bolt and I can see his point.

    If this is the Paris march with the line of "world leaders" we are talking about then some days later I can definitely see his point.

    Something very sinister happened in that march.

    Please do not overlook that the the attack on Charlie was not the only outrage of that event in Paris. The attack on Charlie was not the only attack on our civilisation these monsters carried out. It is shocking to watch this happen before our eyes.

    Same hate filled monsters. Same ideology. They attack two sites (they were heading for an elementary school but had to settle for a store after a policewoman gave up her life to stop them). What is this? One is an attack on our civilisation and the other is not?

    You can be absolutely certain that is not the way these depraved men who have declared war on us see it.

    Right now I am shocked that there are so many people who don't get that.

    I think they need to spill it out why they don't see it the same way as the enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, Bolt wrote his piece days before the 40 world leaders joined that later march. Bolt was sneering about the men and women in France who gathered a day after the various shootings were over.

    If you want an intelligent piece about why we are NOT Charlie - an opinion piece that makes Bolt look like an idiot kid banging on an empty drum - read the piece from the NYTs, which I've just linked on a new post on this blog.

    Bolt is clever, including clever manipulative, but he's got no-one up against him, as a comparative point, which would show that he's not an intellectual, and his grasp on the substantive matters is pretty flimsy, when tested. He's not even an exceptional writer.

    The West can't help itself from being politically correct, or so the West likes to believe. We've the good guys. But all this soothing talk and sparing everyone's FEELINGS is political and social suicide.

    Read the NYT piece: compared with that, Bolt is an empty vessel. Besides, I still haven't seen Bolt marching in the streets to defend his freedom of the press or to defend our way of life.

    ReplyDelete