The Thing About Kevin & The Shitsville Express

The last few months have been a hellish roller coaster ride, writes Assistant Managing Editor Timothy W. Humphries

Funnily enough, I remember during the 1980s a particularly colourful roller coaster ride at Dreamworld. Its gone now. However It used to slide in and out of view as our family barreled down the Pacific Highway to visit relatives on the Gold Coast.

I would argue we have entered a Dreamworld type era of twists and turns in Australian politics. Both sides of politics are setting themselves up as the answer in a political climate best described as 'disillusioned'. 

While I cannot vote Labor, I struggle to find justification to vote Liberal. Even against my own loyalty and trust, Tony Abbott agrees with Climate Alarmism and wants a direct action plan that will plunder the taxpayer "a bit less" then the other mob. This "a bit less then the other mob" paradigm has dominated every policy response.

Meanwhile Kevin Rudd in his newly incarnated form wants to punch forward with a dubious NBN, Health Reforms and a band-aid Asylum Seeker policy that doesn't account for long term requirements.  

In a politically unstable environment, there is no clarion call to achievable freedom and small government. It remains incredible to me that a man derided and replaced by a marxist radical can be reinstalled and yet still find favour with the Australian electorate.

If the narrative is correct and Kevin Rudd's leaking against Julia Gillard is the primary reason for his return to the leadership, there is something seriously wrong with how political narrative is communicated in this country.

The obsession seems to extend to the occasional nattering of the media class about whether or not Malcolm Turnbull would be an appropriate replacement for the Leader of the Opposition, in the obvious unfortunate circumstance that he loses the next election.This media dynamic is crazy!

Malcolm Turnbull, if the media's dreams are realised essentially sits in the same position that Kevin Rudd sits regarding climate change and many other issues. The sort of differentiation that is equal to naught.

One only has to mention the words "market mechanism" and somehow sliding from a disagreeable Carbon Tax to a disagreeable Emissions Trading Scam Scheme is bipartisan.

So here we are again. Lurching from one perceptual crisis to another, all the while assaulted by the visage of litugical charlatanism.

In such a parlous state the mind wanders to the future and who might be around the corner on Australia's political landscape.  

Whilst there are a mixture of views on Joe Hilderbrand and his brand of "journalism", his recent ABC program the "Shitsville Express" is a remarkably informative take on the supposed leaders of tommorow.

I do have allot of respect for what Mr Hilderbrand is trying to achieve with this program. Clearly the premise points to the future of the country through Gen Y and Millenial eyes. I liked this element.

However what our "future leaders" fail to realise is the nuance and guile required to achieve real reform. The sort of March of the Patriots reform that has been lacking in the polity since the end of the Hawke-Keating, Howard-Costello era. 

We have entered a Dreamworld scenario, where revolving door leadership and zany 24 hour news cycle explosions have replaced the considered creation and management of political narrative, that is comprehensible to those of us outside the beltway.

I remember being asked to jump on the old Dreamworld roller coaster by someone who had pumped themselves up on hot dogs, lemonade and fairy floss. After successfully declining, I watched their demeanour change after the ride ended.

Unfortunately Australian Politics and the Shitsville Express appear to be mirroring each other in that they reflect a process whereby politics itself is turning into a metaphorical disembarkation and search for a brown paper bag.

Timothy W Humphries is Assistant Managing Editor of Menzies House

“Our” ABC redefines sexism for Josh Thomas

Terpstra

On Wednesday, the sexist Laborfirst standup comic Josh Thomas made the Herald Sun’s frontpage.  Headline: “Nitwit tweets.” 

You see, for some reason the ABC2 joker and progressive Q&A guest thought it was funny to attack Tony Abbott’s mother, Fay.

Just hilarious, right? 

As the Herald Sun (Melbourne) editorialised:

THE ABC might think it amusing to put comedian Josh Thomas on the panel of Q&A, but his crude tweet about Tony Abbott’s mother should see him sacked. 

Thomas’s tweet that rather than stopping the boats, he would prefer it if Mr Abbott stopped his mother from “comin’ round my place at night for sex” is highly offensive and painfully personal.

His comments were sent to his 220,000 followers on Twitter when they should be consigned to the ABC toilets.

It is not the first time Thomas has ridiculed Opposition figures, but making Mr Abbott’s mother a target is a step too far.

Clearly, Thomas does not consider the rules of common decency apply to him. He’s wrong…

You might also remember Thomas from Channel 7’s C-list flop, Celebrity Splash. Nevertheless, the ABC celebrity is apparently beyond realworld accountability.  So, while Alan Jones is condemned for his remarks about Julia Gillard’s father in a private setting, Thomas’ public attack on Abbott’s mother is wished away. 

Recall too how the ABC melted down after a sexist antiGillard menu was allegedly distributed at a conservative dinner. I certainly do. The taxpayerfunded media’s outrage was palpable.  Yet, “our” ABC is now cool with Thomas’ sexism. 

In today’s toxic media groupthink culture, rules are selectively applied (in this case) to punish “sinful” conservatives and reward “angelic” leftwingers. Coalition bad. Labor good. 

As for Abbott’s mother? Well, she’s just a piece of comedy meat. Sexism, like marriage, is being redefined. 

Ben-Peter Terpstra contributes to many publications including MH and Quadrant. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Cat at a Dog Show

Certain gay rights advocates are calling for what they call ‘marriage equality’, or same-sex marriage, writes Justin de Vere 

National governments in New Zealand and France, as well as certain other countries and states, have recently passed laws legalising this. In doing so, the governments of these places now consider a marriage of a man and a woman to be the equivalent of a similar ceremony ‘marrying’ two men or two women.

The desire for marriage equality, while superficially a call for justice and an idea whose time has come, is actually a hurtful, destructive, selfish desire which speciously defies logic, abuses ordinary people’s sense of justice, and will cause damage to an ancient social custom that predates government and civilisation and has nothing to do with homosexuality. The politicians who would effect this change would do so not in the best interests of the country they serve, but in the short-term interests of the party they serve.

Read More: http://justindevere.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/a-cat-at-a-dog-show/

The sisterhood of multiculturalism and bias


Toby

Toby’s humour temporarily soured when he learned that the ABC has no conservative presenters in their ranks. Given that the Absolutely Bias Corporation is merely a propaganda instrument of the socialist left, but also subsidised by all those on the right, Toby applied to replace the presenter of Q&A Tony Jones.

Toby was accused of being a mentally deranged madman who should be locked up. The letter in reply contained two words: “Piss-off!”

Knowing there must be a vacancy with Britain’s BBC given the departure of Jimmy Savile, Toby went to England to seek advice and perhaps a recommendation from fellow Aussie Rolf Harris. Rolf supported Toby’s self-written CV but all was to no avail.

The BBC refusal in reply had a familiar tone: “Piss-off Aussie misogynist!”

Similarities between the BBC and Auntie appear obvious. “They’re joined at the bloody hip,” as Toby writes. GC.Ed.@L.

News has just escaped from Great Britain that induces bladder malfunction and an irresistible impulse to drop the jaw. A 25-year study found that the BBC downplayed every negative story on multiculturalism and, conversely, up played every touchy-feely warmy-fuzzy dry-my-tears ‘success’ of multiculturalism.

 “Downplayed” hardly does justice in some cases. They didn’t report it at all.

As if we didn’t know.

The BBC took a wide view of ‘multiculturalism’. To the BBC, multiculturalism embraces immigration and religion; it is not just Serbian folk dances, Khana Pakana with chips, and colourful salwar kameez and lehenga choli.

No indeedy, the BBC thought it best to give anybody space who wanted to question Christianity, condemn the Pope or sneer at the Archbishop of Canterbury, cast doubt on the accuracy of the Epistles of Paul, while happily playing along with the concept of Islam as the Religion of Peace. Christian nut-cases were routinely bagged while—to quote the report—the ‘left wing Corporation’ downplayed ‘violence by Islamists’

Mind you, said the report, the BBC bias was manifest but the bias was often unintentional or provoked by ‘basic decency’ and a desire to protect the underdog.

Corruption, no doubt, biases no doubt, but corruption for a noble cause.

So that’s all right then. Basically decent chaps distorting and suppressing news for a noble cause.

As to immigration, the report says that the corporation suffers from left wing ‘groupthink’ that prevents its journalists from challenging institutional bias and results in pro-immigration ‘propaganda’.

Ah, decent chaps caught up in unrecognised (by them) thinking alike.

Who wooda thunk?

Others might have put it; “fools never differ.”

“In its coverage of the topic of immigration, the BBC has given overwhelmingly greater weight to pro-migration voices, even though they represent a minority—even elitist—viewpoint.” And, “in its coverage of the economic arguments for and against immigration, it has devoted somewhat more space to pro-migration voices.

‘In terms of the social costs, the BBC has almost totally ignored certain areas. ‘It would be no exaggeration to say that a foreigner who subscribed only to the BBC might visit this country and be blissfully unaware of many of the social problems associated with immigration.’

Never mind the foreigner, the Brits themselves who watch the BBC have been subjected to nothing less than brainwashing for 25 years.

The report tipped the can over BBC article on ‘Migrant Myths’ published in 2002.

The BBC article had said the idea of the ‘scrounging, bogus asylum seeker’ was a ‘misconception’, while opponents of mass immigration were guilty of ‘racism, political opportunism, misinformation, media mischief-making and sheer cowardice’ as well as genuine concern.

The report added: ‘The BBC feels uncomfortable tackling Islamic extremism or aggression by minorities; it feels more at ease to see Muslims as victims of racism or Islamophobia.’

Yes, and clearly much more at ease slandering anyone outside the groupthink cocoon as a racist cowardly stupid mischief-maker.

It’s not only immigration. The European Union is regarded as the pinnacle of Multiculturalism. This was praised and exalted in spite of the fact—as the poet puts it:

The whole world is festering with unhappy souls.

The French hate the Germans. The Germans hate the Poles.

Italians hate Yugoslavs. South Africans hate the Dutch

And we don’t like anybody very much!

Thank God the Australian ABC is not like that.

Not one bit.

Absolutely!

The ABC gets itself completely facted

By Perkin-Warbeck

In this other world there is a publicly funded TV and radio broadcasting organisation – let’s for argument’s sake call it the ABC – which gets more than $1 billion a year from the taxpayers and which has a public commitment to the highest ethical standards of journalism – a commitment to truth, balance, impartiality and all of that.

This ABC has long prided itself on being above politics; in fact it has made a point of publishing and promoting its journalism code of ethics and stresses that all journalist employees must pay heed to it. Presumably, the journalists employed by this ABC are also members of the reporters’ trade union, the Media Alliance, which also has its own lofty code of ethics.

Now it is only four months or so to an election in this parallel universe and a conservative government headed by a Prime Minister – who for want of a better name is called Tony Abbott – is desperately hanging on in the face of overwhelming opinion polls which shows it is headed for electoral oblivion. An aggressive, hard-hitting Opposition headed by – again for want of a better name – Julia Gillard is so far ahead in the polls that the likely outcome almost defies gravity.

Now this ABC decides to appoint what it is pleased to call a “fact checker” and they hire, again for want of a better name a journalist called Russell Skelton. It is obvious that this position is necessary because ABC journalists cannot be relied upon by their own management to adhere to the ABC lofty code of ethics. 

The CEO of this ABC appears before a Senate committee and is grilled by Opposition senators about the independence of the “fact checker” and they cite numerous examples of the “fact checker” tweeting comments which blatantly support Abbott’s tottering government and denigrating Opposition Leader Gillard and her Shadow Ministers.

While the CEO flounders about trying to justify this appointment, the Communications Minister – again for want of a better name we will call Malcolm Turnbull – keeps up a constant flow of openly political comments defending the “fact checker” and the ABC. 

The Minister’s enthusiasm for this goes far beyond just defending the impartiality and integrity of the ABC when he agrees with tweets produced by Opposition Senators from the “fact checker” openly abusing the Opposition and making wildly untrue claims. The best the CEO can do is lamely complain that these tweets were broadcast prior to the appointment of the “fact checker”.

Well, this parallel universe doesn’t, of course, exist.

What does exist is that all of what is imagined about the parallel universe has happened in the real world but in mirror image.

Our ABC of the real world does have a marvellous code of ethics – it runs to 22 pages and has 13 separate sections. Words such as “integrity”, “independence” and “impartiality” abound.

An example: “ … the ABC is guided by these hallmarks of impartiality: a balance that follows the weight of evidence; fair treatment; open-mindedness; and opportunities over time for principle relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be expressed.”

It begs the question about the actual need for any “fact checker” at all, much less Mr Skelton, if ABC journalists follow the organisation’s own code. I wonder if the appointment is a tacit admission by ABC management that their journalists don’t, or won’t, adhere to the code.

Some of Mr Skelton’s tweets produced by the Opposition included his retweet of an absurd claim that Senate Liberal Leader Eric Abetz wanted to start a “race war” with Aborigines, while Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce has been described as “super snide”, “a dense opportunistic carpetbagger” and as “Bananaby”. Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey was described as being “not the sharpest pencil in the box” while Abbott himself was frequently referred to as “The Monk”- a snide reference to his Catholic background.

If anybody ever called Ms Gillard “The Nun”, there would be another deluge of confected outrage from her defenders alleging misogyny and worse.

If this controversy wasn’t enough for the ABC, they must face the collective cross-party outrage of the under fives when the current batch of Bananas in Pyjamas episodes end and B1 and B2 are put to bed at least until next year.

Conspiracy theorists could be forgiven for thinking that as B1 and B2 go beddie byes just as a Coalition Government takes office, distressed parents may well blame brand new Communications Minister Turnbull.  There is an insidious trend emerging here.

Some of us are old enough to remember that the ABC closed down the radio serial Blue Hills in 1976 at about the time the Fraser Government was hitting its stride and we all remember who copped the blame for this bit of ABC high-handedness.

Run that by your fact checker!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More on ABC bias

ABC TYPES DEFEND ABC – LET’S HEAR FROM ACKLAND (EX-AUNTY) AND GREEN (CURRENTLY AUNTY)

NANCY’S PICK-OF-THE-WEEK

Richard Ackland’s column in today’s Sydney Morning Herald in a beauty.  M ‘learned friend supports the view that it would be better for a “wombat” to become the next attorney-general of Australia than for Coalition front-bencher George Brandis SC to attain the position.  What a profound thinker your man Ackland is, don’t you think?

Read more:http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/media-watch-dog/

The Worm Factory

ED@L

Jonathan Holmes, the ABC’s supercilious presenter of Media Watch is stepping down. I suggest only rusted-on supporters of ABC bias will miss his pompous leer and greasy persona.

While the ABC has many excellent and well-researched programmes I point to Media Watch and the appointing of presenters that flag their leftist ideology from the Worm Factory rooftop. Media Watch has cycled a muster of seven presenters, all of them cloned in like ideology beginning with Stuart Littlemore, Richard Ackland, Paul Barry, David Marr, Liz Jackson, Monica Attard and, Jonathan Holmes.

Trying to broach the subject of bias with anyone inside the ABC’s Worm Factory incubator is futile. Sidetracking the tunnel-visioned political correctness would be like  converting the Pope to Islam. No amount of complaining or lobbying bears fruit or consideration from the executive, including managing director Mark Scott as all seem programmed to ignore the corporation’s own Editorial Policies to “… support the diversity of perspectives.”

Scott is quick to defend all epithets of bias by wheeling out his host of Counterpoint, former Liberal minister Amanda Vanstone as would a pathologist present his favourite specimen, a shrivelled appendix in a bottle of formaldehyde, That an enigma like Vanstone is permitted to tread the corridors of Labor greats must have countless production managers gagging on their mung bean wraps.

BalanceABCstyle

However, this unspoken policy of “diversity of perspectives” is laughingly exampled in most, if not all other departments by appropriately re-educated “Yes Minister” contenders like Barrie Cassidy, Fran Kelly, Kerry O’Brien, Trioli, the fawning Waleed Aly and Phillip Adams the Factory’s resident walking Google. All of them good presenters, mind you, despite their predictably cloying slant.

Not to be omitted from the Factory’s gaggle of social reformers is Factory pet, Jonathan Green, who, with eagerness to prove the value of his socialist brainwashing that he threw a party to celebrate then Prime Minister Howard’s electoral defeat to Maxine McKew, the subsequent political flop. The highlight of Green’s soiree was when his guests programmed as one; armed with sticks, beat to pieces a piñata effigy of John Howard. A Karl Marx medal for the most aggressive boy or girl? Weird behaviour! Even for worms!

There was, however, to be a gap in the Worm Factory’s slate of obedient socialist presenters. Armed with the understanding that exposing the corporation’s hard left brethren would be useless, Andrew Bolt, columnist at News Limited and the Bolt Report on channel 10, tried the humour tack believing one catches more flies with honey than vinegar.

Bolt’s application for Media Watch presenter was sent to managing director Scott, the same bloke who claims not to know the political leanings among his clew of worms. Andrew would know that leftists view rightist humour as offensive and his chances of becoming the sole right-winger among the castings of several thousand worms was nil. The ABC’s bastion of predictable mono-thought would not be penetrated and contaminated by the outspoken renegade Bolt. No sir! The politically incorrect Bolt dared to write what the majority of Australians were thinking and was thus hauled to court where things went awry, much to the hysteric glee from leftist commentators. That entire charade of political correctness gone insane was metaphorically mindful of burning witches at the stake or Romans sacrificing criminals for sport at the Colosseum. It was a day of rejoicing at the Worm Factory.

They say, “every dog has his day” or “the Worm has failed to turn” and that day may come if the Coalition sweeps to power in September. If the polls are true, there could be lots of nervous whispering around the espresso machines at the Factory, and SBS for that matter. With the expected massive financial deficit must come a good deal of restraint. After all, it is by the good graces of the Australian taxpayer that the Worm Factory’s “fair balance” is financed at $1 billion and many believe they are not getting value. Worm poop is pedestrian.

John Howard tried to instigate “balance” but soon discovered that the serpent had fattened from the trough of plenty and thus become a fearsome dragon spitting fire and wrath with great effect upon rightists who trespassed near its cave. What plans have the Coalition for the Labor influenced ABC considering the recent move to muzzle the media—the right-wing media, News Limited in particular?

Tony Abbott, despite his often wishy-washy responses to important questions, and despite his wish to be seen as an unflappable politician is a person that holds his cards close to his chest. There’s no political mileage to be gained by shaking the Worm Factory until after the elections. Until then we shall have to wait. Until then Abbott will not know the depth of mess he will inherit.

I try to imagine what Abbott might feel should he win government on that September night. A political win, especially to the position of Prime Minister, must be a jubilation unequalled by any other. How quickly though will that euphoria be dashed by sipping from the brim of a poisoned chalice?

Ponder the exhilaration of one man’s highest aspiration and deepest disappointment—all on a Saturday night.

Andrew Bolt did not get the job, a recycled Paul Barry did. Oh well, time to feed the worms again.

White Virginia Trioli doesn’t get it

Terpstra

Peter-Ben Terpstra exposes the Absolutely Bias Corporation's (ABC) presenter Virginia Trioli as little more than a prejudiced croupier who deals the race card for effect. Personal bias is fine, but ill serving when delivering news shaped to fit. GC.Ed.@L.

In response to a bloody terrorist attack, “our” ABC pulled out the race card. Or as one divisive headline shouted, “Indigenous Australian runner safe in Boston.”

Seriously. 

I was also offended last Tuesday when “our” taxpayerfunded ABC News Breakfast presenter, Virginia Trioli, casually injected her politics into an important news story. Or as she editorialised, in response to two major explosions in Boston, “It seems to many we are overly focusing on what happens to rich white people in the West, versus what happens on a daily basis in those countries” (meaning Iraq and Afghanistan). 

So, where did Trioli’s “many” assertion come from?  No source was provided. And, what is meant by “we”? I’m confused. 

Moreover, “our” ABC didn’t emphasis the following:

One, Boston is known as an international/multiracial city. It has a sizeable black population, for example. 

Two, the Boston Marathon was held in Boston, not Kirkuk, hence the interest. After all, it’s an international event with international consequences. 

Three, in addition, to the reported 150odd registered Australian entrants in the Boston Marathon (not Kirkuk), supportive Australians were also watching the event in Boston.

Four, we have closer cultural ties to the United States. For instance, Boston is Melbourne’s sister city. 

Five, there are many workingclass families in Boston, and they shouldn’t be ignored. This isn’t a rich West vs. developing world drama. 

Six, much coverage has already been given to terrorist attacks in, say, Iraq, for years now, so we already have a general sense of what’s happening over there. 

Seven, not that race or economic status should matter, but one of the dead victims was a female Chinese graduate student. 

Evidently, then, I’ve reached the conclusion that Virginia Trioli was more emotionally invested in playing politics when she should have been providing context. 

At best, the ABC News Breakfast presenter’s research skills would make a 10yearold blush because over the past 25 years, Africans have dominated the allegedly white city’s famous marathon. Indeed, since 1989, four Ethiopians, nineteen Kenyans, one Italian and one South Korean have won the Men’s Open.

Oh, and another thing: when the white Western ABC employee Jill Meagher was murdered, I don’t recall “our” ABC fussing over her ethnicity. 

But then again, striking a politicallycorrect pose has little to do with reason these days. Or as one divisive headline shouted, “Indigenous Australian runner safe in Boston.”

Seriously. 

Ben-Peter Terpstra contributes to many publications including MH and Quadrant. His blog:  Weekend Libertarian. 

 

 

 

 

 

ABC not biased – Turnbull

Tony Abbott can ill afford Turnbull's undermining bleats in this election year. Something needs to be done. GC.Ed.

Abbott wants ABC to flush out bias but Turnbull does not see its stacked deck

In an exclusive interview with The Australian Financial Review shortly before Christmas, Abbott said that ''there is still this left-of-centre ethos in the ABC'' and expressed hope that the managing director of the ABC, Mark Scott, ''continues to address it''. Abbott commented that there is much about the public broadcaster that he likes and admires.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbott-wants-abc-to-flush-out-bias-but-turnbull-does-not-see-its-stacked-deck-20130107-2ccq2.html#ixzz2HK3h1UWy

Imposed Censorship!

Allan Essery contends that commenting on opinion pieces in leftist media is waste of time. Dissenting comments don't make the grade. More fool them as they preach only to their ilk – no new customers. Maybe that's why such publications suffer plummeting sales.

If you contribute comments to opinion pieces and editorials in the Sydney Morning Herald or The Age, it doesn’t take long to work out that their ‘Moderators’ work outside their own rules to assign comments that they deem inappropriate to the rubbish bin.  God forbid you should criticize one of their leftist journalists, regardless of what tripe they dish up in the belief that they are being fair, honest and balanced.

They also disregard their own rules when it suits them to publish comment that is so obviously a breach of those rules, but so obviously supportive of their leftist agenda.  This in my opinion constitutes a form or unreasonable and inconsistent censorship and removes your freedom of speech.

There is a little club of regulars, and very much left-leaning contributors, who can be found in the comments sections every day, all day.  They take over the comments sections and prattle on to each other with, in the main, pure drivel that has little to do with the subject at hand.  They are rude, offensive and intolerant of anyone from outside their little clique who dares to have something to say.  These people, who are all pro-Labor, are given the freedom to say what they like, but try and serve it back to them and you will be rejected.

A couple of months ago, Ross Gittins, the Sydney Morning Heralds Economics Editor wrote of self-funded retirees, “These Well-Off Retirees’ Claims Are A Bit Rich.”

In typical leftist fashion he inferred, in an incredible rant, that self-funded retirees were hypocrites that were bludging off the taxpayers because they were given concessions to encourage them to put away for their future retirement and took advantage of other concessions that were available to all other retirees.

He completely disregarded the fact that these people were ensuring that they wouldn’t be a burden on the taxpayer in retirement.  Even though this man admits to having a more than generous superannuation nest egg, he claims, for some obscure reason, that he found it repulsive to call himself a self-funded retiree.(?)

He also ignored the fact that old age welfare pensioners were such because, for one reason or another, they had not put enough away for their retirement and therefore were totally reliant on the taxpayers for the remainder of their lives.   For Gittens to ignore these facts solely to lend credibility to his own agenda is a bit rich in itself.

It was fine for Gittins to call self-funded retirees hypocrites and infer they were bludgers, but when I commented that he himself was being hypocritical by taking advantage of the same concessions that other self-funded retirees were taking and therefore his scribblings had little credibility, out came the big red texta and my comment was rejected.

Try commenting on or objecting to the objectionable opinion pieces of Mike Carlton who, like Gittins, is prone to using a whole opinion piece to insult those in his sights, and your comment will never appear in print.  Carlton’s piece in today’s Sydney Morning Herald is a classic example of a pointless, offensive and nasty rant that would brook no opposing view.

The rejection of contributions that are slanderous, untrue and/or contain foul language is reasonable, but the rejection of a comment because the Moderators’, or their bosses, don’t agree with your opinion is nothing less than unwarranted censorship.

We worry about the government wanting to impose restrictions on our freedom of speech, but while the leftist print media bleat about proposed government curtailment of their freedom of the press, it is they, in fact, that actively practice censorship to prevent you from expressing opinions that don’t suit their agenda.

Alan is an ex-RAAF officer retired from active duty. He
was a flight instructor and charter pilot. He also writes on matters political and
is a staunch battler for ex-service superannuants. He is also rumoured to be a
savvy fossicker for the yellow stuff.