You mean it's notLeo.J wrote:Bolt a couple of years back, like many on the right side of politics, was claiming that global warming was a figment of the lefts imagination.
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Will this do for the mean time?I Love Peter Kiel wrote:...I look forward to the likes of David Marr complaining about the 'silencing of dissent'. Somehow I think I'll be waiting a while.
You don't want to debate it AND you didn't debate it, so what's the beef? Crikey, it's not as if you were dragged into the thread and made to contribute to this s***, as you put it.BigMart wrote:Is this about footy........if i want to debate this s*** i'll watch quanda
Bolt didn't help himself with a slew of factual errors and his customary derisive, rabble-rousing tone. I quote:Leo.J wrote:Waltzing St Kilda wrote:I Love Peter Kiel wrote:Cheers, my friend.desperate saint wrote:Thank you"i love peter Kiel" bringing the facts of the case to light debate from both sides of politics is a sign of a healthy democracy! I trust we are never ruled by the "politically correct''
Now, await the onslaught from the self-righteous Left!
It's interesting, Leo, how a few rent-a-quote types poked their bonces up in the media as soon as the judgement came down, banging on about the free speech being dead, democracy in decay, activist judges, blah, blah, blah. Some mob with Menzies in the title even started rattling tins to collect money for Bolt, FFS.Leo.J wrote:Will this do for the mean time?I Love Peter Kiel wrote:...I look forward to the likes of David Marr complaining about the 'silencing of dissent'. Somehow I think I'll be waiting a while.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 1kxba.html
Btw the silencing of dissent and this issue a bit different...
One case is a government bullying people to be quite.
And the other is a court ruling, forcing a jounalist to be accountable...
Are you kidding? David Marr? He complains about Bolt's colourful language but he is far more snide and b*tchy himself. Are you telling me he doesn't bear a grudge against Bolt...the only person who dared to stand up to this intellectual bully on the ABC's Insiders?Leo.J wrote:Will this do for the mean time?I Love Peter Kiel wrote:...I look forward to the likes of David Marr complaining about the 'silencing of dissent'. Somehow I think I'll be waiting a while.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 1kxba.html
Btw the silencing of dissent and this issue a bit different...
One case is a government bullying people to be quite.
And the other is a court ruling, forcing a jounalist to be accountable...
You mean like Insurance Companies, Banks, Governments???VERDUN wrote:Bolt is biased playing on peoples prejudices - you watch he will try and paint himself as a martyr now - he tries to make the majority feel they are in the minority
i detest how he plays on peoples fears and prejudice
Whats wrong is that is against the laws of the land.Ghost Like wrote: What's wrong with questioning them, perhaps even playing devil's advocate?
Wrong!!!!!!!The Craw wrote:joffaboy wrote:A why do you think they did not take this course of action.... would be thrown out in a heartbeat.Ghost Like wrote:
As Marr said, Bolt is damn luck he isn't facing 9 seperate defamation suits against him.
bet he will come out as the poor martyr - he is not the devils advocate he is where the power is that is the point - when people disagree with what he says it plays in to his little game...he is a dog whistler of the worst kind playing to peoples fears to make them feel ok.Ghost Like wrote:You mean like Insurance Companies, Banks, Governments???VERDUN wrote:Bolt is biased playing on peoples prejudices - you watch he will try and paint himself as a martyr now - he tries to make the majority feel they are in the minority
i detest how he plays on peoples fears and prejudice
Personally I don't mind reading his views, possibly not always right, how many of us are? He seemed spot on about Law & Order, Police Command, The Riots in the UK to name 3.
The majority are silent, he does seem to hit an accord with them & does upset a vocal minority who have their own agendas and causes. What's wrong with questioning them, perhaps even playing devil's advocate?
Ummm - no it wouldn't.The Craw wrote:joffaboy wrote:A why do you think they did not take this course of action.... would be thrown out in a heartbeat.Ghost Like wrote:
As Marr said, Bolt is damn luck he isn't facing 9 seperate defamation suits against him.
Yes. It was about identity. If they had sued him it would be about "greedy do-nothing psuedo-Abo's out for a buck".The Craw wrote:You know that as fact do you?GrumpyOne wrote: Wrong!!!!!!!![]()
They did not take that action because it was never about money.... it's about more than that.
The marrow deep flaw in the logic of the climate deniers, Aussie, is the absolute denial of the scientific process itself. None of 'em, not one, has been able to come up with any credible, peer reviewed research to say the consensus view is wrong in fact or basis.Austinnn wrote:Well this is bubbling along nicely! I know it's the wrong thing to do on a footy forum, but I'm a sucker for Climate Change Denial!
To all those who agree with Porky Bolt that Climate Change is a hoax, I hope that your views are based on real unconflicted scientific research, not just on the opinions of those with vested interests in continuing the same destructive way of life. People who make their living from logging or mining for example.
I find it amusing that the media people who oppose the idea of man-made Global Warming are always the same people who champion individualism over humanitarian ideas, great outstanding folks like Bolt, Christopher Monckton, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and James Delingpole. Take a look at some of the other causes they espouse and it's clear that their priority is keeping things the way they've been for the last 100 years. It's also interesting that Rupert Murdoch seems to be paying quite a few of these people's salaries. But they're all different voices, aren't they?![]()
http://theconversation.edu.au/climate-s ... e-war-1692
It's great that not everyone agrees with everyone, and we need to keep the debate open, but the longer we debate, the later we will act. Some causes don't have the time. I remember MMM FM promoting Saving The Planet in 1989. 22 years later and we're STILL mass debating. Let's hope that the Deniers are right, personally I think they're taking this stance because they percieve that a change of lifestyle is too great a sacrifice for a cause they secretly believe it's too late to act on.
BTW Bolt seems to have packed on a few pounds since I last saw a photo of him. Must be all the truffles that Rupert feeds him.
Don't even get me started on Aboriginal affairs.
Anyway back to the footy, opium of the masses.
Might have something to do with stealing their land?Jacks Back wrote:The articles were about part aborigines (very small part for some) claiming awards and benefits when everyone else in OUR community cannot claim these things.
Why are aborigines treated differently to everyone else in the community including ticking the relevant boxes on your tax return, etc?
Aren't we ALL Aussies?
Is that being racist. Saying we are ALL Australian? I am, you are, we are Australian!
This is fair dinkum unbelievable!!!