I shouldn’t be writing this. I’m short of time. I have a heap of other articles to put up from other contributors and our last article was on the same subject.

Last Monday’s Q and A was so eye poppingly subversive, however, that I think it really needs a closer look.

The section in question was when a “guest” asked a question, “when is aggression and violence a better option than strong arguments, assertiveness and modelling the behaviour you expect of others?”

The first response came from Ashton Applewhite who is a female American anti-ageism campaigner. Her immediate answer was that we should resort to violence “when none of that other stuff works.”

She didn’t elaborate on that answer and by the smug look on her face, she seemed to assume that everyone knew what she was talking about. Judging by the reverential silence, it seems that everyone in the studio did.

I wish someone would explain it to deplorables like me. If there is a free pass for full scale societal violence, I personally, would like a rather more detailed explanation of the reason. A self-satisfied smile or a nod and a wink just isn’t enough.

The second woman to wade in was an Egyptian-American journalist with dyed red hair called Mona Eltahawy. Mona’s primary goal is to “Make the patriarchy fear feminists.” Once again, this mythical “Patriarchy” was not explained or defined.

Who are they? What are they? Where are they? I’d love to smash them too if they actually exist.

They’ve been handing out all this male privilege, and I didn’t get a damned thing.

Mona informed us that whilst men are killing and raping women, that it should be justified (presumably for mobs of righteous feminists) to go out and kill rapists.

She doesn’t get bogged down in arguments about the presumption of innocence, jury trials or any of those other pesky “Patriarchal” privileges.

I got the impression that the word of a member of the “sisterhood” would have been good enough for Mona. After all, she was opposed to the police, prison sentences and the state monopoly of violence (ie an actual bona fide judicial system).

Mona was confident that these raging, unaccountable lynch mobs would lead to “a world where I’m not raped and murdered.” Good luck with that one Mona.

Towards the end of her rant, she did give a pretty large hint as to who “The Patriarchy” isn’t.

She spoke of “a Hierarchy of safety,” which included “obviously people of colour.” Well obviously people of colour Mona. “The Patriarchy” doesn’t include “people of colour.”

Probably, that’s why she left Egypt – that bastion of women’s rights – to lecture Australian and American men on how to behave towards women.

Jess Hill was then brought into the discussion. Jess was an author of a book about domestic abuse (towards women I guess). She justified violence by pointing out that the original suffragettes were violent – and would have been more so had not WW1 broken out.

Then Ashton Applewhite hopped back in to justify violence by equivocating it to a “slave rebellion.”

How this overprivileged woman feels that the situation of Western women today is in any way comparable to that of a slave is entirely beyond me.

The last one to comment on the idea of embracing violence was Nayuka Gorrie. A writer who identifies as Aboriginal and Queer. I am not sure of her ancestry.

She looks quite pale but maybe that was the studio lights. However, she identifies as Aboriginal rather than a “coloniser” and considers Australia a colony and her people to be “living in a state of duress.”

She said that Aboriginal people were getting violence from many systems and also interpersonally – whatever that means.

She also said that there isn’t a level playing field (blacks are victims) and wondered what the tipping point would be before people start burning stuff.

“I look forward to it” she said enthusiastically. She also said that the colonisers (white men) don’t seem to have any morality. Gorrie relayed a quote that no one ever got what they wanted by appealing to the moral conscience of their oppressor.

That is untrue of course. Ghandi did just that. He was the only person in history mind you, because he was appealing to White Englishmen.

The women on the panel articulated the belief that we should resort to violence when strong arguments, assertiveness and good behaviour don’t work.

The Cambridge dictionary defines the word incite as follows:

to encourage someone to do or feel something unpleasant or violent: it gives the following example:

She incited racial hatred by distributing anti-Semitic leaflets.

By my understanding, this panel were inciting radical political action which included extreme violence, murder and arson until such time that they get what they want.

Unfortunately, what they want is either unspecified, ill-defined or impossible and seems to change all the time.

A tiny minority of men are killing and raping women just as a tiny minority of women kill men. The women on the panel claimed that extra Judicial killing is justified until we do the impossible and stop all rape and murder of women for an unspecified time.

Another justification for this violence is a mythical “Patriarchy” which doesn’t even exist.

They want to take away the police, empty the prisons, and end the state monopoly on violence, handing it to lynch mobs instead.

The questioner thought this was “pretty good.”

They justified violence because suffragettes used violence historically, implying that it was therefore OK for feminists today to do so.

They also justified violence due to its supposed equivalence to a slave rebellion.

They justified arson because Aboriginal people were getting violence from “systems” and supposedly missing out.

They accused all Whites of being colonisers and denied that we have any morality whatsoever which is horrifically racist.

Fran Kelly then smiled and described the panel as a group of “strong women.”

The ABC costs the taxpayers of Australia (the majority of whom are white males) $1billion every year.

For this money, they provide a service which has always been available for free from multiple privately run networks.

The justification for this huge cash grab is that the ABC is needed to promote “Australian values.” Yet the values promoted on this show were radical, political revolutionary values which incited people to extreme radical revolutionary behavior.

The rhetoric used had no factual basis and was rabble rousing for the most antisocial behaviour imaginable.

Whilst this is the most extreme example I have seen; it is in line with a radical Leftist agenda which has been prevalent at the ABC for over a decade.

The question is, how do we put a stop to it. The answer is quite simple. Ita Buttrose must go.

She is the head of a billion dollar a year media company. This is a very responsible position and she is extremely well paid for what she does.

She bears ultimate responsibility for the messages which are put out by the ABC.

It is not like this is a sudden or unexpected occurrence. This behaviour has part of a pattern of radical political messages being broadcast, in particular by Q and A.

Ita has allowed this to continue and build under her oversight. The panel members were known for radical political views which are completely at odds with Australian values of fairness, non-violence and moderation.

The audience members appeared to be selected for their sympathy to this radical agenda. The questions were known in advance and the response of the panellists was hardly surprising given their well-known views.

The moderator, Fran Kelly, did nothing to pull these women back and seemed if anything, to be encouraging them.

No media manager in his right mind would have allowed this show to be aired on a public network. Clearly, Ita Buttrose is not up to the job of running our National Broadcaster. She needs to be replaced immediately.

Her contract should have a clause allowing for termination in the event of gross negligence. If not, then her replacement’s contract must have.

Ita’s removal will send a powerful message to whomever is in charge of the ABC in future. They must know that this unacceptable.

The ABC claims that Q and A aims “to create a discussion that is constructive, that reflects a diverse range of views and that provides a safe environment where people can respectfully discuss their differences.”

Instead, it is providing a radical and toxic, far Left echo chamber which is inciting violence and advocating for the breakdown of society.

Ita Buttrose has allowed this to happen and must be sacked. She is not fit for such a responsible position. Contact your MP. Write to Communications Minister Paul Fletcher at Suite 1, Level 2, 280 Pacific Highway, Lindfield, NSW, 2070 or phone him on (02) 9465 3950. Let the Prime Minister know too.

Start a petition, protest outside the ABC offices, make a noise. If you are waiting for someone else to do it, it won’t get done.

It is about time that we took back OUR ABC and demanded programming which reflects the traditional Australian Nation which created and sustains it.

1541
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
420 Comment threads
1121 Thread replies
111 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
110 Comment authors
ejadaRossleighBDisraeliLady PirateTigerbalm Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
flying
Donor
flying

New Post

WAPatriot
Donor
WAPatriot

So how many of you signed up to having an online health record thinking it was safe and secure???? This isnt happening in Australia yet (well they havent admitted it yet) but it will… https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/11/report-google-secretly-accessed-millions-of-personal-health-records-in-21-states/

BruceRugby
Donor
BruceRugby

Should Adam Bandt and the Greens Go?. Read what this old lady ran up against. Yesterday after shopping in our local supermarket, I was in the queue at the Check Out, and heard when the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment. The woman apologised to the young girl & then sighed, “We didn’t have this ‘green thing’ back in my earlier days.” The young clerk responded, “That’s our problem today. You folk didn’t do enough to save our environment for future… Read more »

Disraeli
Donor
Disraeli

British backer of Syrian ‘White Helmets’ found dead in Istanbul
By Ali Kucukgocmen
November 12, 2019 — 2.08am

Istanbul: The British founder of an organisation that trained the “White Helmets” emergency response group has been found dead in Istanbul, five years after the group was set up to perform rescue work in rebel areas during the Syrian civil war.

The body of James Le Mesurier, founder of the Mayday Rescue group, was found early on Monday near his home in central Istanbul’s Beyoglu district, a neighbour said.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-east/british-founder-of-syrian-white-helmets-found-dead-in-istanbul-20191112-p539mq.html

Poddy
Donor
Poddy

Harry, Yes of course Iva Buttnose should go… anyone with a hole in their arse agree

geordish
Member
geordish

Test ..

Bkengineering
Donor
Bkengineering
Disraeli
Donor
Disraeli


‘Scientists’ Advocate Population Control to Save Planet
Climate alarmists falsely claim the only “real solution” is to have fewer people.

Like something out of a dystopian science-fiction story, more than 11,000 “scientists” from 153 nations recently signed a petition declaring that climate change would bring “untold human suffering” that is “unavoidable” unless drastic action is immediately taken. And what is the drastic action these “scientists” advocate? A socialist tyranny that would end capitalism by stopping all economic growth and … human population control. Why is it that socialists’ solutions invariably call for less stuff, fewer people, and restricted freedom?

https://patriotpost.us/articles/66693-scientists-advocate-population-control-to-save-planet-2019-11-11

Micky C
Donor
Micky C

Well that’s a good post to make you think.

Once C_A always C_A?
Former C_A elected to Congress?
Former C_A running for Congress?
Former C_A running for Senate?
Former C_A elected to Senate?
Former C_A elected to Presidency?
Define ‘black op’ [clandestine]
Once C_A always C_A?
@Snowden pre_NSA?
@Snowden base of ops [geo location]?
Whistleblower(s) vs. POTUS?
Former C_A?
Define ‘black op’ [clandestine]
What happens if rogue elements of US AB[C] intel agency target [to insert] US political system [President, VP, House, Senate, NSC, US Amb., etc.] in ‘black op’ designated to control friend vs. foe targeting [self-preservation]?
NSA v C_A
Q

Bkengineering
Donor
Bkengineering

An emergency warning is in place for a fast moving bush fire burning in the Emmaville and Stannum areas.
Current Situation
The fire has breached containment lines.
The fire is spreading quickly.
If you are in the path of the fire, you at risk.
Advice
If you are in the area of Emmaville or Stannum, seek shelter to protect yourself of the heat of the fire.
If you are in the area of Deepwater, monitor conditions. Be aware of smoke and embers.

Bkengineering
Donor
Bkengineering

This message applies to the areas of Wingham, Taree, Nabiac and surrounding areas.
There is a number of bush fires burning in the area between Gloucester, Nabiac, Taree and Laurieton.
Under forecast weather conditions on Tuesday, these fires will spread quickly towards the coast.
Fires may impact on areas including Wingham and the outskirts of Taree.
EMERGENCY WARNING – NABIAC AREA
The Hillville Road is spreading quickly towards Nabiac.
If you are in the area of Nabiac, seek shelter as the fire approaches. Protect yourself from the heat of the fire.

Bkengineering
Donor
Bkengineering

An emergency warning is in place for a bush fire burning in the Nowendoc area.
Current Situation
A fire is burning in the area of Thunderbolts Way and Nowendoc Road at Nowendoc.
The fire is spreading quickly.
If you are in the path of the fire, you are at risk.
Advice
If you are in the Nowendoc and Mount George area, you at risk.
It is too late to leave.
Seek shelter as the fire approaches. Protect yourself from the heat of the fire.

Ducktracy
Donor
Ducktracy

Jim Molan wins back his senate spot with 277 first preference votes. While Malcolm Turnbull’s mate Peter Hendy (who helped take down Tony Abbott) only received 5 votes.
Well done, Jim. Sanity prevails.

https://twitter.com/KeiraSavage00/status/1193388750048350209

Regarding Peter Hendy ..5 votes ..Karma is a beautiful thing ..one just has to be patient in life & up bobs the little Karma Man 👍🙏

Radar
Donor
Radar

No doubt about these maggot judges.Musso man violently abuses his wife,but all the tool magistrate is worried about is the kids getting fed pork products by foster carers….https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/11/11/judge-attacks-foster-parents-muslim-children-westernised-ate-bacon/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20191111&utm_content=Final

Radar
Donor
Radar

The shite in the streets is truly disgusting.

paisley
Donor
paisley

GOOD NEWS—–
Farage signs non-aggression pact with Tories in boost for Boris— The Age

Radar
Donor
Radar

America sooner or later……hardnoxandfriends.com/2019/11/11/michael-savage-trump-2020-or-not-the-globalists-and-immigration-will-destroy-america-sooner-rather-than-later/

Rexxy
Donor
Rexxy

What a deluded piece of excrement…

“If we came up with a plan to get out of coal in the next 10 years … then yes we would decrease … the risk of fires like this happening,” Mr Bandt said.

flying
Donor
flying

One of the best! All those smart young Uni voters.

Tricky Woo
Donor
Tricky Woo

It’s hard to come to terms with what is happening in Hong Kong. This latest news, that an elderly man has been doused in petrol and set alight by a young, masked, protester, is particularly difficult to fit in with the Chinese way. Elders in China are revered. Unlike our attitude to those who live to a great age (shove them in a cupboard, patronise them, ignore them, hope they die soon so you can get the inheritance and stop being a nuisance), the Chinese genuinely value the wisdom that comes with experience. The elderly are valued in business, treated… Read more »

1 7 8 9