Wednesday, March 31, 2010


This blog, set up to expose Murdoch’s lies and propaganda empire, has lately been concentrating on just one of Murdoch’s propagandists; Andrew Bolt. Because it is now intended to document Bolt’s racism to the point where racial and religious vilification can be proved, a new blogspot has been set up specifically for the job.

Occasional comments on Bolts day to day column at the ‘Herald Sun’ site will be made at the new blog. Mostly, these will be some of the more pertinent comments that I have made to posts that he has refused to publish as well comments relating to the progress on building a case against Bolt. Naturally, not all the evidence will be presented at this new blog for obvious reasons but as we trawl through Bolt’s archives and make the appropriate discoveries they will be documented at the new blog which will be called, appropriately, Andrew Bolt: Ultra Racist. Readers are welcome to leave comments though, if you are a right-wing racist, don’t bother.

This blog, Murdoch's Propagandists, will revert back to general commentary on, well, Murdoch's other Propagandists.

Monday, March 29, 2010


Murdoch’s three standout racist propagandists, Andrew Bolt of Melbourne’s ‘Herald Sun’ newspaper, and Tim Blair and Piers Akerman of Sydney’s ‘Daily Telegraph’, all of whom run predominately xenophobic and Islamophobic racist blogs, may well be doing so in contravention of Australia’s racial vilification laws by allowing ‘serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of a person or groups on the grounds of race’ to be published and communicated at their blogs.

While in New South Wales the vilification laws apply only to race, in Victoria where Andrew Bolt operates, the vilification laws apply to both race and religion. However, civil or criminal suits may be brought against Blair and Akerman who operate in Sydney, from Victoria for both racial and religious vilification though any action brought against Bolt from NSW can only be brought for racial vilification, not religious.

Andrew Bolt’s blog is clearly the most outrageous of the three overtly racist blogs, and, because he is in Victoria where the vilification laws apply to religious as well as racial vilification, the opportunity to prosecute is much more feasible with a greater likelihood of success. If a favourable judgment against Bolt can be achieved then it is likely to stop Blair and Akerman continuing with their racial vilification without having to resort to legal action against them to stop their vilification.

The way all three of these vile racists work is quite smart. Instead of directly making seriously vilifying comments themselves, they use often blatant innuendo and inference to expound their message in their postings and then allow their followers to comment using increasingly ferocious racially and religiously vilifying attacks against the objects of their hatred that have been suggested in the postings. Bolt, Blair and Akerman are very careful not to make any seriously vilifying statements themselves but nonetheless get their message across by citing from others that clearly do have serious vilification intent.

However, while they are very careful not to incriminate themselves, they may well still be committing an offence by allowing commentators to go far beyond that which Bolt, Blair and Akerman are prepared to go in terms of blatant vilification by allowing such comments to be published, control of which is solely their responsibility since all three blogs are moderated. It is the fact that they are moderated which may make these racists liable for prosecution.

It would be an interesting test of the vilification laws were a suit made against any of these people and, to get the ball rolling, I’ll have their archives trawled for the most blatant posts and comments and then see what a barrister makes of it all. It may come to nought. But, on the other hand…

Thursday, March 18, 2010


Australian ‘Herald-Sun’ Murdoch columnist and propagandist Andrew “my best friend was an Aborigine” Bolt has become increasingly – and disturbingly – obsessive about race in Australia. His outburst yesterday was about Kim Collard, an artist who identifies as Aboriginal. Since Collard’s mother is part Aboriginal, and, therefore, also identifies as Aboriginal, but has a white father, Bolt denies that Collard is Aboriginal because of his pale colour and ancestry. Bolt infers that Collard has had the Aborigine ‘bred out of him’ as the old White Australian rednecks would once say, and that, as a ‘white’ person, is not eligible for any of the various concessions, prizes, awards, etc., that are available to Aboriginal people.

This is not the first time that Bolt has denied people their Aboriginal identity. Back in March 2009, Bolt questioned the Aboriginal identity of a Queensland politician, Leeanne Enoch, who was vying for a seat in the Queensland parliament. Then later in April 2009, Bolt again question the Aboriginal identity of artists and writer Bindi Cole, Annette Sax and Tara June Winch. And then there’s his piece in November last year that criticised the Aboriginal identify of Perth model Emily Cattermole, who is the grand-daughter of WA indigenous politician Ernie Bridge whose Aboriginal identity Bolt also questions. At the end of his article he has the audacity to write this piece of hypocrisy:

“Could we stop obsessing about racial differences almost invisible to the naked eye, and almost washed out by generations of mixed ancestry? It makes us look a little bit, well, racist.”

Well, yes it does, Bolt; but the only one obsessing about it is you and your coterie of obsessed racist bloggies!

But Bolt’s obsession with race doesn’t end just with the non-question of racial identity. He also denies that there were any stolen children and denies that there was ever any policy of ‘breeding the Aborigines out of existence’.

Bolts racist obsession with Aborigines, however, extends way beyond Aborigines. Bolt also obsesses about other races, religions and cultures which are all part of his overall racist paranoia. Asylum seekers that arrive by boat regularly fall into Bolt’s racist sights mainly because they tend to be non-white. While Bolt refers to these people as ‘illegal immigrants’, he says nothing of the hundreds of real illegal immigrants that arrive here every day on tourist and work visas who come with absolutely every intention of staying on beyond the expiration of their visa’s, most of whom are white Europeans who, of course, Bolt has no problem with.

Bolt’s biggest fear is Islam. Bolt doesn’t see Islamophobia as racist. For Bolt racism does not go beyond biological and physical differences between peoples. Culture and religion, the vilification of which most people see as a form of racism, are fair game for Bolt as he attempts to justify himself and, at the same time, avoid the racist tag by denying that being anti-Islam is racist.

Another popular target for Bolt’s over the top racism is black, coloured and non-whites that are embroiled in street violence. Today Bolt has written about gang violence in Melbourne where he highlights the ethnicity of those involved in such a way as to suggest that these people are innately violent because of their ethnicity and because they are immigrants. He even criticises the police for not describing the ethnicity of offenders though this kind of criticism is confined only to the ethnicity of non-whites.

Over the years, all of Bolt’s racism has revolved around either non-whites or Islam or both. All are vilified including Somalis, Samoans, Maoris, Lebanese, Indians, Afghans, Iraqis, Iranians, and, of course, Aborigines.

Bolt has become so fixated about the inferiority of races and cultures that are not Anglo-white European he has actually stated that ‘white Australian racism is a myth’. He’s forgotten, very conveniently, about Australia’s ‘White Australia Policy’, a policy which only ended in 1975.

Bolt recently told me in an email that his best friend when he was in year seven at school was an Aborigine. Given Bolt’s frothing at the mouth seething hatred of Aborigines, one can be forgiven for finding this totally impossible to believe. People like Bolt often deny their racism by telling people that ‘their best friend’ is actually someone of a race that they are vilifying.

Perhaps, if Bolt detests a multicultural Australia so much, he should find somewhere else to live. Certainly Australia will be a far better place without him. Either that or he should seek clinical help for his obsessive compulsion and delusional complexes about racial superiority. First, though, he needs to cease his denial of being a rabid racist and recognise that White Australians are as ‘ethnic’ as anyone else here in Australia and are amongst the most racist of all races that are in our multicultural society.

Monday, March 8, 2010


Traditionally, the extreme right-wing is overtly intolerant of homosexuality. However, beneath the veneer of their homophobic views, there can be found as many gay and lesbian right-wingers as there are on the left. The difference usually is that most gay and lesbian folk on the left are quite open about their sexuality, whereas those on the right tend to be far more covert about it through fear of being ostracised from their right-wing network of friends and associates. This is particularly so in the case of high profile right-wingers who are gay or lesbian. ‘Coming out’ for a right-winger is far more difficult for the right-winger than it is for the left-winger.

Apparently, Tony Abbott, well known for his Roman Catholicism and his so-called ‘moral values’ recently made some remarks that were interpreted as being ‘homophobic’. Murdoch propagandist, Andrew Bolt of the ‘Herald Sun’ Murdoch newspaper in Melbourne, made the mistake of commenting on Abbott’s apparent homophobic remarks.

As an extremist right-winger Bolt should have steered well clear of the debate.

But he didn’t.

Bolt’s main problem is that he’s painted himself into a corner. Bolt cannot condone and support Abbott’s homophobic remarks because he will then be seen as the quintessential hypocrite on the matter of homosexuality.

Part of Bolt’s extreme racism is his paranoid fear of Islam; his Islamophobia. As part of the rhetoric and propaganda that Bolt uses as he sets out to demean and vilify Islam in his column is his frequent reference to Islam’s intolerance to homosexuals which Bolt says Islam, especially in Iran, demonstrates by regularly hanging gay men. (In fact Iran does not hang men just because they are gay; they hang men who have committed sexual crimes, usually rape, against minors and who happen to be gay.) While Bolt’s Bloggies, who are mainly racists and Islamophobes themselves, were quite happy to support Bolt in this context, it seems that they are not happy with Bolt’s stance on homosexuality generally and particularly when it contradicts the views of their new political hero Tony Abbott. As a consequence, many of Bolts Bloggies have expressed extreme disappointment in Bolt for condemning Abbott’s stance.

This from Len of Coolangatta sums up much of the mood of Bolt’s Bloggies:

You know what Andrew, I think that you have become far too self indulgent. You were once the good guy in the campaign against the global warming people. The huge gangs of Bloggers went with you, and now you toy with us. We have followed your family holidays and came back to you when you came we are your playthings.
You have undervalued our intense support.
I hope that your radio show bombs. You have sold your soul man and this latest “Gay Parade” stuff is a further indication that you will use whatever you can to further your career. You belong on FM Outback man.....really outback. I am very disappointed in you Andrew, you are a novice in the real world of commerce.

Bolt has since put a lot of column space between his piece about Abbott’s views and his latest comments avoiding at all cost the subject of homosexuality in a effort to regain a lot of lost ground from his Bloggies.