A well thought out and well written article by Spencer Gear.

For as long as I can remember, there has been little cultural diversity in the media. The fact that the Left had captured the power of the media to promote it's white hating, anti western agenda, is evidenced by the fact that most white people in the western world no longer trusted the media to tell the truth. This was exploited by Rupert Murdoch when he created Fox News, because he knew that there was a market for people who wanted news which gave an opposing view. Since then, right wing commentators have gone from strength to strength as entire western populations turn away from the mainstream media that seems to despise them.

The Fraser Anning speech was a case in point.

Fraser Anning made just the sort of speech that ordinary Australians have wanted to hear from their representatives for the last forty years. He rather stupidly used the term "final solution", a term he obviously did not know the significance of. If he knew the significance, he would never have used it, because it would give the enemies of the Australian people a heaven sent excuse to portray Anning's supporters as Nazis.

As usual, the Left played the champions of the poor downtrodden immigrants who are the victims of white racist Australian population, who are akin to Nazis. Just look at the way they got as much mileage from it as they could. Notice how they always respond in terms of high morale outrage? Moral grandstanding and acting out as the champions of all that is good and holy, is their default position.

It is pure comic opera. Elmer Gantry is now a Lefty.

The funny thing is, that the Left just can't figure out why most western white people have not accepted that their race is the most vile on Earth, or why they no longer take the mainstream media seriously. I had never heard the term "fake news" before Trump used it, and it has obviously struck a chord with white western populations.

ALTRAV,

My article agrees with the sentiments of the early part of your comment. The Nazi final solution was not in the mind of Senator Fraser Anning (according to him) but it was fillet steak for perpetrators of fake news.

I encourage you not to write logical fallacies when describing others, e.g.

+ 'those idiots who came out bagging him' (name calling doesn't help discussion)
+ 'You are so limited in intellect, and so prejudiced and bias towards the man' (name calling again)
+ 'those of you who stupidly believe' (appeal to stupidity);
+ 'even more stupidly believe' (appeal to stupidity);
+ 'you are truly disturbed people' (labelling a person's mental disability);
+ 'he's not another lying, deceitful clown like the rest of em' (name calling again).

We can't have a reasonable conversation when logical fallacies are used because of the erroneous reasoning. I urge you to address the issues I raised. You did that in the early part of your reply but then resorted to the use of fallacies.

OzSpen, my choice of words and phrases are so, because it has become apparent over the years, that merely using passive language and subtleties does not convey the message effectively.
Also I found it a useful tool to convey emotion and inflection in a comment.
It is not enough to merely say someone is 'wrong' if you want to say it forcefully.
What you describe is MY form of expression, to convey a more effective and directed case or to make my point 'loud and clear', if necessary, and not just a bland few words.
You will agree that writing something is completely lacking in inflections, compared to orating the same written script.
So my use of words you have highlighted is quite acceptable to me.
I am pleased to see I am justified and vindicated, by the fact you have given my methods acknowledgement.
Thank you, it will be of great value to me as anyone who may have thought the same as yourself, now knows why I write the way I do.
At least my way, there is no misunderstanding my messages, irrespective of any criticisms you may have.
The important thing is to say what you truly feel or wish to say, no matter the means.
We must reject PC and other mediums that try to stop freedom of speech, warts and all.

ALTRAV,

<<It is not enough to merely say someone is 'wrong' if you want to say it forcefully.
What you describe is MY form of expression, to convey a more effective and directed case or to make my point 'loud and clear', if necessary, and not just a bland few words.>>

What I highlighted was not your 'form of expression' but your fallacious reasoning.

We can say something forcefully by use of powerful adjectives and figures of speech.

For example, I could say: Fraser Anning was taken to the cleaners by the politically correct mob - MPs and media. Anning refused to back down because he knew what he said had absolutely zero to do with the Nazi Holocaust. The spin doctors manufactured abominable replies of insult and ridicule. When will the mass media give us facts instead of fiction?

I don't need to resort to logical fallacies.

Well OzSpen, according to you, I DO!
One can criticise or highlight any and all that they find worthy of condemnation or praise.
Fortunately it is the wonder of free speech that enables us to do so.
If I feel it necessary to convey a certain feeling, I do so without any consideration as to whether the reader is made to feel uncomfortable or not.
Usually, if the reader is offended, it is because they have some connection to the offending words or article.
Or they are merely of weak character.
I don't care to diminish the veracity and intent of my language, simply because of a few who are not in possession of a full gamut of emotions, intellect and maturity.
But thank you for your thoughts and comments.
It is always helpful to know a little about other commentors and their leans.

If the idiotic left is allowed to misrepresent, lie and demonise its a bit rich to complain about someone giving an opinion which is right in a strong manner. How else will the dumbed down left ever understand any basic commonsense.

btw in yesterdays paper their was a question in the crossword about a cleaning lady (the answer being Sadie). I dare say that should give the HRC 3 months work and the feminist something to whinge about and boycott the paper. Surprised the DRUM has not picked up on it. Ha Ha!