'because the articles were shown to be not in good faith and to contain factual errors,

and of course the black armed band historians who speak of the whites invading this land is recorded in good faith even know it is factually wrong. The activist judges who try and prevent free speach in this country always lose out as people see through their political/social agendas.

I dislike the man very much.
But think he is victim to PC.
Again I avoid him at all costs.
But think he was not alone in this view.
I have, quite often, questioned the statement, *if you are excepted as Aboriginal by them you are Aboriginal*I
PC in every way, is silencing free speech.
Putting minority's views first.
May I ask this? is it legal?
What of the other blood, the often two thirds so many have that is not Aboriginal.
My ancestry is Scot/Irish/Welsh/ English/ and a chance some thing else.
Should I be called Australian.
Take our country back from courts PC judges and greens in black frocks and white wigs.
OH and export Bolt.

Can we discuss matter of race any more on OLO?

Why on earth not?

It's a load of nonsense to suggest anything to the contrary.

The case of Andrew Bolt has nothing to do with OLO.
Or freedom of speech as the obnoxious man claims.

Lets get this straight.

The reasons for his finally getting his come- uppence (and rightly
so) has nothing to do with free speech whatsoever. The reasons
for the conclusion in his case and I quote the judge:

"Have to do with the manner in which the articles were written,
including that they contained errors of fact, distortions of the
truth, and inflammatory and provocative language."
(What a surprise!)

The man thrives on fiction not fact. And to claim anything else
is putting it as politely as possible - "nonsense."

Perhaps this just might encourage journalists to clean up their
act and dare we hope that we just may get truth and honesty from
newspapers. Dare we hope that whether its opinion or not that in
future it will be based on fact, not fiction.

As far as Mr Bolt is concerned - I wouldn't hold my breath.
He wouldn't know the truth
if it was tatooed on his forehead.
And he will never recognise the fact the people who enjoy the
rights of free speech have a duty to respect other people's
rights. A person's freedom of speech is limited by the rights
of others. All societies, including
democratic ones, put various limitations on what people may say.

When you write articles that contain errors of fact, distortions
of the truth and inflammatory provocative language - you're
don't have much of a leg to stand on when you then claim to hide
behind "Freedom of speech." Mr Bolt does not deserve any sympathy
whatsoever. He did it all to himself and this time
he has to wear it.

cont'd ...

BTW: I've just exercised my freedom
of speech and I've based it on fact -
not fiction.

I am in total agreement Lexi. Alarmingly I have received a couple of racially vilifying emails from a person I've known for quite some whom seems to be encouraged by Andrew Bolt and people like him.

He, (my person I have known for a while) usually sends me humour from youtube etc, but in the last week has sent pro Israeli propaganda, combined with vilification of Muslims and Palestinians. Today he sent me anti Aboriginal humour of a kind that might have been funny to a racist 50 yrs ago.

My point about Bolt is that nearly all his commentary is vilifying and targeted. He is an un-principled apologist for the Liberal Party and therefore is also politically biased and effectively the furthest thing (with the possible exception of Piers Ackerman) from a real reporter.

Clearly it was about time that someone pulled the rug out from under this bloke and thankfully it was our law structures that did so because it shows that we , as a society, retain at least some civility.

Beyond that Tony Abbott's defence of Bolt today, is evidence that Abbott should never lead this country. Abbott has already forced the Gov't (through pure political populism), to attempt to change the powers of the Minister in relation to boat people.

He is now happy to see middle Australia feel resentment towards our own indigenous people again, as well as international refugees. This popular resentment has been promoted and encouraged by his team from the start, like some continuous "children overboard".

It is clear that a new political low has been reached in our country and it is high time that reason and balance be restored.

As for OLO and matters of race; as would be the case when anyone racially vilifies, or attempts to use race as a motivator for resentment, people such as myself will be active in discouraging it.

cont ..

cont ...

Mainly GrahamY because, resentment based on race is exactly the sort of thing that Hitler used to convince the German public of his value, prior to the 2nd World War, other tyrants since. This is why we have laws against such things. Value judgments based on race would have be one of the lowest apps available for the human mind.

"And as for the Melbourne Herald/Sun, there are many reasons for not buying it".
Despite the fact that actual reporting is sometimes absent from the entire paper, (even the horoscopes are the worst kind of commercial pap), Andrew Bolt remains the best one.