Yesterday, Andrew Bolt was set upon by two masked thugs. Andrew was sprayed the face with an "oily" liquid, upon which he punched his attacker in the head and kicked him in the crutch as he went down. The thug and his mate fled.

Good on you Andrew.

I had to check if that was true, and google tells me it was. Good on Bolt..but shaving cream and glitter?

Maybe they belong to one of the 550 gender types that seem to be floating around these days.

Wouldn't real men use something a little stronger?

http://thenewdaily.com.au/entertainment/tv/2017/06/07/andrew-bolt-attacked/

Three of them, one filming and glitter with foam and dye a report says.

Unprovoked assault in company with two others? A magistrate should be taking that charge quite seriously if it eventuates.

None of them has had the decency to apologise to their victim, then or later. And of course so far no report of any of them turning himself in to the police.

The message to take home for public figures, the public too, is that the presence of security cameras and being in a public place do not deter offenders.

Sure causes concern about the safety of female family and friends and young student relatives who are out and about, especially in off-peak hours.

If they do get caught, & go before a judge, you can bet one of our modern milksop judges will encourage them to go further next time, by rousing on them, & letting them off with no conviction recorded, in case they are now, or want to join the bureaucracy some time in the future.

Bolt is really taking a huge chance retaliating. He must already know that in our courts it is only the victims who are punished if they defend themselves, the offenders are always let off, given another chance, particularly if lefty activists.

just like the bullying leftist thugs tried to silence Margaret Court so they have tried to with Bolt. Socialist know their dogmas are dead and detest anyone pointing out the truth. Thankfully the thugs always overplay their hand and the general public sees through their thuggery and deceit. We have seen the same behaviour against anyone exposing the gw fraud, perverting the marriage act or standing up for the rights of the unborn. I suspect many of these thugs belong to the getup clowns funded by haters of the West such as George Soros. Most of these thugs would also be supporters of the overfunded abc as it usually spews out their dogmas and derides anyone with a contrary view.

Hasbeen,

You are right.

NSW citizen were given back the right of self defence, a right that is only superficially available elsewhere in Australia.

If it was Queensland and one of his attackers had gone base over apex injuring himself, Bolt would likely have faced serious charges himself and been required to defend himself again and under the reversed standard of proof that applies where a person defends himself or loved ones.

Fortunately in NSW the very practical Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party got rid of the reversed standard of proof that re-victimises victims of assault and home invasion and it is the police who (rightly!) are obliged to prove that the defender was not in fear of harm and so on. Restoring the usual, traditional, legal rights of ordinary citizens was resolutely opposed by the treacherous NSW Greens, who as one might realise, have very little concern about the public and victims of crime, preferring to bolster criminals' 'rights' wherever they can.

All that glitters is not gold, Was this a set up by the extreme right to gain publicity? All seems very convenient, TV cameras present, high profile "victim" present, all ready for the "attack". Lights, camera, action, as our intrepid hero fights off the would-be "attackers", A very convenient package to show on the 6 o'clock news.

Paul,

After endless violent assaults by left whinge activists, suddenly this is staged. If you look at the video it is clearly not.

I hope the cops catch these idiots and they get a criminal record.

Shadow, I watched all 39 seconds of the "Glitter" attack, listened to what Bolt had to say. If the assailants have not been identifyied, or apprehended and made a full confession, How does Bolt know they were a couple of left wing Fascists. and not right wing fascists or a marauding gang of Catholic nuns for that matter!
The injured party, Bolt, has been quick to capitalize on the whole incident, has he not.
Correction: All that glitters is not Bolt!
Over to you.

Things just fell into place for Bolt, it has all the hallmarks of a staged show. The cameras were nicely placed and did not miss any of the action.

An offence was committed.If Bolt made this up it is a waste of police time or a nasty assault, either way the coppers should actually put down the coffee and donuts and do something!
Mind you our useless PC Police Commissioner will do nothing. Sits on his hands and looks to even more rewards from his labour mates in retirement.
When the libs get in they should decimate the police command.

incredible you blokes, blame the left for everything, and say nothing about your devout Abbott. You know he was the one that told all of them lies to win an election. It was even too much for his own party and decided to part his ribs with a blade.
Bolt is nothing but a comical Far right whinger, Stage show man, things must of been closing in on him. Why would anyone want to through kids sparkles at him for, it was certainly not to do him any harm. It was put on.

Hi Paul,

God, I love that logic: if someone could conceivably gain something from something, therefore no need for evidence, they musta done it !

Christ knowing that his crucifixion would rally half-wits to his rat-bag cause ? So he must have be in on it with Pilate ! Yeah, no need for evidence. Not even evidence that Christ existed :) Sorry, Runner.

As whites moved out into the interior of Australia, it's logical that they would benefit from slaughtering Aboriginal people, at least from one angle. Therefore they did. No need for a single forensic investigation; ergo, not one forensic investigation yet. [Of course, massacres were very likely, but some proof would help.]

Somehow the Yanks or the Jews might benefit from sooling the media onto Al Qa'ida, therefore they did 9/11.

Wow, this is fun, it saves all sorts of problems, like looking for evidence. Let's see: Andrew Bolt might benefit from being beaten up: therefore organise it. Yeah.

Hmmmm, I thought you might be close to those thugs, Paul: what, you don't know which of the dumb-arse 'Left' were involved ? You're losing your touch :)

Any other paranoid theories ? ISIS doesn't exist, except on a film-lot in Arizona ? There's never been a famine in Africa - in fact, Africa doesn't exist ? Costa Rica did well out of remaining neutral during WW II, therefore its current government are all Nazis ? The real differential for Pi is 4 - 3.1429 or whatever was a Macedonian plot ? When Newton invented gravity, he belonged to a secret Christian sect which was opposed to people flying ?

The world is full of bastards ? Well, yeah, you got that right, a vast spectrum of them from Left to Right, mostly at each others' throats.

Joe

The video footage was put up on YouTube by the person who took the video, who was a member of the three man group who attacked Bolt. ANTIFA have apparently claimed it was some of their " family" members who did the attack.
No one has to stage these cowardly events, it's fast becoming the norm for people who can't tolerate any opinion different to theirs.

Being assaulted for your opinion is wrong whether
you're John Howard (shoe throwing incident on TV),
or Andrew Bolt, or at the National Gallery of
Victoria attending an Institute of Public Affairs
dinner.

This recent incident on Bolt though does appear to
be the stuff that "The Chaser" crowd might take part
in. How was Bolt "attacked?" We might ask.
With a knife, a gun? king-hit? a baseball bat?

Nope, nothing that would seriously qualify as a weapon.
That would do serious damage.
Instead these so called "thugs" used shaving-cream and glitter.
The only damage done was to his suit. And he fought back.
Supposedly kicking one in the groin, and
bruising the other's face.

There even appeared video footage
to show Bolt's heroics and the man wrote a column about it.
Stressing he wanted no sympathy from anyone.
He after all was not a "loser."
He forced them to flee. And he knew that they were
"Left-wing fascists." Who else could they be?

Uni students on a dare - perhaps? Melbourne University
campus is within walking distance of the restaurant.

We've probably not heard the end of this. I suspect that
it's going to be milked for all its worth.

'; Instead these so called "thugs" used shaving-cream and glitter.
The only damage done was to his suit. And he fought back.
Supposedly kicking one in the groin, and
bruising the other's face. '

yes Foxy as about harmful as a pie in the face. Interesting to see the different punishment for both crimes.

It seems it needed two brave thugs to do it, an another to film it. If it were me, I hope I would get in a couple of knees to the knuts before one of them (for all Bolt knew) stuck the knife in. or - for all he knew - the poison started to work.

Joe

I think ANTIFA set the whole thing up to make it look like Bolt set the whole thing up.

I am surprised at you Foxy that you have taken sides with two
irradesent lefty greenies like Paul & doog.
Why surprised that Bolt suspected the lefties ?
Didn't you know that he had to move house to escape them ?
Who else would do it anyway ?
Well perhaps the moslems, but what is the difference ?

That sort of thing gives the real nut cases the idea.
I typed something there but deleted it because we don't really know
who is on here.

That is what it has come to these days.

One more point;
In the situation that we are facing these days, stunts like what
happened to Bolt or to QANTAS's CEO Joyce could become very dangerous.
Bodyguards are likely to become more common and you could get shot.
After all how can a bodyguard tell the difference between a pie and
and a dangerous substance ?

Dear Bazz,

I'm not really taking sides as you put it.
At least not intentionally. Its just that
the "weapons" used in this so called "attack"
that makes it all a bit suss wouldn't you
agree? I mean shaving-cream and glitter?
Wouldn't "Leftie Fascists" have used something
a bit stronger?

It's almost like a joke?

When I first read about it I thought is this a
belated "April Fool's" thing? Or "Fake News?"

Dear Bazz,

Gosh, I hope it doesn't come to people having to use
bodyguards like they do overseas. Not in this
country. The sooner the police find out and let us
know the truth behind all this, the better.

We should wait and see what develops next.

Paul,

Given that almost without exception, violent politically based assaults are initiated by left whinge activists, and that it was initiated against Andrew Bolt, only an idiot would claim otherwise.

I would pin it on left whinge fascist clowns such as Getup or the greens. As one guy was stupid enough not to wear a mask, it is only a matter of time.

In the interim, the left whinge thug can enjoy the black eye, blue balls and humiliation.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Here in Melbourne we've had demonstrators who started
out peacefully but it's been the right-wing element
in some cases who have actually initiated fights.

You should not really generalise about people.

Some may actually surprise you.

As we've seen with President Trump.

No Foxy I was not generalising and I did not comment on who started
fights in Melbourne.
We do however see the trend of Left Wing students & others preventing
others speaking at meetings etc.

I do have a vivid memory of a TV news item of left wing rioters trying
to attack a right wing group that was protecting a meeting.
The police intervened.
That was in Melbourne. There seems to be a very belligerent left wing
movement in Melbourne. It seems to be getting quite a reputation.

the left are generally very quick to tantrums as we saw with the election of President Trump and Brexit. I suspect most of them have liberal parents who though cowardice produce brats.

Come off it, Foxy, how was Bolt to know that it's just shaving cream and glitter ? With the murder of Kim Jong-Un's brother in Malaysia with poison to the face, who's to know what it might be ? Or do you think that Bolt can foretell the future ?

Thugs be aware, there are plenty of us just itching to give you one or two good kicks in the crown jewels :)

Joe

Hi Phanto,

Being still a bit paranoid, a hangover from my lefty days, I suspect that you are only half right:

It's extremely likely that ANTIFA set the whole thing up to make it look like Bolt set the whole thing up to make it look like ANTIFA set the whole thing up to make it look like Bolt set the whole thing up.

You know it's clearly true ! Only very cunning people can see it, like you and me.

Joe

New report,

<New footage reveals sheer violence of Andrew Bolt attack outside Melbourne restaurant

Alarming new footage shows commentator Andrew Bolt being assaulted on the streets of Melbourne in what he says is an example of how dangerous the city has become for conservatives.

The video, posted on social media on Thursday morning, shows a hooded man approaching Bolt from behind and throwing a substance at his head, initiating a brawl in broad daylight on busy Lygon Street.

The ensuing scuffle sees Bolt pushed into a pole and then falling over chairs and tables outside a restaurant. He fights back fiercely, kicking and punching his two assailants in the face and groin before they give up and start to walk away.

An unknown man shouts "what are you doing?" and "go away" as the brawl concludes.

The assault took place on Tuesday at the launch of The Art of the Impossible, a book on Donald Trump and the 2016 US presidential election campaign by RMIT associate professor Steve Kates.

On Tuesday night Victoria Police confirmed it was investigating the "incident" and was searching for three men: the two assailants plus a third man who was wielding a camera and "appeared to be filming or taking photos".

Police confirmed Bolt was hit with a mixture of shaving cream and glitter.

Speaking to Fairfax Media on Thursday morning, Bolt said he was sick of being targeted for his conservative beliefs and would pursue his attackers for justice and demand a charitable donation.

"I'm not a brawler," he said. "I had one bruised knuckle and I don't care a stuff about it. I had a suit ruined and I want every cent of that paid back. And I want a hefty donation to a charity of my choice.">

tbc

contd..

<Melbourne Antifa, a loose collection of left-wing activists united behind "anti-fascist action", appeared to claim a role in the incident, posting on Facebook that "some of our family in solidarity were attacked by Andrew Bolt while they were protesting today".

The group argued Bolt should be imprisoned for his "violent, horrendous language".

Bolt told Fairfax Media the attack was the latest in a long line of threats to the safety of himself, his family and other conservatives in his home city.

"I am sick of people trying to intimidate me, trying to threaten me," he said. "I'm sick of the threats on my life and my reputation. I'm sick of being sued and bullied and I'm not going to take it. I'm just not going to take it.

"We should be free to have a debate and to walk down the street without fear of being attacked.

"The right to free speech has to be better protected – everywhere but particularly in Melbourne. It is ridiculous how dangerous it is for conservatives in this town to speak out.

"If you don't like what I say just prove me wrong. Don't threaten me, don't threaten my house, don't threaten my family, don't abuse me – just argue with me.

"It must be a question of the principle and not the side.">

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/new-footage-reveals-sheer-violence-of-andrew-bolt-attack-outside-melbourne-restaurant-20170608-gwmx7k.html

To add, some posters here make no attempt to conceal the glaring similarities between the lunar spin of the activists and their own hateful comments sledging the victim of the violent attack.

Dear Bazz,

I did not say that you generalised.
My post was addressed to Shadow Minister.
Not you.

Talking about protests in Melbourne, there have
been quite a few, - which included
the United Patriot Front, the True Blue Crew,
the Rise Up Australia mob. Since November
there have been eight violent clashes in Melbourne
between the warring sides.

Blaming these violent clashes on one side or the
other is rather futile. All sides seem to have their
fair share of abuse. The Premier has pointed
out it costs the taxpayers a fortune having the
police presence trying to control these protestors.

I've just read in our local newspaper of a horror crime
week in our city, two terrifying violent robberies have
left a 14 year old boy and a family traumatised and injured.
And a teenager walking her dog in a nearby park was also
left badly shaken after a man tried to assault her.

A couple woke in terror at 1am last Thursday (June 1)
when four masked knife-wielding men, described as of
African appearance, smashed their way through their master
bedroom window, overpowered them and demanded money.

The couple's two sons, one aged 18 the other 22 heard the
commotion and rushed in to help.
A scuffle broke out and one of the intruders slashed the
older sons's forehead causing a gash which was later
treated at a hospital nearby.

Another shocking attack was on a teen
waiting to be picked up by his parents at Westfield
Shopping Centre. The 14 year old was punched and had his
mobile phone stolen near Coles at 7.45pm on May 29, after
he was approached by a youth, described as of African
appearance in his late teens, who accused the boy of
attacking his family. The boy told the youth he was mistaken.

The offender who had distinctive red and brown braided hair
attacked the teen and then fled on a bus. The boy was treated at
the nearby hospital for swelling and bruising.

Police are still looking for all attackers.

cont'd ...

Dear Bazz,

It seems that in Melbourne we are having a spate
of violent attacks - all in one week.

Regarding Mr Bolt? Of course as Joe (Loudmouth)
pointed out Mr Bolt was not to know what was being
hurled at him. He had no way of knowing it was
shaving cream and glitter. However let us wait
and see when the results of police investigations
are in as to the end result of all this.

Hopefully it won't take too long.

Yes, Foxy, let's hope that if they are found, hiding no doubt in some basement, and then pronounced guilty by a court, that they will each get six months or more, including the dick with the camera. I agree with you that assault is a serious offence and should be punished accordingly. Down with anti-fascism-fascism !

Joe

Foxy, "I hope it doesn't come to people having to use bodyguards like they do overseas"

One of the unintended negative consequences of putting 'diversity' ahead of public good in immigration policy.

Joe (Loudmouth),

Yes indeed - the self-appointed opponents of bigotry
can be as ugly as the racist groups they oppose.

Foxy,

Where is the evidence that Andrew Bolt was being 'racist' before he was set upon by those cowardly thugs?

Foxy you are falling into the trap of merging Islam with racism.
The left protesters are not attacking racists but those opposing Islam.
They tie that together with opposition to free speech.

Ahh yes I went back and read it. I had read the SM one after I read
the previous one and contantinated them in my mind.

Foxy,

I have yet to see violence in a demonstration where the left whinge are not equally or more ready to initiate the violence. As for attacks on individuals especially those trying to talk at universities, the vast predominance is attacks by left whingers.

And to top it off an unknown group of left whinge bedwetters have claimed responsibility. I hope they catch the cowards and charge them.

Still clutching at straws Shadow, trying to pin the Bolt beat up on people with politics you and Bolt don't agree with. Despite not having a scintilla of evidence, you jointed the chorus of useful idiots supporting the Bolt line that he was viciously attacked with shaving cream and glitter by so called left wing Fascists.
In your capacity as the forums resident Rumpole of the Bailey, what is the penalty in Victoria for the offence of being a public nuisance, Bolt show be made aware of that.

Foxy,

"Gosh, I hope it doesn't come to people having to use
bodyguards like they do overseas. Not in this
country....."

Are you so naive that you don't know that some people already have bodyguards, armed no less, and always wearing loose jackets when they are guarding the PM etc?
Loose jackets so that hey can get to their pistols.

' Still clutching at straws Paul, trying to pin the Alan Jocye beat up on people with politics you and Jocye don't agree with. '

What don't you understand Paul. I know you have been totally dumbed down by your leftist dogma but your lack of logic defies belief.

runner, I can only assume you are once more off in biblical fairyland. Where have I ever stated on the Forum that I agree with the politics of Alan Jocye. I don't know what Joyce agrees or disagrees with, and I don't particularly care.

runner, i must say, thank you for the complement, "mimicry is flattery' re your last post.

Oh my boy. do you think your favorite Cardinal, the one and only Archie Pell will ever vacate the safety, comfort and protection of the Vatican and return to Australia to face the music over those child abuse allegations.
Or would your advise the good shepherd to "Stick where you are George, Australians prisons are bad places!"

Having George Pell rule on Catholic pedophile clergy, is like having Ivan Milat on the Parole Board! Agree my son?

While on the subject of bodyguards etc, there are a number of us who
have been very critical of Islam and the left wing trendies.
There must be some who get really stirred up by our comments and we
could be at risk from some sort of attack.
A question for Graham, is my assumption that you have a policy of
keeping our email addresses and full names secure correct ?

None of us have a public image like Andrew Bolt, but if they cannot
get at more prominent people they could lower their sights.

Paul,

Still desperately trying to pretend the attackers weren't left whingers?

Unfortunately by my second post, the incident had already been claimed by the far left whinge Melbourne Antifa snowflake brigade who are claiming that their victim behaved inappropriately, and their storm troopers have had their feelings hurt.

Seriously, what a bunch of grade A twats.

Gotta love your thinking here Paul.

The 'evidence' against Pell is so weak that the Vic Police, who'd clearly salivate at being able to charge him, can't come up with a single verifiable piece of evidence. Yet here you already have him being fitted up for prison stripes.

Meanwhile the evidence that Bolt's attackers were left leaning Brown shirts is rather comPelling. Yet no evidence will ever be enough for you.

If it wasn't for your double standards, you'd have no standards at all.

Paul.

When was Pell convicted?

Shadow, I see you are manufacturing fake news again: <<the incident had already been claimed by the far left whinge Melbourne Antifa snowflake brigade" Was that something you read in Bolt's Baloney Column in 'The Daily Telecrap' Given your track record at predictions, for example the British election result, I find it hard to believe anything you say.

Good to see Archie Pell has a loyal bunch of the like mined on hand to defend him from prosecution! I never sail Pell was guilty of anything, I said "accusations".

I really don't see that the type of weapon used against Bolt has anything to do with the situation. Shaving cream, water pistol or something deadly. The action itself took place because someone doesn't like Bolt's opinions. Once we go beyond argument or debate to the physical, we are in big trouble. In this case, one of the aggressors was injured for his inability to accept that people are permitted to have opinions contrary to his. Perhaps he might learn something from that.

The incident proves something that Bolt has always maintained: that it is the Left who resort to the physical when people disagree with them.

Hi Ttbn,

I have to say that sections of the 'Left' have always been too bereft of argument to do anything other than use violence. Back in the late seventies, when Dr Hans Eysenck was coming to Adelaide, to Flinders University, to talk about his theories on the inheritance of intelligence (which I totally disagreed with), I was loosely associated with a group of Maoists there - when I suggested that he should bee confronted with clear argument to rebut him, especially to criticise his reliance on the forged data from Cyril Burt. My closest Maoist friend said, "No ! We smash him !"

So not much changes, does it ?

Cheers,

Joe

Dear ttbn,

We should all be concerned about violence no matter
who it comes from. And it comes from more than
just one group as the following link shows:

http://theconversation.com/australians-should-also-worry-about-white-extremists-in-our-own-backyard-63650

Hi Foxy,

Deaths from Australian white extremists in 2017: Nil.

Deaths from Australians espousing support for Islam in 2017:

* five (six ?) in Melbourne's Bourke Street, ?January?

* one, Brighton, 5th June.

TOTAL, 2017 (so far): (six) or seven killed by Islamists, none by white extremists.

What were you referring to ? Previous years ? Would you like to do a count for us, of the atrocities perpetrated, say in the past fifteen years, by both groups, white extremists and Islamic terrorists ?

I should clarify: when I mention Islamic terrorists, I'm referring to both those terrorists who have not yet been condemned by any Australian imams, and those who have.

Joe

Joe (Loudmouth),

If you Google "A brief history of far right
violence in Australia," it will give you the
answers you're looking forward.
More recent events are in the link I
cited in my previous post. Perhaps you should
read it?

Also, issue-oriented and ethno-nationalist
groups continue to operate in Australia and
are likely to remain as an ongoing security
concern into the future. Far right violent
extremist groups have existed in Australia
for almost a century. Violent extremism
has been a persistent concern over a long period
of time with such acts manifesting in a range
of different forms in Australia since WWII.

A historical presence of far-right extremists in
Australia and dramatic attacks conducted
internationally by individuals such as Wade Mitchael
Page, Anders Breivick, and David Copeland has
demonstrated the potential for far right violence.
Hence the warnings given in the link I cited
earlier.

Foxy,

I wasn't aware that that mongrel Breivik was Australian. You learn something every day :)

Yes, I realise we have to go back a long way to document all of the violent extremist atrocities in Australia, such as the Muslim killings on the train from Broken Hill in (I think?) 1917. Wow, a hundred years of extremist atrocities.

Yes, the Ustasha, perhaps some Soviet 'extra-judicial' killings and many other fascist groups (although I don't know that those others killed anybody). But let's be honest: since, let's say, 2001, there have been more such atrocities than in all of the century before. And who has been involved in most of those ? Why, I do believe it has been followers of Islam, citing - quite correctly, when they had the chance - the validations for their acts from the Koran.

That's the reality: the great majority of terrorist killings - probably since about 1900 - have been by Islamists, people citing the Koran as their legitimising authority.

Isn't that so ? Is that what you are talking about ? Yes, I agree completely that those groups are far-right groups - how else would you categorise Islamist fascism ?

Of course, like you, I eagerly await the forthright condemnation of such vile actions by all of the imams in Australia, speaking as one.

How long do you reckon we will have to wait ?

Joe

Joe (Loudmouth),

What a really charming man you're turning out
to be. Do try to avoid flatulent rhetoric in
discussions or else you'll be binned just like
leoj.

I did not say that Anders Breivik was Australian.
Read my post.

Foxy,

If you want to make things up to impress other posters, so be it I suppose.

My last post was pages back and had nothing to do with what you are presently discussing.

However I am reminded that you did not provide any evidence to support your smears of Andrew Bolt. So here is the question again,

"Where is the evidence that Andrew Bolt was being 'racist' before he was set upon by those cowardly thugs?"
Posted by leoj, Thursday, 8 June 2017 7:17:02 PM

Foxy, I think you over reacted to Joe's post.
Just recently I saw a score on moslem attacks and the score.
In the period which I have forgotten it was something like 10,000
people killed. I wish I could remember where I saw it.
In Germany they are having a war. Some thousands of assaults,
rapes & killings just in one year.
I read these reports but do not keep them so I do not have accurate
figures, but it is really appalling.

Of course it is getting closer to home. The Philippines is the latest
area of concern as the ISIS mob are looking for a new HQ and have
been invited to join the Moro mob.
They have their eyes on Indonesia as well and PNG worries me.

leoj,

Kindly show me where exactly did I call Mr Bolt
a racist or smear him?

Dear Bazz,

Of course I understand your concerns.

I think we all do.

Dear Foxy,

Sometimes your remarks are so hurtful: I had no idea my flatulence was so well-known :( I suppose such things are hard to keep secret, especially on a crowded bus. Who told you ?

But I'm at a loss to see any connection between that personal failing and what I wrote. Would you like to join the dots for me ?

Love notwithstanding,

Joe

Foxy,

You will always find something from the ABC that refutes what I say. Can you find instances where similar attacks on Left wing mouthpieces have occurred as in the Bolt case? Instances where Rightists have physically attacked a Left wing journalists who has done nothing but express his or her opinions? Something akin to the Left wing media's dog f.....g humiliation of a conservative journalist would be interesting to see, too.

I don't think that bunches of yahoos carrying placards through the streets are the sorts of people we are talking about here. Street demonstrators are all naturally violent people, Left or Right. They are a noisy embarrassment to a civilised society. It is the not-so-public white ants eating away at democracy and free speech that are the real problem. Now, I believe that the the Left activists are much nastier than the Right. If you have evidence that that belief is wrong, fair enough.

Joe,

No. Not much changes at all. We are all probably banging our heads against the wall trying to find something that doesn't exist.

The really silly thing, I find, is that when a Right, white Australian condemns, say, Muslim terrorism, a Left, white Australian feels the need to find an example of something foul in his/her own culture to counteract the first critic, no matter how correct the first critic is. It seems as though we have forgotten the old adage. 'he might be a bastard, but he is our bastard'. Some people no longer appear to think that we really do need to defend ourselves against forces which are determined to undermine and overpower us. Something to do with cultural relativism, I suppose.

What we all should be doing, Left and Right, is defending our culture and values against all comers, and not fighting among ourselves. We don't have much time left.

Hi Ttbn,

Yes, I think you're right:

"What we all should be doing, Left and Right, is defending our culture and values against all comers, and not fighting among ourselves. We don't have much time left."

For the life of me, I can't understand why the 'Left' defends Islamist terrorism. Do they think that, since it's anti-American, and anything American is bad, 'therefore' (in that Manichaean way that there is only one right and one wrong, black and white and nothing in between, therefore anything 'not wrong' must be right) therefore Islamist fascism must be good.

They don't seem to grasp, just as small children can't, that there are infinite ways of being 'bad', some much worse than others, and not too many ways of being 'good'. Life is surely a search for knowledge, for the truth, for evidence one way or the other, for a particular political position, and so we have to always be searching.

Sometimes, in that search, we come up with unpleasant, or very complex truths, some surprising, some very unsettling, but we have always to run with the truth, as we find it. As you say,

"What we all should be doing, Left and Right, is defending our culture and values against all comers, and not fighting among ourselves. We don't have much time left."

Best wishes,

Joe

Joe,

If you have any doubts about what it means to be associated with the Left these days, read Bolt's blog this morning to see what some Guardian readers think of the assault.

I tried to include some examples of the comments, but I got tired of trying to edit out the profanities that OLO won't accept. Needless to say, all the posters were very pleased to see Bolt being set upon, he deserved worse etc. etc., and some of them didn't condone violence, but made an exception in Bolt's case.

These people are real crazies. I don't think that 'Left' properly describes them any more. I can't believe that the traditional left i.e. Labor, would subscribe to such hatred and vicious thought.

Dear ttbn,

The point that I was trying to make was that there
are violent people on both sides of the fence so
to speak and that labelling just the one group
as the "Left" as always being violent was not
correct according to the history of violence in this
country. I was not talking about Islamists. Simply
about the "Left" and "Right" labelling of people and
groups. As I think that is wrong. Most people I know
belong to neither group but are somewhere in the
middle. They are quite liberal on some issue but
quite conservative on others. The labels of "Left"
and "Right" seem so yesterday.

Joe (Loudmouth),

Your subtle digs provoked the reaction that it did
from me. I found your rhetoric to be just what I
described. If you don't like the opinion I am
beginning to form about you - you can always improve.

Cheers.

Dearest Foxy,

As some old Greek said, "Know thyself". Of course, we all should, and never stop trying. Give it a go :)

As Ttbn wrote, most appropriately, "What we all should be doing, Left and Right, is defending our culture and values against all comers, and not fighting among ourselves. We don't have much time left."

From your last remarks, I assume that you might agree with Ttbn whole-heartedly ? That it is violence that we should be opposing, no matter where it comes from ? And that, as it happens, the last dozen or twenty, people killed by political violence in Australia (or Australians overseas) have been killed by Islamist terrorists, here and overseas ? Is that what you are suggesting ? That such fascist and Islamist atrocities have to be opposed ?

I'm sure that both Ttbn and I would agree with you. The question is: why are they doing it ? Why are there so many, and is Islam at the root of those atrocities ? Or at least a strict interpretation of its teachings ? That instructions for such fascist atrocities can be found, with little trouble, in the Koran, the unchanging word, word for word, of Allah ? Never to be changed, criticised or - worst of all - denied ?

i.e. Is Islam the problem ?

If so, then we ARE in trouble. Don't you agree ?

Can Islam be somehow reformed and revised ? Can the vicious bits be excised ? Whose job would that be, if not the imams ?

Love,

Joe

It was said by some spinmeister that the real measure of successful spin is to be able to have the victim him/herself seen as responsible for, or at the very least a contributor, to the harm that was done to her/him.

OLO has some rather gifted amateur spinmeisters. That is if they are not hired tools of astroturfing political and other lobbyists. And speaking of the last mentioned, there are many professionals and NGOs who suck hundreds of millions of dollars from the trough of taxpayers' money every year. What is a few dollars for some hack to sit on sites?

Some have been in the business of exploiting victimhood for years. And multiculturalism has provided endless opportunities for the quick-witted to double-dip from the public trough by weasel themselves too into seats on the victimhood gravy train. Then there is the retinue of commentator and 'journalist' (not a journalist's derriere) flogs who judge and scold the Australian public for recently invented 'wrongs'. Humiliation TV, loved by the dumbed-down.

Back to OLO's talented amateur try-hard spinmeisters, it took no time at all for the usual suspects to cast doubt about the Bolt attack - that was recorded after all, on videotape. So the evidence was clear enough. Then, even if it did occur and there was still doubt they explained, it could have been 'Chaser' or uni students. - Which would have done two things: firstly, direct attention away from the violent leftists (who still would claim credit anyhow, oddly enough); and secondly, by trivialising the offence there arose the implication that Bolt 'over-reacted' and was violent himself and couldn't take a 'joke'.

OLO's amateur spinmeisters moved on to apply the always successful tactics of ad hominem and various red herrings, including the perennial favourite, tu quoque. The formula is played out on so many threads (and for years?).

However there was an attack and hopefully the police and eventually a court will catch up with the thugs. So, go hard, spinmeisters, your work is ahead of you.

"Why I’ve finally given up on the left"
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/09/why-ive-finally-given-up-on-the-left/

Hi Leoj,

That URL, referring to an article by Nick Cohen, should be a must-read for anybody who still thinks they are on the left. Perhaps they will join him in declaring

"So, for what it is worth, this is my resignation letter from the left. I have no idea who I should send it to or if there are forms to fill in. But I do know this: like so many before me, I can claim constructive dismissal."

It's incredibly difficult to give up lifelong allegiances. It's taken me nearly seventy years, painfully, slowly, bit by bit, plank by plank :(

Thanks, Leoj.

Joe

Joe (Loudmouth),

I don't think that anyone on this forum advocates
violence no matter who it comes from.
Most thinking people are
against the generalisations that occur
and the unnecessary labelling of people.

My point was that blame should not be assigned to only
"Left-Wing" groups when you have members of the far-right
groups who are also threatening political violence.

http://newmatilda.com/2015/11/21/members-of-the-far-right-are-threatening-political-violence-whatever-happened-to-those-anti-terr0r-laws/

As for your reference to immams. Previous and subsequent
statements have been issued by the Islamic Council of
Australia condemning terrorist acts and other forms of
violence committed here and overseas. You can fact-check
this on the web if you're interested. This is common
knowledge.

ooops - again, my apologies for the typo.
Here's the link once more:

http://newmatilda.com/2015/11/21/members-of-the-far-right-are-threatening-political-violence-whatever-happened-to-those-anti-terror-laws/

So Foxy, now you will be needing to bury this with some googled trivia,

<Behind the left-wing Antifa movement that attacked Andrew Bolt

A broad-daylight brawl between commentator Andrew Bolt and apparent members of the anti-fascist "Antifa" movement have raised concerns about the safety of high-profile conservatives, particularly in Melbourne.
..
New footage reveals sheer violence of Andrew Bolt attack
The News Corp columnist and Sky News host fought back fiercely, landing kicks and punches on his assailants until they disbanded, while an unknown onlooker shouted: "What are you doing?" and "Go away".

Bolt and other commentators told Fairfax Media they feared conservatives faced an increasing threat to their safety from far-left activists, especially in the Victorian capital.

"It is ridiculous how dangerous it is for conservatives in this town to speak out," Bolt said. "The right to free speech has to be better protected – everywhere but particularly in Melbourne."

Troy Whitford, history and politics lecturer at Charles Sturt University, said political violence in Melbourne was "nothing new" but it had been a long time since violence from the far-left had been as prominent.
..
Antifa takes its inspiration from the German Antifaschistische Aktion network that arose prior to World War II. Dr Whitford described the Australian version as a loosely-assembled "reactionary group" that seeks to combat the alternative-right, with a particular focus on defending multiculturalism, anti-racism and feminism.

"They're basically taking on that very militant approach to fostering left-wing, progressive views," he said. "If you don't subscribe to them, they kick you in the head. Anti-fascism is what they go under but they're actually practising fascist techniques.">

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/is-melbourne-too-dangerous-for-conservatives-behind-the-leftwing-antifa-movement-that-attacked-andrew-bolt-20170608-gwnb6h.html

Foxy,

Surely you're not so naïve as to fall for those mealy-mouthed and carefully-worded statements in relation to Islamist terrorism ? Strange, they always go only so far, and - to the faithful - the statements that they make are probably quite ambiguous, deliberately so, since they are talking to two audiences, out of both sides of their mouths. Tekkiah to the max.

Joe

Yes, Joe. Every time a Muslim spokesperson makes a statement, you have to think 'taqiyya'. When under pressure, Muslims are encouraged to lie. It's all part of the Islam that people shy away from familiarising themselves with.

Foxy,

With the greatest respect to you, of course you are going to get 'backup

Foxy,

I always get excited when I'm addressing you, and I prematurely hit the enter key before I had finished.

What I would have said is, that you will always get ammunition to disagree with me from the Lefty ABC and New Matilda, etc: so it's not going to make any impression on me. I am happy with your own opinions and points of view, and I respect your airing of them. I do not, however, respect the ABC or New Matilda or the Left press. Besides, every time I open a reference (Left or Right origin) I get kicked out back to my desktop and have to start again, which makes me swear a lot.

My, my the trite indignation of some posters,

A Bolt supporter has managed to reduce the deaths of innocent Australians at the hands of extremest to something akin to a footy match, keeping score are we.

Joe racks up the score: "TOTAL, 2017 (so far): (six) or seven killed by Islamists, none by white extremists."

Tut tut, and its only approaching half time.

Leoj tried to jump on me when I mentioned the gun death of a copper in Queensland, with demands for apologies and retractions, yet lets that comment sail through to the keeper, no comment when in a crass representation Joe puts up the score of deaths, six or is it seven, innocent people at the hands of extremists from one side and nil for the other team.

I am sure Foxy will join me in deploring the death of even one innocent person at the hands of extremists left or right. Unfortunately I can not say the same for others.

Leoj, you claim to be an "evidence" man, where is the evidence that Bolt was attacked by those he claims, left wing Fascists, or as an old Hansonite yourself do you accept Bolts word as proof. I thought you might have blamed the Greens, that's your usual tactic.

The death of the copper up Queensland has nothing to do with any religion though Paul.

We've always had nutjobs but in comparison to muslim killings they're pretty rare.

Most murders are for a reason and are usually one offs, domestic violence, drug money owed, some robberies and muggings that go wrong.

Serial killers, especially one's that rape and/or target kids are another group. Thing is, evil and revolting though they are, and no-one says ever says otherwise...they're not a world wide conglomeration set out to kill for a religion and there is no way such killings can threaten a whole country.

There are countries that were once a different religion that are now predominately muslim. There are countries that are now terrifyingly mega muslim like Iran and Afghanistan that were once very liberal muslim.

As a religion and or a way of life, I'm sorry to say..it sucks bigtime. It's wrong on every level.

And that's even if one doesn't even count the massacres.

I'm no christian either, I believe the whole religion rubbish to be as believable as Hansel and Gretal or Snow White and the 7 dwarfs.

Paul,

The difference is that you jumped on the bandwagon, with the cowardly murder of the policeman, to score a point; even before the funeral.

A Greens' tactic that is all too common.

Dear ttbn,

Thank You for your kind words.

I guess we all have links whose sources either appeal to
us or don't. I tend to read the articles and then
I decide whether they're suitable to the topic of the
discussion. I've used The Herald Sun a fair bit lately
only to discover that their articles are not always
accessible. That you have to be a subscriber. So I've gone
to using other sources.

We should all be concerned about the escalation of violence
lately. From various groups in our communities. Our streets
are becoming unsafe and that is something that should not
be allowed to get out of hand.

I've only now had the chance to look at the video in any detail.

I was initially of the view that Bolt had some justification for what he did particularly as the glitter pair were masked. Now I am not so sure.

The footage shows one of the men getting Bolt with some glitter spray. Bolt reacted by throwing punches which is when the second person stepped in and pushed Bolt away from his associate. Bolt then retaliated by throwing more punches and kicking.

Bolt was 'attacked' to the same degree as Joyce was attacked by the religious nut job. If Joyce had gone after the pie thrower with the viciousness that Bolt displayed he would have been rightly criticised.

While I'm sympathetic to the idea that Bolt may have feared for his own physical safety and reacted accordingly I fail to see how a charge of attacking or of thuggery against the protesters can be substantiated.

RIP Police Officer, Senior Constable Brett Forte, slain in the line of duty.
http://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/state-funeral-to-farewell-citys-heroic-officer-bre/3186606/

Senior Constable Brett Forte, a good family man and model citizen, was loved and is sadly missed by his family, friends and colleagues. By the general community in Queensland too, many of whom paid respects at his funeral and in other memorial services. His death diminished us all.

Senior Constable Brett Forte is the brave soul that Paul1405 contemptuously refers to only by 'copper'. Paul1405's reference above is irrelevant and inappropriate. It is also forum baiting. I will leave it at that.

Hi Scaly Repox,

So how was Bolt not to know that he wasn't being hit with acid ? Some Korean poison ? What would you do, wait until you've ascertained that it was, slapped the thug on the back, and said, "Jolly good trick, old chap."

Or do you react sensibly, i.e. as a quick as you can, especially when a second thug steps in ? How many more are there, you may think. Are they Islamist terrorists or worse, elderly homosexual marriage advocates ?

Perhaps you're right, Bolt should have said, "Look, fellas, let's sit down together to a nice Soy-Lite-Kale-Smoothie and discuss like people do on the 'Left' ? My shout."

Because usually the Left are so civil and sensible, or have I got that wrong ?

Joe

By the way, Steal, it's called 'assault'. One has the right to defend oneself reasonably, if one is being assaulted.

Tell your mates to be a bit more careful next time. And wear nut-protectors

Dear Loudmouth,

Lol.

Ah mate, you really don't do this macho stuff well do you. I don't think it is in your nature, which isn't a bad thing but it does make attempts to appear pugnacious a little silly and rather childish.

Now have you viewed the video yet? Just like the Rabbit Proof Fence reviewing the evidence before spouting is advisable.

Here is a link;

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/new-footage-reveals-sheer-violence-of-andrew-bolt-attack-outside-melbourne-restaurant-20170608-gwmx7k.html

Let me know if you think the sequence of events are different to what I have said.

Wow ! I hadn't seen the video before: anybody with half a brain would do what Bolt did. How was he to know - the way he looks around at the end of the video at the bloke coming up to him - how many are involved ? What weapons have they got ? How is he to know what has been thrown on him ?

After all, he's not to know that they're just a couple of anarchist or Trot dick-brains - he's not familiar with the Left these days.

Would you really act any differently to Bolt if you were attacked/assaulted/whatever? by strangers ?

Joyce got off lightly with just a cream pie.

Mmmmmmm ..... cream pie ...... yum.

SteeleRedux would have repelled them with instant diarrhoea.

Sh(bleep) happens.

They look like they were going to have another go at their victim, but slink away when another brave older gent arrives to even up the odds.

Dear loudmouth,

You wrote;

“anybody with half a brain would do what Bolt did”

Truer words was never spoken.

If you are asking would I react to someone spraying me with glitter by repeatedly punching and kicking them then the answer is hopefully no.

That is not to say I am incapable of over-reacting on occasion. There are quite a few incidents where I really should have walked away but didn't. One in particular where I was prepared to put someone who had stolen from me through a large window to get his mates to back off. I was pretty shaken at being willing to potentially maim someone over some shop stock. It made me take a good look at myself.

Most people who initially might have reacted the way Bolt did would probably be thinking afterward that using fists and boots because of some glitter spray was a bit over the top. I doubt though it is within Bolt's emotional range, especially with ratings in the offing.

There is nothing in that short bit of video that in anyway supports Bolts claim that he was "attacked" by left wing Fascists. In fact it could just as easily be interpreted that the whole thing was a set up.
Unless there is supporting evidence to the contrary. Bolt would have more to gain from sympathetic publicity than anyone else.

Leoj when it suits, you will apply a double standard. Get off your high horse, The police use the word "copper" as does the rest of the community, as evident by the official police bumper sticker which reads 'COPS ARE TOPS'.
Why didn't you jump in when Joe used the deaths of 6 or 7, innocent Australians to score a political point? You passed it over, because the point favored your way of thinking. You can't have it both ways. Elsewhere you demand evidence, yet here you gleefully accept Bolts word as evidence. Again because it suits your politics. When it don't you will carry on like a pork chop.

Hmmm, in the last scene the attacker facing toward the camera shows
he is prepared for fisticuffs. He changes his stance when the man with
his back to the camera shows up.
I cannot see any jury convicting Bolt after that video.
Just looked at it again. It was two against one, plus the cameraman,
one was wearing a hoodie, in the last shots both were shaping up to
start punching. They were not attempting to run away.
It seems to have ended when the other man turned up. He shouted
"Whats going on ?". Was he the restaurateur ?

Still can't see a jury finding guilty there.

SR,

There is no doubt that Bolt had every right to defend himself against the masked left whinge extremists who half blinded him with their first assault. That they tried to assault him further before bravely running away is also clear.

In managing to humiliate the left whinge extremists (yes Paul you can stop your laughable bleating to the contrary) he made them look pathetic, and probably reduced the chances of them repeating their violent assaults.

The cherry on the cake would be these thugs getting criminal records.

Ah Shadow, and I thought you were a legal expert, so you claim. In absence of any creditable witnesses, with no evidence, and unnamed accused. Who exactly are you finding guilty of this heinous crime? The Tooth Fairy!

I see Bolt is still cashing in on the whole affair. Auctioning off the infamous pair of undies, or some such item of paraphernalia, he was wearing at the time. And to make it worse Bolt will throw in two copies of his crappy book to boot.

If it had been Richard Michael Di Natale who was attacked with, to him, unknown substances, then Paul would be singing a different tune.

Three cheers for Bolt and anyone else that stands up for themselves and fights back, even a Green!

It is clear that the extreme Left on OLO is happy to have anybody who disagrees with them beaten up or sprayed - perhaps terminated? - and also blame them for being attacked. What lovely people they are.

Dear ttbn,

The "extreme left" on OLO?

What about the "extreme right?"

As far as I know most people who post here have
a variety of views depending on the issues.
They can be liberal in some cases and conservative
in others.

Of course we do have people who
tend to harp on the same themes all the time and
that gets a bit dull, boring and predictable after
a while but even then their views are not usually
set in concrete. Thinking people usually tend to
be flexible. Therefore putting labels on people
is not a good idea. Especially, if their views
happen to disagree with ours. The fault then lies
with us, not them.

"Extreme Left/Extreme Right?"

Labels belong on clothes not people.

Argue and disprove their views. Don't label.
It achieves nothing productive and only results
in counter-labelling and a breakdown in communication.

Now I'll get off my soap box, and go sit in the
"naughty corner".

Foxy,

Yes. What about the extreme Right? Do you have something to say about them? If so, go ahead. Can I not criticise the extreme Left without mentioning the extreme Right who, if they exist here, have not indulged in blaming the victim (Andrew Bolt) as have the extreme Left. I cannot blame the extreme Right or anyone else for something the extreme Left does, no matter how even-handed or 'fair' I wish to be.

Could you point out the extreme Right comments (or commentators) for me, please. (on OLO, that is).

As for labels, they are a fact of life. There has always been a Left, a Right - and a Centre for the indecisive. Very few of them extreme, in my view.

The only extremists we have to worry about – because they have got themselves into parliament – are the Greens. Ratbag with shaven heads and placards might, like Atifa, the goons who attacked Bolt, be extremists, but they are of no consequence because they have no power. We have laws and police to deal with hooligans.

We have had a good example of Rancid extreme right person haven't we, and keeps carrying on like a filthy little runt that he is today. No one wants that repeated any time soon.
Bolt is one of them, he is short om publicity.

One or two here may have been absent coughing up a fur ball at the time, but this appeared in an earlier post. The leftists (I dispute they have anything in common with the Left tradition of yesteryear, make that 30 years ago), ARE the modern day totalitarians who deny others freedom of speech and are prepared to assault journalists in the street and in broad daylight:

<Bolt and other commentators told Fairfax Media they feared conservatives faced an increasing threat to their safety from far-left activists, especially in the Victorian capital.

"It is ridiculous how dangerous it is for conservatives in this town to speak out," Bolt said. "The right to free speech has to be better protected – everywhere but particularly in Melbourne."

Troy Whitford, history and politics lecturer at Charles Sturt University, said political violence in Melbourne was "nothing new" but it had been a long time since violence from the far-left had been as prominent.
..
Antifa takes its inspiration from the German Antifaschistische Aktion network that arose prior to World War II. Dr Whitford described the Australian version as a loosely-assembled "reactionary group" that seeks to combat the alternative-right, with a particular focus on defending multiculturalism, anti-racism and feminism.

"They're basically taking on that very militant approach to fostering left-wing, progressive views," he said. "If you don't subscribe to them, they kick you in the head. Anti-fascism is what they go under but they're actually practising fascist techniques.">

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/is-melbourne-too-dangerous-for-conservatives-behind-the-leftwing-antifa-movement-that-attacked-andrew-bolt-20170608-gwnb6h.html

While it was not mentioned in the quoted article, the leftist 'Progressives' (Regressives) side with toxic fundamentalism such as Islam and are themselves corrosive to freedom of speech, democracy, traditional institutions (such as marriage) and Australian Law. What about the female union heavy who arrogantly declared that she will break whatever laws she likes and she encourages others of her ilk to do the same?

Dependable Dorg,

Right on cue ! A bloke gets assaulted, defends himself, with a third bloke coming up for all he knows, and you can find him guilty of ....... hmmm ...... guilty of what, Dorg ?

Ah, being a right-winger. There you go. Different laws for different folks, is it ? Left-wingers of all rancid shapes and sizes can assault, that's okay, but no right-winger should be allowed to defend himself. Is that it ?

In Australia, anybody who is attacked - extreme rat-bag left-wing or right-wing, has the right not to be assaulted. They have the right to defend themselves. Given that, on the spur of the moment, not all factors, pro and con, can be immediately processed, when one perceives that one is being attacked, one is perfectly entitle to defend oneself.

If you think otherwise, you're obviously nothing much more than a bigot. Which is legal, since who defines a bigot ? Never mind, you can be both a bigot AND a moron simultaneously.

Joe

What is an attack, someone with a mug full of kids play stuff. Who says you have the right to defend your self. If the defense is greater than the attack you are in trouble. As you noticed they did not fight back.
Yes far right wingers have all the cheek in the world, take Abbott for example.
Bolt is one of them and fair play, radical and far right.
The world has gone past that sort of rhetoric.
And they blame muslims for extremism, the right are just as bad if not worse.
Bolt was ready to assault, joyse just took it. In other words Bolt was expecting it.

Foxy,

"I don't think that anyone on this forum advocates
violence no matter who it comes from"

Well, I do advocate violence, particularly when unlawfully attacked, anyone who physically attacks me or mine can expect a violent reaction; Andrew Bolt was perfectly justified in reacting with violence and had one of his punches resulted in serious injury or death then he would have had no case to answer.
I also advocate violence from the Armed Forces and the police when it is necessary, I'm all for police when attacked, using violence to protect themselves and others.

The attackers initiated the violence, therefore they are to blame for any outcome.

Dick-brain Dorg,

How do you know ? Somebody chucks something on you and then something else, two blokes in hoodies like most gutless wonders, what is anybody supposed to think ? Are you suggesting that Bolt is clairvoyant, he instantly understands what has been thrown on him and rubbed in his face ? He instantly realises that it's not some sort of Korean poison, not some suffocating or poisonous or acidic substance, and instantly forgives the half-wits as just playing a bit of a prank ?

Would you ? If you were accosted like this, by blokes with tatts, hob-nail boots, and skin-heads, what would you suspect ? How would you react ?

Ah, haven't thought about that yet ? Take your time, I know it's hard for mental-defectives. The world is so unfair.

Joe

no doubt Paul will have the stabbed London victims as the perpetrators of the crime. It fits with his reasoning.

Well, it looks as if anyone with the mind to do so could go and give doog a smacking and he would't defend himself. I have tried to engage him with common sense, but it is clear that he is an imbecile.

doog, "Who says you have the right to defend your self. If the defense is greater than the attack you are in trouble"

Well done, doog for the odd frankness (even if unintended and rooted in hubris) that consistently evades other leftist 'Progressives' on OLO (and their heads do bob up on threads like this).

For you have openly stated what they believe, that they choose who has rights and who doesn't. And obviously in the subject case it is Bolt who has no rights because he is not one of them.

Thanks are due to you too, for brazenly making it crystal clear that while leftist 'Progressives' (and we are talking about International Socialists aren't we? you might have added that), are all for criminals rights, they don't give a proverbial about victims' rights and citizens rights.

Next, where anyone does defend him- herself or loved ones, including against home invasions, the very first interest of the police is in charging the defender, the victim, who if charged will face the expensive, uphill battle of defending his-herself against a reversed standard of proof. -That doesn't apply to his/her attacker/s.

That is of course what the sly, unethical, leftist stirrers are doing on the forum, casting about for ways, no matter how unlikely, whereby the victim of this assault, Bolt, can be re-victimised by them and preferably, by the State. But even in that hugely unlikely scenario, it would rely on the gutless perpetrators of leftist violence being caught and charges proved.

Dear ttbn,

You asked me to point out to you any extreme comments
on this discussion. I've found quite a few.

"Scaly Repox" followed by "Steal" in reply to
SteeleRedux's civil post on page 13.

Followed by posts and comments like "sh(bleep) happens"
and the "instant diarrhoea quote, followed by
references to bigots and morons simultaneously.
Then came the totally unnecessary -"Dependable Dorg," reference
which was "improved" on with - "Dick-brain Dorg."

Why is it that people who profess to be for "free-speech"
are the ones who personally attack others and tarnish them with
the "left-wing" labels, and worse.

What sort of labels should we judge them by their
behaviour?

Silly, childish? Or equally rudely as -
mental midgets with IQ's of fence-posts perhaps?

Or something even less polite?

Nobody likes or supports illogical and abusive debaters.

To the sycophantic Bolt supporting fraternity,

Many of you claim to be evidence based people. Joe you argued long and hard on the 'Rabbit Proof Fence' thread that there was a lack of creditable evidence, and therefore you were unwilling to accept the verbal accounts of those involved, fair enough.
With this incident however you, like a number of others, readily accept at face value Bolts account of the incident. Is Bolt truthful, no one can say with certainty. Has Bolt anything to gain from this, the answer is yes. Has Bolt exploited the incident to his advantage since, again the answer is yes.

I hope the Victorian Police have not given Bolt, being a high profile type, any special consideration when investigating this matter. In the normal course of events, a junior officer takes a statement(s), gives Bolt an incident number, and unless there is some new development, the matter dies a natural death.

Look, it has become obvious that doog is a hopeless case.
There is no point in discussing anything with him.
He obviously needs glasses.

Regarding this word "progressives"
It seems to be a contradiction in terms.
I see some use regressives instead but that does not seem to be
suitable either, as some on the left are looking for a better world.
The lefties we are talking about seem to want to go toward a more
arbitrary regime where they know best and we should just accept it.
I can see why they are so sympathetic to Islam as it works on the same
rules, Allah knows best and don't you forget it.

Can we have a competition for a new name for the arrogant left.

Paul1405:

“With this incident however you, like a number of others, readily accept at face value Bolts account of the incident. Is Bolt truthful, no one can say with certainty. Has Bolt anything to gain from this, the answer is yes. Has Bolt exploited the incident to his advantage since, again the answer is yes.”

What has Bolt to gain exactly? Publicity for his views? He has a national TV show and everyone knows his views. He had these views before the incident and will have them afterwards. How does this incident change anything? What does it prove?

Either he set it up which does not make his views any more or less ‘right’ than they already are or he was attacked by an isolated group who did not agree with his views.

The only ones to gain were those who sought to physically injure him if indeed that was their intent.

Hi Paul,

Well, I've seen the video now. Bearing in mind that shoving something in someone's face is assault, in any Australian jurisdiction, and that if two blokes in hoodies stand and appear to be about to throw some punches, Bolt was certainly within his rights tov defend himself. Isn't that so ? What would you have one ?

He was not to know at the moment what it as was they shoved in his face. And when the third bloke comes up, he's not to know if he's one of the scum-bags' accomplices or not. Isn't that so ? What would you have done ?

Let's see how this plays out in the courts.

Sorry, your bias is showing :)

Joe

Joe,

How could you?

Paul is not biased, he is a Green!!

Is Mise, I freely admit it, I am as biased as every other poster on this forum, including you. Please name one forumite who is not biased? In fact can you name one person on the planet who, unless they are in some totally catatonic state, are not biased in some way.

"Let's see how this plays out in the courts." Joe who has been charged? When is the court date?

Has Bolt got anything to gain, phanto, are you that naive, read the following.

PRIME Minister Malcolm Turnbull is being urged to declare the organisation whose members glitter-bombed conservative commentator Andrew Bolt a “terrorist group”.

Copy from Murdoch's No News Corp, well well, the same mob that employs Bolt. Stamp out the opposition ah!

I ask "URGED BY WHOM?" the bloody Bolt mob, that's who!

Paul,

While I understand that you would like your fellow left whingers to get off Scott free, they committed a premeditated act of violence against a prominent citizen so I doubt that they will relegate it to a jnr beat cop as it is more than just common assault.

They already have their photographer who was filming the event and posted it, so it is only a matter of time before they get the other thugs, and with DNA hopefully give them a stint in prison.

My previous post was a bit long, ought to have read "Paul is a Green"!

No, Foxy. I asked if you could point out extreme Rightists and extreme Right posts. Name calling has nothing to do with it.

There is one thing Paul has not taken into account.
Bolt had to move house and family because he had significant threats.
He said they were life threats against himself and family.
If this is the case then the police will have been involved.
Bolts location at any time would not been known except the book launch
would have been publicised, but whether that he was to speak may not
have been known.
There are number of people like Geert Wilders and Salmon Rushdie that
are under police protection. If these sort of things continue you will
find the same thing happening here.

What we have here is a lot of surmising by the forums Usual Suspects, surmising this, surmising that. The evidence is nothing more than the word of Bolt, his biased opinions.
Special treatment for one of your Elites, ah Shadow, a "prominent citizen" DNA etc top cops involved, maybe the Commissioner himself can take over the investigation, Bolt is not the Prime Bloody Minister, he's a Murdoch hack, nothing more, a peddler of wothless exaggerations and gossip, a bloke that was found guilty of a crime in a court of law, unreliable I would say.
I should be careful of what I post about Bolt, the Tactical Response Group, could be breaking my door down any minute, on the order of the Unser Fuhrer himself!

I apologize Is Mise, I did not realize you were totally catatonic.

Paul,

Not all of us are on the unreconstructed opportunist Left, you know: some of us do have eyes to watch the video, and brains to work out what's going on. I'm confident that you do too :)

A bloke gets attacked by two other hooded blokes. He defends himself, and gets ready for a third if necessary. Seriously, what would you do ? Ask to see their party cards ? Left or Right, I don't think a bloke would do any different. To defend oneself is not a Right-wing-only trait, even someone on the Left would do it, unless their mother was there to do it for them. Or if their attackers were Muslim, then they would lay down and take a good kicking (or stay standing and take a good knifing for the Cause of Peace).

Hmm, there's an idea.

Joe

In these days when one punch can kill, your presumption that it is ok to punch and kick someone that has invaded your space with a stupid prank can get you into a lot of trouble.
We have police and law courts for settling disputes.
It does not count saying the contents of the cup could have been acid, it wasn't.
There is no justification for retaliation.
Bolt is a hard right extremist muslim winger, to him all muslims are tared with the same brush, a never ending hatred for a race of people, which keeps the pot on the boil.
Turnbull tels you to keep the rhetoric down, most people do, except the far right winge bags of course

Dear ttbn,

And do tell us - who on this forum take part in name
calling and abuse if opinions don't agree with
their own? Look at the records here on this site
and the predictable patterns that follow.

Dearest Foxy,

Well, Dorg for one - see immediately above. Complaint demolished :)

Dorg makes the amazing assertion that "There is no justification for retaliation." Of course there is. I sincerely hope that if ever a 'Left'-winger is attacked without provocation, that she fights back with everything she's got. Advice: go for the nuts, that reeeeallly hurts ! Then the eyes, then the throat. Good god, I'm giving advice to the 'Left' and for free !

I hope Trump has to give up his tapes. I hope the Aggressive-Left Trots has to give up that video. How's that for objectivity ?

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

No. not doog - you!

Doog simply expressed an opinion.

It did not agree with yours.

You stooped to calling him "Dick-brain Dorg,"
"Dependable Dorg." You did the same with
SteeleRedux - "Scaly Repox"- "Steal."

Complaint not demolished.

Hi Foxy,

Guilty as charged. But I'm sure Deputy Dorg and Stale can take it.

BTT: I hereby declare that if you were ever attacked without provocation, by anyone, and if I were nearby (probably mooning over you, too tongue-tied to speak), I would immediately come to defend you with whatever violence I could muster on my old knees and poor eyesight.

My rough understanding of the law is that someone attacked would have the right to defend themselves until the attacker desisted, conscious or not. Perhaps not with a gun or a knife, but certainly with their fists.

It would be an honour to defend you, Foxy, even to the point of my life :)

Love,

Joe

Foxy,

I repeat. I asked you to expose the extreme Rightists and extreme Right posts seen on OLO. I have no interest whatsoever in name calling. If you can't do this for me, just let it go.

PS, Foxy,

I called doog an 'imbecile', if that's what you are talking about. That's what I think of anyone who thinks Bolt, or anyone else, does not have the right to defend themselves against physical attack is.

That is not political, left right, or anything else. It is just a reaction to a very, very peculiar individual, someone who keeps harping on about Tony Abbott - even when Tony Abbott has NOT been mentioned in any conversation.

I tried to have a discussion with doog, but he rejected the chance, and he continues to carp on about Abbott and makes ridiculous comments that nobody else, left or right, would dream of making. I think that he is programmed, and somebody winds him up every morning.

And really, Foxy, if you take exception to Jovial Joe's occasional lapse into playing around with people's monikers, you are getting a bit thin-skinned.

Joe, you claim to be an evidence based person, and will demand evidence when ever the argument is against you. In fact you run a website which supposedly to be all evidence based. Yet on this question, Bolts claimed attack by Left Wing Fascists. You readily accepted as the "gospel truth" what Bolt has to say, Could it be you are simply a one eyed Bolt supporter with similar views, and without proof you take at face value whatever Bolt claims.

Then you make this silly claim yourself <<Or if their (someone on the Left) attackers were Muslim, then they would lay down and take a good kicking (or stay standing and take a good knifing for the Cause of Peace>>

Maybe you run a con job on the forum, claiming to once have been a misguided member of the evil left, who one day miraculously seen the light, and is now encamped firmly with the good folk of the right. People like Bolt. Where did your conversion take place, on the road to Damascus?

Dear ttbn,

You can make all the justifications that you want.
The fact remains that there is a double standard
here. When "jovial Joe" insults people for their
opinions that's allright and my pointing it out
makes me thin-skinned. And when doog expresses
an opinion he's an "imbecile." And the list goes on.
Then there are the accusations of being "left-wing"
hurled around because anyone who dares to criticise
Andrew Bolt must be a "Left-winger," whereas those
that defend him and insult posters for their opinions
cannot possibly be right-wingers.

Okay then. Sounds fair.

We get it.

Foxy,

That's life. Whatever one 'side' says against the other applies to them as well. We just have different opinions of the same thing. It has always been thus, and it will continue that way. What a boring place it would be if we all thought the same way.

Hi Paul,

Whatev. Wait and see if and when the matter goes to court. Are you suggesting that

(a) Bolt was attacked by rival right-wing thugs ? or

(b) that Bolt was assaulted randomly by people of no particular persuasion ?

(a) is possible since, after all, there is no limit to the variations on both Left and Right themes. And come to think of it, I suppose the same applies to the 'Left'. I remember a friend (in NZ actually, the late Bruce Jesson) who was associated with the Trots, to their Whatever Revolutionary People's Movement or Whatever (Uninterrupted Revolution), to a splinter from it which took the tag (Spasmodic). No doubt later, a sub-splinter broke away from that, called something like (the Punctuated Evolution Revolutionary Caucus).

Life is almost never either-or. Politics is almost never cut and dried, The One And Only Left versus The One And Only Right (and Nothing In Between). For all I know, the old Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist)split into a pro-Albania wing and a pro-Pol-Pot wing, both denouncing the original bird as Rightist.

Perhaps (eventually) things fall apart, but in the meantime, while waiting for that inevitability, they certainly fragment. Just look at ISIS and al Qa'ida and the Muslim Brotherhood, all Islamo-fascist movements but at each others' throats - viz. the Saudis, Iran and Qatar.

It's an inconveniently complicated world, Paul :)

Cheers,

Joe

Dear ttbn,

So now - "that's life?"

And, whatever one "side" says against the other
applies to them as well. Really?

That's good to hear.

I'm also so glad that you finally agree with
what I've been saying for a long time on OLO -
that - what a boring place it
would be if we all thought the same.

So good also, to see that you've had a change of heart.
From what
you wrote on page 16, when you stated that:

"It is clear that the extreme Left on OLO is happy to have
anybody who disagrees with them beaten up or sprayed
- perhaps terminated? and also blame them for being
attacked. What lovely people they are."

Good to know that you will apply the same standards to
everybody in the future not just singling out one side
as opposed to the other. After all as I stated earlier
people today have a mixture of opinions depending on the
issues. Conservative in some cases, and quite liberal
in others, and often somewhere in between as well.

I'm happy that we've made progress - finally.

As was apparent where there was justified criticism of the superficially kindly, powdered pink old grandma (who was anything but nice) that allowed (orchestrated, some allege) foul abuses of the rights of vulnerable, church-mouse poor QUT students, the obscenity where the attack on Bolt is concerned lies in the act itself and not in any public discussion of it.

How can these affronts and outright attacks on the normal human rights (and person where Bolt is concerned) of ordinary citizens be occurring in Australia?

What has changed?

Because this is NOT the Australia of my youth and early adulthood. It is a recent thing.

In an OLO article, some author explains away, rationalises and finally appears to blame migrant-welcoming Australian society for the indiscretions of an in-your-face, ambitious person seeking power. Blame-shifting spin where the offender flips to victim. What spin! What gall! What BS!

The assault on columnist Bolt is an obscenity. It is another big step towards tyranny and as dangerous as the trampling of the rights of the QUT students and the cartoonist Bill Leak. Because it was also politically motivated and attacks the fundamental basis and public consensus on what Australian culture is and its most valued institutions of freedom of speech and democracy.

Foxy,

“I'm also so glad that you finally agree with
what I've been saying for a long time on OLO -
that - what a boring place it 
would be if we all thought the same.

So good also, to see that you've had a change of heart.
From what
you wrote on page 16, when you stated that:

"It is clear that the extreme Left on OLO is happy to have
anybody who disagrees with them beaten up or sprayed
- perhaps terminated? and also blame them for being
attacked. What lovely people they are."

Hate to sound like Pauline, but 'please explain'.

I criticised the Left for being “happy to have anybody who disagrees with them beaten up or sprayed....”.

Are you implying that the Right would be happy to see one of the many Left journalists beaten up? Has there been a Left journalist physically attacked by the Right? And has anyone from the Right ever cheered the attackers on as the Left on OLO definitely has. I would be very disappointed if there were.

leoj makes a valid point.
The attack on Bolt was a political attack and that makes it doubly dangerous.
It was not done in front of a crowd as a demo, it was an isolated act.
It was recorded so to be a incitement prop to fellow leftists.
We indeed have crossed a red line.

I hate to raise the issue of Australian values, they're so boring, but I hope that all of us would go to the aid of anyone being attacked, Left, Right, Muslim, Buddhist, what-the-hell-ever.

Judging by the actions of that lovely girl from Loxton, SA last seek, on London Bridge, which got her killed, I hope that that's what we would do as Australians. Why ? Because we value human life, anybody's. Why ? Because we assume that one person is as good as another, that everybody has the right to an unfettered life, every man and every woman, the right to all the opportunities that our society is supposed to offer, especially the right to life.

Yes, if someone attacks someone else with a knife or a gun, then they temporarily surrender those rights until they are, one way or the other, subdued, with commensurate force.

I hope that, when the time comes, I have the courage of that wonderful girl from Loxton, to defend anybody being attacked. Surely most of us could say the same ?

Joe

David Penberthy writing for the Advertiser has an excellent
article on what happened to Bolt was an assault whichever
side you're on. It's worth Googling and well worth a read.

David argues that "We have seen left-wing and right-wing people
tormented through opinion pages and social media with calls
for their sacking from private businesses or government jobs
on the basis of opinions they held."

"On the right there were anti same-sex marriage campaigners
and members of the Christian lobby targeted in their
workplace for daring to hold such views. On the left we saw
attacks on Yassmin Abdel Magied who declared on the ABC's
Q&A program that Islam is the most feminist of faiths,
which it is - if you set aside its rules preventing women
from being educated, working, marrying the man of their choice,
driving cars, and leaving house without their face covered."

"Sure Abdel Magied's Facebook comments on Anzac Day were a
bit off, but she apologised and deleted them right away,
realising as much. None of this spared her from what felt like
several thousand opinion pieces."

"We used to agree to disagree. These days we don't just shout
people down, we insult them, abuse them, and even belt them if
they continue to do so, and blame them after for daring to speak
their minds."

Paul is now going to watch the video of the attack on Bolt; good on yer Paul!

Paul you said

"PRIME Minister Malcolm Turnbull is being urged to declare the organisation whose members glitter-bombed conservative commentator Andrew Bolt a “terrorist group”...

I ask "URGED BY WHOM?" the bloody Bolt mob, that's who!"

So obviously you have no need for evidence when making pronouncements, yet need proof beyond reasonable doubt when others post. You are clearly a hypocrite.

Secondly as Bolt has been frequently harassed by left whinge activists, and as most violent political activists are left whinge, it is more than reasonable to assume that the masked thugs were left whinge activists.

SR and Doog,

The judgement with respect to reasonable force depends entirely on the victims impression as to the threat on his life. Given the atmosphere of terrorist attacks, an attack by multiple masked assailants, who threw chemicals in Bolt's face that half blinded him, even if one of the thugs was killed, it would be extremely difficult to prove a case of unreasonable assault.

If the delicate flower that was thrashed feels that he wants to lay charges against Bolt he is free to do so, however, I don't see it going well for him.

Hi Paul,

After very careful consideration, I would respectfully suggest that Shadow Minister has a very strong case against you for hypocrisy.

Fascinating: how do YOU know that the thugs were Left-wingers (using the term somewhat loosely ) ? How do you know they weren't thugs to the right of Bolt ? After all, there's no actual 'end' to either extreme ?

Either way, anyone would be entitled to defend oneself against Right-wing thugs OR Left-wing thugs, as Bolt did. As I suggest you would, and I would support your right to do so.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Shadow Minister,

You opined in my direction;

“The judgement with respect to reasonable force depends entirely on the victims impression as to the threat on his life. Given the atmosphere of terrorist attacks, an attack by multiple masked assailants, who threw chemicals in Bolt's face that half blinded him, even if one of the thugs was killed, it would be extremely difficult to prove a case of unreasonable assault.”

Yet I had already stated;

“While I'm sympathetic to the idea that Bolt may have feared for his own physical safety and reacted accordingly I fail to see how a charge of attacking or of thuggery against the protesters can be substantiated.”

Perhaps you would care to address the point. Does glitter spraying someone now constitute assault and thuggery and if so where does that leave the actions of the religious nut job who thrust a pie into the face of Joyce?

Bolt makes an idiot out of himself every-time he opens his mouth. Him and the fish and chip shop operator would get on like a house on fire. They are complete racist’s
I think SM is a little peeved with the stripping of may the other day. Seeing that he keeps an eye on English politics.
Who ever did that to bolt should have him for assault, and grievous bodily damage. Bolt would get 6 months working for the dole or worse. He had no right what so ever to retaliate, and should be held accountable.
He done far more damage to that bloke, and he got nothing. What a twit he is. Probably a road rage’r, one of the lower class.

' Bolt makes an idiot out of himself every-time he opens his mouth.'

dear oh dear doog. You have given me my laugh for the day.

Paul,

"Melbourne Antifa, a loose collection of left-wing activists united behind "anti-fascist action", appeared to claim a role in the incident, posting on Facebook that "some of our family in solidarity were attacked by Andrew Bolt while they were protesting today".

Slam Dunk, The fascist left it was.

SR,

Legally the spraying of the chemical into Bolt's eyes is common assault. Thuggery is defined as violent behaviour, especially of a criminal nature, which is exactly what it was. Note that the two hooded thugs were quite happy to trade blows with one man until they ran away. The idiot who pied Joyce is also a thug who is now facing criminal charges (as the two hooded thugs should). Does that answer your question?

Doog,

Fortunately the law and reason differs hugely from your ignorant opinion.

Hi Joe,

I am willing to accept that Bolts account of the incident may be factual, but without positive identification of the assailants, how can anyone, Bolt included tag then one way or the other, Then there is my argument that it is just as plausible that Bolt and/or his supporters orchestrated the whole affair for their own political advantage.
It would be derelict of police if they simply accepted Bolts account at face value. and did not investigate the possibility of a setup. History shows that on more than one occasion extreme governments and some moderates have made untruthful claims. The Howard Governments 'Children Overboard' lie is a classic example. Just like the Bolt story, the Usual Suspects on the forum, lapped that one up. Were you taken in by the Howard lie?

Dear Shadow Minister,

I suppose you are right though I feel a little nostalgic for the time when we could toss an egg or the proverbial rotten tomato, or pie, or douse in shaving cream some pollie or an obnoxious blowhard without facing charges of assault.

The nanny state is really catching up with us isn't it.

Shadow, I can only suggest you trade in your crystal ball, it must be faulty, every prediction you make on the forum turns out to be a dud

If Bolt should ever end up on a public mischief charge over this. For his sake, I hope you are not his lawyer, what a disaster that would be.

Hi Paul,

In answer to your question, no.

As for identifying the thugs, don't be half-witted, you know that those blokes would be not only on their mate's camera (and probably being shared around the world- real heroes - on social media by now) but also on police cameras from sundry demos. It would be child's play to identify them.

Now the fascist 'anti'-fascists have admitted to it. So I would say the jig is up.

I don't understand why you have to draw such a long bow - and really a non sequitur, but SJ will pounce on that - to compare the 'Children Overboard' myth with this incident. 'This incident' is on camera. It's been on TV. Anybody who knows those blokes, would recognise them and probably dob them in. They did it, their fascist mates have admitted it. Do you have the slightest evidence that Bolt set it up ? No ? Then why suggest it ? Talk about grasping at straws.

Quit while you're behind, Paul :)

Joe

SteeleRedux, "I feel a little nostalgic for the time when we could toss an egg or the proverbial rotten tomato, or pie, or douse in shaving cream some pollie or an obnoxious blowhard without facing charges of assault"

BS, those examples were always regarded as offences. I can remember the reported costs to the taxpayer from clowns of demonstrators hurling eggs at vehicles of 'authorities' and dye/paint/filth on buildings.

It isn't a 'Nanny State' that recognises such offences as assault and crimes. By what right do you presume to assault others who are going about their lawful business?

It would be different if this happened to you,

<Mother-of-three blinded in one eye by egg thrown from car seeks damages
Friday, November 01, 2013
A mother of three who was left blind in one eye after she was “egged” from a passing car has brought an action for damages in the High Court against the driver.

Ann Doody has to wear a false left eye but worries if anything happens to her right eye.
..
The 46-year-old Dublin nurse and midwife told Mr Justice Kevin Cross she wishes it never happened.

“I suddenly felt something in my left eye,” she said. “There was horrific pain and blood. I knew I had to go to hospital.”>

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/mother-of-three-blinded-in-one-eye-by-egg-thrown-from-car-seeks-damages-248160.html

Paul,

Your crystal ball is a crystal square. Melbourn Antifa just came out with a picture of their member's black eye, so you are wrong yet again, just as the left whinge fascists have been exposed as ignorant louts yet again.

Shadow, please provide a link that is evidence of your claim(s). One thing we can agree on is this Melbourne mob, calling themselves 'Melbourne Antifa' although I would agree they have a legitimate right to protest, peacefully, they certainly do not have the right to assault anyone, including Bolt.

From the video footage, whoever were the perpetrators, the above mob, or Bolt's boys, or someone else, its clear there was no intention to cause injury to Bolt, more or less an attempt at embarrassment, if that's what it was it backfired. It is not the kind of protest action I would endorse, it has the effect of making Bolt some kind of martyr/hero, rather counter productive. It gives Bolt yet another opportunity to grandstand to a broader audience.

Bolts rants, newspaper, TV, are usually confined to preaching to the converted, you and the other Usual Suspects, who readily accept without question anything the blowhard has to say, as demonstrated by this thread.

Good one Leoj, you only had to travel 10,000 miles to Ireland to come up with a story about injury caused by egging, I don't read your links at the best of times, the virus spreader could be at work again. Were the Eggers a bunch of stupid high school kids? The lesson is don't egg anyone, one egg in a million turns out to be a dangerous weapon, as shown by the case in Ireland.

@ Foxy.

"We used to agree to disagree. These days we don't just shout
people down, we insult them, abuse them, and even belt them if
they continue to do so, and blame them after for daring to speak
their minds."

These days there are so few out there with any commonsense that to insult them, abuse them, and even belt them is the only way the rest of us can get rest easy and get any damn sleep!

' "We used to agree to disagree. These days we don't just shout
people down, we insult them, abuse them, and even belt them if
they continue to do so, and blame them after for daring to speak
their minds."'

yep just like they have done with Margaret Court Foxy.

Hi Paul,

Are there two Pauls, one fairly reasonable and polite, the other a bit of a loony ranter ? Is somebody hacking your OLO User Name ? Those pesky Russians.

So ........ because that incident probably will play out in Bolt's favour, he organised for that fascist-anti-fascist mob to commit a 'fake' assault on him, which in his evil way, he could then use against the innocent 'Left' ? i.e. motivation dictates it all ? You should watch a few more TV crime shows, you learn pretty early on that someone with a motive to commit a crime is often - devilishly cunning script-writing - NOT the villain ?

And your fascist friends didn't 'intend' to do him harm (and they didn't do it anyway, they're being framed, and even if they did he deserved it, but he wasn't hurt, so .... ), so he had no right to interpret their friendly prank as an assault and therefore brutally and aggressively fight back ? He should have known instantly that he wasn't in any danger ? What, they nudge, nudge, wink, winked at him ? And anyway, he planned it ? And anyway, the fascists were with their sick mothers in Sydney at the time.

And one of your fascist mates goes and films it for the world's social media :)

Not smart, Paul.

Cheers,

Joe

Foxy,

"Are you implying that the Right would be happy to see one of the many Left journalists beaten up? Has there been a Left journalist physically attacked by the Right? And has anyone from the Right ever cheered the attackers on as the Left on OLO definitely has. I would be very disappointed if there were."

Still waiting for an answer, Foxy. Repeating what someone else says (particularly when it has nothing to do with my question) doesn't cut the mustard. Penberthy notorious Lefty, married to Left MP Kate Ellis, is in not in position to be pontificating about what other people should be doing. As I said, I am interested in what you have to say, not something you have copied from someone else. OLO is about OUR opinions, not repeats from some windbag who is paid to blather.

Paul,

" The Howard Governments 'Children Overboard' lie is a classic example."

Just like the classic examples performed by the Greens on numerous occasions,

Dear ttbn,

There is plenty of information on the web.
All you have to do is Google it.

People who commit violent acts are not just
part of one particular political group.

We've had politicians engaged in political attacks
and vilifications of a previous female Prime Minister
that sent a sign to people on the conservative side
of politics that there's nothing too low, nothing
out of bounds, nothing that goes to far in personal
attacks. I'm talking about our former PM - Julia
Gillard.

You mentioned journalists? Alan Jones told his listeners
that our former PM Julia Gillard should be tied up in a
chaff bag taken to sea and dumped.

Sydney University's Liberal Club had a function which
featured an auction of a jacket made from a chaff bag.

And there's much more but I won't go into the details
here. You can Google all this stuff for yourself.

As for the the link I gave earlier - had you bothered to
read it you would have seen that the author was not
condoning the attack on Andrew Bolt.
On the contrary.

I can't understand why we're arguing here.
Nobody condones the attack on Mr Bolt.
The objections seem to be the claims of the Left/Right
finger-pointing regarding this incident. Some of us
are merely trying to maintain a balance here.

1. often Fascism. a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. The first two facists were Mussolini, Hitler, and then came guess who.

Hi Dorg,

Who, the leaders of China ? Your narrow definition of fascism seems to fit them, currently the most successful exponents of 'socialism' in the world ? Funny how cute definitions and the real world only overlap, they're not identical.

So which socialist regime has NOT morphed, sometimes very quickly, into some variant of fascism ? Even down to the nationalism and racism bit ? Pol Pot's Kampuchea ? Stalin and eastern Europe ? China and Tibet and Sinkiang ? Mengistu in Ethiopia ?

After all, when Finland and Poland declared their independence straight after the October Revolution, what did the Bolsheviks do ? Invade both, to bring them back into the old Tsarist Empire. Socialism seems to invariably mean imperialism, getting their old pre-revolutionary empires back, and the suppression of minorities in the name of national unity and socialist progress.

'Fascism means war', said Dimitrov, one of Stalin's victims. Do we have to wait for more evidence of the overlap between socialism and fascism ?

Conversely, supposedly-socialist regimes almost invariably continue on with their predecessors' imperialism. And strangely, when they are overthrown or are 'reformed', their successors (viz. Putin, Milosevic) just carry on with, or easily go back to (or try to go back to), imperialist policies. There is almost invariably so much overlap between revolutionary and pre-revolutionary imperialist polices, that it's difficult to see where one ends and the other begins. Isn't that so, Dorg ?

Joe

Fascism is a form of government which is a type of one-party dictatorship. Fascists are against democracy. They work for a totalitarian one-party state. ... Such a state is led by a strong leader—such as a dictator and a martial government..
That is what the new far right mob should call it self.
The fascist party, instead of hiding behind something less descriptive.

Is Mise,
Those on the boat DID throw their children overboard.
Wouldn't you if you were on a boat being scuttled ?

Dorg,

Fascism means a lot more than tooth-brush moustaches, or black or brown shirts too, Dorg. Try to get below the surface features.

Fascist activity - i.e. that carried out by supporters of fascism - employs brutal, violent, repressive, terrorising tactics to get their way. A fascist tactic might be to launch a brutal attack on unsuspecting individuals, usually well outnumbering him. Another tactic is to shut down any discussion, using violence as well as overwhelming noise, shouting, loud-hailers, etc. to stop an opponent from getting their view heard, and resorting to violence when 'necessary'.

A fascist will admire someone who uses the most brutal forms of violence, even if they are not of the same group: fascists are always learning 'better brutality'. They are likely to be addicted to violence porn.

Fascism is not remotely interested in principle, or ideas generally: whatever works, whatever or whoever works to destroy your enemy, use it. All the worst scum are welcome into fascist ranks.

A fascist regime will repress the voice of the people, jailing, say, 1400 peaceful marchers, including their leader, if they can't kill him just yet, as they may have done before. A fascist regime will murder reporters (careful getting into a lift, Dorg) in order to terrorise the rest into silence. A fascist regime will ban opposition parties, of course.

And, of course, a fascist regime will set up networks of agents in other countries, in order to subvert them.

Any of that sounds familiar ?

Joe

Bazz,

Sorry about that, the children were thrown overboard but as I remember it they were thrown to Australian servicemen and women who were already in the water.

My point was that the Greens are notorious for the lies that they tell.
See:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jun/07/indigenous-people-victims-of-green-fight-against-adani-mine-says-marcia-langton

Yes...AFTER they'd set fire to their own boat. They have us figured out long before they get here.

Paul,

I can't believe that you are so pathetic that you can't look this up yourself:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4587116/Left-wing-Antifa-Australia-attack-Andrew-Bolt-Melbourne.html
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/antifa-claims-my-attackers-were-its-family/news-story/f6ba913a910b12c0f8dde2ced9f3d810
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/new-footage-reveals-sheer-violence-of-andrew-bolt-attack-outside-melbourne-restaurant-20170608-gwmx7k.html
http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/news/call-to-classify-group-behind-andrew-bolt-glitterbombing-a-terrorist-organisation/news-story/e0ea7881a20aeac10e3b0d89563cdbb7
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/is-melbourne-too-dangerous-for-conservatives-behind-the-leftwing-antifa-movement-that-attacked-andrew-bolt-20170608-gwnb6h.html
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/they-bolted-after-being-bolted/news-story/83d2f63a1f55c50807abbf1fa4d23164

Left whinge fascists initiated the assault.

Doog,

The conservative side of politics in Aus favour democracy, free speech and the removal of regulations. The left whinge side of politics prefer restrictions on free speech and a highly regulated society, and thus by your definition are far closer to fascists.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The following link may be of interest:

http://aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/481-500/tandi491.html

While far-right violent extremist groups have existed in Australia for almost a century, their criminal activities have traditionally been sporadic and relatively contained. Historically, the first far-right groups in Australia appeared post-WWI (including the ex-soldier’s fascist movement known as the White Army) and emerged more strongly in the late 1930s in the form of the Australia First Movement (whose membership was interned during World War II; Bessant 1995). Later came the explicitly Nazi Nationalist Socialist Party of Australia in the 1960s, the National Front of Australia and the Australian National Alliance during the 1970s and early 1980s, and National Action from the early 1980s onwards (Henderson 2002).

Although in 1969 an Australian associated with the evangelical and Millennialist Church of God set fire to the al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem (Lentini 2008), acts of systematic violence by the far-right did not appear consistently on Australian soil until the 1980s.

It is inconceivable that any here would be so stupid as to be going along with the sustained and systematic meta-narrative of spin-masters.

Giving a bit of a boost to policies one agrees with, or even through some selfish motivation that one might accrue advantage is one thing. - But one would imagine that no-one would be cutting off her nose to spite her face by assisting to bury the alarming evidence of political brutality and attempted censorship, Brown Shirt like, that was evidenced by the attack on Bolt and apparently through verbal only so far has previously been directed at his family.

It is shameful. This is Australia, how dare these politically bullying, gutless mongrels attack a defenceless citizen in the street?

Pages back, a poster (Bazz) put the problem succinctly,

"The attack on Bolt was a political attack and that makes it doubly dangerous.
It was not done in front of a crowd as a demo, it was an isolated act.
It was recorded so to be a incitement prop to fellow leftists.
We indeed have crossed a red line."
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 13 June 2017 1:52:13 PM

The activists did cross a red line and we would very foolish indeed not to recognise that and be looking forward to the apprehension of these perpetrators and a suitable custodial sentence to deter copycats who may go further.

There are always the young, well-off, well-educated activists who cannot accept the decisions of democracy and require that their opinion, their will, be acquiesced to, or else. Evan Pederick (Hilton Hotel bombing) was one such leftist activist and union organiser, who came from a privileged background, good family and was very intelligent, employed in a safe guvvy job (Centrelink) who could not accept that his will might not always prevail.

The perpetrators, any accomplices and any hidden directing agent behind the Bolt assault need to be identified and properly interviewed and (risk) assessed. Those who hide them should be brought to justice as well and soon.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I have since learnt it seems it was shaving cream and glitter sparkles, not “a liquid”.

When Gillard was getting sandwiches piffed at her your response to the remark 'Having sandwiches thrown at her by school-children is very poor' was “I'm sure with training they'll get better.”

And our resident blowhard Hasbeen asserted;

“It is no good demanding respect for someone, or some group. People get the respect they deserve, throwing a sandwich was wrong, it should have been a sandwich shop's dumpster, after a busy week.”

So my question is should we regard sandwich throwing as assault too? Or does it depend on the recipient.

Foxy,

I don't see how the handful of incidents of far right violence over the past 60 years has relevance to the thousands of left whinge activists prepared to commit low grade violence on a continual basis against anyone that disagrees with them. And for every nasty sign lofted by a conservative, there are hundreds of vile slogans lofted by left whingers.

SR,

Wow, you must have had to go back 5 years for that, and I'm sure that in your mind a spur of the moment prank by a junior school student is comparable to a deliberate violent attack by masked extremists.

I guess that you would like the child to be taken out and flogged?

SteeleRedux,

What possible advantage is there for you or for your loved ones and the community of which you are all part, to be spinning excuses for thugs who would attack in company in broad daylight in a city street?

You would have to concede that they went to some lengths to plan and coordinate the determined attack, likely motivated by political hatred. They were not deterred by the video surveillance, the possibility of getting caught and the penalties for the crime.

Forget the tu quoque that is fallacious anyhow, I am interested to know why you would support thugs who attack vulnerable people, especially a lone, old fellow who has done them no harm.

Dear Shadow Minister,

This is not a competition, or at least it shouldn't be.
Violence is wrong no matter who does it or how many
times it is done. Once is one too many.

I link I gave you showed the history of violence in
this country and the history covered violence from
all groups. It was worth a read.
We're not trying to score brownie points here - like
your side is worse than mine.

All violence is bad.

What you've done Foxy is to employ every tactic to degrade the information available form news reports and video, and try to throw as many curve balls in as possible.

leoj,

Could you please show me how exactly I've done
what you claim?

Otherwise its simply another one of your personal
attacks on me - to which I'm quite used to on this
forum.

Are these the guilty three? In an explosive development, the Supreme Court of Victoria has ordered, three Liberal ministers Health Minister Greg Hunt, Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar and Human Services Minister Alan Tudge to appear on Friday"

Will there be a full and frank confession of wrong doing from the lad? Only time will tell!

Foxy,

"All violence is bad."

What utter rubbish.

Dear Is Mise,

You hate to advocate guns or violence to anyone,
but they've worked for you.

I understand.

Foxy,

The armed services and the police have to use violence to save and protect people, therefore all violence is not bad.

Dear Is Mise,

It's not violence when it's in self-defence,
it's intelligence.

Foxy,

Sure, too easy. From your first post, page 3, where you scoffed and were derisive and tried to diminish the attack (even trying to make it into a student prank, blaming Chaser? Melb Uni students?). An attack that the public and law-makers have always regarded as assault.

A scattergun blast of deflecting, misleading, sidetracking, muddying burley for anything to get traction and sidetrack the discussion, while preferably ending up blaming the victim and not the perpetrators.

What about some compassion for Bolt and his family? They should be able to live their lives in peace and are as entitled as everyone else to be able to go out without fear of assault.

There are no 'ifs' or 'buts', the perpetrators foully attacked the old gent where one would never expect it, in an Australian city street. That is how brazen this foul, politically-motivated attack was.

Such trite indignation from the far right corner. As Leoj goes for the jugular! The soft soap is certainly getting a workout, now at aged 57 Bolt has suddenly become the "old gent". You along with several others of your particular political persuasion need to get the hand off it, and come back to reality, this is nothing more than a misdemeanor at worse. Like the blowhard Bolt himself, you are trying to make political capital out of a minor incident, involving glitter and shaving cream. If the perputrators had intended to inflict grevious harm on Bolt, I'm sure they would have come armed with more than glitter and shaving cream, possibly a cream pie!

Foxy, do not be put off by our dear friend Leoj as he tries to grind away at you, by attacking your totally reasonable summations on the subject. You have to expect that from the Hansonite.

"It's not violence when it's in self-defence,
it's intelligence"

Balderdash!!

Hi Paul 2,

I'm assuming that Paul 1 is off quietly reading somewhere, or watering the kale :)

So, Bolt knew beforehand that what was being thrown on him was only glitter ? He should have realised that instantly. Then he should have known, equally instantly, that it was shaving cream, with no poisonous or acidic additives, being shoved in his face.

After all, from a six -year-old's point of view, as an older person, he knows everything and can predict stuff too. The instant two blokes in hoodies came up to him and threw stuff on him, he knew it was nothing really, just a bit of a prank. All in good fun. Then he over-reacts. Is that it ?

Next time Paul 1 is on, I'll advise him nicely that someone else, a ratbag, has been using his User Name.

Joe

Paul1405,

How casual and dismissive you are where a threat to someone else's body, brain or life is concerned. Do you have no feelings and no compassion? Not even for the plight of Bolt's wife and children if hubby and dad was harmed, even killed? What if he survived a fall but couldn't work any more?

The reason jurisdictions passed new laws with strong penalties for the 'Coward's Punch', was because of the number of deaths and brain injuries from falling.

While he may not have been hit (the video footage needs to be referred to and witness accounts), Bolt could easily have fallen heavily. In fact, he did stumble over tables, and he could have suffered a very serious injury or death had his head hit the pavement, regardless of whether it was due to a blow or a scuffle or a push.

Also, he had a number of assailants, both attacking him and filming.

Bolt was attacked in the street while heading home. We should all be able to go about our daily lives without fear of attack. Our loved ones should never have to hear that one of us was attacked in the street, fell, is in intensive care and everything is being done to try to stabilise. Or sorry, there was bleeding on the brain that went on for too long.

The activists planned and coordinated an attack to catch the elderly gent off guard. Bolt is an office worker. He would not have the stamina of his younger, prepared, cowardly bushwackers.

All in all, Bolt and his family can count their lucky stars that he survived the attack without serious injury.

I suppose there will never be a turning back to what Australia was. Who would have ever imagined such an attack? But Paul1405 is unfazed, even tolerant of such abuses of citizens. How do you manage that, Paul1405?

Don't tell me that there are another 1404!

"WHAT IF", what if the sky had fallen on Bolt, what if a saber toothed tiger had attacked Bolt, what if his mates had done him in. The reality however is somewhat different, I can see how you Leoj take great delight in peppering the whole episode, and if I was on the extreme right, rather than being a center moderate as I am, I too would be catcalling my trite indignation from the highest belfry in town! Just as you and others are attempting to do.

Joe, I don't have two personalities, I'm not the bloke on the forum who claims that one day he walked out of a Commo Party meeting, and across the road into National Action HQ and joined up straight away, and has been there ever since. Now am I.

Issy, what have you shot this week?

Crime in all its forms has to be dealt with, based on the facts, not some hypothetical possibilities.

The good old days... to quote Leoj; "I suppose there will never be a turning back to what Australia was. Who would have ever imagined such an attack?

The Egg Throwing Incident occurred on 29 November 1917 in Warwick, Queensland, Australia. An egg was thrown at the Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes at the Warwick railway station during his campaign for the 1917 plebiscite on conscription. The egg was thrown by Patrick Michael Brosnan, possibly assisted by his brother Bartie Brosnan.

The Queensland Police refused to arrest the egg thrower. Hughes was indigent, so was Leoj, The upshot was Hughes formed the Commonwealth Cops as a result!

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“Wow, you must have had to go back 5 years for that, and I'm sure that in your mind a spur of the moment prank by a junior school student is comparable to a deliberate violent attack by masked extremists.”

Pretty easy, just type in OLO forum Gillard and sandwich and bingo, there were all the usual suspects cheering on the students.

Let me get this straight. Piffing a sandwich at someone is a prank while spraying a little shaving cream on another is a violent attack? I have readily acknowledged the difference in circumstances but I am talking about the specific action. How are you making an assessment that they are so different?

It's all in the eye of the beholder when it comes to the far right nutters.
They show their true colours when one of them is facing assault charges.

Interesting how the leftists are always horrified by verbal offence and of course defend s18c, even where the rights of QUT students are trampled, but a ferocious, unprovoked attack in company against a columnist whose opinions they don't like is OK, mere 'piffing' and to be applauded.

Paul,

"Issy, what have you shot this week? "

With the No1 Ruger, scope sighted, high powered rifle in .220 Swift, 3 fox and 2 feral cats; what have you, or the rest of the Greens, done for our wildlife?

Sunday I shot paper targets with rifle and next Saturday is the monthly pistol shoot and I'll be shooting with a .22 Ruger Mk II pistol, a Model 10 Smith & Wesson revolver in 38 Special and my reproduction 1873 Colt revolver in .357 Magnum.

Hi Stale Reflux,

A kid throwing a sandwich at someone probably looks very like a kid, throwing what looks very much like a sandwich, at someone.

Two grown men (albeit half-witted) in hoodies throwing 'something' in someone's face, and then shoving some sort of soft stuff into someone's face, COULD be just a couple of nice young men carrying out a little prank, OR a couple of hired thugs throwing acid into someone's face before planning to belt the daylights out of him.

If it was you, how would you interpret the situation, on the spur of the moment, in those vital split-seconds before - for all you knew - something much worse was about to happen ?

I realise that, as a six-year-old, you would assume that that big man was all-knowing, like all dads, and would have immediate understanding of what was going on - which was ? A prank ? Or an assault ? Ah, it must have been a prank because there was that other big man with a video camera thing.

How was Bolt to know that it was just glitter ? How was he to know that it was just shaving cream ? How was he to know that those two idiots weren't intent on beating the sh!t out of him ?

Or worse ?

You really are an idiot, Stale.

Joe

leoj,

You left out in your accusation the fact that I quite
clearly stated that being assaulted for your
opinion is WRONG no matter who you are -whether
you're John Howard, Andrew Bolt, et cetera.

But never mind. As ttbn pointed out people will
selectively choose out of someone's posts what they
want to believe about that particular poster. I have
no control over what you think, or say or your
interpretation of things. It's funny nobody else picks
up the things that you do. Is it any wonder that most
of the time I don't bother to read what you post - as soon
as I see your name - I simply scroll past.

It's rather odd as well that you did not point out what
I wrote in my posts that followed after that one -
where once again - violence was condemned. But I guess
that doesn't suit your purpose of personal attacks.

Keep up the good - work. I'm surprised you didn't bring in
your usual rants of "Progressives," Emily-listers,
the Greens, et al.

Joe,

You are only encouraging Paul and Steelwhatsit. They are too thick to know when they are having the Mickey taken out of them.

Hi Paul 2,

I'm not sure what my former links to communism have to do with a couple of thugs trying to beat up Andrew Bolt, perhaps you can join the dots.

But since you make an assertion, let me point out that my communist parents had broken with the CPA while I was still a mid-teen, on the grounds that it was too soft. I can't recall attending any Communist Party meetings, but my mum might have taken me to some meetings, from the time when I was a newborn. The CPA Chairman, J. B. Miles, dandled me and, my mum said, I peed on him. She used to live with his son before she got married.

I do recall attending a Christmas Party, I think in about 1954, and I think in St Mary's, run by the Eureka Youth League.

So my Road to Damascus has been a very long journey, perhaps sixty years. Ah yes, and I was on the back of a EYL truck (I think it was the EYL) during a World Peace Convention (I think at Milperra) in about late 1952. I remember talking there to an elderly British Somaliland delegate, nice old bloke.

That's about it, really.

Does National Action still exist ? You seem to know, and also where the two of them meet. Ah, you're one of them, working under-cover ?

Anyhow, BTT: Foxy made some vapid statement about 'all violence is bad'. No, violence, of the most extreme form, can be justified depending on the threat to innocent people. For example, I would advocate that police should be equipped with rapid-fire machine guns when confronting Islamist terrorists.

I know that might upset the Opportunist 'Left' but I suppose they can always get back at me when I'm alone and hobbling down the street for the paper, and try to shove shaving cream into my face: hopefully, then, they will experience violence, as much as I can muster. Bring your nut-protectors, Paul 2.

Joe

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your advice concerning leoj.

I've been through it all before when he went
under the name of "on the beach." It's old
tactics of his. I've been advised by my doctor
to totally ignore him - not read what he posts
and simply scroll past when I see his name.
I've done that most of the time. I'm still
working on not responding to him AT ALL.
Still not perfect - but I'm working on it.
He's a master of the irrelevant monologue as we know.

Bolt has a reasonable photograph on his blog today of one of the thugs who attacked him.

Hi Ttbn,

Yes, it's at:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/one-of-the-thugs-who-attacked-me-police-release-photo/news-story/77ccc65f68e4eb962aa9d0300131948a

Anybody who knows this bloke even slightly would recognise him pretty easily. Puzzle: does he look like a National Action supporter or a Left-Opportunist supporter ? Perhaps a Trot or an Anarchist ? i.e. a fascist thug ?

For anybody trying to make sense of how the Left has moved Right, try this, on 'postmodernism' and violence at university campuses in the US and Canada:

http://quillette.com/2017/06/14/whos-afraid-jordan-peterson/

Fascinating, if a big heavy :) As far as I could follow the author's arguments, I don't agree with all of them.

Joe

Hi Joe. you took it upon yourself to give me two personalities referring to me as Paul 2. The slight about being a commo one day and and a right extremest the next, was not to be taken literally, but it seems you have. I didn't realize you were of such senior years, are you like Issy and approaching the nervous 90's?

One this issue I have been of one mind, unlike you and others I was not willing to simply take Bolt's word for the whole affair.

ttbn, <<They are too thick to know when they are having the Mickey taken out of them.>> You're not that smart.

As for your photo, it looks like Prince Harry! He was in Oz last week, arrest Harry! Could that be the answer?

Dear Paul,

Now that you mentioned it - the bloke does
look like Prince Harry. Does that mean that
the attackers were not "left-wingers" after all?

Golly geeeeee.

Hi Foxy, obviously the work of a disgruntled Royalist! The Usual Suspects will be along shortly to demand the death penalty or permanent exile to the Colonies, what ever comes first.

Paul 1,

Now that you mention it, the bloke in that photo does look like a National Action thug. It's so hard to tell thugs apart these days.

Putting on my paranoid hat, I could ask: how does anyone know that this bloke was one of the thugs ? It could be anyone, even an innocent National Action supporter. You might be able to tell, Paul 1, with your links to both sides ?

Anyway, we can expect arrests and raids soon, and subsequent jailings. Sic transit violencia, as Foxy would say. I wonder if there are many Bolt supporters in jail, maybe National Action types ? That brightens my day :)

Joe

I see one of the TRump haters have taken to shooting a Congressman. No doubt many on the left will be justifying his actions.

Dear Loudmouth,

Lol mate.

I understand that coherency and comprehension can be a struggle for you sometimes but you need to appreciate that it does get a bit repetitive to repeatedly explain things in triplicate to you.

I was at pains to separate the act from the circumstance and was just asking if there was justification for say the act of spraying some shaving cream on someone can really be regarded as violent assault while having someone throw a sandwich can be relegated to a prank. We are sure, I hope, that punching and kicking someone in most cases is regarded as assault.

Perhaps I could invite you to read my posts a little more carefully. That may assist in reducing your confusion.

President Trump officially quit the Paris Agreement on climate change and invoked American business interests as his main reason. But Exxon Mobil urged the President to stay in the deal, as did nearly 1100 companies that signed onto a statement to the president.

So, for fact's sake, here's why corporate America isn't on board with the president's decision.
So whos' side is the far right on.

Sorry Stale,

Yes, I may be confused, I do differentiate, perhaps wrongly, between a kid at a school throwing a sandwich, and a couple of hooded strangers seeming to assault a man in a street. Of course, he should have known immediately that they meant no harm, that what they were shoving in his face was harmless, and so he shouldn't have reacted as he did.

Is that what you are saying ? Have you tested these differences in anything like a 'pub test' ?

Nope, still can't see it. I still think you're an idiot :)

What to do ? You're perhaps too young or simple (or more likely, too biased) to understand the differences. Not much I can do about that. In the olden days, they would put a half-witted child out on a barren mountain-side. Perhaps your parents should have tried that. Bit late now.

So, end of.

Joe

runner,

Yes the left violence is growing, but it was always present. Earlier there was the example of the Hilton Hotel bomber who was left and a union member, and like some leftists here, couldn't bear the thought that others might be permitted to have a differing opinion.

As for the leftist who shot Republicans, the leftists would say that the gun did it. But the leftists would be chortling over the violence committed against their de-personalised adversaries as they see them.

The leftists spend a lot of their time trying to 'dirty up' their perceived adversaries and in conducting vengeful hate campaigns against anyone who disagrees with them. Many on OLO, myself included, are daily the subject/s of personal attack for having the temerity to check facts. The leftists are the sworn enemies of science.

OLO's leftist bots could never imagine Andrew Bolt and his family as being human too. They imagine him and unfortunately his family too by association with him, as political effigies to stick pins into, to abuse, smash and disfigure.

leoj

what you say is so true. The conservatives have a little of blame in that they have continued to fund organisations like the abc whose hatred and rhetoric towards anything decent has been plain to see for decades. From Islamic terrorist to every violent leftie organisation we have seen the abc/sbs as champions of. The conservatives have turned a blind eye. I have been very impressed by Malcolm Roberts lately.

SR,

I see that you are really struggling with the concept of assault.

1, There has to be actually be contact with the victim, from what I recall the sandwich didn't actually hit Juliar,
2, there has to be intent, and from what I recall it was never clarified as to whether Juliar was even the actual target. Secondly children have limited responsibility for their actions for obvious reasons, and this clearly wasn't premeditated.
3 Finally, the severity of the assault is determined by the damage or injury.

With the violent assault on Bolt the two thugs were masked as they clearly knew that what they were doing was criminal, they attacked him spraying in the face and body, and then swung a few punches at him. Not only was Bolt partially blinded at the time, but his expensive suit was ruined.

Only an imbecile couldn't tell the difference. If a man came up to Juliar and smashed a sandwich in her face, I would react the same way as when the pie was smashed in to Joyce's face. The outrage from the left when a junior school child lobbed a sarmi vaguely in Juliar's direction is a vast over reaction and should be mocked.

I also notice that police have now released a photo of one of the thugs, and it is only a matter of time before he is charged.

Dear Loudmouth,

There, there young fella. No need to get the knickers in a knot, you might do yourself a mischief.

Name calling is usually an excellent sign that you find yourself bereft of valid argument. That is fine, maturity will perhaps bring wisdom.

Perhaps if we approach this from a different angle you might not feel as threatened.

If the chap who sprayed the right-wing blowhard with shaving cream had instead chucked a sammo at him would you still regard that as assault? Conversely if the student had attempted to spray shaving cream on Ms Gillard would you still regard it as a harmless prank?

If you find this also to be too difficult I do have another way of assisting you.

leoj,

" Earlier there was the example of the Hilton Hotel bomber who was left and a union member, and like some leftists here, couldn't bear the thought that others might be permitted to have a differing opinion."

Not a good example as many felt, at the time, that it was a Government bomb, and many (if not more) still think so.

Read the whole story, then if you're of a mind, tell us all why the police kept turning the garbage trucks away from the rubbish, then a truck got through and.....BANG.

Foxy,

There is no competition for politically motivated violence. If there was the left whingers would win hands down. The discussion was focussed on Paul's patently ridiculous assertion that the masked thugs that attacked Bolt could have been anything other than left whinge activists.

Political activism is almost exclusively the preserve of left whingers, who seem to be increasingly promoting more violent and illegal forms of protest. No longer happy to simply protest, blockades, assaults and destruction of property is seemingly acceptable and even exalted in the growing ranks of left whinge extremists.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Unless I have viewed a different video to you it is quite evident that fists were first raised by Bolt and that he was pushed away from assaulting one of the pair by the other. I am also sympathetic to the idea that

In my very first post I said;

“I'm sympathetic to the idea that Bolt may have feared for his own physical safety and reacted accordingly.”

I am also sympathetic to the idea that having been punched in the face and kicked in the nuts one of the men raised his fists in retaliation.

However what I am exploring is you reacting to the two incidents of sandwiches being thrown at our then prime minister by requesting that the students aim better. I actually think the pie, the shaving cream and the sandwiches were all pretty unsavoury and idiotic but struggle with the notion that there were assaults deserving of a criminal charge.

You seem a bit more selective.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“There is no competition for politically motivated violence. If there was the left whingers would win hands down.”

Really?

"In any case; I would rather have preferred a Ruger Mini 30, but I already own a 7.62 bolt rifle and it is likely that the police wouldn’t grant me a similar caliber. On the application form I stated: “hunting deer”. It would have been tempting to just write the truth; “executing category A and B cultural Marxists/multiculturalist traitors” just to see their reaction:P"

Anders Breivik

Gawd, isn't this thread now threadbare ?

Dear Shadow Minister,

Who knows who Bolt's attackers were.

We may learn in due course (or not).

However ASIO has warned after the arrest of Phillip
Galea that it marked a dangerous development in the
growth of right-wing opinion in Australia. Politically
motivated extremism is increasing and it is a concern
to the Australian Federal Police and its law
enforcement and national security partners. Groups like
Reclaim Australia, the United Patriots Front, The
Patriots Defence League of Australia are all being
watched closely.

Pauline Hanson's One Nation claimed more than 175,000
votes - enough for 4 Senate seats, and other radical right-wing
parties attracted 100,000 more votes.

The times they are a changing - that's for sure.

Ahh yes Foxy, you neatly tied One Nation to "other" radical right wing parties.

They've released a mug shot of one of the attackers. It's not the best mug shot ever but if one knew him they might recognize him.

The filthy coward.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-14/police-release-image-of-man-after-andrew-bolt-attacked/8617846

Gord. Can we get over this? Right or Left, let the legal system do its work: the thugs are identified, Fight or Left, arrested, charged, tried and probably put on a good behaviour bond, or whatever.

The one bright bit would be that the bloke who got it in the nuts is probably still sore. He'll probably limp into court. I wonder which nut copped it worst, the right or the left one ? God moves in mysterious ways, perhaps he's biased :)

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Did you know that the term testicle derives from
the Latin word "testis" meaning "witness."

In Roman times men placed their right hand on their
balls before giving testimony in court.
The reason being having testicles supposedly made them
whole. As opposed to women and eunuchs who were not
allowed to testify.

Foxy,

You are clearly not up to speed, Antifa the extremist left whinge group has essentially claimed responsibility. See my earlier reply. That the cops have a facial photo of one of the thugs means that it is not long before they have him in cuffs.

The far right has reclaim, the far left has GetUp. Both sides members instigate violence, except the far left does it far more frequently.

SR,

I meet your Brevik nutjob and raise you the Red brigade.

I also feel sorry for you that you cannot grasp simple concepts.

Thugs firing a sandwich or foam into someone's face is assault of the same magnitude, however, general flinging of sandwiches or foam that does not hit the victim is not assault by definition. Also, if someone aims a sandwich at a bin, but hits someone by mistake that is negligence not assault (No actual intent). Finally adults are considered fully responsible for their actions, where children especially younger children are not.

So on all the aggravating factors of assault i.e. actual contact with foam and fists, the premeditated intent, and the wearing of masks to shirk responsibility, the violent attack on Bolt was aggravated assault. However, a sandwich lobbed by a child, for an undetermined reason, that hits no one, and the reasoning behind the throw is never determined meets none of the criteria to be called assault.

So essentially your comparison is piss poor, and so I taunt you a second time.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The following link explains some of the problems
we are facing in this country. We should
all be very concerned:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/investigations/asio-monitoring-of-rightwing-extremists-uncovered-alleged-plan-to-attack-radical-left-20160813-ggrsgt.html

Right or Left - both should be a worry.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Were you really taunting me? I thought you were behaving as normal. Perhaps you had best flag when you are doing it so I can remind myself to be offended.

Now to your poorly researched post.

Firstly you can't raise me anything as over 18 years of operations the Red Brigades killed less than your right-winger managed in a day. “A total of 75 people are thought to have been murdered by the BR.” Wikipedia

Secondly the sandwich lobbed at Gillard only narrowly missed her head where it was aimed and instead struck her arm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvZEZ-Mz0rI

Thus by your definition this was assault.

Finally I reject the notion that a 16 year old should not be held 'responsible for their actions'.

I was shocked to find this kind of terrorist training film is freely available on the internet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2KxoWtb2VE

Note the bloke in the video, obviously a member of Left Wing Ratbag Inc, naturally in cowardly disguise (wearing sunglasses), but the coppers have a full description, an arrest is expected shortly. Not to be outdone, the rival mob, The Popular Patriotic Peoples Front of Oz, the right wing crazies, in a statement released on Faceybook, recommend the use of 'Vegemite' as a filling, "it will demonstrate your total commitment, and national pride in all things Aussie" they said. They also suggest you aim for the "nuts" (not them) when launching you deadly missile!

SR,

I think your research is faulty.

"According to Clarence A. Martin, the BR were credited with 14,000 acts of violence in the first ten years of the group's existence. According to statistics by the Ministry of Interior. A total of 75 people are thought to have been murdered by the BR. A majority of the murders were politically motivated, though a number of assassinations of random police and carabinieri officers took place, as well as a number of murders occurring during criminal ventures such as bank robberies and kidnappings." So the body count is roughly the same but the red brigade were by any measure far worse than Brevik.

Also along with your left whinge red brigade, there are more than a dozen other EU left whinge groups such as your Baader Meinhof, Your red army faction etc, (responsible for the Bologna train station bombing which killed 85 and wounded many more.) etc etc etc.

From the video that you linked, it is clear that the sarmi didn't come within a country mile of Juliar's head, but I see now that it did graze her elbow and could technically be called assault. However, differences are still vast.

The sarmi itself did no damage or injury, unlike the masked hoods that used their fists to assault Bolt, partially blinded him with the foam squirted deliberately in his face and eyes, and ruined his suit.

With respect to diminished responsibility due to age, this is a basic fundamental tenet of law not my opinion, and the measure is different. Similarly the vile activist that spat on liberal members only got a slap on the wrist.

The perpetrators and their handlers obviously believed that crimes were to be committed, because the perpetrators wore the masks and other concealing disguise to hide their hair for example.

They didn't remain at the scene to have the victim and passers-by share the 'joke'. When a brave citizen arrived on the scene and challenged them verbally, a time where any prankster would be certain to declare it was all in jest, the perpetrators took to their heel and disappeared. That also suggests a planned escape route and probably other support, maybe transport close by.

Since then the perpetrators have gone to ground. Responsibility has been claimed by a leftist fundamentalist outfit known for extremism and violence. The announcement employed similar means and twisted propaganda that are part of the modus operandi of terrorists.

Disguises, assault in company, escaping the scene and going to ground in a safe house/s somewhere, with a stage-managed announcement being made by some fundamentalist activist crew is not the behaviour of the prankster.

By their own behaviour the perpetrators have defined their assault as a political attack and the handlers who have claimed responsibility confirmed that to be the case.

It is telling that those here who defend these thugs, through attempting to trivialise the assault for instance, are also sinking their political boots into Bolt. They see the assault as politically motivated, to humiliate, punish and hopefully gag a hated journalist.

Hopefully police can bring their investigation to a close soon and the Court can decide.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Lol. My research faulty?

You really aren't very good at this are you.

You wrote;

“Also along with your left whinge red brigade, there are more than a dozen other EU left whinge groups such as your Baader Meinhof, Your red army faction etc, (responsible for the Bologna train station bombing which killed 85 and wounded many more.) etc etc etc.”

No the Red Army faction was not responsible for the Bologna station bombing rather it was the ultra right wing group the NAR.

“Armed Revolutionary Nuclei (NAR) was the largest and most violent right-wing terrorist organization in Italy during the second half of the 1970s. It was responsible for several individual murders as well as the worst terrorist attack in post-War Italian history, a bombing in a Bologna train station that killed 85.”
http://web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/259

Perhaps retiring from this conversation might be a wise move for you.

SR,

So you've conceded that you were wrong about the red brigade, good. Wrong about the law and many other things, so perhaps you should retreat with your tail between your legs.

Even Brevik and the NAR don't measure up to all the violence from your left whinge terrorist groups.

What is the delay with VICPOL? There is the person in the blue beanie and there would have been other cameras in the vicinity and people to interview.

Antifa has claimed credit for the Bolt assault. One would imagine that fact alone should encourage senior police to want to nip the budding political violence in the bud.

This is what can be done,

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/05/08/04/33/train-commuter-fined-after-racist-rant-against-muslim-couple

I am not so sure about antifa. Someone did not like what he has been spruking about. Who got Joyce in the face with a pie.

It is a mystery isn't it, how NSW police can move quickly and decisively to identify and charge a seventy year old women who uttered something offensive on a train,

BUT,

Daniel Andrew's VICPOL, with no lesser video leads and eye witnesses and claims of responsibility from fascist left Antifa, is as quiet as a mouse, and the news hounds of The Age and the Twitterati are softy, softly, all sssshhh, too.

VICPOL has a prodigious media (spin) team and is not shy in letting them loose.
The Age is desperate for stories. But all is very quiet. Quiet where the Bolt assault is concerned at least.

I know this will come as a shock to you Leo, and a few others on this thread, and I fully understand why you would see it as an unnecessary imposition on the police, but the courts still require a silly little things called EVIDENCE before convicting anyone of a crime, even if it is a charge of assaulting one of your favorite right wingers in Bolt.
Leo when your fearless leader, the Lovely Pauline takes over, you will just have to change the law. In fact I am sure you will agree, who needs courts, when we have the coppers, and your citizens militia backing them up, out there dishing out justice, Bolt and Hanson style!

Hi Paul,

1 or 2, I' not sure :)

Yes, you're ight, evidence is crucial. I hope that those extreme-
Right-wingers who attacked Bolt are identified on CCTV up and down the street, and charged with assault, based on the evidence of the videos and photos amply available. I hope that, like all extreme-Right-wing thugs, they do time: I'm sure you would agree with me ?

Cheers,

Joe

Paul is all in favour of evidence and it does him credit, he is also in favour of evidence-based legislation.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Oh well.

How idiotic must you feel my friend? A case of self inflicted injury indeed. Spouting on about a left wing terror attack as evidence that radicals from the left are far more dangerous than those on the right and it turns out the act was committed by a hard core right wing group. 85 dead and over 200 injured, many horribly and maimed for life.

In one fell swoop you have not only made a complete fool of yourself but managed to totally destroy your initial argument. On top of it you accuse me of poor research.

Then you swan back in here like nothing has happened. What on earth goes on in your head to allow that kind of hubris?

Paul1405,

It is understood where you are concerned and the totalitarian Greens Eastern Bloc, that you are going to be disrupting the discussion, using fabrications and ad hominem and your silliness, your amateur funnyman routine to throw the discussion off course.

At least online the Greens Eastern Bloc don't get to use their bull horns, air horns, chanting, jostling and abuse to disrupt and shout down discussion. Discussing things openly and factually is irrelevant isn't it where you have to toe the line to slavish political correctness.

The attack on Andrew Bolt is the extension of the violence of the leftists, that has grown into assaults on people not just on property and inconveniencing and causing delays, inconvenience and financial losses to ordinary people who are trying to go about their normal, lawful business.

The question posed that you want to hide and ignore is very simple. How can NSW police move quickly and decisively to identify and charge a seventy year old women who uttered something offensive on a train,

BUT,

Daniel Andrew's VICPOL, with no lesser video leads and eye witnesses and claims of responsibility from fascist left Antifa, is as quiet as a mouse, and the news hounds of The Age and the Twitterati are softy, softly, all sssshhh, too?

SR

What a complete moron you must feel after claiming that Brevik was worse than your red brigade. Not to mention the Baader Meinhof gang and the dozen other left whinge terrorist groups, or even the South American left whinge groups that have killed 10s of 1000s.

Again you must have felt a right twat trying to compare Juliar being grazed on the elbow by a Sarmi from a school kid with two masked thugs attacking Bolt with spray to the eyes and fists.

Leoj, as the all knowing, all seeing, fly on the wall, when it comes to anything left of center (now you are trying to label the Victorian police as left wing in some way). As the king of left conspiracy theories, and privy to insider information like you are, I thought you would be able to answer your own question.

Unlike you LeoW, I don't hide my politics on the forum, nor do I scuttle off and return with a new nick when exposed as just another right wing blowhard, trying to fool people that I am a man of reason, a "moderate" no less. You are the only poster that does that, why?
I don't expect an answer, just another one of your unfathomable boring monologues of a post about Greens, progressives, feminists, etc etc, all conspiring to get at the likes of you, an old salt of the long passed white shoe brigade of The Gold Coast.

Paul1405,

As already said, it is understood where you and the totalitarian Greens Eastern Bloc are concerned, that you are going to be disrupting the discussion, using fabrications and ad hominem and your silliness.

Now, to return to the question that has you ducking and weaving,

" How can NSW police move quickly and decisively to identify and charge a seventy year old women who uttered something offensive on a train,

BUT,

Daniel Andrew's VICPOL, with no lesser video leads and eye witnesses and claims of responsibility from fascist left Antifa, is as quiet as a mouse, and the news hounds of The Age and the Twitterati are softy, softly, all sssshhh, too?"

What is your answer?

Leo, as I said you are the best placed to answer your own question, being the fly on the wall type you are. I fail to see the relationship between the two events. Now can you answer my question:

Unlike you LeoW, I don't hide my politics on the forum, nor do I scuttle off and return with a new nick when exposed as just another right wing blowhard, trying to fool people that I am a man of reason, a "moderate" no less. You are the only poster that does that, why?

Paul1405,

There are other examples from other jurisdictions too, where a claim of racist offence has seen the alleged offender run to ground in very short order indeed. And to thunderous denunciations in the media and Twitter and others light up like beacons.

It is nothing short of amazing that a group of thugs can plan and conduct a serious, politically motivated attack on a journalist, Andrew Bolt, and in broad daylight in the front of cameras and eye witnesses, with responsibility claimed by the dangerous fascist-left Antifa, but so far no-one has been collared by VICPOL.

I am only speculating Leo, but maybe a lack of evidence is proving to be a stumbling block. I am sure a lack of evidence would never deter you and the storm troopers from making an "arrest". How do you suggest the police obtain a confession, the use of a rubber hose?

Can't answer a straight question can you.

Hi Paul 1,

A sensible post. Well done.

Of course, Trump should surrender any tapes of his conversation with Comey if they exist.

Of course, the right-wing thug filming the attack on Bolt should be identified and required to surrender his video. But of course, it's a bit late, since it's all over social media :)

Would someone attacked like that have to lodge a complaint with the police, for anything to be done ? Or would it automatically become a police matter, once they have seen the video ?

I'm sure that you would agree that the police should be able keep our streets safe from Right-wing thugs like these.

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

That they have the thugs' photographer, and mugshot of one of the idiots, it is only a matter of time before they make an arrest. In fact I'd bet that they already have their names and are building a case.

Also, suggesting using a rubber hose to extract confessions is very stalinist of you.

Been 3 weeks since the so called Bolt assault, according to the forums Usual Suspects, led by the likes of Shadow Minister, Joe, leoj, etc etc, it was an open and shut case. The guilty parties were well known, Bolt had fingered the lot, All the coppers had to do was wiz around in the paddy wagon to Lefty HQ and pick up the desperado's. All to easy, so it seemed.
After a few early howls for blood from the peanut gallery I had the temerity to post:

<<All that glitters is not gold, Was this a set up by the extreme right to gain publicity? All seems very convenient, TV cameras present, high profile "victim" present, all ready for the "attack". Lights, camera, action, as our intrepid hero fights off the would-be "attackers", A very convenient package to show on the 6 o'clock news.>>

3 weeks on I still ask the same question!

Paul1405, "I had the temerity to post.."

Temerity is a synonym for gall so you'd get a half-mark for part-right. However the best choice would have been mendacity, or simply, hypocrisy. The NSW Greens excel at both.

You must have been a test for those Christian Brothers.

Hi Paul 1/2,

Yeah: if someone can benefit from some atrocity, such as Bolt because of that right-wing attack on him, then it's obvious that he set it up.

We know now that makes sense: Bolt's a right-winger, he puts a couple of thugs up to making out they're attacking him, he pretends to hit back, they run off like a couple of girls etc. - it's so obvious now that you infer it. Bolt did it. The whole episode was just one more attack on the innocent Left.

Thanks, Paul. We benefit so much from your Manichaean, either-or, black-white, good/bad sense of the world: everything is my way OR the way of Trump/Hitler/Bolt/evil incarnate, with no in-betweens, no greys, no ambivalence, no uncertainties. Good, that's settled that then.

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

I know that the unquestioning loyalty demanded by left whinge extremists often demands often requires abandoning reason, but this time you have surpassed yourself.

I know that the left whinge Antifa was humiliated, but just look at your ludicrous proposal. If Bolt set this up, why did he beat his co-conspirator so hard, and why did the neo-fascist like group ANTIFA (ironic) claim responsibility and post a pic of the thug's black eye?

That the group responsible is known is no longer in debate, but violent attacks the police don't necessarily arrest suspects immediately, but often wait until they have enough evidence to ensure a conviction, and uncover others involved.

These left whinge morons will spend the next couple of years looking over their shoulders.

Thank you Joe. No need to mention it, should you stray again from the path of righteousness, I will again attempt to put you back onto the straight and narrow, as I have obviously and most successfully done here.
It makes me feel all worm and fuzzy, to know I have rescued a poor soul from his evil ways and put him on the pathway to redemption, Its making me feel all evangelistic, I think I will go forth and multiply or whatever us of the new faith must do. Want to join me, we can multiply together, fasting for forty days and forty nights, its going to be a hoot! Come forth my brother, come forth, and be saved! See you again at the 'Golden Church of Paulie' soon , hallelujah brother...hallelujah! .

It truly beggars belief that anyone could be rendered so stupid, so robotic, by his/her leftist political idealism that he/she might lend support to or trivialise an extremist, politically-motivated assault in company on a public street in daylight in an Australian town.

Surely that would be cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

Shorten is doing irreparable harm to Labor just by being in the role of leader. But his efforts to win back the lunatic far leftists from where they have found their true home with the 'crazy as a cut snake' Greens factions such as its 'Eastern Bloc', will ensure the continued loss of confidence and departure by Labor members.

A couple more lost souls, have come my way, peace to brother Shadow and brother Leo.

Anything can be fabricated. Whenever there is an international incident like the "Bolt Assault", yes Bolt's BS has gone international, gaining mention in the 'Pitcairn Herald' Pitcairn population 40, there will be all sorts of fruit loops and copycats coming out of the woodwork, to claim responsibility. In this case these anti folk, it is possible for anyone to produce a pic of a black eye, just use Google Images, and bingo, black eyes galore. I did it, and I thought for a moment I had found Andrew Bolt with a black eye, but it was only a donkey, and not the other ass! These Anti mob are that crazy they regularly give each other black eyes, so they would have no problem producing a pic of a member with such injury, it could even be self inflicted!
Shadow, you must have been a fan of World Championship Wrestling and believed every blow delivered by 'The Golden Greek' was fair dinkum!
After reading about the 'Sandwich Attack' on a world leader in Julia Gilard. I was moved to believe the 'Bolt Assault' may have been nothing more than boisterous school lads launching an end of financial year prank!

Shadow, you were claiming an arrest was imminent, now you are going on about two years. poor Leo is off with the fairies once more.
BTW Shadow, what is the penalty in Victoria if Bolt should be found to be a public mischief?

Paul,

I am used to you writing complete bollocks, but this time you surpassed yourself. I would recommend to you and anyone else not to post after smoking a fat one.

Other than chasing the dragon, your claims are false. You said "Shadow, you were claiming an arrest was imminent" when I didn't. When I said that it's only a matter of time, that's all it meant. It could be a day a week or a year or two. There are no statutes of limitations.

I

Shadow, around my way, when there has been a minor assault, and the assailent(s) is unknown, where there is no injury requiring hospitalization, was Bolt hospitalized, did he require medical attention or any kind? If the answer is no, then the police investigation is commiserate with the crime; statements from the victim and witness's if any. Other investigation would be CCTV, mobile phone pic, video, and in the Bolt case, a review of film taken at the time, to possibly establish what happened and who was the perpetrator. other than that give the victim an event number, and unless there is some new development, such as stolen property recovered, was there any stolen property in the Bolt case? Not much else happens. If there is going to be an arrest, it generally takes place within hours, at the outside a week maybe.Not a couple of years.
Then again you see Bolt as one of your right wing elites, and probably believe 50 detectives have been assigned to the case.

Paul 2,

Forgive me, I'm a bit confused: a sandwich thrown at a left-wing person is assault, but two blokes throwing stuff in someone's face and shaping up to him, is not ?

I suppose we'll see if charges are laid :)

Joe

Damn it all but Paul1405 has a point there. That is obviously why NSW police should and did move quickly and decisively to identify and charge a seventy year old women who said something offensive on a train,

and,

why police in Victoria would discount as not worth investigating, a physical, public street assault by leftists in company on a conservative male disliked by the leftists.

And as Paul1405 helpfully adds, Bolt, as one of the hated 'them' he not only deserved what he got but Bolt did it to himself.

But wait a bit, didn't George Orwell have something to say about that?

What is interesting here is that Paul1405 and other far leftists probably believe much of that.

Hi Joe, I used the words minor assault in the Bolt case, and then went on to critique simply what I believe happens in such minor cases around my way. It may be different in Victoria, it maybe different in the Bolt case, seeing Bolt as a member of the rights privileged elite, maybe his case requires special consideration.

I can only relate what I know of an elderly neighbors assault a few moths back, when she had her bag snatched down at the local shopping strip. The young female police officer took a statement, Mavis's daughter took her to the medical center for a badly bruised arm. The PC called on Mavis a few days later to see if she was okay, and if she could remember anything else, giving her an event number, and saying if anything came up she would let Mavis know, and a number for Mavis to ring if she wanted to know anything herself. Not a word since, the case has gone cold, assuming it was hot to begin with. I suppose Bolt is in the same boat, or is he, maybe there is 50 D's on the Bolt Case. I don't know.

Joe, you are forgiven, no its not assault, if the assailants have been organized by you, and are in your pay, and are doing what you want them to. That is blast you with shaving cream and sprinkle you with glitter. For a price you could probably get the same thing done at a kinky night spot in town, by a woman wearing fish net stockings and not much else.

Poor Leo is totally confused, but that's normal for Leo.

Paul1405,

Your very first post took this tack,

<All that glitters is not gold, Was this a set up by the extreme right to gain publicity? All seems very convenient, TV cameras present, high profile "victim" present, all ready for the "attack". Lights, camera, action, as our intrepid hero fights off the would-be "attackers", A very convenient package to show on the 6 o'clock news.>
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 8 June 2017 5:52:29 AM

And your second, soon after,

<..The injured party, Bolt, has been quick to capitalize on the whole incident, has he not.
Correction: All that glitters is not Bolt!
Over to you.>
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 8 June 2017 7:04:54 AM

Interesting posts.

Leo, the third post on this was from you. Being quick to joint the other two would-be Bolt sycophantic posters in condemning the whole affair as the unprovoked work of persons unknown to Bolt. Which could have been, and still is, the possible facts of the matter. Your effort was followed by a couple of predictable Bolt supporting comments from Hassy and runner. For me Bolt is a known right wing blow hard, found guilty in a court of law of exaggerated discrimination, all to serve his own political philosophy. The episode was quickly linked to the extreme left. I again say this could be the truth of the matter. Then I posted a possible alternative to the neat little Bolt line, which still stands.

Leo, don't put words in my mouth << And as Paul1405 helpfully adds, Bolt, as one of the hated 'them' he not only deserved what he got but Bolt did it to himself.>>
If Bolt is indeed the innocent party in all this he certainly did not DESERVE WHAT HE GOT! if he is not, then he DESERVES WHAT HE GETS!

As for your woman on a train in NSW being quickly arrested for her actions, it has absolutely nothing to do with the Bolt case, just one of your red herrings.

Hi Paul 1/2,

So let's assume that Bolt was attacked by 'members' of some disaffected extreme-Right-wing group: the Right-wing is an extremely broad church, just as the Left is (I'm sorry if that's too confusing for an either/or mentality).

Two of these Right-wing thugs threw 'something' in his face (how was he to know what it was ?) then rubbed something in his face as well, a la Korean assassination method. He retaliates, they shape up, he gets stuck into them, they run off (as cowardly Right-wingers would).

So an assault on a person has occurred; Bolt defends himself; they piss off; their mate videos it all.

So let's leave the police to do their job; all in good time.

Joe

Hi Joe, my beef with you and others 3 weeks ago was, without evidence, and based on the assertions of the known publicity hound, Bolt, you had swallowed his version of events without question. I simply pointed out, given the circumstances, there could be alternative versions. One of those versions was that Bolt himself was complicit in the whole affair.
Obviously the police too are not as yet prepared to lay charges against anyone, including Bolt or the lefties. At this stage, more than likely, no one will ever be charged over the matter, but that can change.

BTW, I am not a supporter of these left wing loonies in Victoria.

Paul 2,

No, I 'swallowed' the version of events that I saw on the video: it was obvious that Bolt was attacked without provocation by gutless Right-wing thugs. I haven't yet read anything Bolt wrote about it: did he ? Not every body who disagrees with you is some sort of fascist rat-bag. Probably none are: many of them have probably re-badged themselves as anarchists, for hire by your mates.

Let's let justice take its course: its wheels grind slowly.

Joe

Paul2,

Oops ! That clever jibe should have read:

"Not every body who disagrees with you is some sort of fascist rat-bag. Probably none are. Many genuine fascist rat-bags have probably re-badged themselves as anarchists, for hire by your mates."

I apologise if any sensible, level-headed people on this thread somehow took offence at being called a 'fascist rat-bag'.

Joe

Paul,

Full of BS as usual, the person that put a pie in Joyce's face is being charged criminally, and he didn't use his fists or mask his face.

Paul1405,

Why I said those two early posts of yours (later ones too) were 'interesting' was the coincidence. -Whereby you evidenced a stronger but similarly outrageous account of the incident, one that reversed the blame onto the victim Bolt, as did the far leftist Melbourne cell of Antifa that was to claim responsibility for the incident. But you went considerably further.

Also, and this is 'interesting' too, you have continued to maintain your fake news and your blaming of the victim Bolt long after Melbourne Aftifa dropped theirs, and you have done that in spite of news reports with video evidence and remonstrations from posters here.

Antifa
"Behind the left-wing Antifa movement that attacked Andrew Bolt
Michael Koziol 9 Jun 2017
....In a now-deleted Facebook post, Melbourne Antifa said "some of our family in solidarity were attacked by Andrew Bolt while they were protesting today" and said Bolt should be jailed for his "violent, horrendous language".
http://tinyurl.com/y8eyjedq

Despite a possible defensive, or is that a misleading backflip today, "If Bolt is indeed the innocent party" [Paul1405, Monday, 26 June 2017], you seem to have a world view and opinions that appear to be even more aggressively extreme leftist and totalitarian than the extremist group Antifa.

Or if you don't really believe what you were accusing Bolt of (and by implication disputing the veracity of news reports to spread you own fake news), would you now deny your outrageous allegations and apologise to the OLO posters and readers for wasting their time with schoolboy stirring?

Joe, the one who continually refers to fascists is Bolt, a lover of the term "left wing fascists", Is everyone who disagrees with you a "left wing fascists", you take everything else Bolt says as "Gospel", why not take that.
Bolt quote: “Watch the fascist Left attack me and get clobbered,” Was that a promo for Bolts TV show.

Leo, the fly on the wall, you try all sorts of attacks with your conspiracy nonsense. There was something sinister behind the Victorian police investigation. Then there was the woman on the train in Sydney. The CEO of QANTAS got a mention, if not by you, by others.

Paul 2 Mark 2,

Nice try: I haven't used the term 'left-wing fascist' on this thread, from memory, only the term, as a hypothetical, 'Right-wing fascist'. Fascists on the whole, 'left' or right, are Right-wing. I think you might have been 'projecting' :)

That says something about the current 'Left', and as a clear example of their total opportunism, their readiness to suck up to the looniest fringes of, effectively, both.

To be clear: I view fascism, whether it's 'Left', Right or Islamist - all totalitarians together - to be one of the major evils facing us today. Yes, more evil that capitalism or sea-level rise.

Joe

Paul1405,

I take you quite seriously, others would too, recognising that your amateur funnyman and other ploys are just that, strategies to manipulate and cover for a world view that is wildly far left, Starship Enterprise and totalitarian.

It is your prejudice against ordinary Australians and especially those who are successful (it takes hard work and application and does not come for free you should know) and goodness knows where that came from (who cares at your age!), that makes you a willing tool for an educated, selfish, egocentric elite who like to dabble in social experimentation and like to rub the noses of ordinary Australians in some 'do-do'.

I guess some are bored in their well-paid sinecures and like to strut some moral superiority and exercise power without ever being held responsible. They need 'Useful Idiots'.

But where does that leave serial wanna-be activists like you? You get an outlet for your hate, for instance railing against Bolt (a doll for your pins), but it is only finally through grasping the opportunities that were always available to you and doing the hard yards and being accountable, that you will improve your lot ( a bit late now) and as a spin-off be a constructive, positive model for youth.

Because youth should always be encouraged to participate and find their solutions in the institutions and avenues that are freely available in a democracy. It is education in civics, not time life-wasting and self-destructive serial activism that will benefit them and Australia too.

Hidey Ho Joe, no I said Bolt used the term "left wing Fascist" not you, but feel free if you so desire, I will not be offended. I find you more the ambidextrous type, not knowing if you are left or right, Arthur or Mather, Having been converted on the road to Damascus as you were. Ah! that's not so at all is it.
And what is the state of play in the Bolt conundrum at the moment?

Leo, you should be a minister of religion delivering those sermons the way you do. Having all the cliche's; far left, Starship Enterprise, totalitarian. egocentric elite, 'Useful Idiots' etc etc. You continually mimic the words of the extremists, like the Bolt's and Hanson's of this world, while trying to portray yourself as some kind of reasonable, middle of the road moderate, when you are no such thing. Nice try but you are a failure as Leoj. Like, onthebeach, its time to bury Leoj and reincarnate yourself as Willy Wonker or some such nick, and try again.

Paul,

I realise that the left whinge would like to copyright the term fascist to mean anyone that disagrees with them, however, the actions of the jack booted activists such as those that tried to silence Bolt are behaving far more like the brown and black-shirted fascists than their victims.

The term left whinge fascist is thus particularly apt if only to enlighten the masked thugs that they have become that which they despise.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Terms like "Left wing" or "Right Wing" and facists -
bring back images of the past. Images of Stalin
and Hitler.

A past that my family ran away from and that I
would hate to see come to this country.
Therefore the use of
terminology like "Left Wing" "Right-Wing" or
references to dictators and facists - make me very
nervous.

Let us not forget
that Stalin admired Hitler, and initially, the two
worked hand in hand. History is clear that in 1939,
Stalin and Hitler were allies against the free people
of Europe. They were both, by then, accomplished killers,
even though Stalin led the score in victims tortured,
starved, and massacred. Each created panic and chaos
throughout Europe.

Each produced millions of refugees and homeless. Each
was expanding and building concentration camps in which
millions of innocent victims would perish. Both
despised and mistrusted democracies. Each abhorred Jews,
Christians, and organised religion. Both were set on
their conquests.

The two dictators used the same methods to deal with their
domestic opposition - terror.

I therefore question your use of the terminology in your
posts. Do you really believe that the past is being
resurrected here in this country and that only one side
"The Left" is bad?

Think again. We don't want history repeated. As David F.
Springer, an American lawyer once stated:

"The measure of our society over history is our fidelity
to our principles. We must remind our government and our
people to remain faithful to those principles or otherwise
our society, like so many in the past, will be swept on the
ash heap of history."

Therefore the point that I am trying to make is - extremes
of either side - left or right need to be avoided and
watched very carefully. Singling out just the one side and
finger pointing will still end up with very bad results
as history has shown.

Hi Foxy,

In my book there is no left wing, right wing, blame the French for that one. There is extreme and moderates. Stalin and Hitler were bedfellows, more united than divided them. The war between the two had more to do with power and control, than anything philosophical. Hitler could have been a communist, Stalin could have been a fascists.

Dear Paul,

They both used the same methods to deal with their
domestic opposition - terror.

Foxy,

I don't disagree with you, however, it was the tactics of the left whinge activists to call everyone right of centre fascists. In fact, the thugs that targeted Bolt were from the group identifying as the Melbourne branch of ANTIFA which is short for ANTI-FAscists who are the paramilitary bedwetters that target prominent citizens that don't adhere to their left whinge ideology.

Given that, real Fascists used violence to suppress unwanted opinions my argument is that the ease with which these left whinge activists resort to violence against those that voice differing opinions more solidly earns them the title of fascist than their targets.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Thank You for your explanation.

I'm still somewhat hesitant about applying labels
to any one group. I even somehow doubt if these groups
would even know what the labels really mean in
historical terms. I prefer the terms "extremists"
or even "fanatics."

Individualism versus collectivism.

Liberalism is something different.

It is annoying that the public broadcaster prefers to promote adversarial, B&W argument positions/thinking and sensationalism through its entertainment-pretending-to-be-educational shows like Q&A. There is an abysmal lack of nuance that could help the public understand.

However the bigger issue is the increasing criminalisation of behaviour. Migrants who fled Europe after WW2 should be noting with fear that creeping change in Western democracies and definitely happening in Oz.

Returning to the thread topic..

leoj,

Unfortunately many of the refugees who fled from the
totalitarian regimes during World War II and ended
up in Australia are no longer living. And, many of
their children born and bred in this country are not
fully aware of the pitfalls of the ideologies that their
parents ran from.

As we approach the one month anniversary of the "Bolt Assault" I thought I would pop into this thread and check on progress. With the claims from the forums usual suspects that the evidence was crystal clear, and that an arrest of the perpetrators was imminent.

Hummmm, not much to report fellas, I am not saying an arrest is not going to take place, even at this late stage, it may well do, it could even be for public mischief.

This is NSW, but I am sure Victoria have something similar;

CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 547B

Public mischief
547B Public mischief

(1) Any person who, by any means, knowingly makes to a police officer any false representation that an act has been, or will be, done or that any event has occurred, or will occur, which act or event as so represented is such as calls for an investigation by a police officer, shall be liable on conviction before the Local Court to imprisonment for 12 months, or to a fine of 50 penalty units, or both.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a person shall be deemed to make a representation to a police officer if the person makes the representation to any other person and the nature of the representation reasonably requires that other person to communicate it to a police officer and that person does so communicate it.

Now that is clear!

Paul,

Another rookie mistake, as the police have already issued a photo of the suspect the police are way beyond determining whether it was staged. If you have more than your own fevered imagination as to contribute, perhaps you could take it to the police, or are you know that you will get done for public mischief.

P.S. you are the only person on this thread to use the word imminent.

Just popped in to see if there have been any developments in the 'Bolt Attack'. hummm nothing, when can we expect an arrest in this open and shut case, the forums usual Suspects got it completely wrong. as usual, Ah Shadow and co.

Paul,

So how's it going with your claim that the attack was a right wing set up? Completely debunked I believe. So you got it wrong again.

Please show where anyone other that yourself claimed that the arrest was imminent? Or did you get that wrong too?

So far, Paul, you are 0 for 2.

Shadow, why not just admit it, you and the other sycophantic Bolt supporters got it wrong. I merely put forward the suggestion that since there was no evidence, other than Bolts word, as to the events surrounding his claimed assault, there might have been other plausible explanations, not the least that Bolt set the whole thing up himself to gain publicity.
Bolt may well have been assaulted by some left wing crazies. I never said he wasn't, but then again, given the blokes track record, anything is possible. You and a number of other Bolt syco's jumped in claiming it was all cut and dried, the cpppers would would have their man in no time. In the fullness of time, it has been proven you blokes, GOT IT WRONG!

Paul,

I know that you struggle with the English language, and confuse "a matter of time" with imminent, just as Scott Numbnuts confused "naturalised citizen" with not being a citizen of NZ.

That you fervently denied that the violent attack was carried out by left whinge white trash, in the face of admissions by the neo-nazi ANTIFA and suggested it was a set up by Bolt showed a level of denial that usually requires schizophrenia to achieve.

That you and Scott Dumdum cocked it up is self-evident.

Shadow said "I would pin it on left whinge fascist clowns such as Getup or the greens. As one guy was stupid enough not to wear a mask, it is only a matter of time."

A matter of time, How much time Shadow, you got it wrong, along with the rest of the gaggle of geese, better known as the forums 'Usual Suspects' of which you are a leading member.

Paul,

You painted yourself in this corner and I'm not going to dig you out. Lying about what was said, then trying to hold me to that lie makes you wrong not me. Secondly I was also right about it being left whinge fascist clowns that perpetrated this violent attack. The moment they used their fists it became aggravated assault.

Finally, I see that you are vigorously avoiding the topic of Scott Numbnuts being booted from the Senate. I also see that his dual citizenship was a subject of an FOI request 3yrs ago which he refused to answer, so essentially he knew, and has for at least one election committed fraud. He should be made to pay back his salary for the last 9 years.

Shadow do you deny what you said: I will show you the reference;

Paul,

Given that almost without exception, violent politically based assaults are initiated by left whinge activists, and that it was initiated against Andrew Bolt, only an idiot would claim otherwise.

I would pin it on left whinge fascist clowns such as Getup or the greens. As one guy was stupid enough not to wear a mask, it is only a matter of time.

In the interim, the left whinge thug can enjoy the black eye, blue balls and humiliation.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 8 June 2017 4:12:47 PM

I repeat, how much is a matter of time? an hour, a day, a week, a month? They have all passed and no arrest. So what have you got to say for yourself?

I have the perfect quote for you and Bolt:

"Oh! What A Tangled Web We Weave When First We Practice To Deceive"

Paul,

What about 6 months, a year, a decade, a century. Admit it you cocked it up, and got everything wrong.

Of course, you lied, but not as badly as Scott Numbnuts who is up for $2m of salary and costs to pay back.

Its official Shadow has given the coppers up to 100 years to solve the mystery of the 'Bolt Attack'. Are you expecting some miracle in police forensics by then. When will it be classed as a cold case?

Paul,

I haven't set any time limit, you are desperately trying to do so because you cocked up. It is also clear that most of the consequences of this violent attack have eluded you.

The moment that this left whinge fascists used their fists, this became aggravated assault, and unlike the vile greenie that spat on people, this isn't a slap on the wrist offence, but rather a criminal record type of offence. The sting in the tail is that unlike the US, there is no statute of limitations, that one of these Fwits had the photo of his eye published means that other people know who they are and probably the police do too.

Daniel Morecambe's case took more than a decade to bring to trial, so these retards are going to have to look over their shoulders all the time.

(criminal record means no directorship of companies, no practising as a lawyer and other professions, no overseas travel, no running for parliament etc)