Why are the vast majority of the other Australian journalists not asking the same question?
It is often said that one should be cautious of asking a question to which one doesn’t already have the answer(s), so here are my answers to my question:
Some don’t have the courage, but most,
like true Leftists, don’t want their own shoddy, self-serving reasoning, if such it can be called, along with that of the homosexual “marriage” lobby, exposed to view, and subject to rebuttal.
Enough from me - Michael Cook's article commences:
One of today’s Australian headlines is “We can already see how a ‘debate’ about love will lead to violence and hate”. The article was written after a bomb threat to an LGBT FM station in Melbourne by a strong supporter of same-sex marriage and vehement opponent of a plebiscite. However, there may a grain of truth in her prediction, judging from the way doctor, activist and author David van Gend has been treated.
Dr van Gend, a general practitioner from Toowoomba, is the author of the just-published book Stealing from a Child: the Injustice of 'Marriage Equality'. He makes a strong case for traditional marriage, attacks the “genderless agenda” and critiques the push for gay marriage. He describes it as "a manifesto in defense of society's inviolable foundation: Father, Mother, Child".
I read an advance copy. Van Gend has firm ideas, but expresses them respectfully and insults no one.
So he was quite surprised when the printer contacted the publisher, Connor Court Press, on the evening before the book was launched to announce that the company would not fill the order. "Due to the subject matter and content of your book, unfortunately I have been instructed by senior management not to proceed with printing this title," the publisher was told.
Can you believe that – not the publisher, but the printer, refusing to print the book?
In the remainder of the article, Cook briefly outlines the various ways in which the homosexual lobby, forever bleating about intolerance to them, demonstrate the disgraceful intolerance of which they are capable in an intellectually lazy culture.
Oh, and you know that bomb threat . . .
Posted by John on September 27, 2016, 9:36 am, in reply to "A very good question"
. . . the amount of accurate, detailed, clearly attested information about that is phenomenal.
Phenomenally absent, that is. Take the article in *star observer , (Setting Australia’s LGBTI agenda since 1979), titled: JOY 94.9 STUDIOS EVACUATED AFTER REPORTS OF ALLEGED BOMB THREAT Wow! Nothing quite like an All-caps heading to get the biases running ahead of the intellect, is there? And “reports of an alleged bomb threat”? Well, I suppose secondhand, thirdhand, rumours are as good as facts really in some circumstances, aren’t they?
The article commences:
THE JOY 94.9 studios were evacuated and searched by Victoria Police last night after reports of a possible bomb threat. Leading Senior Constable Kendra Jackson said police conducted a security check at the Melbourne radio station just before 8.30pm. “A check of the building was conducted and declared safe,” she said. All staff and volunteers were required to evacuate the building as soon as the alleged threat was made.
So let’s look at some of the “reports”:
A volunteer present told the Star Observer everyone was instructed to grab their things and evacuate, making sure to “disperse” when they exited the Bourke Street building. [No names – no pack-drill, but completely believable, of course.]
The iPad housed at JOY 94.9 used to sign in and out any visiting volunteers was also taken downstairs. [Really! An iPad – well, no chance of any additions, deletions or modifications there, is there?]
Volunteer Liam Clark said he was in the middle of radio training when one of the volunteers told everyone to evacuate. “While we were still upstairs someone said it was a bomb threat,” Clark said. [Pity Liam didn’t know who the “one of the volunteers “ was, but, I guess we can be certain that “one of the volunteers “ had firsthand knowledge of the alleged threat, can’t we?]
Liam also is reported to have said:“Someone asked if the other floors had received an email, so I think the threat was via email,” he said. [“Someone” asked a question about email, so it is pretty clear that the threat was sent via email, isn’t it. I mean, that evidence should stand up in court, don’t you think?]
Liam is also reported as saying: “The person who took our training said they would speak to us as a group when we were all together but they didn’t get anymore {sic} information.” [But one can be sure, I’m sure, that there really is a lot more reliable information that is available that demonstrates that there really was a credible threat, and that it was not the work of an agent provocateur].
Heck ! Where did that thought of the possibility of an agent provocateur come from? No one in the media has suggested that before, have they? I wonder who put that thought into my head?
Enter the CEO:
Chief Executive of JOY 94.9 Tennille Moisel said the station strongly condemned the threat. “Our communities have faced many threats over the years, and this latest one will not silence one of the only LGBTI radio stations in the world,” she said. Moisel added that the threat highlighted the damage a plebiscite on marriage equality could inflict. “A plebiscite is a delaying approach to the issue of marriage equality,” she said.
Ah, the plebiscite! Now we come to the heart of the matter. We don’t want that plebiscite, do we? I mean, it’s not that we are scared that the majority of Australians are fed up with all this rubbish when the economy is what our politicians should be concentrating on, and might vote overwhelming against the proposal, is it? No, of course not; we have much more high-minded objections to it based on the cost to the country – a cost that is miniscule by comparison with the shocking waste of politicians' time on this matter that really affects very few people, when the vast majority are facing the effects of an economy seriously in need of repair, but being ignored.