Mark Latham refuses to apologise for homophobic tweet. “I had a bit of a cry late yesterday…”
- Blubbering Blowhards Battered
- Noticeably eager to escalate Labor’s national war on Catholics
- 2023: “Novak Djokovic has stirred anger after calling for peace”
- I’ll tell you what rule I applied, sir. I applied rule D.S.C!
- Few causes are more satisfying than routing the Spanish left
- The Ma’am With The Golden Smarm
- Mentally vulnerable ‘No’ voters officially stigmatised as racists
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- COVID hysteria
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- Hypocrisy of the left
- Innovation and technology
- Left-wing extremism
- Legal affairs
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Social media
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
The Cat Empire
They can meditate on Romans 1 when they arrive in that place. Don’t say you weren’t warned qwerty peoples.
Latham certainly has rehabilitated himself after selling his soul to the left to be opposition leader.
He promoted good policies before then as an ALP backbencher and has been entertaining indeed since leaving federal politics.
And no point in being nice to these activists. They will never be nice to him. Ever.
1. Mark Latham invited to give a speech at St Michael’s, Belfield. A bit of an honour because the church has hosted civil political addresses many times before.
2. Rainbow terrorists decide to head out there – believing they’ll stand over little old dearies popping in to hear Mr Latham before coffee, cake and a chinwag.
3. Rainbow terrorists block safe entry (per NSW Police). Latham advised to cancel.
4. Local Catholics show up to defend the Church. But they’re not little old dearies. They’re military-age Maronites.
5. Rainbow terrorists set fire to a crucifix.
6. Shoving begins and police arrest a few officially acceptable baddies (that is, anyone who isn’t a homosexual, an Aborigine or a cross-dresser).
7. Alex Greenwich, quoted in the SMH, calls the victim – Mark Latham – a “disgusting human being” and a “dangerous individual.” Completely mendacious response to what happened and also defamatory.
8. Latham Tweets his opinion of Greenwich.
9. Greenwich becomes the sainted victim, Andrew Bolt declares Latham persona non grate, everyone forgets the anti-church terrorism and Alex has a cry.
The irony is that Greenwich wouldn’t give Bolt the time of day.
Very far from it.
Bolt keeps making the mistake of far too many conservatives of being nice and polite to people who will never return the favour.
Good summary, CL.
WOW! The qwerty one-sidedness of the article is breathtaking. And Greenitch is an enthusiastic… nay, zealous…
spokespersonpropagandist for the alphabet mafia.
In just the recent past, the qwerty demand has gone from tolerance to acceptance to celebration. It could only have gotten this far with the full approval of global medical HQ, the World Health Organization. Many governments and large corporations/organizations, particularly in the West, have taken their lead from the WHO and have gleefully embraced “the movement”. For example, creepy Joe has stated that qwerty is at the core of US foreign policy. The contortions, distortions, to legitimize the perverse, the dysfunctional, are extraordinary, only made possible by fact and reason, too, being estranged.
Thanks C.L. My understanding is that the Greenwich/Latham Twitter contretemps started well before the Belfield incident, and that the Rainbow Warriors had more than a little connection with Greenwich.
If Latham’s words made Greenwich cry, he must be a very fragile individual indeed. Too fragile for the Bear Pit. Perhaps he needs some time off to recover.
Perhaps he needs some time off to recover.
Greenitch is lobbying for “alphabet stress” leave.
Many governments and large corporations/organizations, particularly in the West, have taken their lead from the WHO and have gleefully embraced “the movement”.
He didn’t apologise.
Makes me happy
‘UNHINGED’: Pro-life event swarmed by protestors, seen ‘attacking’ students
I’m guessing Latham is going to have a few more things “to say” on this topic. Who knows, it might win him more votes than he loses.
Off topic but Cardimona will be on the George Christensen radio show about 6pm on TNT radio here
Dover, sometimes you come here.
You have banned me from your site.
It’s your blog, and that’s fair enough, it’s yours and it’s full of denialist retards anyway and they weren’t going to let the truth in no matter what, and I feel somewhat like it’s good because I tried to get through to them, but they are lost…time to move on.
You know how many times you have not allowed my comments and yet they pretend I just flounced and you don’t correct them.
Not something you should be proud of. Get some integrity about yourself.
You are a denialist yourself, throwing you head into the sand that is Ukraine..and that is all fine, but stand by your decisions and let them know.
No-one dies perpetual outrage like the left.
How long was it before they stopped sobbing about ‘Ditch the Witch’?
Struth, I love ya like a distant cousin, but you need to be like Don Draper when he says to that bloke “I don’t think about you at all”
It’s fair to say the Greensnitch is mortified that Latham would impute that he is some sort of heathen and wouldn’t give himself a big old flush out with an enema before taking it up to the hilt.
Maybe Latham’s choice of words was a bit crude (good old working-class vernacular), but in substance it was a perfectly accurate description of the act of buggery. Greenwich ought to be proud of it.
Some of us remember the pederast pervert mates of the ABC’s pin-up leftist pervert Richard Neville rhapsodising on ABC radio in 1975 about how wonderful it was to do it to a twelve-year-old boy. And now Whitlam’s hand-picked ABC chairman defended the program.
Greenwich made an uncalled-for most disparaging comment about Latham.
Latham retorted with an observation disparaging homosexual behaviour, likely insinuating while not stating that Greenwich was a homosexual. Even so, Latham did not attack the man but a behaviour whereas Greenwich attacked the man. It’s the latter which is grievous.
Every word Latham spoke was true.
Back when I was a kid we were told to be aware of your surroundings.
Now you have to bear your arse for the queers!
Actually, Old Lefty is right, for Latham’s retort was not disparaging of homosexual behaviour but rather called into question as to whether a literal description of the behaviour was evidence that that behaviour was deserving of disparagement.
If Greenwich had been called a disgusting human being, I doubt he would have cared so much as he appears to be a super-confident individual.
But as well, he could be a fastidious type.
Now infamously associated with excrement.
This will wound. He’ll be smarting.
Here we go:
Just like Trump. They are resorting to lawfare.
Is truth a defense?
I’m going against the grain of the blog here and saying that Latham messed up on this one … although there’s not a lot of point apologizing to these people because they have no decency and will attack no matter what.
I am not disputing the accuracy of the timeline above … important point being that the trans activists are willing to use street blockages, threats of violence and intimidation of chirchgoers to achieve their political aims. Burning a crucifix is what the KKK used to do, and it clearly isn’t intended to be a peaceful activity.
So Latham responds by describing the mechanical details of anal sex … and yeah, no one disputes the accuracy, but IMHO it was an inappropriate response to thtrats of violence. Latham’s biggest weakness is that he’s a hot head who gets himself goaded into this kind of thing. We are all made of bodily fluids, none of us are etherial beings … people are disguisted by various things, some people find women’s periods a bit icky … others are horrified by fat people, or whatever. Our political discourse should not be based around arguments over bodily function.
Latham has got to focus on what matters … one of the things he campaigned on was the question of whether children are being indoctrinated towards a trans lifestyle in schools and this remains a very valid question. I don’t believe in one lifestyle to suit everyone, but I do think it’s very important that everyone at least gets the chance to make their own personal decisions. I’m not against people who want to smoke, or enjoy a few drinks, or even get tattoos or ride a motorcycle … probably none of those things are real good for you but nor are they any business of the government. That said, we don’t want primary school kids getting drunk and getting tattoos either.
On the other hand, street violence is something government should be at least trying to put a stop to … especially political violence which can easily spin out of control and has destroyed nations in the past.
For Christians, the aberrant are fallen sinners, like the rest of us.
Why are poofters suddenly the flavour of the month?
It’s thoughtful writing.
Maybe the condoning and the pandering causes the hot-head to explode when one of their group attacks. Frustration, and anger, over all the inches given and the miles and miles taken; the lid’s been lifted.
Still, hot-heads should be somewhere peaceful; not in politics.
I see the strain of “mind illness” on Mark Latham’s face and feel great sympathy for him; a sort of tragedy, to be blessed with high intelligence but dogged by the ‘wrong’ personality.
Latham’s delivery may be twitter-crude, yet if Latham is judged as being inappropriate in his details of homosexuality, applying the same standard of judgement can only make the teaching of homosexuality-trans genderisms in schools equally inappropriate. Unless, of course, it is not taught in Latham’s terms but with a fey gloss.
Also in my view the prevailing gender ideologies are not really about lifestyles but about intentions to redefine and distort truth about all that is involved in being human.
And what a shitty flavour it is.
Excellent analysis, Tel.
There were several alternative angles that would have served the anti-transterror cause better, yes. The counter-argument to this, however, is that the sacralisation of homosexuality can only be undermined by Trumpian jolts; by a normalisation of attacking left-wing extremists like Greenwich who hide behind teh gay just as Gillard hid behind being female.
This is what Trump did to Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren. That sledge was red hot at the time but is now mainstream. Nobody cares. Everyone calls her Pocahontas. A self-serving (and fraudulent) piety was jolted out of its firmament permanently.
Latham’s Tweet was a little more extreme, to be sure, but let’s not forget that he thought better of it himself – of his own volition – anyway.
Only it was a response to Greenwich calling Latham “disgusting”, not the violence. An entirely appropriate response too, because it is indeed true that what Greenwich does is disgusting. It also has the added bonus of puncturing the carefully curated image of rainbows and ‘gay’ that the homos have successfully pushed about their lifestyle.
If they want to destroy the star chamber system they’ve set up, they need to drag Latham in.
Greenitch – gaslighting much?
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party must ‘take action’ over Mark Latham’s ‘homophobic’ tweet.
If the comment was phobic about anything it was the act itself. And Greenwich himself of course.
I expect Latham gets along quite well with gays that are not so… would intolerant be the right word?
Sad day when Latham is anyone’s pin up.
Video length ~8.00 mins
A leftist, “Christian” [don’t laugh, in the back] analysis of the Nashville tragedy, a.k.a. The Twilight Zone.
The Un Zud PM, Hip Chipkins
What is a woman?
Good take Tel. Unfortunately Latham has always had the odd diesel leak into his pituitary and he goes a little berserk from time to time. He is not perfect, but has good intentions.
Sad day when Crusadick pops up here.
The Cruelty of CAPTCHA
Never apologise to leftists.
I wonder. The attacks by the transgender supporters appears orchestrated by powers that are covertly manipulating both the trans contagions and the attack contagions. In contrast to the contagions, I don’t think that the political super-elites (those controlling the strings as distinct from the leading, principal dancers) are themselves overtly homosexual or transitioning, they being the playwrights and choreographers. Not sure that anyone in Gates’s or Soros’s or Schwab ‘s or Biden’s or Obama’s or Clinton’s league or that any other world leader or anyone from the royal houses – while no doubt fetishists, all – has joined the trans ranks. Why would they, if corrupt though they be, perhaps not entirely silly. The contagion of medium and message is occult.
“Let Them Eat Cake” – Amid Strikes, Blockades and Social Chaos, French Minister Marlene Schiappa’s Playboy Cover Ignites a Flood of Controversy
whoops… meant to post at Finnish PM article!
It’s fascinating how terrified these lefties are of saying the wrong thing.
Labour voter of 16 years tears up membership over Starmer’s ‘transphobic’ interview (3 Apr)
“Sir Keir Starmer is facing indignation from Labour members over the issue of trans and women’s rights. One Labour member yesterday said they would be tearing up their membership card in response to the issue. This came after an interview with the Sunday Times, which saw Sir Keir claim that “99.9 percent” of women “haven’t got a penis”.”
Yes that’s all he said, that 99.9% of women don’t have penises. Now the hysterical woke are after him…