Bastards! How dare they apologies for saying this?

Quadrant magazine today “unreservedly apologised” to ABC managing director Michelle Guthrie for an online article that suggested it would have been better off if the Manchester terrorist had bombed the public broadcaster’s Sydney headquarters.

The offending piece:

This was a moment when Jones really should have interrupted, asked Krauss if he lies about everything, not just when reality and circumstance intrude on favoured pieties.

But of course Jones was silent. It’s a monstrously absurd and obscene self-evident untruth to claim that refrigerators are more dangerous than terrorists, but it fits with the approved narrative, so not a peep from the man who is paid by the national broadcaster to promote fair, free, frank and factual debate on matters of national importance.

This morning, mere hours after Jones’ guests pocketed their ABC taxi vouchers and repaired to hotel rooms paid for with taxpayer dollars processed through the Sydney Writers Festival, mere children were torn to pieces on the other side of the world.

Life isn’t fair and death less so. What if that blast had detonated in an Ultimo TV studio? Unlike those young girls in Manchester, their lives snuffed out before they could begin, none of the panel’s likely casualties would have represented the slightest reduction in humanity’s intelligence, decency, empathy or honesty.

Mind you, as Krauss felt his body being penetrated by the Prophet’s shrapnel of nuts, bolts and nails, those goitered eyes might in their last glimmering have caught a glimpse of vindication.

A blast of Manchester dimensions must surely knock over the studio’s lunchroom refrigerator. Allah only knows how many innocent lives that shocking incident might claim.

Intemperate perhaps but understandable in the circumstances? The luvvies having a chat among themselves smugly does bring to mind Mencken:

Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.

21 comments on “Bastards! How dare they apologies for saying this?

  1. And had the ABC declared their preference for the bomb to have gone off at the Conservative party conference, no-one would have batted an eyelid.

  2. Entirely excusable – indeed, refreshing – when you read the link.

    — ‘Here’s the Guardian’s Mona Chalabi…”…actually, the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, if you want to view it in terms of number of dead bodies, which, as awful as it sounds, is the way to kind of make sense of some threat, actually, really, isn’t that present… the chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist is one in 3.6 million … but all of our perception of threat has been distorted because of the way that risk is presented to us by politicians…You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you.”

    It’s the morning after Kristallnacht and the left is defending the murderous overnight violence by saying that, in practical terms, only a handful of people were butchered, and that the real worry here is people using it as an excuse to pursue their Naziphobic agenda.

  3. I’ve heard it said that they’d solve a lot of problems in the world if they dropped a bomb on Twickenham during the Varsity match.

    Said to make a point, not a serious threat.

  4. I don’t care what the treat of of being killed by a foreign born terrorist is, it tells me nothing.

    I want to know what the probability is of being killed by a a Muslim, Methodist, Quaker etc. Irrespective of where they were born.

    Once I know that I can make my own risk assessment.

  5. Yes, the “foreign-born” just shows the dishonesty of the argument. Can you imagine, say, a Spanish nun at the time of their civil war declaring that she didn’t want to be raped and murdered by a foreign-born communist?

  6. P.S. What a pity that Quadrant backed down: when I used to read it it was an excellent magazine.

  7. dearieme – “Can you imagine, say, a Spanish nun at the time of their civil war declaring that she didn’t want to be raped and murdered by a foreign-born communist?”

    I bet Rocco can. Shame on them for backing down.

  8. ”…actually, the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, if you want to view it in terms of number of dead bodies, which, as awful as it sounds, is the way to kind of make sense of some threat, actually, really, isn’t that present… the chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist is one in 3.6 million … but all of our perception of threat has been distorted because of the way that risk is presented to us by politicians…You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you.”

    I expect the odds of being murdered by racially motivated whites are far higher even than this, but mysteriously this is a much, much bigger problem for the Guardian and has never been compared to having a refrigerator falling on you.

    Imagine someone, say in the Mail, writing this after the murder of Stephen Lawrence, and judge the reaction of the Guardian. Hint: you won’t need a crystal ball.

  9. Progressives are normally eager to detect violence (or a spectrum of violence, or a culture of violence) in apparently non-violent everyday interactions.

    Progressives are normally eager to take a political view of acts of violence – it’s not just the damage to the body of the individual victim, it’s the intent to humiliate, silence, and marginalize the community to which the victim belongs.

    And progressives normally say that if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem – your silence or non-engagement makes you an ally of the perpetrator.

    But with this rhetorical tactic of um well actschually you’re more likely to die of a piano falling on your head than from a suicide bomber, they reverse this tendency – deliberate violence has no political meaning, and it can be measured in the same cold actuarial terms as injuries and deaths from accidents.

  10. Quadrant has a new editor. This is not a good start. Paddy McGuiness or Keith Windschuttle would not have backed down.

    It’s a good piece. The bit about the ABC being blown up, although in poor taste, is actually illustrating the absurdity of a claim made the night before on the ABC’s Q&A show. A speaker called Lawrence Krauss had claimed that “You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you” than being killed by an Islamic terrorist.

    In no way whatsoever did it suggest that it would have been better off if the Manchester terrorist had bombed the ABC rather than Manchester.

    When do you ever hear a leftists apologise for the endless death threats they heap upon the right?

  11. It’s a good piece. The bit about the ABC being blown up, although in poor taste, is actually illustrating the absurdity of a claim made the night before on the ABC’s Q&A show. A speaker called Lawrence Krauss had claimed that “You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you” than being killed by an Islamic terrorist.

    In no way whatsoever did it suggest that it would have been better off if the Manchester terrorist had bombed the ABC rather than Manchester.

    I’m disappointed Windschuttle apologised. But Quadrant does partly rely on taxpayer’s money. The comments don’t seem that bad either (unless they’ve deleted some bad ones).

    When do you ever hear a leftists apologise for the endless death threats they heap upon the right?

  12. Double post because I thought my first comment hadn’t posted (and then I edited it after seeing that Windschuttle is editor again — disappointed that he did this).

  13. Relating to the above:
    When did the left ever apologise for anything they’ve said, caused offence?

  14. Wat quotes the Graun’s Mona: “the chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist is one in 3.6 million …You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you.”

    What’s missing here in the Graun’s argument is that the presence of fridges is necessary. More of us would likely be dead without them than with.

    More likely to die by lightning too. But lightning is a force of nature we can’t really control (yes, Goebbels Warmists, you can fuck right off too).

    Or being hit by a car. But we need cars.

    The Left (deliberately) misses the necessity and avoidability of these deaths when they make this “you are more likely” argument.

  15. The piece has possibly been changed from a more offensive original version. Will do some digging.

  16. The article does not suggest it would have been better if the ABC had been bombed, it asks “what if?” It is not in any way in poor taste, it quite rightly challenges the trivialisation of terrorism by Islamic apologists by asking how they might feel if they were not developing their ridiculous ideas from a perceived comfortable distance.

    Very disappointed by the response by Quadrant editor to crocodile tears from the snowflakes at the ABC.

    The article had finally convinced me it was high time that I subscribed, the apology has changed my mind.

  17. The original version was more offensive (the version up now has been changed). Apparently it read “had there been a shred of justice”, the Manchester blast would have “detonated in an Ultimo TV studio” (Ultimo being the Sydney suburb where the ABC is). That is arguably worthy of an apology, especially seeing as Quadrant has spent decades trying to be classy and rising above the shrill hatred of the left.

    But the leftists have been twisting it, as usual. There has been a police complaint made. Even in the original form the piece clearly made no suggestion that it wanted the ABC blown up, which is what the leftist media is now saying. And anyway leftists say this sort of thing every day (eg. Madonna wanting to blow up the White House).

  18. The Daily Mail also has an article on this in which they show some Twitter posts which claim that Roger Franklin wanted the ABC studios bombed, eg. Chip Le Grand (known in Oz as a total asshole) says that Franklin advocates the bombing of ABC headquarters. Even on the original version of the article this is a barefaced lie, and defamatory. (But I don’t suppose Franklin is the type to go crying to the libel courts.)

  19. The original was clumsily worded, but the intent was still clear. These apologist scum are part of the process that stops western society dealing with the Islamic problem. They downplay the risk and vilify and persecute anyone who dares to challenge their politically correct views. As long as it is not SJWs or politicians who created the problem who are being blown to pieces, nothing will happen because they value multiculturalism above the lives of ordinary people.

    Quite frankly, we do need the likes of Merkel or Andy “bomber was a terrorist not a Muslim’ Burnham to suffer the consequences of their actions before there is any chance of them trying to solve the problem. Until then, all we have are hashtags and candlelight vigils.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.