Guest Post: Peter O’Brien A defence of Roger Franklin

Scene:  ABC Ultimo Studio.  Monday Night Q&A.

Host Tony Jones:

Good evening and welcome to Q&A.  Tonight’s panel includes Niki Savva, columnist for The Australian,  Mona Chalabi of the Guardian and American scientist Lawrence Krauss.

In the wake of yesterday’s tragic bombing at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester in which 22 young people lost their lives, I would like to get the view of panellists on how this attack, tragic though it is, fits into a global context.  Mona Chalabi, can we start with you.

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.

Tony Jones:

Thank you, Mona.  Lawrence Krauss?

Lawrence Krauss:

Actually, Tony, You’re more likely to be killed by a refrigerator, in the United States, falling on you.

~~~

It didn’t happen in that sequence of course but, if it had, would anybody be outraged by Roger Franklin’s outburst against this vacuous and dangerous drivel?

But Monday night’s Q&A did happen in the wake of many previous atrocities.  The panellists had, at their disposal, extensive knowledge of the effects of terrorism on countless innocent families but, with the comfort of swiftly fading memories, felt able to mouth these comforting (for them) platitudes.

The point that Roger Franklin was making was that we too easily relegate these events to history once the candlelit vigils have been complete.  And as long as we keep doing that, apologists like those on Monday night’s Q&A  will continue to weaken the political resolve to take more resolute and effective action to put an end to the threat rather than to just counter it.  In that sense they are contributing to the deaths that will, inevitably, come in the future.  In much the same way that 1200 unfortunates who drowned off the coast of Australia in recent years would have been better off if the likes of Sarah Hanson-Young had not held such sway with decision makers.

Draw your own conclusion from that.

This entry was posted in Guest Post, Hypocrisy of progressives. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Guest Post: Peter O’Brien A defence of Roger Franklin

  1. Habib

    The ABC has made itself a legitimate target by being a broadcast facility for the enemy. Scramble 1st flight 3Sqn, JDAM fused for contact, HE MK84. Only 2 birds tasked, eta to target 25. Launch once target fully acquired, minimise collateral, possibility of noncoms in target area. Zero AAA or high cover. Only low value targets in primary.

  2. Dr Fred Lenin

    larry Pickering has come up with a btilliant solution to islamic terrorism Baptise the remains orcorpse of terrorists .holy water and all those who blow themselves tobits ,scrape up remains put ina jarmarked with their new Christian names and bury in the paupers section . No 72virgins for baptised christian apostates ?
    When you blow yourself up or commit a terrorist act your corpse belongs to the State .to dipose of by civilised burial ,a Christian burial in a Christian country ,whats wrong with that ?
    Just imagine the mind bending that would cause amongst the islamofascists and their commofascist allies .heads exploding all over the world , Its so simple but the best psychowar move I have heard of .it makes the cia and kgb look like school kids . Now the hard bit finding a leader with the guts to implement it ,it totally negates the 72 virgin paradise crap you become a martyr for bugger all ? Even the illiterate peasant will understand this.

  3. Roger

    …apologists like those on Monday night’s Q&A will continue to weaken the political resolve to take more resolute and effective action to put an end to the threat rather than to just counter it. In that sense they are contributing to the deaths that will, inevitably, come in the future.

    Add to them the useless “counter-terrorism experts” who identify the causes of terrorism as poverty and exclusion and the politicians who listen to them and then express bewilderment that another terrorist act has been committed despite all the tax payer dollars invested in the Muslim community.

  4. Chris

    The media are force multipliers for terrorists. Without publicity terrorism dies; without name recognition the terrorists get less reward for their murders.
    Social media has diluted the responsibility of the old MSM, but now every private publisher on facechook shares culpability.
    Brievik was sponsored by the media who published his picture and his writings, their contract with him to do so was written in the ink of the previous mass killing coverage.

  5. whyisitso

    Is Roger in the above comments Roger Franklin? I note the “offending” article has now been deleted from Quadrant’s website. I wonder if Roger has been fired. No new posts today, which is unusual. Very disappointed in Windschuttle’s craven reaction.

  6. Empire

    Is Roger in the above comments Roger Franklin?

    No.

  7. Sinclair Davidson

    I wonder if Roger has been fired.

    Not to my knowledge.

    Very disappointed in Windschuttle’s craven reaction.

    Indeed. Even more disappointed by Nick Cater’s grovelling performance on The Drum last night.

  8. Mr skeletor

    He was engaging in hyperbole. The fact this is outrageous shows just how dumb this nation has become.

  9. Deplorable

    I will not resubscribe to Quadrant after the back down by Windschuttle and backstabbing by another board member. Roger there are plenty of sites that are proud to display your patriotic writings so please continue to support Australian culture.

  10. Habib

    Chris: Adder cleared to engage targets of opp using non frag ord following initial run.

  11. Roger

    Is Roger in the above comments Roger Franklin?

    No.

    Roger F. posts here under a nom de plume, whyisitso.

  12. Habib

    Windy by name and by nature, Cater cravenly crawled into a crater. Is there a single “conservative” in this pathetic burrow of blouses that possesses even just one shrivelled testicle, with a few wisps of hair attached? Too stupid, weak and enfeebled to survive.
    I for one welcome our new pointy-shod, dishtowel and fanbelt becrowned overlords*.

    *Script for issue at all broadcasters. Might hold off the katos for a day or so.

  13. ian3029

    disappointed by Nick Cater’s grovelling performance on The Drum last night.

    Also Miranda Devine on PML. I switched off.

  14. A Lurker

    The article (linked below) was mentioned once or twice in passing on the Open Forum, but I think it deserves another mention and a link to go with it.

    Here is an extract – the entire article is a must-read and really does deserve its own guest post on Catallaxy.

    That the post-terror narrative is fundamentally about taming our passion and politics is clear from its sidelining of all issues of substance. We are actively warned against asking difficult questions about 21st-century society and why it has this violence in it, this nihilism in it. Question the wisdom of multiculturalism, of refusing to elevate one culture over another and instead encouraging people to live in their own cultural bubbles, and you’re racist. Wonder if the obsession with combatting ‘Islamophobia’ might have given rise to a situation where some Muslims, especially younger ones, cannot handle ridicule of their religion, and… well, you’re ‘Islamophobic’. As for immigration: this is the great unmentionable; you’re a fascist even for thinking about it. The post-terror narrative that barks ‘You must empathise!’ also says, implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, ‘You mustn’t think! You mustn’t ask those questions or say that thing.’ And so in their response to terrorism, they erect an intellectual forcefield around some of the problems that might, just might, be contributing to that terrorism.

    Link here.

  15. Fulcrum

    Obviously what runs through Kraus’ss veins is closer to refrigerant than blood. (Apologies for the misplaced apostophe)
    Anyway, I assume the audience didn’t walk out on their honorable guest, having been enthralled by the latest statistics and humanity of fridges.

  16. incoherent rambler

    Indeed. Even more disappointed by Nick Cater’s grovelling performance on The Drum last night.

    Yep. Not a culture warrior at all.

  17. Habib

    Quadrant sub now gone bye-bye. I keep hearing this mewling that “they can’t afford to defend themselves from the Big Bad ABC, and its taxpayer warchest“. Since when did “eat shit and die” cost a dinar? I’d deploy it for free on their behalf. What’s the ABC and its pathetic enablers on the treasury benches going to do, withdraw their advertising?

    Sitzpinklers, every one of them.

  18. Adelagado

    Sinclair Davidson#2390674, posted on May 25, 2017 at 2:02 pm

    Indeed. Even more disappointed by Nick Cater’s grovelling performance on The Drum last night.

    The grovelling apology I could almost bear, but that there was not a word in Frankins defence was what I found most galling.

    The article was angry and magnificent. In the context of the events of the last few years, and especially of the last few days, 99% of it was expressed in a style I can only wish I had the talent to match. Unfortunately one or two words have allowed it to be taken out of context. Cater mentioned none of that.

  19. Beef

    Roger Franklin is without doubt the best writer in the country. But I Repeat Myself. To have him muse at this site following his musings at Quadrant have allowed me to witness true literary genius for years with little to no cost to myself. And for this I am in his debt.

    I look forward to the equally well written article by Keith et.al. in Quadrant addressing it’s motivation.

  20. Sinclair Davidson

    Also Miranda Devine on PML. I switched off.

    I had already switched off by that stage.

  21. Sinclair Davidson

    For all of you refusing to renew your subscriptions and/or cancelling your subscriptions please spare a thought for Roger. Do you think that the board are going to accept responsibility for their craven to appeasers or do you think they are going to scapegoat Roger?

  22. Habib

    Do you think that the board are going to accept responsibility for their craven to appeasers or do you think they are going to scapegoat Roger? The latter most definitely, seeing as they’ve outed themselves as craven appeasers and no better than the Q&A panel that was the original and very legitimate target. Given that who’d want to work for such despicable fuckers? Go commando at the ABC for a lot more ackers, and plod protection from non-existent assailants.

  23. Beef

    I will stay as long as Roger stays Professor Davidson. I will take his lead on this, has always been by thought. I certainly owe him no less. Whilst reading his prose one day I was pointed to this site, the free-est on the internet. Cheers to you both.

  24. Oh come on

    A temporarily absent voice from this discussion cites the shameful treatment of Roger Franklin as further proof that you must never, ever, ever apologise to the Left, or back down in any confrontation with the Left.

    As long as you haven’t been careless enough to libel anyone, you simply must double down. Otherwise they win. Here we see an example of what should have been a spectacular Leftist own-goal parried into total victory.

  25. Oh come on

    And we must be prepared to push back hard in support of people like Roger Franklin in these kinds of circumstances, even if you think he may have gone a bit OTT. I’m in two minds about what’s the best way forward from here. I take Sinc’s point about damage control. On the other hand, you could make the argument that an example needs to be made of an entity supposedly on ‘our side’ that proves itself so willing to cut one of our own loose and start grovelling at the first shrieks of confected Leftist outrage.

  26. whyisitso

    disappointed by Nick Cater’s grovelling performance on The Drum last night.

    Also Miranda Devine on PML. I switched off.

    I was expecting Bolt to have the same reaction. It’s in his character. He sucks up to the Left every now and then to demonstrate his own “moral superiority”. Let’s wait until tonight’s Sky.

  27. ilajd

    My subscription renewal dependent on the following:
    1. Restore Roger’s article online and buy the man a well earned Red, at the very least a St Hugo
    2. Retract the apology,
    3. demand the ABC apologise for traducing its charter,
    4. Remove Nick Cater from the board, and
    5. Counsel Keith Windshuttle. might start by reading him this passage: Quadrant is uncompromisingly in favour of freedom of thought and expression. While insisting on civilised discourse, it opposes any political, academic or religious tendency that wants to suppress freedom of speech. It does not support diversity for diversity’s sake nor does it mindlessly endorse tolerance of all viewpoints, especially those that do not return the compliment. Rather, it understands tolerance to mean the willingness to listen to unpopular or unorthodox views that are well argued, while in practice taking tolerance to mean the willingness to live and let live, which is so typical of Australian life.

  28. Infidel Tiger 2.0 (Premium Content Subscribers Only)

    For all of you refusing to renew your subscriptions and/or cancelling your subscriptions please spare a thought for Roger. Do you think that the board are going to accept responsibility for their craven to appeasers or do you think they are going to scapegoat Roger?

    Give me Roger’s account details. I’ll gladly transfer him the subs fee annually.

  29. .

    It wasn’t even hyperbole, it was hypothetical.

    There must be nothing important happening in Australia now for this to even be newsworthy.

  30. I just sent this email to the Editor of Quadrant, Mr John O’Sullivan,
    Dear Sir,

    I sincerely regret that your journal chose to cave so quickly to the forces that we are up against. I hope, if you have a future, that in future you will plan your defence far better.

    Instead of reacting poorly and not defending your own, everybody associated with your publication should have been prepared for the onslaught which was bound to arrive. To find board members and senior editors hanging their associates out to dry was an absolute crying shame.

    A simple heads up to other right minded members of the press with a reminder of past associations would help defend the flanks.

    This is a war and you gave away significant ground because you were unprepared.

    Yours Sincerely, etc.

  31. Razor

    I wonder if Roger’s statement about the zero loss to the world intelligence should a bomb blast the panel to dust was really what got the ire of the leftards – so attack on their usual grounds racist islamophobia.

    I would have said that the world stood to gain in intelligence should their contribution to discourse be obliterated by whatever means.

  32. Oh come on
    #2390764, posted on May 25, 2017 at 3:10 pm

    + plusgood

    Oh come on
    #2390771, posted on May 25, 2017 at 3:21 pm

    + double plusgood

    As someone suggested much earlier, we need a new website. A Quadrant with balls, that we can subscribe to and support people like Roger.

  33. Cassie of Sydney

    Ah, Cater, Devine and Bolt, I call them supine “cuckservatives”.

  34. stackja

    Just catching up. I trust Sinclair’s judgment on this matter. No surrender. Nuts as Bastogne said.

  35. stackja

    MSM types like Bolt worried about their jobs?
    Why aren’t ABC types worried?
    Yeah, I know, protected species!

  36. Atoms for Peace

    Australia is a nanny state that would dress a brown dog in fluoro on a dark night for safety reasons.
    Dealing with toxic religious systems seems to fall under some other WHS process.
    No worries mate; she’ll be right.

  37. stackja

    Dot – Yes. Might not be exact word! History censored?

  38. Jannie

    You cant blame Windshuttle and Quadrant for being cautious and fearful. The Monster ABC could lawfare them out of existence. Its a frigging Dictatorship, the small guy with a few assets on the ground is an easy target for the bureaucracy. This is the Australian Socialist State.

  39. John J

    Contact Response to Quadrant

    Very unhappy to hear you’ve removed Roger Franklin’s outstanding article.

    The only thing wrong with Roger’s suggestion was it didn’t suggest a Nuke be used.

    We have Socialist Alliance brown shirts physically assaulting anybody that has a different point of view and you can’t stand by your editor when he expresses the obvious outrage of 90% of the population.

    I’m quite glad now Keith, that you haven’t automated the subscription renewal.

  40. Baldrick

    According to the ABC, Roger Franklin’s piece was offensive to them, yet Hizb ut Tahrir Australia spokesman Wassim Doureihi told a crowd of Sydney Muslims in 2014-

    “Even if a thousand bombs went off in this country, all that it will prove is that the Muslims are angry and they have every reason to be angry.”

    This is the very same Wassim Doureihi that ABC employee Yassmin Abdel-Magied sought advise from following an appearance on Q&A:

    Mr Doureihi and others criti­cised Yassmin Abdel-Magied for argu­ing through a “secular lens” and not having the required deep knowledge of Islam to prosecute her case.
    “Salams! Well, I am always happy to take feedback,” Ms Abdel-Magied wrote in response.
    “What specifically was problematic and how can I do better in the future inshallah? I am young, and willing to learn, inshallah. Trying to do the best with the platform I can, Allah willing.”
    After Mr Doureihi told Ms Abdel-Magied she “ended up framing Islam through a secular lens, aimed at a secular people and conscious of the presence of a secular government”, the author and activist said: “Ah indeed. Sigh. This is always a tricky one. Will DM (private message) you.”

    Where was the ABC’s confected outrage at one of their own, speaking publicly to a man who condones bombings in Australia as a lawful act of anger?

  41. Oh come on

    I mean, seriously. What have these people (Windschuttle and Cater) gained by caving in to the Left and throwing Roger Franklin under the bus? Nothing worth a pinch of shit.

  42. Oh come on

    We could easily have circled the wagons and held firm. But no. One thing is beyond doubt, though – the Left now owns Windschuttle and Cater. They are irreparably damaged goods for our purposes. They’ll never live this down.

    It’s been a good couple of days for the Australian Left. Windschuttle in particular is a prized scalp for them.

  43. Oh come on

    “Even if a thousand bombs went off in this country, all that it will prove is that the Muslims are angry and they have every reason to be angry.”

    Never trust anyone who pronounces ‘Muslim’ as Mussssssslim.

  44. Crossie

    But Monday night’s Q&A did happen in the wake of many previous atrocities. The panellists had, at their disposal, extensive knowledge of the effects of terrorism on countless innocent families but, with the comfort of swiftly fading memories, felt able to mouth these comforting (for them) platitudes.

    The panelists probably imagine themselves elites who will always be protected by a layer of security therefore to them any terrorist attack is purely rhetorical. It’s the protected against the unprotected who are not worthy of consideration. Up to now no celebrities have suffered which proves their point.

    There will be no change in attitude or approach until the Emmys, Grammys or Oscars go up in flames.

  45. Crossie

    … you must never, ever, ever apologise to the Left, or back down in any confrontation with the Left.

    It just leads to the Left holding you even more in contempt.

  46. Crossie

    We could easily have circled the wagons and held firm. But no. One thing is beyond doubt, though – the Left now owns Windschuttle and Cater. They are irreparably damaged goods for our purposes. They’ll never live this down.

    It’s been a good couple of days for the Australian Left. Windschuttle in particular is a prized scalp for them.

    Yes, as I commented above, the Left will despise them and we have lost respect for them. Apologies for something like Franklin’s article are surrender flags.

  47. Mique

    Appeasement never works.

  48. t

    I’m old enough to remember when Sinclair Davidson was the sane one; now I guess he’s just one of the Family Court Dad set.

  49. 3d1k

    I wasn’t offended by Fanklin’s comments. I took it as a kind of frustrated satire. Anyone who’s on Twitter will have seen the most awful ends desired for Rupert Murdoch and The Oz journos (often by other journos) and no one bats an eye.

    Franklin’s mistake was directing his despair toward Aunty Untouchable.

    More horror and outrage spent by the cognoscenti attacking Franklin than attacking those who perpetrated the murderous bombings.

    The pen mightier than the sword?

  50. .

    t
    #2391430, posted on May 26, 2017 at 1:13 am
    I’m old enough to remember when Sinclair Davidson was the sane one; now I guess he’s just one of the Family Court Dad set.

    Ah yes the good old family court. Everyone loves that place.

  51. Interested observer

    I understand the sentiments expressed but have subscribed for the first time to Quadrant. It gives me the right to inform the editors of my support for Roger Franklin. I do not however blame them for issuing a simple apology to head off crippling lawfare. If Yasmin whatever considers herself exonerated from all criticism by a faux mumbling of formula, the same reasoning must apply here – mustn’t it?

  52. Habib

    I do not however blame them for issuing a simple apology to head off crippling lawfare. For what offence or civil tort? Nothing illegal yet in that item, however it did expose the craven cowardice of many who describe themselves as liberal/conservatives. There’s more testosterone in a nunnery I’m afraid, which is why we are completely fucked. Might as well join the APS and milk it for all it’s worth before the bailiffs arrive, and flee this detestable wasted opportunity.

  53. .

    I wouldn’t be man enough to play chicken and see if an indictment is issued, let alone a statement of claim.

    Maybe you would, but you’ve got to think about risk/reward ratios for everyone else.

    Even free legal advice and counsel is not enough. You need a benefactor to underwrite costs.

  54. Habib

    There are no grounds for action. I’d stare the fuckers down, in fact encourage them to go legal. Be a hoot if a court ruled the ABC a legitimate target under LOAC.

  55. Clam Chowdah

    Free Roger Franklin!

Comments are closed.