He won’t be intimidated by this 77 year-old grandmother

You know what’s sad? That a scribbler who spends so much time ‘writing’ books about the great men of old should a) join a (near violent) mob to attack an elderly lady who cannot defend herself and b) not be aware that doing so makes him one of the curs of history. But FitzSimons doesn’t see it. He believes Jacka, Monash and Cook would have his back on this. They’d stand with him against … Margaret Court. This isn’t the first theatrical missive FitzSimons has penned, of course. In 2001, he said “sorry” to the 9/11 terrorists.

This entry was posted in civil society, Freedom of speech. Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to He won’t be intimidated by this 77 year-old grandmother

  1. mh

    Fitz is a Wallaby great.

    He played seven Tests. SEVEN!

    * swoon *

  2. Candy

    Peter FitzSimon never seems to have much kindness and tolerance. Not vicious but unkind hurtful style of expressing his opinions.

  3. nb

    In the world of the left all light is darkness, and the dark is light.
    A ghoul of mayhem and destruction. An evil blight.

  4. Mother Lode

    Surely Firzsimian is a 4-chan prank that is widely broadcast by uncritical people desperate to score points and later revealed to be made up to embarrass these same people.

    Like the ‘Okay’ gesture meaning ‘KKK’.

    Or the Professor Bunyip’s Arlene Composta.

  5. Caveman

    Peter FitzSimons,
    King of the Alphabet people

  6. Alan sivkoff

    Fitzsimmons, struggled to play for Australia. I would think MC has more runs on the board than this pontificating wanker.

  7. Old Lefty

    I’d go further than Mother Lode. I sometimes wonder if Fitzsimons and Keneally are agents provocateurs secretly employed by the Coalition and Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy. The same role that Bill Hartley and George Crawford used to play – every time they open their mouths the drain up sympathy for the Libs..

  8. Old Lefty

    The really worrying thing is that Victoria has a premier who channels Hartley and Crawford and gets re-elected. The voters in the 60s at least had more sense.

  9. Infidel Tiger

    Mrs Court’s church clothes and feeds thousands of people every year.

    Evil bitch.

  10. jupes

    Margaret Court has more character and principle than weak idiots like The Pirate can even recognise.

    A true Australian champion, then and now.

  11. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Margaret Court has more character and principle than weak idiots like The Pirate can even recognise.

    A true Australian champion, then and now.

    You are far too charitable, jupes. For ‘weak idiots” substitute “pretentious floggers.”

  12. The BigBlueCat

    Fitz is suffering from tight bandana syndrome … it cuts of the blood supply to the vital, cognitive parts of the brain.

    But he is typical of the “tolerant” left – not really tolerant at all and wants the world to see things his way or not at all. If he was really tolerant, he wouldn’t have anything to say about Margaret Court or her beliefs (at least not publically).

    And Fitz, you are no theologian – leave the Bible interpretation, application and textual criticism to the real experts, there’s a nice chap!

    And thankfully, you are not the Tennis Australia Media Director – you’re too divisive!

  13. Texas Jack

    Leave him be. He’s doing us all a favour….!

  14. Knuckle Dragger

    Look.

    Can we please have some perspective, and stop calling him Pirate Pete.

    This is piraticism at its worst.

    I quite like William Teach and the rest of the bloodthirsty buggers, hanging around the West Indies and northern Africa. Wenches, free piss, burying stuff.

    They don’t deserve to be associated with this semi-literate fuckstick.

  15. Knuckle Dragger

    And, apropos of his 2001 vomit:

    Why does he insist on pretending to be other people when he ‘writes’, and when he’s not doing that makes out he speaks for the Australian people?

  16. Some History

    A comment to the Pirate’s tweet:

    Replying to @Peter_Fitz @smh
    #RolfHarris was a brilliant entertainer, artist and even painted the Queen’s portrait. Talented, famous. #MargaretCourt could hit a tennis ball with a racquet really well. Talented, famous. Both Rolf Harris and Margaret Court are fallen heroes. They both hurt people.

  17. Rossini

    Who the fuck did Mrs Court hurt?

  18. RobK

    They both hurt people.
    The false equivalence makes reading this person’s utterances a waste of time.

  19. Cassie of Sydney

    “who spends so much time ‘writing’ books”

    Really? That’s not what I have been told.

  20. Nob

    Margaret Court probably condemns my lifestyle too.
    So what?
    It’s of no interest to me. Her tennis career is.

    Has your man Fitzsimons ever looked into the views of, say, Muhammed Ali, on gay marriage?
    Or Muhammed anybody.

  21. Bruce of Newcastle

    Intolerance for Christians is an increasing plague amongst the Left.
    And it’s straight out of the Bible, in this case John 15:18-25.

  22. iain russell

    I’m with OL at 1059pm. Other such creatures include Bob Brown and Adam Ant of The Slime. So appalling you can’t believe anyone would believe.

  23. Atoms for Peace

    The SSM plebiscite in round figures was 60 40 .
    Margaret Court has lots of supporters amongst the population

  24. JC

    FitzSimons is a worthless place of shit. The science is in and the debate is over on this one.

  25. P

    Intolerance for Christians is an increasing plague amongst the Left.
    And it’s straight out of the Bible, in this case John 15:18-25.

    Stand up, stand up for Jesus, ye soldiers of the cross

  26. Bronson

    When pirate Pete got flatten by the French forwards in his very short rugged career it was interesting to see not a lot of support from his team mates. Sums up the man in general when even your own team mates think your flog who deserves what he got.

  27. notafan

    You are right.

    Mrs Court’s opinion on same sex marriage should not make her persona non grata.

    The plebesite didn’t make having a different opinion illegal.

    But apparently it did.

  28. Des Deskperson

    Fitz told a person of colour ‘It’s that simple’ .

    Fitz called a person of colour a gorilla.

    A kind person might suggest that he is a bit, well, thoughtless and insensitive when referring to people of colour.

    A more robust critic might point out that he has less excuse, even, that the girl who called Goodes an ape, since he comes form a privileged background, was expensively and privately educated and moves in highly ‘woke’ circles.

    To be fair, I believe he has averred that some of his best friends are Pacific Islanders.

  29. Up The Workers!

    What is it with hulking, knuckle-dragging thugby goons and decency-phobia?

    If Fitzy really was in 7 tests, did he ever pass any of them or did he just pay Senator Kitching to impersonate him and sit them for him? (She’s good at that – Bull Shitten even rewarded her with a Senate seat for her proficiency at it).

  30. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare

    Mrs Court’s opinion on same sex marriage should not make her persona non grata.
    The plebesite didn’t make having a different opinion illegal.

    Well said, Notafan, and also Nob, up thread, doing a very good ‘Voltaire for free speech’ on this. And all others who point out the irrational hatred being spouted by this poor excuse for a man and a writer, that red bandana’d piece of sanctimony, FitzSimmering.

  31. DaveR

    Dont paint all rugby players and supporters with FitzSimons leftist arrogance. He’s on the nose with that crowd too. The shame for him is that he doest even understand what reasonable Australian people think on this issue.

  32. Iampeter

    That a scribbler who spends so much time ‘writing’ books about the great men of old should a) join a (near violent) mob to attack an elderly lady who cannot defend herself and b) not be aware that doing so makes him one of the curs of history.

    So you disagree with his article I take it? Any particular reason you want to mention since you dedicated a blog post to it? Or are we just going with the feels? Damn curs of history!

    As to this bit:

    This isn’t the first theatrical missive FitzSimons has penned, of course. In 2001, he said “sorry” to the 9/11 terrorists.

    Not all that different to conservative commentary on the issue.
    For example, Dinesh D’Souza wrote re 9/11 and the Islamist threat in general:

    …a decadent American culture that angers and repulses traditional societies, especially those in the Islamic world that are being overwhelmed with this culture.”

    Conservative or progressive, they all sound the same and they all agree that the West and it’s values are the problem.

  33. dover_beach

    But FitzSimons doesn’t see it. He believes Jacka, Monash and Cook would have his back on this.

    Sure, but this depends upon the following: generalizing the men and women of the past as evil, ignorant, or stupid, while nevertheless thinking that this or that person from that same past was a harbinger of whatever progressive talking point is now the rage. It’s beacons of light in a sea of darkness. Bugmen like FitzSimons look at the past with a curled lip because he looks at it with the eyes of contemporary morality.

  34. dover_beach

    honouring a homophobic zealot

    What has she said that is either ‘homophobic’ or ‘zealous’?

  35. Des Deskperson

    ‘“who spends so much time ‘writing’ books”

    Really? That’s not what I have been told.’

    According to Fitz himself, he employs ‘up to five researchers at any one time’.

    It would be interesting to know the arrangements under which these kiddies – as I suspect many of them are – are engage by Fitz or by whatever corporate body he has set up.

    Do they have any sort of ongoing employment relationship or are they casually hired and terminated under short term contracts? what are their super arrangements? Are they members of the MEAA?

    I’m assuming, of course, that so woke a ‘progressive’ as Fitz would never do anything exploitative.

  36. notafan

    Tennis Australia should not have positions on anything outside tennis.

    I’m very sick of corporations undermining the rights of individuals

  37. candy

    Margaret Court could be considered one of the greatest tennis players of all time. Through her ministry she helps to provide food to and look after less fortunate individuals as I heard her talking about what they do. She seems dedicated to that.

    It’s a very small mind that can’t see that as a life of tremendous achievement.

  38. mh

    From the Open thread

    Nick
    #3207151, posted on November 10, 2019 at 9:08 am
    The Left are a strange lot. Go on Q and A and advocate violence against men and it’s no big deal. Question whether two people of the same sex can marry, and you are shunned for ‘hurting people’.

  39. Percy Popinjay

    I have become very intolerant of homosexuality in my old age. The fascist idiocy indulged in by laughable, preposterous, hypocritical imbeciles like FitzSimians is a large part of the reason why.

    The SSM plebiscite in round figures was 60 40

    It was a farcical anti-democratic glitter covered piece of dogshit which should never have been conducted. A secret ballot it wasn’t. Had a plebiscite on this disgusting absurd rubbish been held on an election day it would have been overwhelmingly rejected.

    And of course, who foisted it on us?

    Oh, that’s right – the stupid.forking.gliberals.

  40. egg_

    Is the parrot on his shoulder the ghost writer for Pirate Pete’s retarded missives?
    The Frogs gave him a few too many blows to the noggin?

  41. Mother Lode

    Fitz (sic) called a person of colour a gorilla.

    Funny thing is the poplin-domed gasbag used the word ‘gorilla’ in precisely the same way the unfairly persecuted teenager used ‘ape’, meaning a sizeable primate, strong and physically formidable but of limited intelligence – a single flickering tongue of flame lost within a thick black fog.

    It is an old established usage, which is why Pete said it – him not being a creative or original thinker – so he knew better when he piled on the girl with the rest. His lack of creativity was revealed by his stupid excuse when caught out with ‘gorilla’, saying it was common slang for ‘bouncer’.

    He is an ape himself – hence ‘Fitzsimian’.

    After his complicity in the public humiliation of the teenage girl, just to help Goodes push his grievance barrow, shows he has no moral authority at all.

  42. Percy Popinjay

    The Frogs gave him a few too many blows to the noggin?

    Unfortunately not enough, it seems.

  43. Every time someone mentions Pirate Pete, Tim the Flim-Flam Man Flummery comes to mind as well. The two could have come out of the same mould.

  44. Percy Popinjay

    The two could have come out of the same mould.

    Indeed. What sort of pathetic z-grade backwater tolerates such complete and utter fuckwits in its so called “public life”?

  45. Robbo

    FitzSimons is an ignorant tool. Can’t spell and punctuation is a total mystery to him yet he continues to pretend he is a writer. Now he adds stupidity and cowardice to his CV.

  46. Some History

    Goth Castle speaks with the Pirate to the Starsz. And on it goes…

    “I respect Izzy as a Christian man… as long as he doesn’t say anything disparaging about poofism”.

    Re-signing Israel Folau was a mistake, Rugby Australia boss Raelene Castle admits

    Re-signing Israel Folau was a mistake, Rugby Australia boss Raelene Castle has admitted.
    Folau was sacked earlier this year for again making homophobic comments on social media. He had already done so before re-signing with Rugby Australia on a four-year contract worth about $5 million.
    Folau, a former Wallabies superstar, is now seeking $10 million in damages from Rugby Australia.
    In an interview with Peter FitzSimons, Castle told The Sun Herald that “in hindsight”, Folau’s re-signing was a mistake. She insists, however, that Folau gave her a clear commitment to not repeating his homophobic rant.
    “In hindsight, yes. But before signing he made the commitment that he would not do it again,” Castle said.
    “It’s very sad because I believed him and I had an agreement that I supported him in being the proud Christian man that he is. And he told me that he would use his social media platforms respectfully.”

    https://wwos.nine.com.au/rugby/israel-folau-raelene-castle-signing-mistake/b3d373d0-adea-40a8-92c4-9dfd56d583c4

  47. Cynic of Ayr

    Fitzsimons is of the Left, because the Right won’t have him!
    And, this he hates. He truly believes he should be loved by all, not just the Left.
    However, he strives to hide this fact.
    How? By crawling and sucking up to the Left, proving beyond doubt why the Right won’t have him.

  48. candy

    The Israel Folau case is different, I think. Being a current sports star, the contract involved which all seems bungled and now a legal tussle.

    Margaret Court though is now a private citizen and being bullied by a journalist for her beliefs because he feels like doing that. C.L. seems right about him picking on a 77 year old grandmother – because easy target.

  49. Overburdened

    Haven’t scanned the thread yet.

    My starting position based on what I know of him is that he thinks he’s big shit in whatever he does and doesn’t perform well in the role.

    This is no problem to him because he knows he is correct in everything because he thinks he’s big shit.

    He can’t even see how pissweak he is.

    To tangle metaphors.

  50. Overburdened

    Ok scanned the thread.

    As a straw poll it would be fair to say that a majority of generally reasonable people hold agree that this arse clown is not held in good regard.

    I’d like to propose that this is because he is a fuckwit.

  51. Overburdened

    Fn would agree not hold.

    I’d now like to run a poll on autocorrect and it’s appreciation rating.

  52. Des Deskperson

    ‘It is an old established usage, which is why Pete said it ‘

    Indeed, but by the standards of ‘progressive’ culture, any comparison of people of colour to simians in any context is inexcusable. Even if he genuinely believed ‘gorilla’ was a term for bouncers, his inner wokeness should have rung alarm bells.

    Then there was his notorious ‘whitesplaining’ open letter to Taneila Tupou about the latter’s defence of Israel Folau. How could Fitz not understand that a rich, privileged whitey talking down to a person of colour from what we used to call the third World was a bad look.

    I’m sure Fitz is no racist, but he certianly seem to stumble about when it comes to people of colour. Maybe he should consult his ‘Missus” more on these issues.

  53. ArthurB

    The Fitz occasionally gets a gig on Q&A and Teh Dumb, where he deigns to give us proles the benefit of his vast erudition and tolerance. Just for once, I am grateful to the ABC because, having seen him, I would never waste money buying one of his crapulous books.

  54. Some History

    What evil there lurks. The Pirate watches the following video over, and over, and over again, salivating… dreaming of the day when he nails that tackle on pesky, “homophobic” Marg Court. And wouldn’t it be a bonus if it was on Margaret Court Arena! Please, no Snickers for sale.

    At 0.06

  55. Tim Neilson

    Even if he genuinely believed ‘gorilla’ was a term for bouncers, his inner wokeness should have rung alarm bells.

    Strange how none of the other approx. 25,515,199 inhabitants of Australia have backed him up on this.

  56. yarpos

    He is clearly both ageist and mysoginist in the identity stakes. Odd mix for a try hard lefty.

  57. Tiny Dancer

    No wonder the French attacked him, even back then.

  58. The BigBlueCat

    So you disagree with his article I take it? Any particular reason you want to mention since you dedicated a blog post to it? Or are we just going with the feels? Damn curs of history!

    It’s because Fitzsimon plays leftist identity politics. As do you. So Margaret Court stood up and disagreed with SSM for reasons shared by many (nearly 40% of those who responded to the plebiscite). That is no reason why her tennis achievements should be recognised on the 50th anniversary of one of those achievements. But Fitz thinks it is and he attempts to channel what Tennis Australia ought to do (in his warped way of thinking). BTW – it is not illegal to hold the opinion that SSM is wrong, yet thugs like Fitz think people should be punished (or at least ignored for their sporting achievements) for holding opinions he opposes.

    Conservative or progressive, they all sound the same and they all agree that the West and it’s values are the problem.

    D’Souza wasn’t apologising, nor was he claiming that “the West and it’s values are the problem”. He was proposing reasons why traditional societies (code for radical Isl*mists) might want to attack the West. The reason why it sounds the same to you is that you only hear what you want to hear (selective deafness). You must be such a joy to live with (not!!).

  59. The BigBlueCat

    Correction: That is no reason why her tennis achievements should NOT be recognised on the 50th anniversary of one of those achievements.

  60. Iampeter

    It’s because Fitzsimon plays leftist identity politics. As do you.

    “Identity politics” is not in evidence just because someone disagrees with your position.
    Identity politics is about viewing people as part of groups instead of as individuals. This is what YOU do.
    Peter FitzSimmons certainly does this. He’s a leftist.
    But so does Sanger, D’Souza, C.L, most of today’s conservatives and pretty much every poster at the Cat. You are leftists who don’t even understand you are leftists.
    Playing identity politics without even realizing it.

  61. The BigBlueCat

    FitzSimon applies identity politics to diminish Margaret Court because “anti-SSM” and “Christian” (both of which are perfectly legal and moral positions to hold) … and the fact that her personal beliefs regarding SSM and a deity should have no bearing whatsoever on her tennis achievements being recognised in a 50-year commemoration of her success. If she’d done anything grossly illegal or immoral, then that is another matter. But she hasn’t. It’s her identity as “anti-SSM” and leader of a Christian church that pits FitzSimon against her and no other reason … ergo identity politics. She’s being pilloried by FitzSimon for her personal beliefs … my, how reasonable of him. /sarc

    You, on the other hand, always gather together “most of today’s conservatives and pretty much every poster at the Cat”, and you don’t realise that in doing so are applying the exact same principle of Collectivism that you claim to despise in others. You make a tacit (and false) determination because “conservative” and “poster at the Cat”. You just don’t get it, do you? I guess there are none so blind as those who will not see.

    To quote back at you: “Playing identity politics without even realizing it” and “You are leftists who don’t even understand you are leftists”. This also evidenced by your support of many issues you share with leftists: anti-religion, pro-abortion, no borders, et al. You are an agent provocateur.

  62. The Sheriff

    How long now until Pirate Pete decides to identify as a trannie?

  63. Iampeter

    FitzSimon applies identity politics to diminish Margaret Court because “anti-SSM” and “Christian” (both of which are perfectly legal and moral positions to hold)

    No, that’s identity politics you idiot. Both pro or anti SSM or Christian is identity politics. Sanger, Fitz, Cat posters, conservatives in general, progressives in general are ALL leftist playing identity politics.

    You, on the other hand, always gather together “most of today’s conservatives and pretty much every poster at the Cat”, and you don’t realise that in doing so are applying the exact same principle of Collectivism

    Um…no. Not at all.
    Let me put it to you very simply:
    If person A points out that the state should act based on person B’s arbitrary grouping, instead of an objective application of political theory, then person A is playing identity politics.
    If person B points out that person A is a Leftist as a result, that doesn’t mean person B is now also a Leftist. Or a collectivist.

  64. The BigBlueCat

    @ Iampeter …. *yawn*

    No, that’s identity politics you idiot. Both pro or anti SSM or Christian is identity politics. Sanger, Fitz, Cat posters, conservatives in general, progressives in general are ALL leftist playing identity politics.

    Thereby proving that you apply the same identity politics you claim to disdain in others. You can’t say “conservatives in general, progressives in general are ALL leftists playing identity politics” without using identity politics (and according to you, act as a collectivist). You should be arguing specific points without resorting to generalities.

    You should know that identity politics isn’t limited to the left – I’m not supporting the use of identity politics, just saying that its use spans left-wing and right-wing politics and everything in between. Use of identity politics on its own does not mean the user is leftist (which appears to be your claim). My claim is that FitzSimons is a leftist and is using identity politics to attack someone. Your position is illogical, especially when considering your use of it and your claims of being a right-wing Objectivist! The fact is, your claim that “identity politics means leftist” is wrong as it is used by many across the political divide. Even you, it seems. All you can reasonably claim is that identity politics is based on generalities and is tribalism, and those tribes might represent any political ideology or leaning. At its core, identity politics applies assumptions and generalities that may or may not be germane to the issue at hand.

    In the context of Margaret Court and FitzSimons’ article, no-one has made any reference to pro or anti SSM or Christian worldview other than to critique FitzSimons and his use of identity politics. FitzSimons attempts to make the point that Margaret Court is unworthy of further recognition because of her anti-SSM stance and Christian worldview (which he says is problematic anyway given his poorly-attempted theological appraisal of women in ministry). It’s his identity politicking along with his left-wing leanings that leads him to the unworthiness position, not an analysis of her sporting achievements that many believe ought to receive recognition on the 50th anniversary of one of those. In my opinion, FitzSimons is being a left-wing boor and a bully boy who thinks his identity-politics-driven opinion is the one and only to be heeded.

    Margaret Court hasn’t done anything illegal or immoral (or unsporting) in her SSM or Christian position – so why would FitzSimons want to use his perceptions of those characteristics to prevent her from receiving further recognition for her sporting achievements? Answer: In being anti-SSM and not meet his interpretation of Christian leadership, she’s not worthy of being in the tribe of “further sporting recognition”!

    And you’re just plain wrong if you think D’Souza is apologising to “traditional cultures” for 9/11, and is doing so because “Conservative”. Or is in any way the same as FitzSimons “sorry”. It’s not – D’Souza’s is a personal analysis as to why 9/11 happened based on what he says is a certain traditional culture’s perception of the American culture as decadent. No apology should be implied, especially not from one such as D’Souza. D’Souza is considered far-right by most people and is no respecter of extreme Isl*mists.

    I don’t out of necessity support what D’Souza writes, but equally, I don’t support your characterisation of the quote you refer to as anything like a “sorry” – D’Souza was attacking American liberalism; he was holding the American left and liberalism responsible. But responsibility for 9/11 rests Osama bin Laden, who was responding to his own views on American-Israeli middle-eastern policy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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