fasgnadh
I hope he does. But I'd guess he'd put forward money to find you a suitable therapist.
Yup, preceeding. He was talking to people about the troubles at Cronulla from your friends, the thugs who were attacking people using the beach and the lifeguards.
And "the charge" in this context was people complaining that something had to be done about gangs and thugs and antisocial behaviour. During the preceeding days, people were complaining that the government and the police did nothing to rid society of the scourge of thuggery. A rally in support of this would be good. A rally that used thuggery would be bad.
Were you listening? If not how do you know what he said afterwards? Or for that matter what he said before (which is when he condemned it).
Since you want to quote from the press, here is the exchange you have clipped to suit your insane agenda.
"TANYA NOLAN: Well, if we have a look at some of the examples that have been made of Alan Jones' comments in the lead up to the Cronulla riots on Sunday, one caller to his station said that if police can't do the job, the next tier is us.
Alan Jones' response to that was, yeah, good on you, John, and when the caller went on to offer this maxim - 'shoot one and the rest will run' - Alan Jones began to laugh and say no, you don't play Queensberry's rules, good on you, John.
Is that not in some way inciting vigilantism?
DAVID FLINT: I think there's been a careful selectivity by a print journalist of what Alan Jones has said. If you listened to the context of the program, what it was, was an buttembly of people on the beach and there was no suggestion, if you listen to the context, that there should be violence and in fact he was counselling against this.
A complaint could be made, I suppose, to the ACMA (Australian Communications and Media Authority) about this, but I think if you look at the context, it will be seen that he was supporting people standing up for their rights, but he wasn't supporting violence."
As can be seen clearly here, you are a lying scum and your pathetic editing of reports just reveals that you have no conscience about misleading people in any of your writing. "but I think if you look at the context, it will be seen that he was supporting people standing up for their rights, but he wasn't supporting violence." Editing out the context and lying about it is your style and your only method. You are sick.
What incitement? Jones wasn't an incitement, you have clipped what he said on either side of his statement. David Flint disagrees with your take on the episode and he actually heard the broadcast and is the former head of the Australian Broadcasting Authority, not an insane lying piece of scum like yourself. Best you entertain yourself with your normal bout of attacking him now ...
Gee, same transcript as above, of an ABC radio show. If you had written the quote it would look like:
"support the Leb and Wog bashing day." - Karen Percy
Of course the true context is: "Talk-back radio has been singled out for much of the blame, including 2GB's Alan Jones, who's accused of whipping up some of the trouble witnessed in Cronulla on Sunday, by reading out on air some of the emails and text messages urging people to, quote, "support the Leb and Wog bashing day."
Note she has the integrity to point out that he was reading out text messages at the time. She actually gets this bit wrong, he had mentioned before that he would try to get the details of the "incitement" message that had been talked about in the news for a while, when he obtained it he read it out in the context that this is what is being forwarded around the Cronulla area.
Yes and the quotes reveal that you are lying and deliberately quoting out of context to give the impression that Jones himself was advocating this position, which the ABC's own report on the matter doesn't support.
You are revealed as a liar and a fraud. Well done again.
