So our Immigration Minister, Peter Mutton, is considering denying a visa to Daryush “Roosh” Valizadeh and planning to send some babies to Nauru or Manus. Excellent, I say and not just because this Daryush guy has a funny, foreign-sounding name.
Valizadeh, or “Roosh” as he prefers to be called, is the figurehead of the controversial group, Return of the Kings. (This is not to be confused with the third book of “Lord of The Rings” series, Return of The King) And by controversial, I mean that, thanks to the media reporting, people have started talking about a group that was so insignificant that nobody in Australia had ever heard of it. This is a group which has an even smaller grip on reality than a Kim Jong-un fan club. It advocates for such things as rape being legal on private property and denying the vote to women. And although he said that transgender women who sleep with heterosexual men were guilty of rape, his views on whether it was still rape if it took place on private property haven’t been made clear. Today, they’re suggesting that Microsoft committed voter fraud in Iowa. So when I say that it’s a controversial group, I mean that in the sense that nearly everybody is in agreement that they’re a ridiculous group of pathetic men who must have some inability to form worthwhile relationships and probably aren’t worth talking about, so I don’t know why we’re giving them so much free publicity.
Of course, some will wonder why after making all that fuss the media giving them free publicity that I’m writing about them myself.
While that’s a worthwhile point, the best way to answer it is by changing the subject and telling you that some are also wondering why the government that made all the fuss about freedom of speech, Andrew Bolt and 18C and allowed Geert Wilders in the country, have since denied so many other people that same right. It’s simple really – most of the party agree with Bolt and Wilders, whereas there are votes to be had by barring people like rapper Chris Brown, and drawing attention to someone with even less concern for women’s rights than the Liberal Party’s conservative faction – sorry, not faction, there are no factions in the Liberal Party.
So naturally I support our government in denying this man a visa, and not just because we already have Mark Latham to make idiotic statements. However, he’s said that he’ll come anyway.
Our borders are weak??? Hasn’t he heard about Tony Abbott and our strong borders? If he hasn’t heard about the dangers of coming by boat, then how do we expect people fleeing war zones to be informed about how impenetrable our borders are? Doesn’t he realise that he’ll be towed all the way back to the US?
Ah, I guess he just thinks that Turnbull is softer when it comes to border protection…
Which brings me to the return of the babies…
We’re having our heart strings pulled by photos of them looking all babyish and innocent, but let me just remind you that they chose to come here. Well, they chose to be born here. Or rather their parents chose to leave Manus or Nauru just because the government decided that having people die in childbirth was inhumane, so they flew them back here and now, having been given such a great start in life, people want these babies not to have to face punishment. If you allow these babies to go unpunished, what sort of a signal does that send to people like Roosh about our weak borders? No, it’s only by punishing those who seek to come here seeking asylum that you make it clear to people like Chris Brown that violence against women will not be tolerated unless it’s done by a Liberal politician and the media don’t run with the story.
We even have advertising campaigns advising women that it’s better that they get out of an abusive relationship even if it means sleeping in the streets. Although it doesn’t actually say that, because that might suggest to people that it might have been better to actually spend the money on support services than white ribbons, but hey, the PM can’t wear a support service on his lapel, now can he?
192 total views, 2 views today