Hanson comments judged by a different set of rules
JUST out of curiosity, what was the difference between what Pauline Hanson had to say regarding the 3000 occupants of the Housing Department towers in Melbourne and what The Greens party member Melbourne City Councillor Rohan Leppert stated in a series of tweets?
MCC and GPM Rohan Leppert, stated that the police posted on every floor of the towers should not be armed while patrolling inside the buildings. He also stated that if there were police, then there should also be social workers, counsellors, domestic violence workers and translators on every floor as well.
Don’t his tweets specifically targets certain people by their backgrounds, their ethnicities, their individual situations? Was it apparently OK because it was stated by someone other than Pauline Hanson.
If there weren’t problems with COVID-19 outbreaks within such a large group of people then why did he make a point of drawing attention to them specifically in his tweets?
The real problem here is simply that it was Pauline Hanson, someone who has the gall to say it as it is without all the sugar coating and new age speak used by people to appear so totally PC.
When Pauline Hanson says something, she’s accused of being a racist, a homophobe, sexist or any other derogatory word, that suits the particular argument of the person doing the ‘point scoring’.
It was interesting that of the many photos and footage I’ve seen across the various areas of the media, that the majority of adults, small children, women, men, young adults looking out of the windows or outside the towers and various other situations, that the news coverage appeared to focus only on those of a couple of ethnicities.
Why weren’t the media being held accountable for what some could perceive as selective journalism by not showing the wide range of other occupants said to live in the towers?
Are we not seeing the media showing a particular bias, intentionally or otherwise, towards the occupants of these towers?
ELLIE GRANT, RUNAWAY BAY