How many political gays are working at Melbourne's feminist Age?

Some time ago I came across a comment on a Christian website with the following headline:

Is a homosexual agenda driving the ultra-left-wing
reporting at the New York Times?

The headline captured my attention immediately because I have often wondered about the extent of homosexual activist infiltration in Australia's mainstream media. That feverish gay activists have nestled comfortably in all major political organs and instruments in our society and are doing their subversive best is beyond dispute. There is no end to the homosexualist propaganda that is forced down the community's throat on a daily basis, much of it systematically regurgitated by the Fairfax media in Australia. And let's not forget those pretend Catholic magazines like Eureka Street who apparently cannot miss an opportunity to scold Australian society for its homophobia. The extent of the media penetration by political gays has been, as I say, a question for me. Several passages from the above comment now give some indication:

...To date, none of the discussions I've seen about why the New York Times is so blatantly anti-military and anti-Bush has addressed the homosexual influence at that paper.

This link from Accuracy in Media provides insight into that influence. The tenth annual National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association convention held on April 12, 2000, hosted over six hundred attendees. Richard Berke, the New York Times National Political Correspondent was one of the speakers. The full statement from Berke, who is a long time member of the gay journalists association, is as follows:

"...When I started there 15 years ago...the department heads were asking for lists of the gay reporters on different sections so they could be punished in different ways...Since I’ve been there, there’s been a dramatic shift: I remember coming and wondering if there were...any gay reporters there...Now...there are times when you look at the front-page meeting and...literally three-quarters of the people deciding what’s on the front page are not-so-closeted homosexuals...[It is] a real far cry from what it was like not so long ago...""

If this quote is accurate, then it is not surprising that the New York Times would have such an anti-military agenda given the fact that the military continues to discharge homosexuals, and because President Bush's anti-homosexual positions.

Indeed, it is not surprising. It would also not come as a surprise if a NYT sister rag like Melbourne's feminist Age had an equivalent quota of gay activists churning out their many reports and commentaries on 'gay rights' and the shocking levels of homophobia in a society that appears determined not to be enlightened. How else would you account for the frequency and extent of the propaganda? Sure, the Age's leading femo-fascists would be eager to promote their fellow activists and an overlapping ideology, but I don't think that accounts for the frequency and extent. There has to be, in my view, also a powerful platoon of homo-fascists at the Age, directing the gay rights campaign. But why am I making an issue of all this now?

Well, we must assume that the Age's gay activists would not only be writing about gay rights issues. As is the case with the NYT, they would write about a variety of topics, political or otherwise, and those reports and commentaries would be determined by the dogma of their homosexualism. The significance of this at this particular time in Australia's history should not be lost on anyone. Tony Abbott, potential conservative prime minister of Australia in the 2010 federal election, presents a nightmare scenario for that whole homosexualist cabal.

Tony Abbott projects a masculinity and a masculine morality that will nerve the spiteful pen of all gay and feminist media scribblers. Just you watch.

Comment: gerard@gerardcharleswilson.com