Trump attacks the media because it's been attacking/attempting to slander him since he first start running for president. Us media is extremely biased and they should be called out on that. The only thing you can trust from them to be objective is the weather forecasts. 

Trump is not far-right.

That last bit is asisinine because many news sources can be wrong or right on something regardless if their main stream or alternative news. Many alternative news sources try to source their news because it won't be believed otherwise compared to main stream news. 

The media attacks everyone. They attacked Obama.
They rubbished Hillary and their never ending regurgitation of leaked emails.

You also have plenty of media outlets which are conservative/far right. Fox News is an example of a media outlet with a conservative/right-wing bias.

He most certainly is. He is certainly not a lefty or near the center.

This is why people have beliefs like the Earth is Flat, that Vaccines are bad for you, that man never landed on the moon.

Because they prefer "alternate" news sources, without evidence or citations to backup their claim.
Once you throw away evidence, citations and sources, then you become an opinion piece, not one based on fact or evidence, that shouldn't be tolerated.

You are correct that multiple news sources can get it wrong, but it's far less likely than just a singular opinion piece that doesn't backup it's claims, to propose otherwise (And I shall use your wording...) is asinine.

Is it just me or have Islamic countries been going bat shit crazy lately?

Ah, maybe its just me.

Trump is closer to center than most of the right. He's definitely not far-right. Many support him just because he's rocking the boat in US politics. 

Don't conflate flat earthers or conspirancy nuts with alternative news sources that disagree with main stream media on active political issues. They're not the same.  

I disagree. Trumps anti-islamic rhetoric is certainly far-right mentality.
Trumps wall-building excursion is far-right mentality.
I could go on.

With that, we need to keep in mind that I am Australian, the USA's political environment is a whole step over to the right compared to here and in general, a large chunk of the planet.

You are missing the point entirely. I shouldn't be surprised I guess.

If you push towards alternate news sources that don't backup their claims with multiple sources, evidence and citations and opt for an opinion-styled outlay instead, then yes... Allot of fluff can be conspiracy theories.
You cannot expect anything to be accurate if you don't have this little thing called "Evidence".

And if a news outlet is backing it's claim up with evidence, then it should be seen as the more credible news outlet. To say otherwise is why flat earth nutters have gained traction the way they have.

But out of kicks and giggles. Shall I assume you are a right-wing, trump supporting, alternate news championing US citizen? If so, I am genuinely interested on what News outlets you tend to use.

They literally warned us about this shit in English classes. *sigh*

Any way we can help people flee? Any orgs or charities that are working on combating this?

Trying to protect your borders from illegal immigration and potential terriorists (nothing wrong with throughly vetting people who come from countries where terrorists are active) is not far-right. To the left's pov maybe but not in general. 

I'm not missing the point. I'm just not agreeing with you completely. I'm all for any news that backs up their claims but I won't trust any of it until I dig further into a story of theirs and check it against other sources. It's no secret that each and every news outlet is biased in some way but what matters is their agenda behind what they're reporting. For example, you can't trust BBC's reporting on immigrant crime or CNN's reporting on anything related to politics or Fox's reporting on environmental related issues or what young people think.  How about MSNBC's Mr. Maddow's reporting on Trump's tax returns? lmao.  In truth, whenever a news story breaks, I check the main news outlets and some of the alternative ones/pundits to try and get the complete story. Too many try to spin something or omit information they don't like so you have to check it out throughly.  I stay away from the far-right or far-left stuff because they're too biased to be even a little objective. I watch a good bit of content from The Rubin Report, Louder With Crowder, Sargon Of Akkad, Gavin Mcinnes, Laura Southern, Ben Shapiro, Blaire White, Milo Yiannopoulos, Joe Rogan and Theryn Meyer. I watch a bit of The Young Turks or Laci Green for contrast or to get a bead on what's going on the other side of things.

I'm a right leaning libertarian and I did vote for trump. Mainly because I honestly believe he's better for the whole of the country compared to what Hillary offered to a few groups of people.

Beginning of the end. I will never go to Turkey now - which is a shame. I've always wanted to go to Istanbul, but maybe I'll be putting that off for good.

This. People who think "far-right" should see holocaust deniers, Adolf Hitler (who was actually on the left economically), ect. These are the true "far-right".

I never specifically said that protecting your borders was a far-right mentality.  But the xenophobic approach that is taken, was.

Every country has a requirement to protect it's borders.
If anything, my country is better than yours at it, we are surrounded by sea which is a natural border... And when boats enter our borders, we capture them and implement fascist right-wing ideals. We stick them in a concentration camp on a remote island with minimal support.
Or we turn them back... And hopefully the boats dont sink and hundreds don't drown in the process.

You obviously don't fall into the stereotype which is great to see and have a mix of left and right news souces, which means you have multiple differentiating sources. Even a few comedians.

If you soley relied on something like Infowars, then there would be an issue.

I can't stand trump. But I also can't stand HIllary. I think the USA was stuck between a rock and a hard place the last election.
Now whether he is better for the entire country remains to be seen.

But thus far:
His wall got downgraded to a fence in places.
He hasn't repealed and replaced Obama care.
He filled up the swamp twice as high.
He has given tax breaks to the rich and big business and tax rises for some middle/low-income tax thresholds.
Backtracked on the hard stance against China.
Backtracked on Russia. Tensions have thus risen.
He insulted my own country.
His threats against Hillary, corruption during the campaign never materialized...
He has actively attacked women on Twitter.

But I do like his position on Syria after the Chemical weapons fiasco and I do like him calling out North Korea's bluff and leveraging the Chinese connections to increase pressure on the North as well.
But that can also backfire. (Unlikely. But I digress.)

Hitler was a fascist. Right-wing.

But you are right, he did implement social/left-leaning economic principles, which did great things for the empire.

But how he got there is the interesting part, which is very right-leaning.

Before Hitlers rise to power, the world was experiencing the Great Depression, unemployment rates were high.
Antisemitism (Hating the Jewish religion and it's followers which is not that different from hating the Islamic religion and it's followers.) was on the rise, when Hitler got into power, he essentially drove millions of Jews out of Europe which left a massive jobs hole which sent unemployment rates plummeting.

That is how the Nazi's kickstarted their economic turn around. Not because of left-leaning economic principles.