Blame no one – and everyone – for the Oz Day debacle

acotrel says:

06:07am | 31/01/12

@Erick
Why can’t you just admit that Tony Abbott’s politics are pretty down, and it was only a matter of time before somebody fired up in response?

TimB says:

06:23am | 31/01/12

‘and it was only a matter of time before somebody fired up in response?’

Fired up in response to what Acotrel? A lie made up by an ALP staffer, something Tony never said?

How stupid.

Stephen says:

06:24am | 31/01/12

@ acotrel, hello Alan, I’m happy to see that your still sticking to the official Labor script.  why don’t you just insert a link to the feed it would save you so much time typing it out.

Poa says:

06:42am | 31/01/12

reported on Andrew Bolt….That Gillard overturned a negative security assessment for the venue herself.
Why?
Well no-one could believe that place was just dandy with her security detail.
Funny reading all the ALP Industry desperately trying to kill the story.
Why’s that?

Poa says:

06:42am | 31/01/12

reported on Andrew Bolt….That Gillard overturned a negative security assessment for the venue herself.
Why?
Well no-one could believe that place was just dandy with her security detail.
Funny reading all the ALP Industry desperately trying to kill the story.
Why’s that?

The righteous one says:

06:48am | 31/01/12

@ Timb, No, you were not there , you do not know what the staffer actually said.  At best you are the victim of chinese whispers, at worst you are continueing the chinese whispers.  Or are you stating that the AFP are in the pocket of the government when they say there is nothing to investigate?  I think all of you should take a deep breath and take Tory’s advice.  Or are all you LNP barnacles outraged that a group of noisy protesters had the audacity to demand an explanation of tony Abbott on a public statement he made.

Joan says:

06:55am | 31/01/12

The mystery journo who asked Abbott if he ”thought the tent Embassy was still relevant or should be moved `, is the only person to suggest the physical move of the tent Emabssy yet we dont know her name and the press in collusion do not name her.  The ABC repoters then proceded to verbal Abbott even though they has access to exact wording of Abbott reply. Earlier on in Australia Day Abbott was interviewed by Alan Jones - if Alan Jones had asked that question the whole treatment by the press of the days events would be completely different and Alan Jones would have been pilloried for suggesting moving of tent - yet ABC reporter shielded and we are not to know her name - which is??????? ABC the protected species can verbal Abbott and edit film to promote their personal agendas and Australians should just get over it. What a pathetic line

acotrel says:

07:03am | 31/01/12

@poa
‘negative security assessment’
I’ll bet Julia Gillard won’t appear at any future public functions with Tony Abbott !

TimB says:

07:14am | 31/01/12

“@ Timb, No, you were not there , you do not know what the staffer actually said.”

Let’s see. He resigned. Clearly he felt he did something wrong. As Julia and Acotrel and every other ALP muppet are insistent on telling us, there is no issue with Hodges merely passing on Tony’s original comment and confirming his location. And more to the point you have to ask yourself- Why bother passing on a comment that was so innocent? What did he expect to happen?

Now the next fact is that the next link in the chain (Kim Sattler), was spreading the distorted version of Abbott’s statement. An email sent by her & a Facebook update (now removed) confirms this. But her earlier story was that she had been told the distorted version by Hodges. So if Hodges is claiming innocence, then one of them is lying.

Again I point to the fact that Hodges has actually resigned & he had nothing to gain by spreading the original version. The only logical conclusion to draw is that he passed on the distorted version of what Abbott said, not the innocent one.

As I said to Zoyd in the other thread, it’s not hard to join the dots here.

“Or are all you LNP barnacles outraged that a group of noisy protesters had the audacity to demand an explanation of tony Abbott on a public statement he made.”

....Except he didn’t make it. And even if he did, you really think that reaction is an appropriate way of getting an explanation? Please.

I can’t believe the idiots still defending what happened and trying to smear Abbott. It’s beyond pathetic.

KH says:

07:28am | 31/01/12

Who cares?  I don’t get the big problem here. So Abbott is a class A twat.  Duh - tell us something we don’t know.  Protesters got the wrong end of the stick.  No!  It couldn’t happen!  Seriously, the whole thing is a storm in a teacup.  Get over it.

The righteous one says:

07:47am | 31/01/12

@timb 1/yes something was seen to be amiss and give a bad look I agree but we dont know what.
2/ i’m not an idiot
3/ I am not an ALP Muppet, both parties are a waste of space in my opinion
4/ Tony Abbot did make a public statement, for once a very reasonable one.  I did not make mention of anything he stated you assumed, wrongly, that I was a muppet and that I was criticising him. I did neither, you jumped to a conclusion. So, from a non ALP / LNP or any other flavour barnacle to a LNP barnacle, you are letting your leanings colour your perceptions

Tim says:

07:52am | 31/01/12

Erick,
for the millionth time who cares?
A journalist asked a relevant question on a pertinent day.

What you are suggesting is that Tony Abbott was part of this conspiracy as well. I mean how could the journalist possibly know what Abbott’s answer would be?

Actually now that I think about it, you’re right. This must be a conspiracy from the Liberals to discredit Julia Gillard.

-First Journalist asks Tony Abbott question they’d prepared earlier.
-Tony Abbott gives pre-prepared answer.
-They then leak it to Tony Hodges.
-He thinks he can get political mileage out of it and leaks it to Kim Sattler.
-.......??/
-..$$???
-Riot!!!!

You’re right we need to ask these hard questions as to how Tony Abbott was asked that question and why he gave the answer he did?

Tim says:

08:09am | 31/01/12

POA,
actually Bolt’s question says nothing of the sort.

The Lobby restaurant is a common place in Canberra for meetings like the award ceremony attended by politicians.
It’s close to parliament and is used often.
What evidence have you got that a negative safety assessment was given on a regularly used venue?

Joan says:

08:11am | 31/01/12

Tim: the journo was the only person who wanted to move the tent so of course I what to know who it is. Why does she and ABC want to move Tent and know the time frame for moving it./ that`s my reading of her question, she wants to move the tent and wanted Abbots opinion on it   Please explain I say to her.

TChong says:

08:30am | 31/01/12

Joan
Why dont you ask the ABC ?
They should be able to tell you which reporters were covering the event.
Go to their site- that’ll give you directions how to make an inquiry, make a complaint etc.

Erick says:

08:33am | 31/01/12

@Tim - If it’s such a non-issue, why is there such a wall of silence around the journalist’s name? Why is there no answer about where the question came from?

This scandal is starting to spread to the media themselves. Are journos covering for one of their own?

TChong says:

08:33am | 31/01/12

TimB
The “idiots” who blame Abbott are no different to the “idiots ” trying to link Gillard into directly planning the whole thing.

Eda says:

09:05am | 31/01/12

‘Who was the ABC journalist who asked Tony Abbott the fateful question? ‘

Tony Abbott was there, when asked the question, was he not, he knows which journalist asked him the question.

Why has he not said anything re the journalist?

TimB says:

09:07am | 31/01/12

I agree Chongy, assuming those people are saying definitely that Gillard was responsible. There is no evidence that she was and as I said yesterday, I also believe it was unlikely she was.

But you cannot discount the fact that the possibility (however remote)exists. Proclaiming her complete and total innocence as fact is just as silly as proclaiming her guilt as fact. A full investigation is required to determine the truth.

jf says:

09:14am | 31/01/12

TChong says:09:33am | 31/01/12

“The “idiots” who blame Abbott are no different to the “idiots ” trying to link Gillard into directly planning the whole thing.”

Only a couple of days ago, anyone suggesting that the Prime Minister’s office was involved in any way at all was an idiot.

ProfGold says:

09:27am | 31/01/12

@Erick
C’mon man! The name of the journalist who asked the ‘fateful’ question being kept quiet is part of the conspiracy?  An ‘obvious lead’ the media won’t follow? 

And ‘as yet unconfirmed allegations’ that a second ‘also unnamed’ ABC journalist requested the question.  And dark questioning about why the unnamed, unconfirmed second journalist ‘wanted’ the question asked.

And questions about whether the PM’s staff were involved in setting up the question.

And ‘two people have already confessed’ and ‘evidence keeps mounting” (about what?)

C’mon man, it’s time to take a reality check - or a cold shower.

TChong says:

09:59am | 31/01/12

jf
Dont know where your quote comes from,, not made by me.
Since Satdy, I have stated that Hodges , and anyone who colluded with him needed to go.
The fact he worked for the PM , doesnt mean the PM was responsible, any more than Howard was directly responsible for Godwin Gretchs lies.

Tim says:

10:01am | 31/01/12

Erick,
there’s no wall of silence, it’s in your head.
Are you seriously saying that any journalist who asks a question has to be named, if Andrew Bolt asks?

And as Eda says, Tony Abbott was there when the question was asked. He knows who it is, why isn’t he saying? Hmmm, what’s Tony Abbott got to hide?
This gets smellier and smellier.

TimB says:

10:21am | 31/01/12

“Since Satdy, I have stated that Hodges , and anyone who colluded with him needed to go.
The fact he worked for the PM , doesnt mean the PM was responsible, any more than Howard was directly responsible for Godwin Gretchs lies. “

But again Chongy I ask, how do you know the PM *wasn’t* responsible? How do you know she didn’t collude with Hodges?

Again I’m saying that she did or didn’t. She most likely didn’t. But you seem so utterly convinced that her innocence is fact, despite the lack of an investigation. The question is, why?

Tom says:

10:54am | 31/01/12

TimB, re Grech lies,  Howard was watching the cricket or something, did you mean to say Turnbull? Gillard was never going to admit it if she was in on it. If Rudd knew something, you can guarantee that he would have leaked it by now?

The mafia like wall of silence surrounding this ABC journo just adds to the Labor stench.

Karen from Qld says:

11:05am | 31/01/12

@acotrel - Why is the ALP so scared of a full and frank inquiry into the matter. Surely if there are no skeletons to hide in the closet such an inquiry would clear the air once and for all. The mere fact that the ALP obviously does not want an inquiry fuels the flames. As they say where ther is smoke…...

James1 says:

11:45am | 31/01/12

Tony Abbott knows who the journalist was.  Do we think he is part of the conspiracy too?  After all, he is keeping pretty quiet about her identity.

This is a storm in a teacup.  She asked a relevant question, he gave a reasonable answer, some idiots with very poor understanding of spoken English totally misunderstood him.

TimB says:

11:51am | 31/01/12

@ Tom, Best ask Chongy about the Gretch thing. I was quoting him.

And yes there’s a stench here. The whole ‘nothing to see here’ attitude from the ALP apologists is sickening. We’d have never heard the end of this if the Liberals were the ones being implicated.

GB says:

12:09pm | 31/01/12

@Tory. Firstly, thanks for at least having the courtesy of addressing people’s comments to your opinion pieces, unlike the hit and run tactics of others. However, and not that it really matters to you I’m sure, but I’m really disappointed with this effort and would have expected it from Farr or Penbo but not yourself. You seem to trivialise the identity of who this ABC journo was as though it’s inconsequential, all the while trying to apportion partial blame to Abbott for giving a considered and thoughtful answer to the very question that individual asked, and, which in hindsight, looks to have been a planted question, or at the very least one designed to elicit a controversial response. Given what’s transpired since I’d have thought the identity of this journo is extremely pertinent. On the subject of Abbott’s culpability, I’m still at a loss to comprehend how you could possibly draw the conclusion that anything he said can be considered the slightest bit controversial. Any fair-minded person who saw or has since read his reply to the question IN IT’S ENTIRETY, and not the manipulated response, would agree. Race-baiting, which is exactly what this is, is about as low it gets, even in the grubby world of politics.

SimonFromLakemba says:

12:11pm | 31/01/12

@TimB

“We’d have never heard the end of this if the Liberals were the ones being implicated”

Come on bud, its everywhere!

As James1 says, Tony Abbott knew who it was, why doesn’t he come clean? If it was an ABC journalist surely there was someone from News Ltd there who could tell?

Both sides are playing politics right now and if people think this doesn’t happen all day everyday from both sides they must be pretty naive.

GB says:

12:29pm | 31/01/12

@James1.

“some idiots with very poor understanding of spoken English totally misunderstood him.”

Replace the words “totally misunderstood” with “deliberately misquoted” and that sentence is spot on.

Tom says:

12:37pm | 31/01/12

Thanks, Tory. It was the Canberra branch of the ABC that initiated the question to Abbott. However, you must realise that this ABC Canberra connection just worsens the stench.

The ABC (Canberra) overlooked asking the PM (Canberra) about the 40th anniversary of the tent embassy and instead went to Sydney to ask Abbott? Not exactly even-handed stuff from our national broadcaster?

And two Labor staffers (Canberra) just “happened” to get wind of the interview and thought it seemed like a good idea at the time to tip off the aborigines? And, gee whizz, what a surprise, there was a race riot.

Call me a conspiracy crank or whatever. However, there is a nasty stench not only from Labor but now a bit close to the bosom of our beloved national broadcaster.

Joan says:

12:58pm | 31/01/12

Tory: So who takes responsibilty for putting an inflammatory question with intent to inflame???? - that`s how I heard it as I watched the interview in progress at the very time it happened.  Someone has to own up to the wording of the question and take responsibility. - Abbott didn’t say anything about physically moving the tent - the question did - ABC are the people wanting to move the tent and to know the timeline otherwise why ask the question?  The Australian public pay ABC staff wages - they have a right to know who is responsible for the wording of the question and name of the person who did the questioning. The more you hush, hush, the more we all think what is there to hide?? What`s so hard or troublesome about naming them? They shouldn’t have asked the question if they didn’t want to face consequence - whatever it was. ABC reporters willing to drag and ridicule and pull many peoples names through the gutter even with just innuendo and now can’t own up to naming persons associated with question. Pathetic. Why so precious?

Stephen says:

01:12pm | 31/01/12

@Tory, “The Canberra ABC newsroom wanted that question asked, presumably because it was the 40th anniversary of the embassy”, or perhaps because they had been briefed to ask the question by Gillard’s media advisor.  You have to admit, well maybe you don’t have to, that Gillard and her cronies have form when it comes to dirty tricks. They have an appalling history of failed attempts to fit Abbot up in many cases aided and abetted by sympathetic media, the furore surrounding Abbots supposed refusal to visit the troops in Afghanistan, the way Gillard played it and the way he was lambasted over it even though he had informed Gillard regarding his schedule relating to the visit, then we have the selective misquoting of the conversation he had while there.  Each to his own I suppose.

James1 says:

01:43pm | 31/01/12

“The ABC (Canberra) overlooked asking the PM (Canberra) about the 40th anniversary of the tent embassy and instead went to Sydney to ask Abbott?”

They probably did ask the PM at some point during the day, along with many other senior Cabinet ministers and shadow ministers.  Difference is, no one in Mr Abbott’s office tried to leak it in order to make Ms Gillard look bad.

A word to the wise: many, many questions get asked of politicians that never get on television.  Perhaps Ms Gillard just gave an answer so bland and meaningless that they realised it was not even worth running.

There are some very interesting misconceptions about how the business of politics works running through this thread.  The short of it is this: politicians talk, heaps.  News outlets only have so many pages/words/TV hours to fill, and cannot use every answer every politician gives to every question asked by every journalist.  As such, just because something is not reported in the media you choose to consume does not mean that no journalist asked the question.  I imagine that Mr Abbott’s comment would not have gone beyond a couple of radio spots had it not been for this riot.

Joan says:

01:44pm | 31/01/12

So some reckon just cos you work for ABC you don’t get named and no ones responsible. Perhaps Medicare Doctors should work that way -  don’t show your face wear a mask at all times and when things go wrong , don’t own up and pass the buck to phantoms in Canberra. What a sad joke.

Borderer says:

01:55pm | 31/01/12

So the next question is did Gillard get asked the same question? If yes then most likely fair enough, Hodges was just being opportunistic, if not, why not? Why are her thoughts as Prime Minister less important than those of the leader of the opposition? Was Tony the only one being asked?

Luke says:

02:06pm | 31/01/12

Tory - Abbott said
“I think the Indigenous people of Australia can be very proud of the respect in which they are held by every Australian and yes, I think a lot has changed since then and I think it probably is time to move on from that.”

DOB says:

02:15pm | 31/01/12

Reading all this paranoid delusional illogical ranting (above) is disturbing. It is also enlightening because it gives a clear example of how mass irrationality works and helps iluminate how a large number of Germans managed to convince themselves that the carnage of the first world war wasnt the result of the imperial machinations of several european states but was the result of a jewish conspiracy to dominate the world - no doubt they held their beliefs just as emphatically, and with as much absolute certainty, as some on here hold their’s. Luckily our home grown paranoid fantasists are too disorganised and -  lets face it - too complacent and just plain lazy to become a serious threat, but its clear that the crazies like each others’ company and they certainly manage to derail any sensible conversation on a consistently regular basis. In that sense they are a perfect reflection of the modern society they infest.

Tom says:

02:35pm | 31/01/12

DOB, I call Godwin’s.

A typica Labor “lowest common denominator” ploy to make the debate go away. Didn’t work.

Tim says:

03:43pm | 31/01/12

James,
as I said yesterday, I’ve seen this question and similar questions asked many times in Canberra to many people. Most politicians usually mumble something about caring for Aboriginals, right to protest or something completely meaningless.
That’s why it doesn’t make the news, because it’s boring and not newsworthy.
Some here seem to think that because Abbott actually gave a reasoned response that he was the only one to be asked the question. Most politicians do their utmost to not say anything that’s remotely controversial.

James says:

03:44pm | 31/01/12

Doesn’t matter it is early 2012 and it is just business as usual for Labor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2-15mYWpmA&feature=related

Joan says:

03:45pm | 31/01/12

TChong:  If ABC had no snide intentions the journo would have put the question to the most appropriate people PM Gillard and an Aboriginal representative at the Tent Embassy   if they   ”thought the tent Embassy was still relevant or should be moved `,  They didn’t. Why would I waste my time complaining or asking anything of ABC, I’ve done that in the past and they just write back and tell me they are perfect and never wrong.

James1 says:

03:59pm | 31/01/12

Jesus Joan are you seriously advocating that journalists self censor?  A journalist cannot be blamed for the way a crowd misinterpreted the answer to a question she asked.

How in the name of Zeus can anyone argue otherwise?

acotrel says:

06:57am | 31/01/12

@Nathan
’ However I don’t think Abbott played any roll in what happened, he was asked an opinion and gave it, I don’t think he said anything that warranted the reaction (and I can’t stand Abbott).’
The Wik decision actually meant something t o the aborigines.  Telling them that their protests are no longer relevant was pretty stupid !
You will note that both John Howard and Kevin Rudd, and the current government tread very carefully where the aborigines are concerned, these days.

Joan says:

07:02am | 31/01/12

Gillard surrounds herself with staff media advisers of the quality,  depth, insight and brains of a Kyle Sandilands. The only difference is that taxpayers foot the wages.  Says a lot a Gillard.

acotrel says:

07:33am | 31/01/12

@Joan
Who wrote ‘the script’ for Tony Abbott’s answer to that question ?

Nathan says:

07:41am | 31/01/12

@Acotrel
It pains me to say this but i don’t think Abbott was “Telling them that their protests are no longer relevant was pretty stupid !” i took it as meaning that the tent embassy could be rejuvenated into something that would better tackle the issues they face today.

Either way though you took one meaning i took another and to be honest if the tent embassy leaders can’t control their group they don’t have a chance in hell of achieving anything substantial so maybe they do have to look at alternatives.

Joan says:

07:52am | 31/01/12

Acotrel: Based on Australia Day- would seem Abbott surrounded by smarter people than Gillard Kyle Sandilands variety.

acotrel says:

08:19am | 31/01/12

I wonder why none of the clips on youtube show Abbott answering that question, but all of them show Julia being rescued ? Similarly with the ‘LIE’ about the carbon tax, none of the clips show her full statement I CALL BULLSHIT !
I personally saw Abbott answering that question on TV.  His answer was quite innocuous, but I can see how it would upset the tent embassy people !

Angry God of Townsville says:

08:37am | 31/01/12

alcotroll, the video of the question was available on the ABC website, they asked the question, it was a question fed to the Sydney reporter from the Canberra bureau rather than the little dear creating it. These two items are known. The smell of this problem is apparent in Townsville, can you not smell it where you are.

Joan says:

09:15am | 31/01/12

Actotrel: If all had replayed Abbott clip or quoted what he said word for word instead of r verballing him there would have been no riot. The only person looking to move Tent Embassy was myster ABC reporter.

acotrel says:

06:10am | 31/01/12

@James
I agree, the story should be killed off !  We can’t have Tony Abbott exposed to criticism for his stupidity !  All he had to do was acknowledge the aborigines right to protest - was that so difficult ? The guy is a jerk !

Stephen says:

06:31am | 31/01/12

@ acotrel, don’t be such a bigot it does you no service.  Kindly provide objective evidence of where and in what way Abbott was stupid, you have said nothing that is supported by evidence just your opinion.  If you weren’t a Labor troll I’d seriously think you were a Liberal plant, your diatribe is just stupid.

acotrel says:

06:48am | 31/01/12

@Stephen
You guys think it’s OK to let him loose on the world stage, when he can’t even judge the mood of a bunch of aboriginal protestors.

Stephen says:

07:05am | 31/01/12

@acotrel, honestly I don’t think any of them should be let out of their tank. But in this case Abbott didn’t do anything wrong, Abbott’s comments to the reporter were deliberately misrepresented to the protesters, in what now appears to be a immature attempt on the part of a Gillard staffer to score points.

Erick says:

07:17am | 31/01/12

@acotrel - Everyone knows that what Tony Abbott said wasn’t offensive or inflammatory in any way. Even the leaders of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy say his remarks were fair and reasonable.

By repeating this obvious and proven untruth, you are simply destroying what little credibility you ever had.

marley says:

07:25am | 31/01/12

@acotrel - umm, he was in Sydney at the time.  Short of telepathy, how was he supposed to judge the mood of people in Canberra, or guess that an ALP staffer and/or a Labor hack would misrepresent what he said to the protesters?

acotrel says:

07:36am | 31/01/12

@Erick
You are obviously not an aboriginal who has been sitting in the tent embassy for yonks ! Do you really believe they don’t have a reason for being there ?

acotrel says:

07:47am | 31/01/12

@marley
I’ve seen the TV coverage where he answered the question.  The aborigines were standing right outside the function looking in through the glass, when he made his comment. He must be blind !

jf says:

08:03am | 31/01/12

acotrel says: 07:48am | 31/01/12

“You guys think it’s OK to let him loose on the world stage, when he can’t even judge the mood of a bunch of aboriginal protestors.”

Moderate Aboriginal leaders have defended Tony Abbott’s answer and criticised the people who misrepresented him for base political gain.

Even the Aboriginal leaders at the tent embassy have said that Abbott said nothing wrong and that they felt as though they were set up.

Why do you continue to misrepresent their views? Why do you continue to patronise Aboriginals with your patronising paternalism?

Borderer says:

08:50am | 31/01/12

@Acotrel
Yes the story should be killed off, why would we be concerned about the office of the prime minister being caught out spreading falsehoods, inciting mobs, endangering the lives of our political leaders and trying to cover their tracks….
Are we supposed to believe that Hodges and Sattler came up with this whole little scheme by themselves without conducting a proper investigation first? Wouldn’t it be prudent to see if there is something wrong? The Greens and Labor jumped down the throat of the Australian media because a related media outlet on the other side of the world was caught phone tapping, now the PM’s office has been caught being dishonest and we are supposed to take them on their word? Accountability, is not just the prowess of bean counters….

acotrel says:

09:19am | 31/01/12

@Borderer
Tony Abbott made the comment !  Even if it was a set up, it would never have worked if he wasn’t so predictable. You can rely on him never to make a neutral comment or defuse a situation.

Borderer says:

10:42am | 31/01/12

Acotrel
Tony made ‘a’ comment, not ‘the’ comment that incited the mob. Tony’s comment is a matter of public record and is roundly considered very mild at worst, the involvement and actions of the others is not, hence why the investigation needs to occur. Don’t forget, these actions also endangered the Prime Minister.

Tom says:

11:06am | 31/01/12

marley, Erick, borderer, jf, stephen, you are being had. Stop feeding the troll.

Martin says:

11:28am | 31/01/12

Acotrel, Abbott did nothing wrong he simply replied to a question asked in a pleasant and non confrontational manner. You, being the Labor drongo that you are, are stiil pathetically attempting to suggest this is his fault. All this rubbish from you just shows that you are irrational, childish and obssessed. And you have the hide to talk about “letting him loose on the world stage”. LMAO acotrel, who let you loose with a keyboard on here? Fair dinkum there should be law against this level of stupidity.

Andrew says:

12:16pm | 31/01/12

Are you actually serious acotrel, he was asked the question while still in Sydney, he was not asked the question in canberra with the aboriginals looking in though the glass. You are nothing but a lying idiot.

marley says:

12:27pm | 31/01/12

@acotrel - enough already.  For three days you have been frothing at the mouth about Abbott’s response to that question - but from your comment above, that you saw him on TV answering while the Aborigines looked through the Lobby glass,  it’s clear you’ve never even looked at the video clip.

Here it is:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-27/abbotts-embassy-comments/3796304

Please note that the building in the background is not the Tent Embassy or the Lobby; it’s the Sydney Opera House which, I believe, is located in Sydney, not Canberra.

Perhaps you might actually want to watch the correct clip before commenting further.

Tony says:

12:29pm | 31/01/12

@acotrel
After reading your comments and others of your ilk, you have convinced me to never vote Labor /green again. Your daily, nasty, irrational, ranting is exactly what this country does not need.

LJ Dots says:

05:57pm | 31/01/12

You too Tony? It’s always been lurking there in the back of my mind, but now I’m convinced.

acotrel is a Liberal plant specially developed, trained and funded by the neo-con, military industrial complex as the ultimate weapon in the anti-Labor arsenal.

acotrel says:

06:17am | 31/01/12

How long has the aboriginal tent embassy been out side parliament house in Canberra ? Are we really supposed to believe they are there for the fun of it ?  It’s time some people learned the meaning of the word ‘EMPATHY’.  Tony Abbott certainly doesn’t know what it means !

Stephen says:

06:52am | 31/01/12

@ acotrel, Allan, they achieved their original purpose a long time ago, unlike yourself whose sole purpose for being seems to be to vilify Tony Abbott.  Bye the way you have still haven’t provided any objective evidence to support your assertions, only your own bitter opinion.

G says:

07:26am | 31/01/12

acotrel you keep supporting a lost cause.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/12765316/latest-newspoll-shows-gillard-struggling/

I would expect from your regular crap comments that Gillard would be 70% in the polls at least. acotrel the loner for the unAustralian ALP.

acotrel says:

07:37am | 31/01/12

@Stephen
What was their ‘original purpose’ ?

acotrel says:

07:50am | 31/01/12

@G
‘I would expect from your regular crap comments that Gillard would be 70% in the polls at least. acotrel the loner for the unAustralian ALP. ‘

So now we use the polls to determine what is true ?  The polls result from what people are told by the media !

marley says:

07:56am | 31/01/12

@acotrel - what is their current purpose?.  Tell me what it is the Tent Embassy is specifically trying to achieve.

ShamWow says:

08:04am | 31/01/12

@acotrel
I believe the original tent embassy was set up to protest Aboriginal land rights, someone please correct me if I am wrong. Among the list of demands was ownership of the NT, country wide mining rights and compensation in the billions. As I said, someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Anubis says:

08:21am | 31/01/12

The Tent Embassy was set up 40 years when the then PM made a speech which inferred that, under no circumstances, would there be a possibility of Aboriginal Land Rights. His preferred option was leasing of land to Aboriginals. This prompted the Aboriginal activists to plant a beach umbrella in the lawns outside parliament. From this the Tent Embassy developed and has remained ever since, even though their original aims have been met - Land Rights.

acotrel says:

08:51am | 31/01/12

@Sham Wow
All you have to do is think back on John Howard’s reaction to the Wik decision ! Also ask yourself why Kevin Rudd would apologise to the aborigines.  Indigenous rights are an issue with potential !  At present it is internal to Australia, if it ends up in the international court of justice, the outcomes might be dramatic.  Time for a treaty !

acotrel says:

09:14am | 31/01/12

@anubis
The aborigines have been outside parliament for 40 years protesting their ownership of Australia, and Tony Abbott says they should ‘move on’ !  Nothing sounds a bit strange about that ? Perhaps we should take their dole off them ?

Andrew says:

12:21pm | 31/01/12

Acotrel, even the aboriginal leaders are saying its time to move on from the embassy, that it is no longer relevant and that it has been taken over by extremists, excuse me if I might take there word above a lying #$%*&^% like yourself.

acotrel says:

06:51am | 31/01/12

@Ripa
That’s YOUR version ! Repeating that stuff over and over won’t make it the truth !

Nathan says:

06:54am | 31/01/12

Why is everybody blaming Abbot or Gillard? What about the people who where involved in the incident? Or do they get a free pass

Stephen says:

07:07am | 31/01/12

@acotrel, in that you are correct Allan, now apply the same rules to yourself.

TimB says:

07:21am | 31/01/12

“Repeating that stuff over and over won’t make it the truth ! “

Which begs the question. why do you come here every day constantly repeating *your”* bullshit Acotrel? No matter how much rubbish you post, it won’t make it true.

Kurisu Sonsaku says:

07:30am | 31/01/12

“Repeating that stuff over and over won’t make it the truth !”

So says acetrol, who repeats the same meme endlessly. How risible.

TChong says:

07:43am | 31/01/12

agree nathan
Gillard , despite all her feet in mouth, didnt plan the incident.
Big Mouth rAbbott Seething with 20/20 hindsight , didnt cause the incident.
Both sides, for obvios political reasons ,  ignore the protesters, and blame each other.
makes this   Fabianist wanna turn anarchist.

Muttley says:

09:46am | 31/01/12

Thank you Nathan. I’ve been waiting for someone to ask the obvious question.

acotrel says:

10:04am | 31/01/12

@Kurisu
What is the name of the ethnic group in Northern Japan which has almost been eliminated by intent ?

jaki says:

11:19am | 31/01/12

And true to form, Crean just piped up and said that Labors plunging popularity was….....yep, you guessed it…..
TONY ABBOTT’S FAULT !!!!!
What a friggin’ joke these idiots are…..unbelievable !

Tom says:

11:33am | 31/01/12

Nathan “Why is everybody blaming Abbot or Gillard?” Err, Nathan, they are not.

1 Hodges (Labor) and Sattler (Labor unionist) have already admitted they are to blame.

2. Aboriginal leaders admit blame although they claim they were used by Labor. Whoodathunk Labor would use Aborigines for political point scoring?

3. Gillard still claims that did even not know what her staffer did (even though she was standing next to Hodges in the restaurant before it all happened). Guess she knows nothing about nothing, hey? (Carmen Lawrence?)

4. Only the dills are trying to lay it on Abbott.

Kurisu Sonsaku says:

12:45pm | 31/01/12

@ acetrol

“What is the name of the ethnic group in Northern Japan which has almost been eliminated by intent ? “

Why acetrol, do you want to blame that on Abbott as well?

Muttley says:

01:09pm | 31/01/12

Tom, Aboriginal leaders admit blame but say they were used by Labour? Yeah, thats sounds like they’re accepting responsibility for the violent thugs who surrounded our PM and opposition leader in a mob. This incident isnt Tony’s fault, it isnt Julia’s fault. Blame rests purely with the professional protesters banging on the restaurant windows. Personally i would love to have seen them dispersed by riot police. Just like any other group threatening the immediate safety of two of our highest ranking politicans. Like them or lump them, this kind of carry on shouldnt be tolerated. Only the dills cant see where the real blame lies with this.

Anubis says:

02:11pm | 31/01/12

Gets more interesting when you read that up to 40 “Occupy” protesters were involved, a lot having travelled down from Sydney for it. Puts to rest the argument that it was “spur of the moment” outrage

Tom says:

02:13pm | 31/01/12

Muttley, “Blame rests purely with the professional protesters banging on the restaurant windows”.

No, it doesn’t. Sattler and Hodges both incited them. They cannot escape blame.

Gillard, meanwhile, is quivering in the shadows denying all knowlege and allowing her staffers to cop it all. Why isn’t Gillard responsible for the actions of her own staff? Why doesn’t the buck stop with the PM?

Gregg says:

07:25am | 31/01/12

Old Fart, you’re as big a joke as Acotrel and if you did your homework you might know that the same Tony Abbott has spent time volunteering in indigenous communities during breaks from parliament.

I think you might find he would be prepared to talk to even more indigenous people at a time when they had not been deliberately antagonised towards him by others and then why is it you do not feel the PM should have gone and talked to the protestors for she is the PM and not Tony Abbott.

marley says:

07:28am | 31/01/12

@old fart - what makes you think Tony knew what the protesters were on about? From his perspective, they were just a bunch of people pounding on the glass of the restaurant.  He might well have assumed they were after Gillard.  I didn’t see her going out to address the mob.

Nathan says:

07:44am | 31/01/12

@Fiddler
Well i have heard that Gillard was meant to show up in font of angry truckies and Alan Jones. They seemed pretty hostile to me

Joan says:

07:45am | 31/01/12

The big squib was Gillard the PM. It took her 24 hours to come out and explain about her staffers. The whole protest precipitated by Hodges taking Australian race relations back to 1972-  I expect a quality PM would have made a national address for a call of calm, unity and reinforcing relations but it didnt come. None of what happened was Abbotts fault. It was mystery ABC reporter, the verballing of Abbott and Gillards staff Hodges who went out of his way to cause trouble for Abbott.  As for Abbott talking to the protestors - your a joke `old fart`  as if security would have allowed that , why didn`t your `wonder woman ` Julia and her fabulous negotiation skills go out appease them instead of being dragged out like an old sack of potatoes.? Only idiots expect Gillard or Abbott to face a raging mob.  A mob who didn’t even understand what Abbott said in the first place - which was quite simple - except for idiots and verballers with other intent who make the most of people already inflamed by their own imaginations. And did you notice that during the curfuffle Gillard lost the plum in her mouth that she has aquired of late and replied to question of how she was in finest Kath and Kim strine and twang of ` Oim foine`

acotrel says:

09:08am | 31/01/12

@marley
‘what makes you think Tony knew what the protesters were on about? From his perspective, they were just a bunch of people pounding on the glass of the restaurant. ‘

From their war paint, and the fact that they were sharpening their spears, he might have suspected they were angry aboriginals from the tent embassy ?

acotrel says:

09:23am | 31/01/12

‘Fiddler says:08:01am | 31/01/12

are you on drugs ?’

Truth drugs ?

Tom says:

11:56am | 31/01/12

Looks like Fiddler has left the building.

marley says:

12:30pm | 31/01/12

@acotrel - missed the point of the question again, I see.  Why would Abbott think the Aborigines were after him and not after the PM who is, after all, responsible for government action (or inaction) on aboriginal issues at the moment.

acotrel says:

07:07am | 31/01/12

‘Trust me, I’m a doctor’ ?

acotrel says:

07:09am | 31/01/12

Why do you think the AFP are not investigating ?

acotrel says:

09:45am | 31/01/12

I’d have love to have heard what the coppers said, when they were asked to investigate !  Must have been a real hoot ?

Martin says:

11:36am | 31/01/12

@acotrel, is it realy necessary to post 40 posts of garbage? We know that no matter what Abbott says or does, you will twist it around being the drongo you are and have a stupid childish dig.

As I said a couple of days ago if you are 70 years old, you should know better. Day after day you are a complete embarrassment to yourself.

MarkS says:

07:49am | 31/01/12

“Imagine the woohaa if an Aboriginal flag was burnt…..then you’d need a solid security protocol!!! “

I have no doubt whatsoeveryou would end up being charged under our racial vilification laws.

acotrel says:

07:13am | 31/01/12

@Mahrat
‘Tony Abbott should have his arse kicked for saying something so stupid on Australia Day.’

Exactly ! And for inadvertantly provoking a group with so much latent power !

TimB says:

07:41am | 31/01/12

“Tony Abbott should have his arse kicked for saying something so stupid on Australia Day.”

What did he say that was so stupid Mahhrat? Enlighten me.

Mahhrat says:

08:19am | 31/01/12

No, Alcotrel, that’s wrong.  He should not be held accountable for how other people react.  Such was not his intent.

He said a stupid thing and should have his arse kicked for saying a stupid thing.  That information was misused by people to whack a hornet’s nest - that is not his fault.

TimB says:

08:38am | 31/01/12

“He said a stupid thing and should have his arse kicked for saying a stupid thing. “

Again Mahhrat I ask you: What stupid thing did Tony Abbott say?

David Morgans says:

08:46am | 31/01/12

What was the stupid thing Mr Abbott said, Mahhrat? I’d like to know (precisely) which words or sentence was ‘stupid’ and why you believe it to be so? All I heard was a coherent and polite response to the question asked that represents the majority of Australian opinion. We eagerly await your response.

Mahhrat says:

09:01am | 31/01/12

@Tim, not the point and you know it.  If he’s been wrongly quoted in the media, then those responsible for that lie should be punished as well.

The point is this:  Stop trying to make this multi-person cockup only about one person.  It’s not, and never will be.

TimB says:

09:20am | 31/01/12

“@Tim, not the point and you know it.  If he’s been wrongly quoted in the media, then those responsible for that lie should be punished as well.”

WTF? It’s the entire goddamn point.

*IF* he’s been wrongly quoted? There’s no ‘if’. He was!

You can argue the case that the misquoted version was stupid. But you cannot argue that what he *actually said* was stupid. It was a perfectly sensible response and most rational thinking people agree.
And I suspect you know that, otherwise you would have answered my question after I asked it- Twice.

“The point is this:  Stop trying to make this multi-person cockup only about one person.  It’s not, and never will be. “

Of course it isn’t. Many people were involved in this. But Tony Abbott was NOT one of those people, despite your insinuations.

acotrel says:

09:32am | 31/01/12

@TimB
The aborigines have had the tent embassy outside parliament house in Canberra for forty years, to protest their ownership rights to Australia.  Howard reacted to the Wik decision by legislative means.  And then Tony Abbott suggests they should ‘move on’ !  Not smart !  Technically, they probably legally own Australia, and if they took their problem to the ICJ, they just might win their case !  They obviously attended that function with intent, would you really blame them for that ?

acotrel says:

09:41am | 31/01/12

@Stephen
I don’t support the aborigines’ cause, but I recognise their rights, and the fact that I’m probably camped on their property as an uninvited guest ! What do you think would happen if they took their land rights issue to the ICJ ? The Wik decision went in their favour !
We might end up subsidising their existence - now that would be a big change ?

Thinking out loud says:

09:55am | 31/01/12

@ acotrel - we already subsidise their existence - how many billions every year is thrown at Aboriginal issues and causes. The most sensible suggestion I heard is that we sign a treaty with them, compensate them for lost land (probably a $billion plus) then revoke every “positive discrimination” scheme. Abstudy, etc.

acotrel says:

09:58am | 31/01/12

@mahrat
There are ‘sins of commission’, and ‘sins of omission’ !  You may not jump up and shout ‘fire’ in a picture theatre, and if someone else is about to do it, they should be restrained. I wonder what instruction pollies get on security issues ?
Like : ‘Don’t say anything really stupid to an angry crowd’ ?

TImB says:

10:05am | 31/01/12

“The aborigines have had the tent embassy outside parliament house in Canberra for forty years, to protest their ownership rights to Australia.”

And they got Native Title didn’t they? Anything more is ridiculous. Have you seen their original list of demands?

Tony Abbott is right. Time to move on.

“I recognise their rights, and the fact that I’m probably camped on their property as an uninvited guest ! “

Then get the hell off then. Pack up and move overseas. Today.

If you don’t, then you’re a hypocrite and you don’t believe the shit you’re spewing.

“What do you think would happen if they took their land rights issue to the ICJ ? “

Nothing.

“The Wik decision went in their favour !”

So what? Like Habeus Corpus, you don’t have any understanding of the the implications. Your legal knowledge is dubious at best.

acotrel says:

10:26am | 31/01/12

@Thinking out loud.

I mentioned a treaty, nothing about compensation.  And that is what Howard was so concerned about.  I’m sure we can tempt them with a few beads, mirrors, and knives. How about royalties or part of the resources rent tax, would that be fair ?

Mahhrat says:

12:47pm | 31/01/12

@Tim:  Not the point, still not the point.  You’re also equating his butt-kicking with the butt-kicking the staffer should receive.  Not my point; different acts require different punishments.  Tony should probably just be counselled against being so silly: the staffer should be put on at least a formal warning, one would think.

You can put me as saying it in there and it’s still not the point.  Since you want to argue the call though, I’m happy to oblige. 

You wouldn’t tell a child on Xmas Eve that santa doesn’t exist.  You wait until later, so they can enjoy their moment.  It doesn’t cost you much considering the benefit it provides others.

Similarly, you don’t tell the people on Parliament House Lawns - on the very day causing them so much angst (right or wrong) - that it’s time to “move on”.  That’s terrible timing.

He should have his arse kicked for that particular piece of insensitivity.  I’m not suggesting he be sacked or any nonsense, but it does hold up the arguments of many who suggest he doesn’t have the tact necessary to be our PM.

Was what he said truthful?  By his own standards, certainly, and it was his opinion, so hey yeah it was a good sentence to say.  It wasn’t an unreasonable point of view to have either (by my own judgment).

That said?  Given the timing and what he should understand about the game he chooses to play, it was poor timing.  So, yes, it was a stupid thing to say and he should be suitably chastised for it.

Tom says:

03:01pm | 31/01/12

Mahrat, only the criminally stupid are holding Abbott responsible for anything to do with the riot. You are better than that.

The more you keep up this trash, the more Abbott’s stocks continue to rise.

PsychoHyena says:

10:00am | 04/02/12

@Mahhrat it seems there are only a few of us who can actually look at this objectively. Any sane person would be aware that there are multiple ways to interpret a comment, and that comment should be carefully worded to avoid misinterpretation.

Abbott’s response, deliberately or not, was misinterpreted. Abbott (allegedly, only he knows the truth) meant the politics needed to move on from where they started 40 years ago. This was interpreted as the Tent Embassy was irrelevant and should be dissolved. Which was then interpreted that Abbott felt that the Indigenous have no more needs.

Another good example is this: if I say “I’m white”. This could be interpreted in many ways as to my intent behind that statement.

In regards to journalists and leading questions: This has always been the case, Alan Jones did it to Abbott regarding CSG; The journalist in this case did it regarding the Tent Embassy just shortly after Abbott’s gaffe regarding the leading question on the Costa Concordia.

For good or bad let’s remember, nothing Tony Abbott says can be taken as gospel unless it’s written down.

acotrel says:

07:43am | 31/01/12

@G
‘FFS the Gillard government needs out now! We need a pro-Australia government that will protect and defend this country from foreign takeovers whether it be buy outs or asylum seekers/Japanese whalers crashing our borders. ‘

And you believe that Tony Abbott is going to give you that ?
I’ve never heard him state that position , apart from declaring he’d turn back the boats.  And the ADF has said a few words about that !

TChong says:

08:25am | 31/01/12

G
The only question the pro mammon Libs will ask is “when do you wanna move in ? ” as if the business orientated Libs are going to put any restriction on foreign investment!

Brad McT says:

09:39am | 31/01/12

Well said TChong! The ALP has hired a great PR person to spread the evil ways of the Liberal Party. I’m going to take a stab in the dark and guess you haven’t figured out that like acotrel you have become a pointless ALP prop (a paid prop at least).

acotrel says:

10:01am | 31/01/12

@Brad
Do people really get paid for indulging such fun ?

acotrel says:

09:51am | 31/01/12

Tory
If you are getting paid by the ALP, would you put in a good word for me?  I’d like a job on their staff , at least until Abbott is gone !

Andrew says:

12:31pm | 31/01/12

Please do get a job with them acotrel, the more losers like you working for them, the longer it will take them to get out of this mess.

Gregg says:

12:38pm | 31/01/12

You’d have to be joking Acca, the ALP need you like a hole in the head to go with the many they already have there and in both feet.

Mickey T says:

10:43am | 31/01/12

@ Josh - “it has the potential to bring down this Government”

Really?

...and how would that be Josh? Apart from wishful thinking.

TimB says:

10:59am | 31/01/12

It’s called a ‘No confidence’ motion Mickey.

If Wilkie decides he want to punish Julia, he can vote with the Coalition on one. If Slipper decides to be true to his declaration of not holding taking the Speaker’s chair if it meant the survival of the Gillard government,  then he can step down and give the Coalition the numbers they need.

Will it happen? Who knows. Is it possible? Hell yes.

Josh says:

11:03am | 31/01/12

Andrew Wilkie has already stated he would consider a no confidence motion, if that were to pass that’s how it would bring down the Government. No wishful thinking here!

Mickey T says:

12:05pm | 31/01/12

LOL - Andrew Wilkie will not support Abbott. Windsor, Oakeshott, Crook, Katter and Bandt also come into play. There is a storm brewing but sadly it’s in a tea-cup.

Vivian says:

06:22pm | 31/01/12

Mikey you are probably right but I think wrong. My take is this.

Wilke will be beaten at the next election unless he gets Liberal preferences. Simple as that. He knows, we know it the electoral gods know it. Simple maths.

So he has this to consider. Do a deal with the Libs somehow or run for the Senate while he is is topical. It will definitely be the Senate in my view. What better way to start your campaign by being the one that ousted Gillard because of her dishonesty and treachery. He also knows full well there will not be a hung parliament next time. Statistically the odds are against it and Gillard has ensured it. He will be irrelevant in the reps hence why not be probably relevant for 6 years ( not 3) in the Upper House?

That is how I think it will play. Take the moral high road and go for gold in the Senate.

Freeman says:

08:40am | 31/01/12

Not so Justin,

Even Laurie Oakes acknowledged that Tony’s comments were totally twisted in order to inflame the situation .

But you’re right in this case. Abbott is obviously blameless and Tory, while taking a cheap shot at Abbott, seems to grudgingly accept that she can’t pin the blame on him. While most commentators can see this looks very bad for Gillard, Tory somehow implies that Abbott is as much to blame as the ALP.

Gregg says:

09:13am | 31/01/12

We know what bed Laurie Oakes lies in and just loves to get something derogatory about Abbott out there, hence his article including a description of the crude abuse delivered towards Abbott and only generalisations about what may also have been directed at Gillard.
And was Laurie even there!!

Suppose that story about strange bedfellows is quite applicable with this article too, but then Tory may just be a closet ALP supporter attempting to put a better spin on the situation.

AdamC says:

08:42am | 31/01/12

Marley, I could not agree more. This is a fantastic comment, and raises the issues which media reporting of this saga has studiously avoided. I actually agree with Tory that people are over-analysing the Australia day fracas and trying to see ‘conspiracy’-style scenarios which probably aren’t there. However, that is not to say that we shouldn’t reach the obvious conclusions from the debacle, which are:

1) the aboriginal tent embassy is a toxic, separatist anachronism that should be dismantled by the ACT government; and

2) the culture of the PM’s office, and the ALP more broadly, has become entirely dysfunctional.

SimonFromLakemba says:

12:29pm | 31/01/12

Both sides have lost their traditional values. Howard played the polls as well as anyone has. The problem with Fed Labor is that they couldn’t organise a root in a Brothel they are that all over the shop.

If half their ideas were implemented with due course they would’ve turned out OK, but they rushed them through with potentially ministers that shouldn’t have had the portfolio.

The amount of coverage about this topic on the Punch is insane, is this the 5th story or so? 1 person has been sacked rightfully, the Union member has been found out and the Police much to the Libs dog squad have said there isn’t anything to charge them with.

Too think that the outcome would be any different if Abbott was PM you would have to be deluded.

marley says:

01:08pm | 31/01/12

@SimonfromLakemba - whether the Coalition is as poll driven as the ALP has been, I expect we’ll find out.  But if they are, it still doesn’t excuse the ALP over the last few years.  Sure, they’ve had some good ideas (and some bad ones) but the implementation of most of them has been poorly thought out and lacking in professionalism.  They seem to put much more effort in publicising their policies than in delivering them properly.  That’s my point.  It’s been very frustrating watching the ALP comprehensively blow an opportunity to make a real difference to Australia over the last few years.

Tim says:

10:07am | 31/01/12

Bitten,
agree completely although Tony Hodges isn’t a public servant, he was a media advisor to the PM.
If he was, he would have been in all worlds of shit for what he did.

The vast majority of the blame has to be laid on the protesters (particularly Barbara Shaw, Greens candidate) with a little bit saved for Hodges and Kim Sattler.

Aitch B says:

08:48am | 31/01/12

@Vivian

Excellent contribution…. very well put. If the same level of intelligence was used by a number of other contributors here it would be much more enjoyable reading.

Sadly, that isn’t the case….......

GB says:

09:36am | 31/01/12

@ Vivian. Best post I’ve read on this forum in a long time.
<Golf claps>
Thanks also for pointing out the work Abbott does in Aboriginal communities, and has done since some of those commenting here were still in shorts, without seeking any fanfare. It’s something that seems to be lost in this tawdry race baiting exercise that has spectacularly backfired. Of all the things they could have tried, painting him as a racist is one of the stupidest and most distasteful acts I’ve seen.

Bev says:

09:57am | 31/01/12

Granted the response from the Tent Embassy was not quite the one anticipated, but it was still probably understandable given how Abbott had been misreported.

If we ignore everything else we can possibly hone in on what was the desired outcome. It seems the aim was to discredit Abbot and bring about a situation where a charge of racist could be leveled against him.

If the timing had of been better?  Juliar could have finished her speach and presentations and left.  I believe protocol dictates Abbot should wait until she left then leave himself.  Then the protestors turn up and have a go at Tony (with cameras present).  This could be then spun to present Abbott in a bad light. Problem was the protesters arrived earlier than wanted or anticipated.  A long bow?  Perhaps but if it had happened this way we would have had a different result much more in Labours favor.  Just shows you can not control a “rent a mob” and once unleashed the outcome may not be as you desired or planned for.

Muttley says:

01:17pm | 31/01/12

Understandable??? You’ve got to be kidding. If someone lies to me and i kill someone else because of it, is that my fault or the liars? Mine of course. In any other country, if the leader was set upon in such a manner the protesters would have been hit with rubber bullets… if they were lucky! So someone upset the poor dears and they can run amok? Absolutely ridiculous.

Stiffy says:

09:52am | 31/01/12

The flag burning was done by a 15 year old aboriginal girl. The worst part of that was the obvious glee shown by the adult aboriginals watching on.
You could see that they enjoyed the fact that the racist hate that these adult extremists display towards non indigenous Australians was being embodied and passed on to the girl.
Would like to see the ABC journalist just come out and say that he or she was not prompted by any of Gillard’s advisors to ask the question. If that is the truth, then the whole matter should be put to rest.
If Abbott sees the Journo again in a media scrum he should ask the journo that question. If he or Pyne won’t, then the whole matter should be dropped. Unfortunately, I can see the matter occupying most of the next question time in Parliament.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

09:57am | 31/01/12

I’m with you on this. And Ms Shepherd seems to be all about excusing the ABC journalist and the asswipe from the PM’s personal spin unit. 
 
Journalists in this country certainly have a heightened opinion of themselves.

Still seriously pissed off says:

12:27pm | 31/01/12

Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition, here’s some free media advice:

How about you both use the situation to your political advantage. Here’s how you do it. You line up and present a united front to the media and announce a bi-partisan decision to move forward, having learned a harsh lesson about the consequences of creating and maintaining a culture of opposition sabotage rather than constructive government. You tell the people of Australia that there is no efficiency or benefit in wasting parliamentary time and taxpayers’ money on post mortems or blame games when there are a shitload of extremely significant policies and economic and social issues that need to be resolved.

Neither of you has to accept responsibility for the chain of events that has just transpired, but you are both accountable for perpetuating the political climate and culture that allowed it to occur. The government and the opposition are paid to govern, legislate and administer the nation through constructive policy building and creative negotiation. You are not paid to conspire and plot and be deliberately adversarial simply because you sit in opposition to one another.

Now: whoever says or does something sensible, gets my vote. Julia, that means; none of your monotone, unproductive statements about Mr Abbott’s political posture and the righteousness of your actions. He copped a raw deal too. Tony: enough of the whining and nit picking. Even if you honestly smell a rat, there’s been plenty of stinking ones in your own party room before to day.

So…moving forward.

James1 says:

12:29pm | 31/01/12

It is the job of journalists to ask challenging questions.  I am surprised that you are all arguing that journalists should self-censor.  Where are we, Singapore?

Agree on the flag burning though.  I hope those involved that live on the taxpayer will be returning their dole cheques and moving out of their government housing.

Bev says:

10:32am | 31/01/12

We all know @acotel changes the facts to suit his agenda.  Good catch anyway. It will however make no difference he will just ignore this inconvient “fact”

casba says:

10:27am | 31/01/12

@ibast.
How true, that it is an attack on the elected reps of OUR parliament! In days of old it would have been called “treason” but today, in our part of the world, it is called “social justice”. Look what they did to Guy Fawkes; after all, nothing more than an attack on Parliament. Need I say more? It is not a matter of WHO is responsible anymore but a matter of WHAT CONSEQUENCES they should suffer for their actions. It is all so shameful and reflective of leftie opinions about social justice instead of a case of let the punishment fit the crime. But then it is not even being perceived as a crime, just a misunderstanding at best or a mere protest at worst.

Casba says:

12:45pm | 31/01/12

@Ange…..I rest my case; apparently ” it was nothing more than a protest”.....! Forget the attack on dignity and respect for the elected members of our Parliament and the dishonesty of misquoting people’s actual words that can be verified as they exist on tape as proof.

marley says:

02:36pm | 31/01/12

Well, I think it would be a “fair thing” if you withdrew all the comments you’ve made about what Abbott said to the reporter, given that you’ve never actually watched the clip of the interview - because if you had ever watched the clip, you’d have known how wrong you were to claim he was at the Lobby in Canberra at the time.

Martin says:

01:42pm | 31/01/12

@LIP. Dead right. Well said. I have noticed footage of Sattler in the background filming events on her IPhone with a big grin on her face whilst they were bundling Gillard into the Comm car. Seemed to most pleased with herself for causing such a riot. That being the case, you have really got to wonder about the mentality of Labor/Union types if this is what amuses them.

James1 says:

02:05pm | 31/01/12

This aspect baffles me, along with this fixation on who asked the question and why it was asked.  It was a bog standard question with a bog standard response.  If stupid people can’t understand the difference between “they should consider moving on” and “we should tear it down”, that is their problem.

The only people to blame are, as you say, Hodges, Sattler, Shaw and the protesters.

PsychoHyena says:

10:07am | 04/02/12

@James1 the problem is that “move on” can be considered in many ways, are they being asked to move on politically? I thought that’s what they were doing by changing their needs as it’s needed. The Tent Embassy is meant to be a representation of the people not a single cause.

What if we told the ACL they need to move on? What would the response be then? Or if we told farmers they need to move on? The phrase “move on” is most often used as a dismissal of a person’s or people’s cause.

Remember the uproar when Rudd claimed “We need to move on from grubby politics”? There was a major uproar because the Coalition believed he was targeting them when he was in fact targeting all politicians.