Did Abbott say ‘shit happens’, or ‘shit happens’?

Adam Diver says:

08:31am | 09/02/11

It was a decent piece until that last paragraph. This is definately a situation where instead of reporting the news, the media have decided to create the news.

As much as I dislike Labor currently, I think I dislike the politcal reporting more, particularly when it claims to be partisan, if Labor come out and defend Abbott, much like Abbott defended Gillards tears, I would have so much respect for that action and hopefully it will bring the media down a notch.

persephone says:

08:36am | 09/02/11

So why did Abbott’s office fight to have the video kept off the air for over three months?

And - given that, and given that he had 2 1/2 hours notice of the interview - why was he so gobsmacked?

fairsfair says:

08:45am | 09/02/11

I agree Tim. I used to have time for Reilly before now, but he has done his dash. His light hearted take on things in his weekly “diary” was often enjoyable even though I didn’t always agree with his take on things. Unnecessary bad publicity for TA aside, how horrible for his family. It is disgusting that he think it ok to use the memory and circumstances of someone’s death to get some mileage. Our rage should be pointed at Mark Reilly and his Ch7 bosses for allowing this to go to air. Even when I saw the edited version I knew there would be more to the story and for them to deliberately leave out the soldier’s agreement is wrong. He is nothing but a tabloid journalist. His job is to report the news, not make the news.

NicoleG says:

09:22am | 09/02/11

Pers, probably because they knew this is the way it would be twisted around. And he was not gobsmacked, he was furious. That Reilly is an absolute toad.

Ryan says:

09:27am | 09/02/11

@persephone: evidence please, if you are going to muckrake in the usual scumbag Labor fashion then produce your evidence! You people have no shame do you!

john says:

09:45am | 09/02/11

@ Ryan

The loud body language of Tony’s shoulders shrugging TWICE the moment he said “SHIT HAPPENS”. Was louder than the actual words.

there’s your evidence

Super D says:

09:46am | 09/02/11

So persephone was he given 2 and a half hours notice of an interview or 2 and a half hours that he was about to be innacurately smeared?

This was a total media beatup of a non-comment.  Channel seven billed it as Tony Abbott being insensitive when he wasn’t.

I mean sure there is the same confected outrage by those who are perpetually outraged by Tony Abbott.  At the end of the day the public will see this what it is - the lowest point in Australian political “journalism” in the nations history

TimB says:

09:55am | 09/02/11

Perse, exactly what notice was he given for the interview?

I don’t know myself, but I’m guessing it was something along the lines of “We want to talk to you about your trip to Afghanistan last year”. You know, nothing too specific.

Did they say “Hey we want to interview you about why you said “shit happens” to the soldiers”? I doubt it.

If you’ve got something that says otherwise though, by all means share.

persephone says:

10:19am | 09/02/11

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/reporter-denies-abbott-ambush-amid-anger-over-digger-remark-20110209-1am3n.html?from=brisbanetimes_sb

‘Today Riley said claims he set up the Opposition Leader are wrong and that he discussed the interview with Mr Abbott’s minders hours before the cameras began rolling.

“I had spoken to his senior press secretary two-and-a-half hours before that interview, to line up the interview,” Riley told radio 3AW.

“I walked him through what the story was going to be. I read him a transcript of the exchange between the US Commander Jim Creighton and Mr Abbott and said, ‘I’ll be asking for Tony’s response to why he said what he said’.

“I was quite surprised that he wasn’t prepared to say anything after accusing me of taking him out of context.”

If any of this is incorrect, I’m sure Abbott’s office will say so.

TheRealDave says:

10:24am | 09/02/11

@Timb - do you miss the bit where Channel 7 was finally allowed to see/publish the footage they had been fighting to get ahold of for MONTHS and his office knew exactly what was on the footage then gave him over 2 more hours to get ready?

Ambush my arse.

Nice Rain Man impression though. Shows the calibre of the man. Caught out and he had nothing to say…..and this is a leader? Fair suck of the sav! All the leadership ability of a bowl of Jelly.

GillA says:

10:46am | 09/02/11

Of course Tony meant ‘shit happens’, meaning “nothing could have been done, it was fate, or God’s will.” As would any Australian leader commenting on this very sad and tragic result of warfare. The real villain in this whole nasty story is Channel 7, who have hit a new low in reporting. It would seem that reporting the truth is now optional and bending the truth is monitory. Tony or any Australian confronted with the idea that he doesn’t give a shit about a fellow young Australian loosing his life, would find that question of his character extremely distasteful and incomprehensible, and it would take sometime too compose oneself.

Bobster says:

10:53am | 09/02/11

Agree 100%, TimB.

This whole sorry affair shows how bloody pathetic Australia’s media has become.

We all spend hours here on the Punch speculating about debt and deficits, fudged or unfudged figures, climate believers versus deniers and all sorts of other empircally verifiable controversy that journalists are supposed to investigate.

No, we can’t have that in this country though.

Instead we get the he said, she said, by a mob of hacks who can’t be bothered - or are just plain not interested - in uncovering the solid facts.

They run around shoving contrived conflicts in our faces, in the desperate hope that someone might make a slip of the tongue.

This is why we can’t have nice things.

Maybe it’s time the media in this country got off it’s arse and did some real work. 

Abbott’s response to Riley was a problem though - I’d have said something along the line’s of, “$%^& off you pathetic little worm.”

Sven Gali says:

11:17am | 09/02/11

Ever since Tony Abbott became Leader of the Opposition, probably more to his own surprise than anyone else’s, persephone, I’ve been harmlessly entertained by his constant gaffes and extreme ideology, until yesterday.

I should stress that I have no problem at all with the “shit happens” comment, but everyone knows that’s not the story, which is, his response to Riley.

Yesterday I was entirely sympathetic, and of the opinion that Abbott was either having an internal dialogue about whether it was worth his job to punch Riley, or simply refusing to dignify the situation with a response.

But having read today that he apparently had prior notice of the content of the interview does put things in a different light, and he could have done much better. I’ve never thought someone with Abbott’s temperament would make an ideal Prime Minister, and now I’m even less convinced.

PD says:

11:25am | 09/02/11

Get off your Liberal damage control mode, TimB and see this for what it is. A legitimate story about a careless Abbott gaffe that TA himself has magnified by his response of silent rage. He goofed. Accept it. It won’t be the last, or worst.

Mark says:

11:39am | 09/02/11

Adam Labor has come out in support of Tony Abbott on this issue.

“DEFENCE Minister Stephen Smith has offered support for Tony Abbott over his “shit happens” remark on the death of an Australian soldier in Afghanistan.

As the Seven Network comes under growing criticism over its story on the remark, made during Mr Abbott’s visit to the troops last year, Mr Smith said he believed Mr Abbott had not intended to cause offence.

“I share the view that I don’t believe that Tony Abbott would say anything that was flippant or insulting or critical about an Australian soldier, an Australian soldier’s death or our contribution in Afghanistan. I share that view,” Mr Smith told Sky News.”

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/defence-minister-stephen-smith-defends-tony-abbott-over-afghan-comment/story-e6frg8yo-1226002707799

TimB says:

11:50am | 09/02/11

So what Perse that’s all you got? Because Riley said so? He wouldn’t have a vested interest in twisting the truth a little now would he?

If Abbott’s press secretary comes out and confirms, then I’ll believe it. In the meantime, a bottom-feeder like Riley does NOT get the benefit of the doubt.

And it’s irrellevant. I don’t care how much warning he had. There was nothing wrong with the response anyway. Riley was deliberately trying to goad Abbott. Abbott didn’t give him the satisfaction.

Channel 7’s sole motivation in this since the very beginning was to embarass Abbott by any means possible. That’s why they hunted down the footage. There was no public interest in the footage. No reason to show it beyond this pathetic smear attempt. None at all. Channel 7 are grubs, and Tony treated Riley with the contempt he deserves.

TimB says:

12:05pm | 09/02/11

@ PD

“....see this for what it is. A legitimate story ...”

ROFL

“Legitimate story”.  Yeah, right!

Thanks for that PD, I needed the laugh.

People like PD are part of the reason why we have such a piss-poor media. The media knows there’s people out there who lap this kind of crap up.

Nora Charles says:

12:05pm | 09/02/11

TimB is spot on.

And the comments at news sites online and on Seven’s own Facebook page are running hot with criticism of the media.

Perhaps a more useful way of using Tory’s skill is for the media to have a long hard look at how they go about gathering news or risk losing what little credibility remains.

The media does play an important role in our society, but until its practitioners do so with honesty, integrity with emphasis on truth, instead a ‘good yarn’ and resist the urge to inject hyperbole and sensation they will lose the privilege of being ‘the free press’.

Kika says:

12:14pm | 09/02/11

A PM has to answer questions they don’t want to answer or they don’t like all the time. Getting ‘furious’ with the journalist is not an appropriate solution. Perhaps he needs anger management or to step down. He’s clearly not up to the job. He’s admitted that you can’t take what he says seriously unless he’s fully scripted with all the liberal party jargon and slogans.

I still don’t get it. He had 2 and a half hours to prepare himself and get scripted up but he still failed to respond appropriately.

Roja says:

12:19pm | 09/02/11

Nobody really holds it against Tony for saying what he said, shit does indeed happen - good on Smith for supporting him on that.  Last night when I believed he was ambushed I fully supported TA’s right to sock Riley one, and I generally despise Abbott (but never for his sincerity or committment to to the Australian people, none more so than frontline soldiers).

However if what Riley says is true, that they were given 2 1/2 hours notice of the interview, what he was both going to show and ask about for comment that does reflect badly on Abbott.  Combine that with a 3 month FOI fight to get the footage, it gets a little suspicious.

Still, the media is truly terrible and Tony was rightly afraid to say anything at all since they seem to think that saying “shit happens” was somehow worth reporting on.

Grumpy says:

12:23pm | 09/02/11

Yea like no one with a decent level of intelligence would organise a website to take political donations to prevent a levy to help people who were affected by one of the worst natural disasters this country has ever seen…no one of a decent level of intelligence would do that.

its funny how people are actually defending what he said that in a certain context it is acceptable. In what context other than over a few beers in a pub, should a potential political leader swear on camera? He cocked up big time. The guy is a jackass.

persephone says:

12:39pm | 09/02/11

TimB

if he is lying, why isn’t anyone from the Libs saying so?

I’m sure he’s got a phone log and email trails if anyone’s in doubt.

It would be a very easy thing for Abbott’s office to disprove, or for Riley to prove.

Until Abbott’s office comes out with proof that Riley’s lying, he has the benefit of the doubt (as if A’s office is going to come out and admit that he’s not! Seriously!)

geoff Bundaleer says:

12:42pm | 09/02/11

Oh not more of you comments persphone
this was and still is a channel 7 beat up as they wanted to deflect the negative result of the flag & tears performance that Gillard managed to perform
Anyone with half a thought in there head would have seen through the media beat up.
Try to think about it the incident was weeks back—why wait for all that time if it was not a beat up.
conived that was the best word I can think of

Adam Diver says:

01:02pm | 09/02/11

@ Mark, I am glad to hear that, I always liked Stephen Smith, probably because he is unassuming and doesn’t stuff up all the time.

It seems the story has turned against 7 so it is not that hard for Labor to support now, but none the less 2 from 2 for our pollies today.

Ro says:

01:11pm | 09/02/11

Totally agree with TimB. It was clear as this article says that Tony Abbott was being sympathetic not flip. That Channel 7 tried to take it as anything other than that and drum it up into a story is pathetic and frankly quite disgusting.

John A Neve says:

01:19pm | 09/02/11

TimB,

This incident is not about Tony, or even what he said and to contradict what I posted yesterday, his action/inaction, rather, it’s about us.

Some of the comments posted both here and yesterday have nothing to do with the incident. They were in fact the blind mindless comments of
dyed-in-the-wool party supporters.

Democracy in this country is tainted by those who are one eyed. Our pollies make mistakes, sections of the electorate condone them. Tell me who are the real villains?

Darren says:

01:23pm | 09/02/11

@TimB:  And you don’t think Abbott has a vested interest in maintaining that he was taken out of context?

Seriously - Abbott has admitted time and time again that he’s not truthful in everything that he says, so why on earth would anyone trust someone who has lied in the past?

While his comments could be taken either way, they were inappropriate and thoughtless at best.

Regardless, if it is proven that Abbott or his minders knew of the question in advance, then it turns Abbott into an even bigger moron and a liar than I give him credit for.

What I found more interesting was Abbott’s stance during the interview - anyone who has watched Abbott under intense questioning knows that this is pretty much standard for him.

And it’s a trait that isn’t suitable for anyone who may become the future PM of Australia.

Quite frankly, the Liberals would do well to rid themselves of him and replace him with someone who isn’t a buffoon.

Then maybe they won’t have to go into defence mode EVERY time Abbott opens his stupid mouth.

Will says:

01:24pm | 09/02/11

Completely agree with TimB here. It is clear what Tony meant when he made the comment. The people who should be held accountable are Channel 7 for creating a mountain out of a mole hill. Channel 7 have definitely gone out to make noise in the name of ratings. Sure, they will deny that all the way but listen to the conversation Tony is having with the Defence staff not just the s**t happens grab, and its clear channel 7 have tried to take this out of context.
Yes the pause was excruciating, and far from an ideal reaction to the questioning, but this kind of media beat up really doesn’t deserve a response.
Tim is right though Tory, it is the interview, not the comment that has garnered the publics interest.

Pete says:

01:34pm | 09/02/11

Abbott is a creep but this time around what he said was entirely resonable. It’s his inept response that is really worrying his supporters.

On the other hand it’s nice to see the media beating up on Abbott unfairly for a change - they’ve been beating up unfairly on Gillard for months.

So to all you Liberal whiners out there - Get over it, “shit happens”.

persephone says:

01:34pm | 09/02/11

Read some tweets saying that Abbott’s office in fact set up the time and place for the interview.

don’t know how reliable the info is.

TEZZA says:

02:33pm | 09/02/11

So Persephone and the Real Dave think that Tony Abbott knew what was coming. I doubt it. OK, he knew there would be questions about his interview in Afghanistan some months ago, perhaps focussing on his swearing (“shits happens” comment). But then when the interview takes place it becomes clear that Riley has a different agenda. Tony gives his answer “You wern’t there. You’ve taken it out of context . I would never seek to make light of the death of an Australian soldier “.
But Riley badgers him: . . “You’re telling me it’s out of context . . . well tell me what is the context . . . Mr. Abbott you’re not saying anything . . . ”  That is when Tony was considering whether to throw away his political career and just deck the little toad. But what did he do? - he mastered the impulse and walked away. Good on you Tony, you showed yourself to be a bigger man than your tormenter. What I suggest is that you let it be known to Channel 7 that you will NEVER give Mark Riley another interview.

dovif says:

02:46pm | 09/02/11

All of you losers like Pers, who is trying to make political milledge out of a soldiers death, should spend a month on the frontline in Afganistan.

When you have done that, I bet you will have better perspective of “shit happens”

PETER says:

03:50pm | 09/02/11

Riley you are just a typical scum reporter and for this I have lost all respect for your reporting. You know as well as most that in no way this comment was meant in the context you are implying. Tony Abbott was not answering your question again because he had answered it and was probably thinking the same as many others RILEY YOU ARE AN ABSOLUTE FUUUUCKING IDIOT

Chris L says:

04:50pm | 09/02/11

I agree that this was yet another storm in a teacup. Yet most of these names I see on posts defending Abbott are the very people who have leaped upon every vague accusation that could possibly be made at Labor politicians. Gillard didn’t cry during the floods! Bligh cried but we think it’s fake! Gillard said she wanted to be teacher, that means she can’t be PM!

This kind of media beat up happens because people like you lap it up. It’s just that this time it happened to your side.

Peter Hinton says:

07:13pm | 09/02/11

I despise Tony Abbott more than most people ever born, but…

Tony Abbott should have decked him. I don’t think anyone (Labor, Liberal, Greens, Communist, Nazi) who would have begrudged him for it. Channel Seven has been dragged down into the Today Tonight pit. What a disgrace!

Gregg says:

11:06pm | 09/02/11

@ Persey
Should I be surprised you have to ask for like how many critics does the bloke have dissecting and dissecting again his every move and wanting to analyse the crap out of him, even the fact that he is a lifesaver and wears speedos in a swim competition for christ sake and because he is a physically fit active sort of guy, even the thought that he wanted to get out and use some weapons in Afghanistan made headlines.

Do you not think that he himself and the Liberal party would not review footages themselves and say there’ll be some scum bag ALP media pets that will have a field day with this, not to mention cause some heartache for a soldier who just happened to get killed about the time he was in Afghanistan.
As for the notice of interview, it would be interesting to see exactly what Riley put in to set up the interview and whether he disclosed he would be showing the Afghanistan footage.

As I say Persey, do I need to be surprised you cannot work through all that yourself and should I also be surprised that there is not more comparison of the redhead and ” We are Australians ” and Anna’s ” Lets remember we are Queenslanders etc. “
Not quite plageurising but a copycat performance!

Christian Real says:

03:38am | 10/02/11

Nicole G
The only ones that twisted things around were Tony Abbott and loyal Liberal supporters and bloggers like yourself

acotrel says:

06:42am | 10/02/11

Is Tony Abbott the Clive Calwell of the Liberal Party? The Lib ideologues must cringe whenever he opens his mouth!

acotrel says:

06:46am | 10/02/11

‘See for yourself in the clip above. I think he meant it in a sympathetic way, reassuring those soldiers around him. ‘

I don’t support Tony Abbott in any shape or form, however I totally agree with you on this occasion.

D Fine says:

06:49am | 10/02/11

Its amazing that Australians constantly look for ways to put people down. There is no story here other than an attempt to deface a man and sell papers doing it. Fair enough, if that is what it takes to get peoples attention. 

I like Ton’y reaction, i would not have dignified the question with a respose either.

Mr JB says:

08:05am | 10/02/11

Tony could have just walked the reporter through the issue and calmly explained the context to the reporter like you would a child.  If he wants the big chair, Tony needs to prepare himself to respond to anything, that’s why they call it the top job.  When are you going back to work Tim?

GlendaSings says:

04:04pm | 10/02/11

I can’t stand Tony Abbott, I think he’s a toad, his policies are terrible for me and my family and I don’t like his general holier-than-thou demeanour. I’m about as far from a Lib supporter as you can get.

I’m also the proud daughter of an Australian Army office who served for 29 years, including a stint in Vietnam.

I think that this is the most reprehensible piece of journalism that I’ve ever seen. It’s absolutely obvious that Tony was reassuring the troops he was talking to that regardless of how prepared you are, sometimes things just go wrong - shit happens. The footage of that so-called journalist standing with Tony, trying to insinuate a different meaning made my blood boil. As Tony stood there silent, angry and disbelieving, I found a small patch of respect for the man for the very first time. A complete low act. The fact that the journalist was using the death of an Australian citizen to try and create a sensational story is disgusting and abhorrent.

HeatherG says:

11:30pm | 10/02/11

Persephone, why haven’t the Libs come out to say that the 7 reporter is a toad and deserves nothing? Why did they fight to keep it off the air? This is why:

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/this-is-actually-about-a-husband-and-father/

Behind all of this is the real person whose death is being used to further an agenda. If Tony was warned (and I don’t believe that for a moment) then why wasn’t the Lance Corporal’s widow and family?

The Libs are treating this with as much dignity as is possible under the circumstances, and the Labor party have followed suit. The reporter, on the other hand…. well, he can go rot, as far as I’m concerned. The Libs don’t need to “defend” themselves: the journo has shown himself for the arse he is, and anyone who thinks Channel 7’s actions are defensible (usually with the same agenda) show themselves in the same light. No more need be said.

Jo Blogg says:

07:03am | 11/02/11

I clicked on our story to tell you that you are just as bad as Channel 7. I am an army wife and my husband just got back from over there. I am fed up with all types of media not just showing the footage of Abbott but then rehashing everything about the soldier in question for his poor wife to live through again. It wasn’t even something that was news worthy and I reckon Channel 7 just was having a slow news night, I would be guessing the liberal party was trying to keep it quiet as well because they didn’t want his wife to have to go through it again and I only believe this because unlike Channel 7, Mr Abbot rang the widow on the Tuesday night to talk to her. I may not like the Liberal party, but come on this was just a stunt by the 7 people to make him look bad and nothing else.

acotrel says:

07:40am | 13/02/11

It’s obvious that Rupert Murdoch has given Abbott the thumbs down.  I’ll bet this story never appears in the Australian media:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jul/08/murdoch-newspapers-phone-hacking

Philip Crowley says:

08:31am | 09/02/11

Ain’t that the truth!

Jen says:

11:36am | 09/02/11

He died last year, i think the articles would’ve been done then not now! Why bring it up for his poor family?

Reg says:

11:59am | 09/02/11

Here here
The lack of any real reporting commending one of our fallen heroes is what is truly shameful.

Reg says:

04:26pm | 09/02/11

Sorry but you’ve all missed the point. Friend Tony was “consulting” with the Yankie brass who had failed to adequately support the Aussie troops in action.

Clearly Tony was agreeing with the Yanks that they had done their best which was not good enough, but that “shit happens.” A term the Yanks would have been comforted to hear.  In this interview, the journalist invites TA as a representative of the Opposition to present to the Australian people his first-hand impressions of what the Yank brass had to say. 

Young Tony, was too blinded from seeing the point of the invitation to elaborate, by the pent up rage generated by the prominence of his words, “shit happens.” The camera was on Tony, not the Yanks.

I’m not putting words into anyone mouth as Timmy persists with doing, I am only going what was actually said on the field and in the studio and the associated body language. Oh the body language!!!!

I think and I vote says:

05:23am | 10/02/11

And the idiot reporters wonder why people aren’t watching free to air anymore - or paying for newspapers for that matter.  Keep destroying your readership/audience guys and you will be out of a job

Margaret says:

08:47am | 09/02/11

I agree. It serves no-one well and I am concerned that this is causing pain to the soldier’s family. I think everyone should think about whether we want “news” of this kind

Chewy says:

09:40am | 09/02/11

Well said Tim. I think this debarcle tells you more about Riley than Abbott. Like so many in the Canberra press pack Riley wears his political colours on his sleave.

PD says:

10:53am | 09/02/11

Who cares? You, for one, obviously. Lots of other people to, obviously - just look at the post numbers.

Here’s a tip - if you see an online story you don’t care about, don’t read, and don’t comment.

Tim says:

02:43pm | 09/02/11

PD,
My “who cares” is not about the story, it’s about the fact that anyone is making a big deal of Tony Abbott’s comment and interview.
Here’s a tip for you, try comprehending before commenting.

Steve Woy Woy says:

02:56pm | 09/02/11

Right on Timmy.. There are plenty of reasons to attack the attack dog ... and who knows anyway.. is this the real Tony or the phony Tony or is this the Bull$hit Tony or the non scripted Tony!!! he did look a lot like his own secret hero Vladimir Tony Putin winning the war all by himself… but hey lets not run away with ourself here… poor luv.. bullies always react the same way as he did right on cue!!

john says:

08:28am | 09/02/11

No Ian your wrong, Tony is wrong. Plain & simple.
This is a war against terrorism that has killed many innocent civilians and soldiers and many billions of dollars of tax payers money that has gone into this war that has the whole world tangled in it.
Its too blas’e of a thing to say and channel 7 was right to expose it , if he is presenting himself as a alternative PM that will represent us on a world stage.

Tony, I have noticed wont bend his knee and apologise about anything, well he should apologise, the longer he leaves it the worse it will get and the liberals chances of winning government.

Faz says:

08:38am | 09/02/11

Fair go Ian.

This should not have been a ‘set up’ or an ‘ambush’. They knew it was coming from somewhere that’s why they fought hard to stop it.

Abbott was caught out because he knew it was a stupid thing to say and should have just said so. It was a stupid thing to say in or out of context. It is almost universally acknowleged—even by Greg Combet this morning on News24 and by Riley at the time—that Abbott would not trivialise the death of a soldier BUT he could have been more careful then and more straightforward afterwards.

@ Tori
Don’t try to justify this with tricks and wisdom after the facts. No matter how much TA may have stuffed up, Riley doesn’t come out smelling of any roses.

Adam Diver says:

08:39am | 09/02/11

Abbott: “I would never seek to make light of the death of an Australian soldier.”

Riley: “I’m not suggesting that.”

So what is the point of the whole story again. The media has lost the plot, the response after the floods just making up news to fill in the 24 hours dedicated to it.

Then the massive build up to the cyclone and the exaggeration afterwards to keep up interest.

Plus publishing of opinions with no factual basis such as 100 metre sea level increases in 100 years due to global warming, no credible scientist has gone past 10 metres.

CNN the other day had an image of australia with Tasmania labelled Queensland.

No wonder the masses are getting dumbed down,the standards of journalism are appalling.

persephone says:

08:42am | 09/02/11

Er, he said he was taken out of context.

Riley asked him to explain the context.

He had over two hours notice about the interview.

His office had spent over three months trying to suppress the video.

James says:

08:48am | 09/02/11

No John, YOU’RE wrong.

Channel 7 should’ve showed the full clip in context.

john says:

09:02am | 09/02/11

@persephone “His office had spent over three months trying to suppress the video.”
Now I’m even more annoyed he hindered the media from reporting it earlier, when it happened, how dare Tony behave like a tyrant to hinder free democratic reporting. I was wondering why it took so long for this to come to light.

Well done channel 7, for sticking it up him. Grill him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVSmbAtllv4&feature=related

Now he has 2 things to apologise for.

Damian says:

09:07am | 09/02/11

persephone, the Liberal party was fighting the FOI to keep the footage of him shooting guns out of the media. No reasonable person would think that this angle would be pursued with the footage. He was ambushed.

Tim says:

09:34am | 09/02/11

C’mon Persephone,
you always defend Julia Gillard from these types of attacks and rightly so.
This is a media beatup, pure and simple. The line of questioning from channel 7 was reprehensible.
No Australian leader from either major party would ever treat the death of an Australian soldier lightly. We’re better than this.

James1 says:

09:44am | 09/02/11

That is a “no true Scotsman” logical fallacy, Damien.

john says:

09:55am | 09/02/11

@ James
No your wrong, completely.

-he shrugs his shoulders 2 times, bad body language as he says shit happens, what more do you want?.
-it is reported his tyrannical office tried to suppress freedom of the press.
-even showing the full clip would make no difference.
-if you want to live in a society where news is spoon fed by how politicians see fit and media muzzled then good for you. I am angry that we were treated like mushrooms and kept in the dark until now.
-to state I’m wrong… that’s a long stretch of YOUR imagination.

Hamish says:

10:05am | 09/02/11

Perse, this is stooping. So you have no problem with a journo trying to smear someone when they know full well the context of the comments? You have no problem with this journo ensuring the family get more cameras in their face and more journos calling them at all hours?

Do you even actually have a problem with what Abbott said? The digger’s wife doesn’t. The commander Abbott was talking to didn’t either. Do you actually think the comment was unreasonable or are you just participating in brain-dead partisanship?

Frankly I’m disappointed in Abbott. He should have just punched the scumbag in the face. Now, that would have been must-watch Television.

persephone says:

10:35am | 09/02/11

Er….

Tim and Hamish

just pointing out the facts.

Why do you have a problem with that?

Where have I said that 7 was right to do this, or that Abbott was out of order?

I’m just correcting Ian’s misunderstandings abut the situation.

It wasn’t a set up.

Damian

When you put in an FOI request, you have to be really specific about what you’re after.

You can’t just say, for example, “All footage of Tony Abbott shot whilst he was in Afghanistan”, because you have to justify why you should be allowed to have the material.

Richard says:

12:33pm | 09/02/11

Persephone

You are a scumbag

I can just imagine how happy you were when this happened last night

You would have had a great big leering grin on your face

I bet.

Hamish says:

12:53pm | 09/02/11

So I take it from your response Perse that you actually don’t have any problem with what Tony said. Is your motive simply to ofuscate? Why do you feel the need to defend Channel 7 over this? Your ‘facts’, while undoubtedly true, are simply irrelevant. Warning someone you’re about to do something grossly unethical doesn’t make you any less unethical does it? For instance, if someone says ‘I’m about to kill you’ before murdering someone that doesn’t make the killing okay, does it?

You’re defending the indefensible which, as much as I never agree with you, is beneath you.

persephone says:

01:40pm | 09/02/11

Hamish

over the top, much?

As I said, I’m expecting hysterical reactions from Tony supporters today.

After all, if he goes, they’re likely to have a Liberal leader who supports action on climate change and (like, it appears, the bulk of the Coaliton front bench) think things such as foreign aid are worthwhile.

The more people like you try and defend Abbott, the more convinced I am of your desperation.

After all, if he’s done nothing wrong, he doesn’t need defending, surely?

And that’s why I’m grinning.

(Pity Tony’s not under attack for what he should be attacked for, his mishandling of the whole disaster recovery, leading to his truly absurd and very wimpy performance yesterday, where he couldn’t make a decision to actually cut anything).

Keith Hammersmith says:

02:25pm | 09/02/11

Pers,  you are just saying the same thing over and over again…  stop please,  I grow weary of seeing the same mundane posts from you.

now

did abbott do wrong,  check the response of the soldier after Abbott says the infamous remark.  The Soldier says “yes it does”
he understood what Abbott was talking about.
so thats that,  reporters need to get over it, and I wouldnt dignify that reporter with a response either.

Richard says:

02:40pm | 09/02/11

The most accurate polls indicate that if an election was held this weekend, Tony Abbott would win.

So why do you think Tony Abbott supporters are desperate Persephone? Why do you think he’s likely to be replaced soon?

Do you think those Australians who oppose a Carbon Tax (who actually outnumber carbon tax advocates btw) would support the Goldman-Sachs banker Turnbull over Abbott? You are wrong. Its just that YOU would just rather have Turnbull over Abbott, just as I would rather have Rudd over Gillard, but I’m not gonna vote Labor and you’re not gonna vote Liberal, so our opinions on these respective situations are invalid.

You see a gaffe because you’re looking for a gaffe. Most ordinary voters on the other hand see a genuine human being making a genuine human response to a stressful situation, and its exactly these kinds of humanising incidents which make Tony Abbott realer and even easier to vote for (even though he doesn’t need to be since he would undoubtedly win the next election as things stand right now anyway). But every little bit helps.

Hamish says:

02:42pm | 09/02/11

Perse, what’s over the top? Abbott doesn’t need defending. He didn’t do anything wrong. You know it. I know it.

My question is, why are you defending the actions of Channel 7?

Tim says:

02:58pm | 09/02/11

Persephone,
I have a problem with you trying to give legs to a story that doesn’t deserve it.
From previous stories I thought you were above it - now maybe not.
Debate issues and policies, not this rot.

Chris L says:

06:27pm | 09/02/11

@Richard “You see a gaffe because you’re looking for a gaffe.” Please remember this next time the regulars at The Punch gnash their teeth about the latest vague attempt to smear Gillard.

There is plenty about both parties that needs to be criticised without bothering with “she said this”, “he said that” or “she didn’t break down in tears while she was visiting flood zones”. Agreed?

Geoff bundaleer says:

07:37pm | 09/02/11

Ian you got it in one , it WAS a ambush and set up.
This incident ook place months ago, why bring it up now? there has to be a reason, besides the fact Riley correctly has been labled as a ahole
and works for channel 7 who is cast with left wing crap.
They should be held to account on this issue, they set about tony in a manner that is unacceptable and reprehensiable.
it’s c hannel 7 who should be the focus of comment not T.A.

persephone says:

07:50pm | 09/02/11

Richard

the most accurate polls are from last weekend.

Mark Latham lost a couple of % overnight because of a handshake.

Abbott promised budget cuts he couldn’t deliver (and upset several members of his shadow cabinet in the process) and then followed it with this interview.

Explain the hysteria - politicians are given hard interviews by journos every day. Pollies have their words and actions taken out of context every day.

What’s different now? Why are people here getting so emotional?

Tim

I’m doing just what I normally do, which is outline the facts. I simply pointed out that Abbott wasn’t ambushed.

I realise that undermines his supporters’ main defence of Abbott, but that’s their problem, not mine.

Paul says:

08:25am | 09/02/11

Hmmmm. Yeah but no.

Philip Crowley says:

08:34am | 09/02/11

Oh puhleese!!!! Abbott doesn’t need to appear ‘blokey’ you tosser. If anything he needs to be less so. Abbott is old school Aussie bloke.

BK says:

01:13pm | 09/02/11

Abbott was amongst these army types and wanted to fit in. Every time a male politician tries to look blokey, it blows up in their face. Look at John Howards attempts to play cricket, Kevin Rudd’s swearing or Tony’s badly chosen words

Sid says:

10:28am | 09/02/11

I feel Tony showed amazing control not to tell the report to go “*uck himself” given the blindingly obvious attempt to entrap Tony in an obvious against a vial misrepresentation that bears no relationship to his character. Guess Labor and their supporters are trying new lows.

Kika says:

01:26pm | 09/02/11

Sid - there’s no entrapment involved. He’s a politician and should be prepared at all times to react to questions calmly and collectively. You said it yourself. He was ready to unleash a barrage of abuse at this guy. Is that an appropriate reaction? What if he were PM. He’d have to defend EVERYTHING he does and says at any given moment.

This guy is obviously a hot head and needs to rethink his career as being the leader of his political party. Or take anger management.

On a side note, if the reports are correct and he had 2 and a half hours to prepare for the interview, then there is no excuse for his lack of rebuttal to the questions being directed to him.

Brad of Bentleigh says:

11:33am | 09/02/11

The author asks us “why did you click on the link?” - as if to say, that the fact you’re reading, means this is newsworthy.

I clicked half expecting Tory to take the “Abbot is evil, and should be deposed” slant. I was pleasantly surprised that she took the opposite (and only logical) view.
And, in Tory’s view, neglecting to report this makes it some sort of cover up is garbage (and she knows it), one would neglect to report this simply because there was nothing to report.

I’d like ot hear Tory’s view as to Riley’s behavior in this. Clearly he’s poured over hours of footage looking for some (any) mud to rake, and this is the best he could come up with… talk about polishing a turd and picking it up by the clean end!

All involved in this from Chanel 7 should be answering serious questions today, the producers, the reporter and even (though, to a lesser extent) the news reader.

For me, this was a new low point in supposed journolism in this country. I’ll certainly not be supporting any company that continues to advertise on chanel 7 in that segment, and I’d encourage anyone who thinks this was disgusting behavior on channel 7’s part, to do likewise.

Nick says:

09:12am | 09/02/11

John you obviously didn’t watch the footage.If you had, you would of seen that his “shit happens” was used to say that it was no ones fault and that these things happen.No disrespect given to the general and none taken by the general.Open the other eye John and be honest with yourself.

Ando says:

10:02am | 09/02/11

John,

You say” To say “shit happens” by Australian meaning it shows that he was blas’e about the situation”
. This is where you you are wrong. Why? because you have created a context to suit yourself.
It is obvious Abbott was reassuring those he was talking to that some things are nobodys fault. They all agreed.
And he did apologize to the relatives of the soldier .

john says:

10:12am | 09/02/11

@Nick

Ok, lets look at it your way, put the shoe on the other foot so to speak, the situation is a global alliance war, you’ve been shot dead and 20 or so of your other comrades and countless civilians so far, and I am Abbot, I fly in on my comfy jet and all i have is…‘banter,banter’... shrug my shoulders 2 times whilst saying “shit happens” and fly out the next day.

You still think that’s ok?, not too blas’e or give a F**k much? No matter we’ll just stick your name on the eternal wall memorial next door to his palace called parliament house….“shit happens”.

Next election I’m voted in and made King of Oz. ..“shit happens”..thanks for laying down your life for me.

Have I now opened my other eye and been honest with myself as you requested ?.

john says:

10:34am | 09/02/11

@ Ando, Oh so shrugging your shoulders 2 times and saying shit happens is not blas’e in ANY context YOU CAN IMAGINE?

You think I was born yesterday?

Adam Diver says:

10:44am | 09/02/11

@ John,

To be honest you havn’t. I am not even sure you understand the context of the quote.

The context is not the death of a soldier but whether or not more troops or equipment were needed to prevent the death. The soldiers family don’t care, the soldiers don’t care and the commanding officers don’t care, the issue for you is your own sensibilities and bias.

Tim says:

11:48am | 09/02/11

John,
I have no idea what you’re on about.
If you watch the footage, T.Abbott was simply saying that “shit happens”. In the context he said it, it meant that sometimes even if you are fully prepared, with all the possible best equipment available to you, in war sometimes you can still be hurt/killed. ie. shit happens.
It was part of a conversation.
Just because you give it the meaning of blas’e doesn’t mean you’re right.
I think your attitude to logic is a little bit blas’e.

Mr GG says:

11:53am | 09/02/11

I hate Abbott as much as anyone, but…
it is a beat up, he shrugged? maybe he was trying to think of something better to say but couldn’t. Abbott is not the best orator, if he had been a Churchill or the like he may have re assured the soldiers that they weren’t to blame with a comment like “sometimes fate conspires against us” but either way it means the same thing; sometimes bad things happen that we can’t prevent .

john says:

12:10pm | 09/02/11

@ Adam Diver
“The soldiers family don’t care, the soldiers don’t care and the commanding officers don’t care”
Is the above really what you believe, contrary to some media reports?

As for the point you raised, “the issue for you is your own sensibilities and bias”...the answer is embedded in all my replies, not certain why it needs further clarification.

Roja says:

12:34pm | 09/02/11

Errr John, the definition of an Australian used to involve being blase.

“She’ll be right” is a classic Australian saying, used even in situations when things seem utterly hopeless.

The sign in the face of the cyclone “Kiss My YASI” was the definition of that attitude.

I’ve been through enough tragedy in my life, I can’t tell you how important “Shit Happens” was a mantra through it.

The ANZAC soldiers were big on “Shit Happens”, because for them it happened a lot. 

When shit does happen, you persevere and get the job done anyway.

That to me is the personification of the Australian attitude, or at least once was.

john says:

12:36pm | 09/02/11

@Tim

Yes mr king spin of blas’e himself, I think my moral goal posts are fine, flexible, tolerable, I was viewing Abbott in the context of possible future PM—poor choice of words, you are viewing it with tunnel vision.

I hope he wins next election and we get the PM we all deserve…shit happens

john says:

03:25pm | 09/02/11

@Roja - I’m not opposed to a person being blas’e, however its not appropriate for an aspiring PM on any level and you know it.

Joan says:

07:09pm | 09/02/11

Yeah… John if Abbott was smart he would have aped Gillard staged performance in parliament and come out wrapped in the Australian flag and   all choked up snivilling into the flag.. Gillard style. ( Notice Gillard style tears… no tissues!)

Roja says:

11:43am | 10/02/11

@John - K Rudd said exactly those words on national TV, while Bob Hawke and blase (any boss that fires someone for not turning up to day is a bum) go hand in hand. 

You could argue the circumstances are very different sure, but then Abbott said it in conversation with the military and not live on national TV or at the soldiers funeral.  It is for this reason the vast majority of Australians do not consider it to be an innapropriate thing for him to have said. 

While I despise Abbott, I am actually with him on this aspect.  His later reaction however is the cause for concern, in light of the fact he was fully informed of the question prior to the interview.

john says:

01:38pm | 10/02/11

@Roja, If we lost the america’s cup, or the ashes and Abbott was PM & said “shit happens” it probably would have been fine. My point is not about his reaction or even the fact he said it, -its in the whole context in which he said it, where he said it, as I said in my reply to Nick:

“@Nick

Ok, lets look at it your way, put the shoe on the other foot so to speak, the situation is a global alliance war, you’ve been shot dead and 20 or so of your other comrades and countless civilians so far, and I am Abbot, I fly in on my comfy jet and all i have is…‘banter,banter’... shrug my shoulders 2 times whilst saying “shit happens” and fly out the next day.

You still think that’s ok?, not too blas’e or give a F**k much? No matter we’ll just stick your name on the eternal wall memorial next door to his palace called parliament house….“shit happens”.
Next election I’m voted in and made King of Oz. ..“shit happens”..thanks for laying down your life for me.
Have I now opened my other eye and been honest with myself as you requested ?. “

How well will it go down if Obama said “shit happens”, my moral goal posts on this issue wont be shifted Roja.
A highly educated scholar like Abbott, should of had something more intelligent & appropriate to say, camera or no camera.

Phil says:

03:59pm | 14/02/11

John,

You are utterly full of it. You have absolutely no idea and think you can force the rest of Australia to think you are right because you are loud about it. MR Abbot has said nothing wrong and trying to imply that he couldn’t care less about soldiers is a disgraceful and disgusting statement by yourself.

You have no idea!

Jane says:

08:58am | 09/02/11

Agreed - he also has to understand that as the alternative PM, anything he says in public will most probably be recorded. He really needs to be more careful.

And Abbott has form - anyone remember his comments about Bernie Banton? He is starting to remind me more and more of Mark Latham - and look how he turned out.

Mal says:

09:09am | 09/02/11

Boost his profile????  Is this the same Tony Abbott on the same trip to Afganistan who was hounded (by media and ALP) over his jetlag excuse for not going when he was wisely not revealing the plans he’d already made.  Some way to boost a profile.

Duff says:

09:23am | 09/02/11

Agreed. He didn’t do a good job with his response.  Made things worse.

Oh well, shit happens, I suppose.

GB says:

06:50pm | 09/02/11

@Jane, STFU with this Bernie Banton nonsense. You ALP clowns make it sound like he pulled the poor guy’s plugs out. That whole episode was smoothed over with Bernie himself within 24 hours, yet here we are years later and you buffoons are still trying to milk it. Give me a f’n break.

Adam Diver says:

08:43am | 09/02/11

Get the focus away, they haven’t even focused on it.

James1 says:

09:22am | 09/02/11

You guys clearly do not read The Australian.

Adam Diver says:

10:40am | 09/02/11

@ James, I don’t actually, but I do realise that they report made up stuff. If there is some factual basis to the paper I then question why no-one else feels its worth reporting.

James1 says:

12:04pm | 09/02/11

Interesting thought, Adam.  I had never considered that, but then I don’t read any Fairfax publications, so I am unaware as to what they are not reporting that the Oz is.

James1 says:

09:24am | 09/02/11

Perhaps it will kick the Liberal Party into getting a better leader.  I hope it is Joe Hockey or Malcolm Turnbull.

Elphaba says:

09:57am | 09/02/11

@James1, an interesting point.  I wouldn’t mind seeing Hockey as Lib leader, he certainly can’t do any worse.

Context or not, an error like this isn’t enough to sway the court of public opinion from Labor’s sins - they’re going to need a bit more dirt, methinks.

Adam Diver says:

11:00am | 09/02/11

James I always respected your opinion but this seems out of character.

Abbott may make gaffes, may make policy bungles, may not be liked by many people but he single handingly turned the LNP around. The last election was entirely a result of Abbott.

Yes you may like hockey or turnbull more but would you prefer to see LNP win though. Most of the support for them come from people who will never vote for them.

“Can’t do any worse”? Then removing a sitting PM and getting a hung election after a first term.

Abbott has done all this with a media that hates him which makes his results all the more remarkable.

James1 says:

12:02pm | 09/02/11

Adam,

Hockey is my favourite, largely because I think he could win an election.  He is erudite, clear in his expression, and can hammer a point like very few others in Australian politics. 

I can’t deny that Abbott did very, very well last election.  I just don’t think, given his personal polling, that he can be the Liberal version of Kevin07.  Hockey could reinvigorate the base by presenting a less extreme face of the party than does Abbott (not that I think that characterisation of Abbott is fair, but it does exist).  Furthermore, Hockey has the ministerial experience to govern effectively.

It might seem out of character, but I have been behind Hockey for the Liberal leadership since the spill that ousted Brendan Nelson.

Duff says:

03:15pm | 09/02/11

@James1 - No way.  It’s Turnbull all the way.  He’d cream Gillard.  My reasons:

1) he got turfed because of his support for an ETS.  He even crossed sides as a matter of principle.  Since then, Labor has actually lost votes to the Greens.  If Abbott had picked those up he’d have won, but those voters hate him and always will.  Turnbull, on the other hand, stood up for his principles on the subject and they would trust him on this issue.

2) there is a sense of unease about the ETS.  It’s Gillards weakest point.  So, who’s your man on that?  Turnbull.  Abbott doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about and Turnbull can talk rings around the issue.  He’d sway a lot of people to him if they new he was calling the shots on this.
 
3) we are now post-GFC and Turnbull is seen as a smarter financial operator than Abbott and Gillard combined.  He’s money, he’s what we want to be.  Gillard and Abbott are, on the other handd, common battlers.  Their time has passed.

Richard says:

04:27pm | 09/02/11

But Duff, the majority of voters oppose a carbon tax, especially conservative voters. Any leader of the Libs will have to respect that viewpoint.

And anyway, the Libs are well out in front according to the polls anyway, why is there all of a sudden a great need to change a winning formula? What, just because some channel 7 hack reporter pissed off Abbott they need to throw him out now? No, don’t be silly. Abbott is doing a tremendous job, he has won a commanding lead for his party, and the only ones who want him replaced are those voters who would likely vote Labor/Greens regardless.

Richard says:

04:28pm | 09/02/11

But Duff, the majority of voters oppose a carbon tax, especially conservative voters. Any leader of the Libs will have to respect that viewpoint.

And anyway, the Libs are well out in front according to the polls anyway, why is there all of a sudden a great need to change a winning formula? What, just because some channel 7 hack reporter pissed off Abbott they need to throw him out now? No, don’t be silly. Abbott is doing a tremendous job, he has won a commanding lead for his party, and the only ones who want him replaced are those voters who would likely vote Labor/Greens regardless.

Manners says:

08:58am | 09/02/11

and shit also happens when you can see the sadness of four deaths due to the pink batt issue, but fail to see the obscenity of sending young men to war…be a little more considered if you will. Intelligence and balance needed

Bryndal says:

09:09am | 09/02/11

I think the real story (and Riley missed it in his rush to score points) was that Abbott was basically agreeing that the troops & ADF had thrown everything they could at this battle which resulted in an unfortunate death while public he was prosecuting the agruement that the troops weren’t adequately supported. This shows the political nature of his arguement (rather than any factual basis).
His resultant ‘silence’ on being asked the question is s seperart issue and goes to his abilities as a ‘leader’ of the country and he has been found wanting. After ample warning about the subject of teh interview all he could muster was a stare of rage which would make Julie Bishop gringe.

Against the Man says:

11:48am | 09/02/11

Pink batts were Australian civilians, war involves Australian soldiers. If you can’t tell the difference, I guess you have the same IQ as your hero fake PM gillard

john says:

08:48am | 09/02/11

@Pamela @notsurprised” If the inflated ego of journalist Mark Riley and the ratings hungry Channel 7 producers really were concerned for the welfare of this trooper and his family they wouldn’t have brought it up”

So you guys would rather the media didn’t bring up the matter as it was too much of a ‘hot potato’ and keep us in the dark like mushrooms?
Then the media wouldn’t be doing their job would they?

Last time I noticed we live in an open and free democratic society, Tony was free to say what he thought was appropriate and the media was free to report it. I’m pissed off they took this long to release it.

Obviously the problem lays with why do senior people in the media sensor our news when it happens? That is now the issue.

Ryan says:

09:32am | 09/02/11

@john: this is a manufactured filthy story and you know it ! Channel 7 should be firing this Riley moron.

Ken says:

09:54am | 09/02/11

As most people agree it wasn’t that he said shit happens that matters, it’s more about his reaction. Look out Labor you may have a new Lib Leader on the cards. It won’t take much of a swing to the Libs to see the end of Gillard and her crew. Bring on a new Liberal Leader I say! I bet Labor would prefer they leave Tony right where he is rather than replace him with the polling dear old Jules is doing at the moment.

john says:

10:22am | 09/02/11

@Ryan

No doubt its manufactured, however Tony is aspiring as an alternative leader for this country, this should have been reported last year, how else will we all teach him to be a good leader, we expect mistakes, we are after all - only human, but for the media to suppress it it has only caused more damage as his image has matured over time. His matured image now is not the Tony back then.
That’s why suppressing the media is wrong, this would have been nipped in the bud back then, now its humiliating him and I’m annoyed because its used to discredit any counter it has towards labor and their recklessness.

Christian Real says:

10:59am | 09/02/11

Ryan
You are wrong sunshine, the Liberal party should be firing Tony Abbott

notsurprised says:

12:27pm | 09/02/11

John, I would rather the news media, “Broadcast factual material accurately and represent viewpoints fairly,” as consistent with Paragraph 4.3.1 (and subsection 4.3.1.1) of the 2010 Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice.
From the following exchange of words,

Abbott: “I would never seek to make light of the death of an Australian soldier.” Riley: “I’m not suggesting that.”,

and the intention in which this entire episode has arisen there may be a case that Mark Riley and Channel 7 have breached the code.
It is good you can see the benefits of living in free and democratic society, however I wonder if you can, at the same time, see the shortfalls of it.

john says:

12:54pm | 09/02/11

@notsurprised ” however I wonder if you can, at the same time, see the shortfalls of it.”.... everything in life has its upside and shortfalls, however the benefits of living in free and democratic society allows us to address the downsides.
Like letting today tonight/current affair caliber of reporters, like chickens scratching for worms roaming the lawns of Parliament house courtyard, is not a good idea. If they are not employed political reporters they should be elsewhere, is Riley a political reporter or just a chase type reporter/camera guy after petty fraudsters, filling in for someone?.

Ryan says:

03:51pm | 09/02/11

@Christian Real: we know you are one of the Labor scum pollies that would use this sort of thing to gain political mileage, I just never knew you lot would stoop this low, I guess gutter trash is always gutter trash.

Riley should be sacked. says:

11:50pm | 09/02/11

Riley did not tell the family he was going ahead with the story, they found out themselves. The soldiers brother was on radio today and he is not happy with Channel Seven trying to score political points from his brother’s death - they just want to be left alone. The father was misled also on the wording. CHRISTIAN - why should Abbott be fired? Abbott is doing something right otherwise Oakes and Riley would not be in competition to see who can get the Gotcha Award and watch Abbott fall
on his sword. Riley should be sacked for being dumb and distasteful

Riley should be sacked. says:

11:50pm | 09/02/11

Riley did not tell the family he was going ahead with the story, they found out themselves. The soldiers brother was on radio today and he is not happy with Channel Seven trying to score political points from his brother’s death - they just want to be left alone. The father was misled also on the wording. CHRISTIAN - why should Abbott be fired? Abbott is doing something right otherwise Oakes and Riley would not be in competition to see who can get the Gotcha Award and watch Abbott fall
on his sword. Riley should be sacked for being dumb and distasteful

Riley should be sacked. says:

11:50pm | 09/02/11

Riley did not tell the family he was going ahead with the story, they found out themselves. The soldiers brother was on radio today and he is not happy with Channel Seven trying to score political points from his brother’s death - they just want to be left alone. The father was misled also on the wording. CHRISTIAN - why should Abbott be fired? Abbott is doing something right otherwise Oakes and Riley would not be in competition to see who can get the Gotcha Award and watch Abbott fall
on his sword. Riley should be sacked for being dumb and distasteful

Riley should be sacked. says:

11:50pm | 09/02/11

Riley did not tell the family he was going ahead with the story, they found out themselves. The soldiers brother was on radio today and he is not happy with Channel Seven trying to score political points from his brother’s death - they just want to be left alone. The father was misled also on the wording. CHRISTIAN - why should Abbott be fired? Abbott is doing something right otherwise Oakes and Riley would not be in competition to see who can get the Gotcha Award and watch Abbott fall
on his sword. Riley should be sacked for being dumb and distasteful

Marcos says:

06:32pm | 11/02/11

I like a Leader who speaks without hear on his tongue.
I like a Leader that speaks directly.
I like a Leader that speaks genuine language.
I like Abbott.
...And he will receive my vote the next election.
P.S.: Mark Riley still have a job?..., well, SHIT HAPPENS…

iansand says:

08:58am | 09/02/11

Oddly enough, Zeta, “emails to Abbott’s chief of staff seeking a response, an interview would have been organised discretely to protect Seven’s exclusivity” is exactly what happened.  Abbott came to the courtyard for an organised interview and had been warned about the topic of that interview.  THAT is what is so bizarre about this incident.

persephone says:

09:09am | 09/02/11

But there was notification - Channel 7 says they set up the interview two and half hours previously.

His office knew about the tape, they fought the FOI request tooth and nail. (Certanly I read about this in the media soon after his Afghanistan visit).

He wasn’t set up.

He said to Riley his words needed to be taken in context, Riley asked him to explain the context, and got the death stare.

James1 says:

09:32am | 09/02/11

I’m not so sure it is justified, in the sense you are thinking.  If you want quality news, read The Economist or STRATFOR.  If you want tabloid rubbish about celebrities and political scandals, watch Seven.  I don’t think we can be angry at Seven for giving its lowest common denominator viewers what they are looking for.  If anything, the rage should be directed at the anti-intellectual currents so prevalent in this country that cause the major networks to act like tabloids in order to garner ratings.

TimB says:

09:48am | 09/02/11

Persephone, Riley & Channel 7 were in posession of the unedited footage. They KNEW the context already. The question was deliberately provocative. That’s why Riley got a death stare.

Salad days says:

10:53am | 09/02/11

“Mark Riley was a real journalist and Seven had a reputation for broadcasting real news” - Zeta you made me laugh till I cried

Likes Joining Dots says:

11:14am | 09/02/11

Provocative tabloid TV at it’s finest.

If Andrew Bolt had turned up, cameras in tow, to ask Gillard about the refugees ‘blood on her hands’ (an over the top statement at the time, even in print), I would have been appalled.

I feel the same way here with Mark Riley. That was just appalling.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

11:14am | 09/02/11

Zeta

I agree. No-one with any perception or even expectation of objective reporting would watch 7.

That just leaves the Labor voters and 7 caters nicely to them.

I can’t comment on the actual interview since I didn’t watch it.

James1 says:

12:32pm | 09/02/11

Not so much Labor voters, Tony, but your average, uneducated, anti-intellectual Australian dullard, I would say.  This includes people on both sides of the political spectrum.

Bryndal says:

09:12am | 09/02/11

Completely agree - that is the real story

persephone says:

09:15am | 09/02/11

Yes, he’d gone there on the basis of an email from a soldier saying that the death was because they were under resourced.

The context of the video is the army brass explaining that this wasn’t true, they had all the resources they needed…so ‘shit happens’ is actually recognition of that.

That was also why the army let him fire off some rounds - to demonstrate that they had plenty of fire power.

Likes Joining Dots says:

12:04pm | 09/02/11

Pete

It is actually Rudd and now Gillard who have the power to ‘bring them home’. It’s been that way for several years now.

The opposition cannot make that call, only the Labor Government can.

mannersplease says:

09:08am | 09/02/11

I really am quite confused by this….how is it that an article about questionable ethics of a journalist hijacking the leader of the opposition becomes another excuse to say more hateful, uninformed things about the PM.  I think we could all do with getting out of the gutter and back to discussing policy. Neither Abbott nor Gillard deserve this sort of rubbish

mannersplease says:

09:09am | 09/02/11

I really am quite confused by this….how is it that an article about questionable ethics of a journalist hijacking the leader of the opposition becomes another excuse to say more hateful, uninformed things about the PM.  I think we could all do with getting out of the gutter and back to discussing policy. Neither Abbott nor Gillard deserve this sort of rubbish

john says:

09:12am | 09/02/11

@Bernie Banter you look like a desperate nut clutching at straws dragging Gillard into this topic.

Its been stated on here that Tony’s office have been trying to suppress this report for three months. Which tyrant is trying to hinder freedom of the press you or Tony?

Kerry Stokes’s channel 7 should be given an award for sticking it up tyrants who try to suppress media in a free and democratic society.

BBanter says:

10:34am | 09/02/11

@Jhn,Like Riley dragging his nuts through the gutter to get a headline
The whole exercise was to see Gillard as a caring human pitted against Abbott as the opposite,orchestrated and obviously political and expensive I would imagine
The timing was perfect and well planned,but it backfired
As for mentioning Stokes,do you use mining machinery?

john says:

11:02am | 09/02/11

@BBanter…WOW good point made my day LOL, this is getting hot…Stokes… mining…if my memory serves me right..google…checking:.

“Seven Network media group will merge with Mr Stokes’ own mining machinery company WesTrac to form a $3 billion holding company, after gaining shareholder approval.”

I’d say stokes’s goose is cooked now. T.Abbott was his last hope. Maybe he’ll fire Riley for F**king him up?

LOL…Here comes the super profits TAX, and carbon TAX. LOL…labor get set ..ready…charge!!

“SHIT HAPPENS”

PD says:

11:22am | 09/02/11

Bernie Banter, your conspiracy theory is the most desperate piece of Liberal party damage control yet seen on a day when party supporters are in a frenzy of damage control. Interesting name BTW, close to that of the man TA insulted when on his death bed with a similar insensitive line as ‘shit happens’.

BB says:

01:07pm | 09/02/11

@PD thanks and LOL,have a lovely gay

john says:

10:51am | 09/02/11

@Michael,  The media has also been abused by Labor as well, lets not forget that it was reported Rudd used Laurie Oaks as a mouth piece when Rudd got stabbed in the back by his party.

The media like the ABC is usually pro-labor, because the government of the day feeds those hungry holes with tax payer dollars.

Its obvious which reporters are pro-liberal pro labor, they are stupid think think we can’t see that.

They should be impartial.

Joan says:

09:36am | 09/02/11

Indeed .... how and why did this soldier`s death and family become linked with comment made on the field in Afghanistan months ago? Riley and Channel 7 creating news not reporting news

Troy says:

10:18am | 09/02/11

You make a good point, Lucius, and I totally agree Channel 7 were doing nothing more than muck-raking and we should not applaud them for this. The “shit happens” comment was nothing and I certainly don’t hold it against Tony.  He was just being honest and perhaps made a poor choice of words in the context he was in.  A minor gaffe and nothing to get worked up about.

Which is why I think the way Abbott handled it and the bizarre way he chose to respond to Riley is the real problem.  Imagine, for a moment, Barack Obama doing something as bizarre as that?  Going deathly silent and bobbing his head in an attempt to intimidate the reporter?  It was simply not PM worthy material.  And it’s not as if Tony is new to this stuff and we can simply write it off as part of the learning curve.  He’s been dealing with reporters in tricky situations for years.  He simply has not improved and he needs to, in order to lead this country.  I personally don’t think he ever will and this is why he is “unelectable”.  Hate to use that word, sorry my NLP friends, but I’m afraid he is.  You need to get someone else to steer the ship for the next election.  I’m a Hockey fan, myself.

Kika says:

11:33am | 09/02/11

So it’s permissable for a so called ‘alternative PM’ to be passively aggressive towards an interviewer/question you don’t like?

Ando says:

04:53pm | 09/02/11

Kika,
My answer -yes

Kika says:

04:48pm | 10/02/11

Well, that’s not someone I would vote for. Obviously it was okay for the libs to knock Mark Latham for his aggressiveness, but it’s ok as long as it’s a liberal politician doing the aggressing

HeatherG says:

12:48am | 11/02/11

Actually, Kika, what you saw in Abbott’s case was someone actually controlling themselves when angry. Latham’s difficulty was that he didn’t control himself, he’d just aggress. People feel angry sometimes, and pollies are no exception—and in this case I would’ve been just as angry and I doubt I would’ve been so accommodating as to not give Riley a serve for his underhanded and deplorable use of the death of a soldier to score ratings.

I think the fact that someone can actually hold their anger IN in such a situation rather than 1) not getting angry at all when they should (aka “sociopathic robot”) or 2) popping someone’s hand bones rather than politely shaking it (aka “Latham”). Tony Abbott’s actions were hardly passive aggressive; it’s called “controlling oneself when [I believe, understandably] angry.”

(You may like to look up “passive aggressive”, btw. I do not think this phrase means what you think it means).

Aussie Wassie says:

11:02am | 09/02/11

Agree! Punch leave it alone no justification for you to keep airing what most of us consider as gutter journalism.

What do you expect in such an enviroment? Have Tony Abbott respond very lady like as if he was our female PM. “I am extremely sorry to hear all this and wish I could have done something to prevent it.”

Tory no need explaining “shit happens” a term of endearment only understood to fair dickum true blue Aussies.

Mary T says:

12:26pm | 09/02/11

Oh for the days of the late Kerry Packer! Channel 9 wouldn’t have had the guts to televise as Kerry Packer would not have tolerated such shameful, disgusting journalism and Riley would have been sacked for sure!

As for Laurie Oakes it is time for him to retire, he blabbers away typical of someone still trying to be one of the nation’s top reporters. Channel 9 if they had any sense would pension him off.

Hamish says:

10:24am | 09/02/11

Economist, I don’t mind you disagreeing with me, but I never said it was a consipracy theory and I have actually refrained from saying anything about Gillard. None of my posts mention Gillard and I have not posted at all in the Gillard thread.

In fact, I think trying to get political mileage out of Gillard’s ‘crocodile tears’ is only slightly less disgraceful than the attempt by Riley to smear Abbott completely knowingly and unjustifiably and the related attempts by Persephone et al to justify something which they actually know was gutter journalism at its worst.

Pointing out hypocrisy is fine if the person you are being critical of has actually been hypocritical, but it’s a Riley-esque smear when they haven’t.

Grumpy says:

12:34pm | 09/02/11

hahaha…gold.

Peter Madden says:

12:02pm | 09/02/11

Thank you RealDave for this intelligent and succinct analysis.

john says:

10:30am | 09/02/11

@nossy, we were wondering where your were. Slept in?..shit happens.

...here’s the update… Its all good entertainment today, usual muck raking by media, hanging out front waiting to pounce, its not a gay sauna, or dark alley, or strip joint waiting for Rudd…..its parliament house lawn this time with a lap top !!! LOL.  Only thing missing was the lawn mower!!

Damo says:

10:33am | 09/02/11

Nossy, are you an official, paid Labor campaigner?  Give it a break, this is hardly relevant!

nossy says:

11:19am | 09/02/11

@john - had a bit of a late night John and thanks for asking - liked you blog fella - you have a top class sense of humour - old Damo there seems pissed doesnt he ?  hahaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Aitch B says:

11:34am | 09/02/11

@nosthow

You still haven’t responded to my question regarding this “$1 a week” statement you keep making. Who exactly will be paying “$1 a week”..... everybody?

If I have to pay more than that can I count on you to come to the party with the difference? If not, why? You seem to be spruiking it as gospel.

john says:

12:25pm | 09/02/11

@nosthow, no money can’t buy this much humor handed on a plate by Riley, who works for Stokes that just merged $3B mining company, Abbotts last stand for mining,carbon tax etc, I can’t believe riley & the Liberal Party hanged themselves. Labor is so cruel to give them so much rope.

I do like the Liberals too, they keep your big spending habits in check, its better this came out now -storm in a tea cup- so there can be a good fight at the next election. It will blow over, you know what they say “today’s news is tomorrows fish & chips”.

Whats this “$1 a week” statement HB is askin about?

AJ says:

05:06pm | 09/02/11

John,
‘whats this $1 dollar a week thing” read the post dopey.

I dont support Abbott but if you think this incident is a positve for Labor your delusional.

Ryan says:

09:48am | 09/02/11

He was trembling because he was holding himself back from smacking that low filth to next Tuesday. He is a better man than me as I for one would not have stood there holding myself back.

Hamish says:

09:59am | 09/02/11

I hope you’re a successful dude Rob. I certainly wouldn’t want to refer to someone as a non-achiever in the context of being leader of one of Australia’s largest political parties unless I’d done pretty well for myself. I assume you’ve been CEO of a major public company or something.

And your political antenna must be pretty crap if you don’t think this will help Abbott. That’s the problem with these lefty media hacks, they don’t realise that this kind of gutter trash actually makes people like the victim more.

Your name:Jazz says:

12:21pm | 09/02/11

I would suggest that being the member for Warringah for over 16 years is a fair achievement, not to mention being charged with managing several improtant portfolios and becoming leader of an opposition that defeated a first term government. What have you acheived Rob???

GB says:

07:11pm | 09/02/11

@Hamish. Pay no attention to Rob R Charteris. He is just another mouth breathing ALP troglodyte in the same vein as Persephone, nosthow, Christian Real etc. Just take a look at the comments section of any political story and you’ll see the lot of them spewing their bile.

Your name:Leah says:

11:15am | 10/02/11

Non-achiever? So I suppose you must have a higher degree than a Masters, studied at a better university than Oxford, worked for more significant employers than The Bulletin and The Australian, been voted for by more people than Abbott, held a federal seat for over 16 years - oh wait, have you even gotten a position in federal parliament? I would not call any federal politician, no matter their politics, a “non-achiever”.

Bud Wiser says:

09:51am | 09/02/11

@Rodent,At least Tory does print and moderate both sides unlike some of the filth .Today is a classic example in regards to other pages

TheRealDave says:

10:17am | 09/02/11

How exactly was the rAbbott ‘ambushed’?? Please explain?

His office fought for months with Channel 7 NOT to release the footage. They knew what was on it. He also had 2 hours to prepare for the interview knowing what was in the footage.

An ambush is where you get your arse handed to you by surprise, not when you’ve had months to prepare.

Bryndal says:

10:35am | 09/02/11

No Ambush 2 1/2 hours warning & 3 months trying to cover it up

Matt says:

10:46am | 09/02/11

@TheRealDave, try and take your Labor glasses off and get some perspective please. Your arguing that this “shit happens” comment has been a time bomb for Abbot waiting to go off is moronic at best, and certainly disingenuous. Any reasonable person can see that this comment has been taken out of context, and it is clear that Abbot was blindsided by the question (which, in context, was a non-event in its own right), which to me is the perfect example of an ambush.

The mother of the fallen soldier didn’t take offense at the comment. A solder whom I heard interviewed this morning on the radio who was there didn’t take offense (and stated that the sound bite was indeed taken out of context). How about you try and look at the situation rationally for once?

Mark says:

11:49am | 09/02/11

Ambushed my foot two and half notice plus the three months of channel seven trying to get access to the footage.

I bet Julia would have liked two and half hours before Laurie Oaks ambushed her. At least she tried to answer the question.

Bryndal says:

12:09pm | 09/02/11

@Matt - if a difficult question to a supposed alternate Prime Minister is being ‘Blind sided’ and is an ‘ambush’ then every Polly in canberra is in trouble. He had notice of the ‘questioning’ he was about to face - Mark Riley had discussed it with his press secretary hours before hand. No Ambush - just a dumb struck Polly - nothing new but he is putting himself up as an alternate PM - not a good look!

Matt says:

12:38pm | 09/02/11

Its amazing you people acting as if there were anything to cover up. I’m completely gobsmacked.

Andew says:

11:33pm | 09/02/11

So they now him they were going to accuse him of taking the soldiers death in vain did they, your kidding right, he might have known what it was about but if you think channel seven told him that they were going to accuse him of that your kidding. What exactly was the cover up, after all havent channel seven admitted the main story was abbotts reaction not the shit happens part, therefore they are admitting there was no story to begin with

TheRealDave says:

10:20am | 09/02/11

Yes… *yawn*... its always someone elses fault isn’t it ‘Ryan’ ??

He got caught out. HE sat there like an absoilute retard with nothing to say.

He’s gone. The Lib backroom boys have just ordered some foreign workers to begin sharpening their knives for them.

Ryan says:

03:56pm | 09/02/11

@TheRealDave: really Dave, you trash that think it is ok to do this sort of thing to make political mileage regardless of the situation make me sick to the stomach. This is someone’s husband and son, and someone who paid the ultimate price to defend us, not a political plaything, have some respect you low bunch of Labor scumbags. Tony’s reaction was one of “I am just about to smack your teeth in for being a cockroach on the back of society” and in my opinion he did well not to teach that scumbag a lesson in manners, something you could learn.

Ryan says:

04:01pm | 09/02/11

@TheRealDave: oh and Dave, here is a reality check for you sunshine, it’s the Labor rats that will stab each other as quick as look at you, hell look at the red rat we have now. This little stunt which smacks of Labor / Union involvement since the timing was too convenient will expose you Labor scum for what you are, the cockroaches of Australian society.

DH says:

10:16am | 09/02/11

I think I’d rather have obvious ‘ill contained’ fury than a blank face and the usual political spin to avoid answering.

Besides, it was actually quite well contained I think. Mark Riley deserved to be impaled on that tree in the background. I’m pretty sure Abbott was weighing it up. Would’ve made for great TV too.

Warren says:

11:05am | 09/02/11

I’d love to have seen it too. He would have ended up in court & lost his job in about 3 seconds flat. Abbott is like Latham, a bully.

Reg says:

04:32pm | 09/02/11

Not true Fiona. Tony Abbott was too stupid and over-come by his gaff to realise he was being invited to elaborate on what the recalcitrant Yank brass was telling him, rather then easing the way for them, by agreeing that their slip up was understandable. You know, ... “shit happens”

Tones was caught off-side by his desire to please the Yank brass.

Adam Diver says:

11:21am | 09/02/11

“apologise to all of us”. You have been on the victim mentalitly train far too long methinks. He apologised to the widow who doesn’t care why exactly do you deserve an apology?

PD says:

11:03am | 09/02/11

Abbott used a piece of inappropriate language and can’t deal with the fallout. It’s legitimate news. There have been plenty more ‘shameful’ pieces of media reporting than this. Would you be disgusted if this involved Gillard or a Labor politician? I suspect not.

BTW, the Liberal Party advertises on channel 7. Will you be telling them you won’t be ‘buying their product’? I’ll bet not.

Were you ‘disgusted’ when the media stalked NSW Minister David Campbell last year to catch him leaving a brothel? If not, why not?

Macca says:

11:37am | 09/02/11

Ratings started on Monday and Question time started yesterday.

Coincidence?

Jimbo says:

11:32am | 09/02/11

@swampi says “I would have snotted this scumbag and I`m a woman!! “
Why do you need to advocate violence? Can’t you express yourself like a normal person?

jf says:

12:54pm | 09/02/11

The interesting thing about this blog is that the more thoughtful and considered of the frequent contributors with Labor/left leanings have been silent on this issue or, like TChong, seem to understand the context of the conversation and of the comment.

I don’t agree with much of what you have to say TChong but your comment does you credit.

charlie says:

11:02am | 09/02/11

I go Hockey   Lets hope it is not Chris Pyne ew

john says:

03:05pm | 09/02/11

@TheRealDave Labor sure do like taking out the knife, even if its to hand it to someone in the opposition. LOL

chunkybutt says:

11:57am | 09/02/11

No but the fake Joolia is the real one, she is a little bit wooden a tad plastic and sounds like she has never been educated and we know she has. Tony is a little bit stoopid and a tad rough but he does not deserve this most of all the family of the fallen soldier this is the story and the issue I have with journalism. Is anyone making sure she is okay? Are TT or ACA at this moment trying to get an interview with her or the dead soldiers Dad?

Adam Diver says:

11:29am | 09/02/11

You are definately loving this, personally its a new low for the media, the guardian of democracy which concerns me.

a) Agree politically, look at the response.  Personally I don’t care, the soldiers family don’t care, the soldiers don’t care and the people he was talking to don’t care. I don’t want PC politicians debate gets stifled and nothing gets done.

b) Talking to brass. Where do you thnk they come from? Inner city coffee shops or child-care workers. They were and are soldiers and they hardly cared, one of them even agrees with the point.

c) You can only speculate. I would assume someone who has performed so well for 2 years would have a response planned if he knew what Riley was “not” speculating.

d) That was blind rage, I have seen that before, and you could see from Rileys uncomfortable response. If you think that is a drooling moron, my advice would be not to provoke drooling morons.

Once this wave of controversy blows over, I would be betting on Gillard getting knifed by shorten before Abbott loses the gig. Hell he is winning the election ATM.

TimB says:

11:54am | 09/02/11

Dave, it’s not just “Liberal shills” defending Tony. He seems to have a vast majority opf people on his side, many from the opposite side of the political spectrum who can see this for what it is.

It’s Labor shills like you who are beating it up. I paticularly like it when you claim “brass” don’t count as soldiers. Leave your own personal definitions & standards out of this. They don’t count for squat.

jaki says:

11:57am | 09/02/11

Great to see that the Jared McKinney’s death has served it’s purpose as an excuse for you to attack Abbott, who you obviously hate.
How nice for you.
What a f***ing low-life

Mr GG says:

11:59am | 09/02/11

point C is not speculating, it is in the Freedom of Information requests, and the Liberals were trying to block it.

I think this is a beat up and while other nations pollies might not say Sh1t happens I think as Aussie should, it is part of our lingo and who we are(or were). It is not disrespectful to say there are situations are beyond our control. what was he supposed to do tell the General and other soldiers that they stuffed up and now a digger is dead because they stuffed up(which doesn’t even seem like the case, it seems like on of those beyond out control things)

Z says:

01:08pm | 09/02/11

TheRealDave,
you’re loving the fact that the death of a great Australian soldier is being dragged again through the media to score cheap political points???
You’re a real nasty piece of work aren’t you?
The poor family and widow are again having their husband, son and father’s death dragged through the media and I think they’ve suffered enough.
But hey, Labor will do anything to improve a 32% primary vote!!!!!

Bobster says:

01:11pm | 09/02/11

@ TimB,

As someone who is often accused of being a Labor shill on here, I take offence at that.

I’m on the record many times here saying I’m not a supporter of Abbott’s politics but on this one, I’m right in his - and it appears, your - corner.

I think anyone who tries to claim this reflects poorly on Abbott rather than Riley is doing huge damage to their credibility, regardless of politics.

This is about the pathetic state of our media, not Tony Abbott, not the Liberal Party and not the ALP.

So far I’ve heard Stephen Smith and Greg Combet refuse to buy in so it looks like even the Labor Party itself sees this as a grubby issue.

If there are Labor supporters out there who disagree, well, I guess they’re telling us a fair bit about how they make their own political decisions.

TimB says:

01:55pm | 09/02/11

“If there are Labor supporters out there who disagree, well, I guess they’re telling us a fair bit about how they make their own political decisions”

Exactly my point Bobster

I’ve had a nice upward revision today in my opinion of a number of individuals whom I quite frequently find myself on the opposing side of the debate from. People who (like yourself), have today who have called this for what it truly is. Heck, even Badger’s making sense. It’s nice to know that sometimes we *can* agree on stuff.

Wish we could do it more often, but that’s the nature of politics unfortunately. It’s divisive.

Even more unfortunately, for the likes of Nossy, Rob R Charteris, Christian Real, etc…the divide seems insurmountable. They are the true shills.

Bobster says:

02:55pm | 09/02/11

Honestly, there are Liberal shills here today as well. There are a lot of people who, predictably, have just come out in support of their own team.

That’s always been my main argument though. You can lean one way or the other but I would like to think there are people out there who try to look for more than the gaffe.

If the opinions of Channel 7’s news editors are anything to go on though, I suspect there may be fewer of those people than we might like.

charlie says:

10:58am | 09/02/11

I agree with you Craig when you said Abbott made it terribly easy for them. We are all aware their is not many decent journos anymore was there every? I mean I suppose we have wikileaks :/.

I dislike Tony Abbott but in this instance he held his ground it was just the last statement that came out of his mouth I went oh crap your more of a twit than I realized don’t open your mouth.  Then again I think Tony wanted to come out with a bunch of swear words here and possibly punch the reporter.

This story has created interest due to the fact it is appalling and people see journos as unintelligent insensitive morons now. Maybe it was set up so we listen to journos less?

Tory this story is not a good one I liked your article until the last bit, a bit like Abbott. Why did you ruin it, you were the last journo out there who had some decency about them. Your last statement was anything for a story. Gossip columns come to mind. Abbot is an asshat but he did not deserve this treatment or the widow who has a baby. Can you imagine the stress that she has been put under? no because a story is worthwhile to get out. Journos are cruel and sick and have not heart okay maybe John Pilger but that is it.

John says:

11:23am | 09/02/11

… “and learn how to not make himself so open”…  pretty sums up what we really need from our politicians doesn’t it, even though we say the opposite.

God we’re immature and full of shit.

If anything brings Abbott down, it’ll be the fact that he’s just a little bit too real and similar to a normal person, rather than a robot.  That’s not a comment on his beliefs or politics, but on the man himself.

Richard says:

01:17pm | 09/02/11

If an election was held this weekend, the Libs would undoubtedly win. The Libs don’t need to change a winning formula just because you hate Tony Abbott. He is a real human being, and the more human he becomes in the eyes of voters (in contrast to robotic Gillard and conniving Shorten), the easier it is for people to vote for him.

Its incidents like this that humanise Abbott as well. I bet in that context, about 80% of us would have said exactly the same thing. And when confronted in such and outrageously insulting way, about 80% of us would be shaking with fury as well. Its things like this that create an impression in voters minds that he is a real person and therefore easier to vote for (as opposed to the Rich ivory tower Goldman Sachs banker Turnbull, or the Beazly-esque fat Hockey).

Tony Abbott is on track to win the next election as things stand anyway, so you can keep your incorrect comments to yourself next time Beau.

Beau says:

09:38am | 10/02/11

Richard you deluded, you won’t get many voting for that robotic, stammering, insincere bigot Abbott, except for the Allan Jones listeners, and yourself.
I hope his there when the election comes, because he will singing that same song, like a stuck record, “We will turn back the boats…”!!

S The says:

04:00pm | 10/02/11

I agree. The reason why I didn’t vote for liberal last time was because I didn’t want Tony Abbott (cringe) as prime minister.

Bobster says:

01:29pm | 09/02/11

No, Oakes’ credibility went to shit during the election campaign when his ego swelled to Nixonian proportions and he decided that Laurie Oakes was allowed beat unsubstantiated gossip into national headlines simply because he was Laurie Oakes.

Riley apparently looks at himself in the same light - if Riley thinks something is so, so must the nation.

Mayday says:

03:44pm | 09/02/11

Is Mark Riley trying to fill Kerry ‘The Smirk” O’Brien’s shoes?

Brad says:

12:43pm | 09/02/11

Yes he could have answered the question Kika. He didn’t to illustrate his disdain for the question. I for one was very sceptical of Tony when took over the leadership but he has proven to be a breath of fresh air. He avoids traditional political responses and acts like a human rather than a robot in front of the cameras.

Laura says:

01:35pm | 09/02/11

Brad - if he was trying to illustrate his disdain, then what with with all the weird head wobbling, and why on earth take such a long pause? Why not say in plain terms, why he refused to answer the question.
20 seconds is too long for dramatic emphasis.

HeatherG says:

01:15am | 11/02/11

That’s the second time you’ve incorrectly used the term “passive aggressive” and I’m feeling overtly pedantic today, so let’s try again. I shall call this film “Educating Kika.” Hopefully, Kika is a redhead with a penchant for Michael Caine and will appreciate the title’s irony.

From wikipedia [admittedly, not the best example of good research but the easiest one to cut and paste @ 1am]:

“Passive–aggressive behavior, a personality trait, is passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following through with expectations in interpersonal or occupational situations. It is a personality trait marked by a pervasive pattern of negative attitudes and passive, usually disavowed resistance in interpersonal or occupational situations.

“It can manifest itself as learned helplessness, procrastination, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness, or deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible.”

From the dictionary:

“Passive Aggressive (adj.) Of, relating to, or having a personality disorder characterized by habitual passive resistance to demands for adequate performance in occupational or social situations, as by procrastination, stubbornness, sullenness, and inefficiency.

Covert (adj.) Not openly shown, engaged in, or avowed : VEILED”

A real-life example would be a teenager who repeatedly refuses to do the washing up while saying that s/he will do so, or a spouse who actively refuses to live up to responsibilities in an attempt to make their significant other “pay” for real or imagined slights. Or, perhaps a reporter who, in an attempt to score ratings points, sets up an interview with the leader of the opposition and then asks a completely different question than the interviewee expected (I wouldn’t have, mostly because I cannot believe *anyone* would stoop so low as to score points in that way, or that Riley’s actions are in any way defensible. I’m obviously too naiive).

Mr Abbott was not being “passive aggressive”. He was “obviously angry”. In no way was his aggression “veiled”. It was, however, “brought under control”. Riley, otoh…. hm.

AdamS says:

04:57pm | 09/02/11

Tony’s intention for being in Afganistan in the first place was to score political points over the supply/support issue.
Thats why he refused to visit at the same time as Gillard.
It’s why the NLP tried to suppress the footage in question because after all the hoo ha there were no points to be scored as he simply agreed with the American colonels explaination of events, basically negating their own argument.
Personally I don’t care about the “Shit Happens” comment as it is the kind of gaffe that we have come to expect from TA and I think sits in the Aussie venacular.
I agree that Mark Riley was out of line but when did we start protecting our fragile pollies from probing journos… bad questions or not.
The real issue was the 25 second silence when pressured.
C’mon honestly it was hilarious and horrifying at the same time.
But I want my leader to be articulate under all circumstances and TA failed terribly at that last night… no denying that!

Linda says:

12:14pm | 09/02/11

Totally agree, replacing Tony will scare the shit out of them!

glen says:

12:20pm | 09/02/11

I’m sorry but I don’t follow your argument. Channel 7 didn’t put the inappropriate words into Mr Abbott’s mouth. Is that the sort of comment an Opposition leader is meant to use to describe the death of a soldier? Nor did Channel 7 ask Mr Abbott to shake uncontrollably rather than give an appropriate response. And just how would any “reasonable person” understand that Mr Abbott would never disrespect the memory an an Australian soldier? What do you base that claim on?

The Badger says:

01:02pm | 09/02/11

glen
I don’t have an argument, I have an opinion.
they are my thoughts
you can have your thoughts too.

The only story here is with regard to the ethics of channel 7 trying to create something out of nothing.

jf says:

01:08pm | 09/02/11

Badger, you are a frequent and robust critic of Abbott’s.

Your comment is balanced and suggests that (despite your loopy views) you are a decent and considered person.

Glen, had Abbott’s comments come from a great orator they may have been delivered more elegantly but there is no doubt that his comments were said with great feeling and empathy. Abbott’s staunchest critics (Badger amongst them) understand that, Mark Riley knows it and Channel Seven knows it.

That Channel 7 opted to divulge a private conversation, out of context is gutless, gutter journalism - a dog act if you will.

What a bunch they are, Koch, Riley et al: the dregs of the financial and political media. They demand superficiality, glibness and shallowness and then complain when they get it.

The Badger says:

02:46pm | 09/02/11

jf
Loopy views, what are you talking about?
you guys have the loopy views.

but glad that you could agree with me on this one.

Kika says:

12:05pm | 09/02/11

It’s not what he said what matters- it’s his reaction to being questioned about it. A senior politician should be prepared to be questioned about what they say/do. He clearly can’t say anything unscripted.  He even admitted it himself.

Bryndal says:

12:41pm | 09/02/11

What - not your perspective?

Mark says:

01:26pm | 09/02/11

Kika - If it is not what he said that matters why was it reported in the first place? The headline was all about Abbott being disrespectful to a fallen digger.

Bryndal, from my perspective 4 people dying and billions of dollars wasted from bad policy and management is far worse than saying “shit happens”. What is your perspective? Which is worse?

Bryndal says:

02:30pm | 09/02/11

@Mark - Apples & Oranges.
This is about Abbotts claim as the alternate Prime Minister not a reviwe of Labour Policies. I dont have any issue with what he said - my comment was i n regard to how he then handled the questioning - very poorly and not looking like an alternate Prime Minister.

Just for the record the Pink Bats scheme was a fiasco finacially but trying to pin deaths on the Government is a low blow - there were deaths in the industry long before the scheme and there will be ones in the future - in fact the schenme introduced far better training than before.
As for the BER - ‘Billions wasted?’ as a % the waste was small and within the norm for projects of that size.

Mark says:

08:09pm | 09/02/11

Bryndal, this is not about Abbott’s claim as an alternative PM. The story was promoted s Abbott being insensitive to a fallen soldier. Abbott chose to stop responding to a ridiculous line of questioning rather than dignify the moronic questions with a response. The press have blown this up into something that is not there. I have not reviewed Labor policy in my comments, simply pointed out in my opinion, Abbott’s comments and response is completely innocuous when compared to the catastrophic blunders of those in Government. My point is there are bigger issues the media should examine.

If you want to debate who is the better leader between Abbott and Gillard, we could go back and forth for days, but I doubt either of us would change our positions.

The fact is 4 people died installing insulation into homes. Would those deaths have occurred had Garrett not introduced such a poorly managed and implemented policy? In my opinion, no. Hence why I believe the policy indirectly killed 4 people.

The facts are there as well with the BER scheme. If the % of waste was normal, why then were the independent schools able to build their halls for 50% less per square metre than the state schools? This the problem with the left, they accept this type of waste as the norm, where in reality its incompetent management.

But some people prefer to be blinded by their ideology I guess rather than face up to reality.

Kika says:

04:56pm | 10/02/11

Mark - the government is not responsible for regulating the administering the insulation industry. We live in a capitalist society and industry is able to go about business without government interference.

These insulation guys had an industry with no mandatory trade qualification and were too greedy for cash they took as many jobs as they could with reckless abandon for the consequences for putting unskilled unqualified people up into ceilings.

Not only were there a few deaths, but I cannot tell you how many people had sustained significant damage to their homes as a result of unqualified people falling through and sticking their boots through their ceilings, or getting water damage as a result of them cracking their tiles etc etc.

There were cleaners getting up there posing as insulation installers (all legal thanks to the lack of requirement for trade qualification) and stuffing things up for everybody.

In hindsight its easy to put the blame on the government for not throughly checking the industry prior to approving the scheme. But hindsight is a very useful tool after the fact.

At the end of the day the government could have done things better, but the insulation industry can thank nobody but themselves if they are now uninsurable and suffer a loss in reputation and trust in the community.

el nino says:

01:25pm | 09/02/11

I think he [Tony] was just barely able to control his anger and he gave the bottom dweller reporter the only thing he deserved….unmitigated silence.  Tony wasn’t uncomfortable I’m sure standing in silence.  It’s the ridiculous pond scum reporter who had to handle the white noise factor that he was facing in his supposed interview.  Idiot of the highest order.

Laura says:

01:27pm | 09/02/11

I think that all Australians (including Tony Abbott) understand the cost of sending our men & women away to war.

I would be very surprised if anyone commenting here would attempt to diminish the loss suffered by families who have lost loved ones, or dishonour the memory of our diggers.

I will however say that I have heard mates of mine who are currently serving O.S use the exact same phrase ‘shit happens’ when describing events not unlike what happened in this instance.
In the way that, nothing they could have done, and none of the training they had could have prevented loss of life, these boys said it with no malice, they were just describing a situation where no blame could be assigned.

samantha says:

01:44pm | 09/02/11

Sean -  In answer to the question in your first paragraph -
“S….  happens” is an expression I often hear men use when they are trying to deal with the emotion of loss, or trying to comfort other men when loss has occurred.
I think that Rielly will be able to look back on this moment as a turning point in his career.

Sean says:

03:13pm | 09/02/11

To Laura and Samantha, 
With all due respect most politicians don’t understand the cost of war let alone how defence operate.

Do you think for one second they would encourage a loved one to join the forces?  When was the last time they lost a friend or family member under these circumstances?

I have many friends serving overseas and I can tell you how the rest of that visit went including Abbott wanting to go on patrol which was knocked on the head because of the risk he would pose to himself and the ADF members involved.  He thought it was a game.

ADF members can say shit happens because they use it to get through what is a mentally gruelling deployment.  They have earned the right to say shit happens that’s how they keep going.  Some can’t say it and they end up a mess.

For someone who has not had to deal with the horror or war that is disrespectful.

Make no mistake the CDF didn’t say that when the enquiry was completed.

My wife has watched the CDF and minister for defence walk into Russel Office on the weekend and re-emerge knowing full well that another digger had died and preparations were underway for a media conference to inform the rest of Australia we have lost another digger.

No politicians have the right to say shit happens.  They don’t load the flag draped coffins on to the C130 or sit with the family and comfort them day in day out.  This isn’t about blame but when the Government deploys troops the result is casualties and this isn’t shit happens it a fact.

They just keep their eyes on the polls. 
Make no mistake that if this was an unpopular war we would have already withdrawn our troops.

Now you know why I find it offensive.

Laura says:

03:38pm | 09/02/11

Sean I do agree with what you said - It was hard to tell from your first post whether you were against the words themselves, or just Tony Abbott saying them.

I agree that it was the wrong thing to say, and whether it was taken out of context or not, the guy is an arseclown and he should never have said it.
I dont know why he said it, maybe he was trying to console them, the right words are hard to find in situations like that.

I’m sure that all politicians are at least 90% human, and like us, are devastated when our fighting men & women are killed during service, maybe just not enough to bring them home.

Sean says:

07:10pm | 09/02/11

Laura this is for any assclown who would think for one minute they are one of the boys just because they jetted in for a 5 minute visit?

They know our lads are dying but they don’t feel or understand the devistation brought on by the events.  Sympathy and empathy are two different things.  I hate politicians trying to empathise with someones plight when they dont know what it is like to lose a loved on in these circumstances. 

Defence is a political pawn used by both parties to draw support.  Big smiles, handshakes a few pictures for the media showing they care and then they jet out.

The real truth is that all the Governments of this country screw ADF members behind the scenes and view the forces as a waste of money.  Hence the reason we have supply problems and a lack of soldiers for propper troop rotations into war zones.
 
The amout of contractors they hire and what they get paid is rip off and the Australian tax payer ends up footing the bill for an inferior service.
Trying to get equipmet from a contractor run warehouse is next to impossible.

All politicians are two faced when it comes to defence and the hipocracy makes me sick. 

Flag in one hand knife in the other.  God Bless Australia.

James1 says:

12:33pm | 09/02/11

I hope you are two people then.

Lails says:

01:57pm | 09/02/11

Looks like you are voting Liberal then… http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/abbott-pays-tribute-to-gillards-decency-20110209-1am03.html

B. Wildered says:

02:32pm | 09/02/11

HUH???  Please explain??

John Oliver says:

03:51pm | 09/02/11

I’m a former combat infantryman and I’ve met Tony Abbott. I can assure you he is a good bloke and respects and is well respected by the soldiers I know. You on the other hand, by the sound of it, are a complete idiot.

Zaf says:

10:25pm | 09/02/11

John Oliver, I wish I could believe you.  Truly I do wish that I could.  But I just can’t.  I don’t think he respects the Australian Armed Forces - he values them as a his ticket to dinky di patriotism, but i don’t think he respects them.

Laura says:

01:12pm | 09/02/11

Ok, just for starters.. I’m not a leftist hack as you put it & I’m not here to argue whether he is/isn’t an appropriate choice for PM.
But REALLY?! You saw that 20+ second train wreck of glaring & head wobbling as ‘dignified’?

I agree that Riley is an opportunistic twat & that TA was taken out of context.
But the way he reacted can hardly be described as ‘keeping it together’ Why did he not just say ‘your quesion is offensive & I wont dignify it with a response’.. It surely isn’t that hard.

Kika says:

01:21pm | 09/02/11

Dignified? Did you know that a great majority of communication is done non-verbally? He looked ready to deck the guy any minute!

The Cricket says:

02:27pm | 09/02/11

So Abbott has spun this to be about the dead soldier?? You’re a disgrace for suggesting such a thing. Abbott did not bring this issue up, Channel Seven did, and I’m sure Abbott would have preferred this issue never be raised given the heat he has copped for it.
You are also (no doubt deliberately) misrepresenting his clash with Nicloa Roxon. It was Roxon who was extremely aggressive and rude towards Abbott when he arrigved at the debate, accusing him of doing so deliberately. He told her that was bullshit.

It is disgusting to see left-wing trolls like you and TheRealDave trying to exploit the sad death of an Australian soldier to taike pot-shots at Abbott. If I thought you genuinely believed Abbott had been insensitive it would be one thing. But you don’t. It’s just a good chance to score cheap political points. Pathetic.

TC says:

02:40pm | 09/02/11

Bernie Banton was political grandstanding.  He was a labor party hack that they had no qualms in pushing to the fore to gain the sympathy vote.  Labor used Banton, and then morons like you squealed when anyone date to suggest the truth.  As for comments about the likes of Nicola Roxon I guess you may be happier to accept mediocrity in our government ministers, but some of us expect actual performance.  Not something we’ve seen in government for quite some years now by either party.

Sean says:

01:17pm | 09/02/11

Heres the problem a decent politician would not have made this remark.
A decent human being would not have made this remark.

Yet here we are.

I can only say that if you support this man regardless of how the issue came to light it shows your utter lack of respect for our troops and their families.

Why dont you enlist and defend our country instead of defending a politician.

You Sir are a discrace.

Kika says:

01:23pm | 09/02/11

A ‘decent politician’ would be able to defend themselves with 2 and a half hours to prepare for an interview with a journalist.

Laura says:

01:36pm | 09/02/11

Spot on Steve.

Lest We Forget.

Sean says:

02:01pm | 09/02/11

Steve I couldn’t agree with you more.
Look past this grubby incident and to the people who would defend a politician before defending the men and women who serve our country.
No matter how it was brought to light the comment and reporting of the incedent is indefensible and the loved ones left behind deserve better.

It’s easier to take a human life than create one.

LEST WE FORGET

Susan says:

12:56pm | 10/02/11

Jamie, he almost couldn’t control himself!  His response was to intimidate and his underlying rage was very visible. Riley pushed his buttons and all his energies went into managing his rage rather than being able to answer Riley with a considered answer.
I thought it was a beef up too but Abbott is not leadership material. What if he did become PM and behaved like this?
What if he was representing Australia overseas and he behaved like this?
The man doesn’t have the emotional competencies to be a leader of any party let alone leader of the opposition!!

Kika says:

01:41pm | 09/02/11

And those soliders were not the victims family either. Just because they said “yes” doesn’t mean its right to say it. Perhaps he should say that to all the families who have lost a husband, father, brother, son serving in our armed services. Oh well, sh*t happens. Not an appropriate thing to say as a leader of the opposition and on camera to boot.

Laura says:

01:55pm | 09/02/11

John, what a ridiculous thing to say: “When a soldier dies there is always something we could have done different to protect them or assist them further”  you go tell that to our men & women fighting overseas. Go and tell them that when their best mate dies ‘you could have done more to prevent it’
Sometimes, no matter how well trained, equiped & prepared our soldiers are, people will die.

Luce says:

02:37pm | 09/02/11

John, the only sure way to protect soldiers’ lives from being lost in war is to never send them to war in the first place.

John says:

04:23pm | 09/02/11

Laura as Luce comments we could save our soldiers by not sending them in the first place and it is very rare in our life when we couldnt do things better particullarly with the benefit of hindsight. I am certain Tony knows he could have done better and so could the troops but he made a condecending statement that amounts to little more than tough shit.

Of course their are 2 issues with making this statement the first is that the Howard government deployed the troops and secondly the Liberals wouldnt want to upset the yanks. I was always taught if you dont have something nice or worth saying dont say anything at all. Complying to this would be hard for TA he would be silenced for his entire life.

Laura says:

05:04pm | 09/02/11

John, of course we could save them by not sending them there, and obviously its better that we bring them home, but the fact remains that they’re there, and as long as they’re there, soldiers are going to die, as tragic as that is - and sometimes there are going to be situations where nothing can be done to avoid it, no matter what we do to support & protect them.
It’s just the way it is.

PD says:

02:56pm | 09/02/11

Abbott’s strange reaction to the interview is what made it a mess. Many of those defending him seem to overlook this. He could have calmly downplayed the ‘shit happens’ comment and not done the silent, nodding rage thing. It was a VERY bad look for a would-be PM.

simon says:

03:37pm | 09/02/11

PD, I think TA’s silence was all about do I smash this guy, and can I get away with that!!! Whatever party you are from you must admit it was a very low act. I wonder what Gillard’s reaction might have looked like if it happened to her, my bet is she would have been furious too!!!!

Luce says:

04:05pm | 09/02/11

Unfortunately you’re right PD. I think it was a completely human reaction, but of course its not what we expect out of politicians seeking to lead our country..

Its just a shame channel 7 had to this as Abbott wasn’t the only one hurt by it.

LAD says:

02:48pm | 09/02/11

That would be good news for the Opposition and bad news for the Government.

TimB says:

03:34pm | 09/02/11

But Badger, if anyone starts criticising the Islamic groups, as certain as night follows day, there will be the mindless accusations of racism. (Despit Islam being a religion not a race)
A consequence of that word being overused to shut down debate.

J.R says:

07:45pm | 09/02/11

‘just because a person is sick doesn’t mean that he is necessarily pure of heart in all things”

Which is actually the complete truth, but we don’t seem to like it when a politician dares to tell us what they really think. I’m sure you complain about lying politicians all the time, Darren, but it’s bleeding heart complaints like this that make sure they never WILL tells us the truth.

Champy says:

03:35pm | 09/02/11

Replace “Shit happens” with meh, whatever”...doesn’t look so good, and deserves questioning…And it is very possible to question ony Abbott’s coments without it being disrespectful of the soldiers family.  Or can nothing be questioned becasue then we aren’t ‘supporting the troops’.

Seano says:

04:13pm | 09/02/11

Shame I can’t return the compliment.

simon says:

03:28pm | 09/02/11

Be careful Holly, the very mantra of Karma suggests you have some Karma coming back to you now!!!!

waterdragon says:

03:44pm | 09/02/11

Oh! You poor, deluded fool

Laura says:

03:49pm | 09/02/11

wishing for bad things to happen to others?
That’s some bad karma right there.

Laura says:

03:42pm | 09/02/11

Peter, I think that is the most wise & logical comment I have read on here all freaking day.

Well done.

CynicalGoatWA says:

07:33pm | 09/02/11

....and yet his widow has completely the opposite view. If anyone has a right to be “appalled” at Abbott’s supposedly insensitive comments, then surely it is her. And yet she’s not.
Channel 7 didn’t have any problem with exploiting the parental grief by obtaining a so called exclusive with the father who was happy to give it to Abbott. Hopefully his widow will continue to show her class by not giving 7 and Riley any more oxygen to continue this appalling exercise in self promotion

Lawrie says:

06:50am | 10/02/11

@CynicalGoatWA - there was a father on the radio yesterday who’s son had died in Afghanistan and he was upset by the comments. Peter’s comments are quite balanced and considered which is something tony could have applied as a potential leader and statesmen of our nation.

CynicalGoatWA says:

11:23am | 10/02/11

....and I repeat my point of earlier Laurie. If the deceased soldiers WIFE fully understands that the comments were taken out of context and were not made in relation to her late husband’s death (as Riley and 7 were obviously trying to imply), then the matter should not have been given the oxygen it has.

Tom says:

04:28pm | 09/02/11

Yet, Riley was a “hero” when he revealed a NSW State MP had visited a gay brothel…..      You ignorant apologists make me sick!

murph says:

08:07pm | 09/02/11

Except that the NSW State MP did visit a brothel and it wasn’t to have his washing done

Vaunted says:

05:04pm | 09/02/11

Tony Abbott swears like a trooper does he? Shock, horror. Oh well nossy, if Pillip Coorey of the SMH said nasty things about Tony Abbott, that would be right enough, wouldn’t it? I mean, Phillip the Totally Fair and Politically Unbiased of the Fairfax Press wouldn’t be one to slag off a conservative politician now would he? Pigs arse he wouldn’t. I seem to recall it was people like you and Phillip once help up that complete boofhead Mark Latham as your dream PM, and then of course there’s that other more recent and wimpy failure you put your support behind, the mealy-mouthed Kevin. And now you’ve given us the real-fake-real-real-fake Joolya. Hey, it seems there’s a pattern happening here. Could it possibly be a complete dearth of leadership talent in the Labor party? You know what (as the great-and-wise-in-his-own-mind Ruddster might ask), I reckon that just might be the case. But nossy old bean, why not run for office yourself? You seem pretty dedicated, you’re really good at slagging off and you’ve obviously got heaps of spare time on your hands.

Truth Mister says:

05:25pm | 09/02/11

You are a child rapist and a murderer…. I have it all on tape, I have absolute proof…. and you’ve been trying to keep it silent for months….... Nossy how do you feel having completely unfounded accusations levelled at you?
Nossy you are nothing but a left wing lacky….

CynicalGoatWA says:

07:22pm | 09/02/11

Yeah because Phil Coorey is a bastion of impartiality. Use a more balanced example if you want to have a crack at Abbott, Sunshine.

against the Man says:

05:28pm | 09/02/11

...............as opposed to the shit already happening under the Rudd/Gillard governments. The health care system is so bad and in utter chaos that people are suffering/dying because you have an ALP leader that cares more about clinging on to power than serving the people of Australia. Suffer ALP zombies and become history’s greatest joke! HaHa!

TCB 24 X 7 says:

08:31pm | 09/02/11

Hey monica,
No if ‘s,  its WHEN they win the next election, Abbott will Shit it in and flush gilly and labor into the political Abyss for the next 10 years.

ruby says:

06:36am | 10/02/11

Louise, you gotta read history, mate.  You will find that every entitlement you have as a worker came from the labour movement.  It is a shame you are so one eyed, maybe your parents voted Liberal!  Labour and Liberal have done terrific things for this country, and it’s a shame that the right wing in this country are just hell bent on crucifying anyone that doesn’t agree with them.  I was not a howard voter but thought he did some great things for this country.  Woudl be gracious of you to acknowledge what labour have done and not be so ignorant.  It could let you down one day, because you need to be educated to have good debate or discussion and be well informed, so that you don’t sprout just blatant rubbish.  Enjoy your 4 weeks holidays this year.  Enjoy your sick days.  Enjoy your superannuation, and enjoy your long service leave.  Although going by your grammer you probably won’t be in a job long enough to get long service leave!!  And just what have labour done to this country?  REad a little bit about the Hawke/Keating years.  You may find it interesting.  Or for you, Louise, you might be best to just listen to Alan Jones.

Lee says:

07:40am | 10/02/11

Most media reporting is nothing more than a tabloid medium, channel 7 being one of the worst offenders, followed by 9.

TCB 24 X 7 says:

02:22am | 10/02/11

Hey Shane,
I suppose then Abbott for Aust. of the year then,for he must be good because he generates the same hate amongst labor supporters.
Compared to past labor govts,This present one is weak and no good for this country,it not only lost its way but what it use to stand for as well.
Remember it lost its majority in last election 73 seats lib to 72 lab.
 
              Lucky the 4 Amigos came to its rescue.
Gillard was beat and it tells you a good majority side with Abbott.

Shane From Melbourne says:

09:17pm | 10/02/11

Actually I agree. Australia hasn’t had good leadership since Paul Keating. You remember him- did all the hard economic reforms. Then John Howard came along and built the middle class welfare state and had high immigration (including large numbers of 457 visas and student visas) Things have been screwed up ever since. As I’ve said before, deciding between Labor and Liberal is like deciding what brand of poison to use…..

Aasq says:

11:19pm | 10/02/11

Just because someone hates the left doesn’t necessarily make them moronic, Mark, but I take your point.

Gandalf says:

03:07pm | 12/02/11

Yes, lets vote for non-foul mouthed and non-self serving pollies like Rudd instead

Sometimes Labor Happens! says:

06:21am | 10/02/11

Couldn’t of summed it up any better!

Matt says:

08:02am | 10/02/11

No actually, I vote for the better party at the time and what policies concern me the most.  Any half-decent person would have worded it much better eg. ‘Unfortunately it’s impossible to foresee every situation and there will be life lost’... If you feel Tony would be a decent candidate for PM when he speaks to army generals like that - let alone another world leader then maybe you’re the dim-witted one you so quickly insult.  Can you also explain away the 45 seconds when Tony had absolutely no clue as to what to say or to explain his choice of words?  Didn’t think so…

Rob says:

09:34am | 10/02/11

Clearly, Matt, you’ve never spent time around soldiers. This is how they talk. Tony was talking at their level, because he’s real. If he’d said what you just suggested, they would have said, “What a ponce…” the moment he walked away.

Matt says:

10:37am | 10/02/11

Actually Rob I spent 4 years in the Navy, I’m aware how armed forces personnel speak..

Matt says:

08:48am | 10/02/11

Blame journalism and the media for his lack of vocabulary?  Really?  I suppose you blame them also for him standing there like a stunned mullet and not being able to think of anything to say?

Laura says:

11:48am | 10/02/11

lawyers

Peter says:

09:26am | 10/02/11

Dear Punch,
First:There are more than 2 ways to inflect the words that Mr Abbott used.  I can think of at least 5.  The shoulder shrug suggests that an intelligent man has alot more to say, but that he knows this is not the time or place.  That might help with understanding what he was thinking.

Second: If the reporter wasn’t able to glean the context from the knowledge that a soldier had died, and that Abbott was talking to soldiers about the incident, he struggled for months for the footage in vain.  He should have introduced the story with the context, as a sign of respect for the viewers and the soldier who died, then he wouldn’t have had to ask what the context was.  Channel Snooze has failed again.

Steve Douglas says:

11:22am | 10/02/11

Dieter for crying out loud he didn’t say it in public.  He was having a private conversation with the military man.  Even Channel has admitted that it took them ages to work out what was said as there were no microphones around - it was picked up by a microphone a long way a way (one of 7’s excuses why it has taken them so long to release the video and audio).  But hey ALP voters will stoop to any level to beat up a story just like 7 has done.

Don says:

12:43pm | 10/02/11

I agree with your statement Rick , the problem we have with all of the media in Australia is none of the journalists understand what is democracy because they scare to get the sack if they try to tell the truth and shit will happen all the time. There is no freedom of speech just the same shit story.

Pat says:

02:16pm | 10/02/11

Rick
according to the today’s “the australian” libs turn on Abbott over 24 seconds of tv silence ..... and it is an eternal silence for us to hear them talking and proposing about what you wrote true democracy a la Switzertland.
You must be the only one in this country to know that, please keep mention it and may be someone will talk about that.

Mike says:

01:11pm | 10/02/11

Bush said ” read my lips ”
Tony said ” shit happens”
than when he was questioned genuily about what he said his lips were sealed but his head was very instable.
That says it all.

Jara says:

01:09pm | 10/02/11

What was genuine about TA is his BIG problem with anger. I thought the story was ridiculous but EVERY politician has to deal with this sort of crap. Problem is that rather than come up with an answer that showed how ridiculous the report was TA only had enough energy to control his rage. And think about it…  What was his rage about? Yes Riley was inferring that Abbott didn’t care about a soldier who had been killed. Pretty low. Abbott was offended - how dare Riley say this about me! If Abbott had any concern for the soldier or his family he would have come up with an answer that protected them but his ONLY concern was for himself.
This man is Liberal’s Mark Latham.

John B says:

08:21am | 14/02/11

@Jara.
Tony Abbott’s “big problem with rage” ?
Unlike Mark Latham breaking a taxi driver’s arm, Abbott didn’t attack Mark Riley. Unlike Mark Latham’s physical intimidation of John Howard with “that” handshake, Abbott didn’t intimidate Riley.
Tony Abbott was falsely accused of the most heartless lack of sympathy for a dead soldier by a deliberate and calculated misrepresentation of what he said and the editing of it to remove context and the fact that a senior Australian soldier agreed with Abbott’s intended meaning.

Abbott’s response was curious, silence as Riley did not deserve a response and was clearly going to attack anything Abbott said.
In fact Abbott’s silence did appear to wrong foot Riley who was out of his depth dealing with Mr Abbott.

This story was a deliberate beatup of a non-issue and has blown back all over Riley and deservedly so.
The day after it all hit the fan, Riley was given a prominent interview of Seven’s TV news and attempted to justify his behaviour. Clearly the tsunami of complaints had Seven worried.

Lola says:

04:58pm | 10/02/11

Or like a man flying into rage, but carefully controlling his actions/thoughts by silence.