Abbott's adviser deletes Twitter account now the damage is done - blames death threats

Mark Textor an adviser to Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has deleted his Twitter account @markatextor after employing the same boots and all approach to Australia-Indonesia relations as Abbott himself.

Textor claimed he could not tolerate the 'death threats' received since he sent the tweets set out below, however if these alleged threats happened they must be thin on the ground because the Topsy archive carries little or no trace of these threats as far as I can tell.

Indeed the twitterverse was more likely to respond with comments such as You are a bogan moron, end of story or "Conduct unbecoming?" Don't f*cking flatter yourself, no one expects anything better from you.

Time online 22 November 2013:

Textor has admitted he slipped up. "Twenty-five years in politics, one or two mistakes, this is certainly one of them," he said Thursday.

As we ponder what the other mistake of his career could be, here are some of his mud-slinging tweets preserved for posterity.

The one where he brought up the 2005 suicide attack in Bali and linked to a photo of the bombers

"Last time I looked no Indonesians were ever bombed in Australia" (removed from Twitter)

The one where he slammed Indonesia's President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's propensity to use Twitter

"What sort of head of state communicates with a head of a neighbouring government by twitter FFS? SBY" (removed from Twitter)

The one where he gave tips for saving on apparently alcoholic beverages to the leader of the country with the biggest Muslim population in the world

@Drew_Bowie @Colvinius @SBYudhoyono @TonyAbbottMHR I think he should sack his foreign service and just do twitter. Save on the drinks bill

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 19, 2013

The one where he predicted journalists would find Indonesia's relationship with Australia sexually arousing…

Indonesian junior official criticises Oz Government. 2 things happen: left media gets hard on. Govt gets more domestic support

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 11, 2013

… but that anyone who mattered didn't care if Indonesians were offended

"No one gives a rat's arse in the real world. The bubble at work." (removed from Twitter)

The one where he described Indonesia's ambassador to Australia as a chess piece

Indonesian ambassador Read: Pawn of Indonesian domestic politics #indonesiavotes2014

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 18, 2013

The one where he implied the Indonesian President was senile

"Poor old bugger SBY is confused." (removed from Twitter)

The one where he re-tweeted a political reporter's response to his porn star slur

@latikambourke @markatextor Personally I disagree Mark. Marty looks more like a bad 70′s Bond villain.

When he reacted to the controversy over his porn star slur

@cathywilcox1 @jonathanvswan it's dull. Silly, gossipy and moronic. Compensated for by fake moral outrage and intellectual snobbery.

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 19, 2013

The time he claimed Indonesia's reaction to the spying controversy was fake

@PetefromHayNSW I think we act peacefully. But the fake indo outrage posturing is frustrating.

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 19, 2013

The one where he demanded Indonesia apologize for spying in 2004

SBY should apologise. "Indonesia 'bugged' Australia By Brendan Nicholson National Security Correspondent Canberra November 15, 2004″

— Mark Textor (@markatextor) November 19, 2013

The one where he took a dig at Australia's public broadcaster and gossip columnists

@latikambourke Where did i mention SBY exactly? More ABC inaccurate nonsense. More ant rooting from glorified gossip columnists

Front page mock up courtesy of @lol_trotsky

Miranda Devine's conspiracy theory travels into regional NSW

On 26 October 2013 Prime Minister Tony Abbott had a handful of right wing media trolls to dinner at Kirribilli House and one, Miranda Devine, returned this hospitality by obligingly beginning  a conspiracy theory on 20 November about the timing of Fairfax media reports on Australia’s spying activities in Indonesia.

Why did The Guardian sit on its bombshell allegations about Australia spying on Indonesia for five months? Ms. Devine began, went on to imply the timing was suspect, then demolished her own argument by including some inconvenient facts.

Andrew Bolt hopped on the bandwagon (along with fellow dinner invitees Greg Sheridan and Paul Sheehan) on 21 November and hasn’t exhausted his vitriol yet.

Her theory was also quickly picked up by a Northern Rivers troll who ditched the inconvenient facts and sent off a letter to the editor which was published in The Daily Examiner on 21 November 2013:

Leftwing nonsense

According to the latest revelations by the ABC, Australian spies have had their eyes and ears focused on Indonesia for years, intercepting the president's telephone calls at will and generally doing what spies are paid to do.

Shock, horror in Indonesia and threats to disembowel present relations with Australia, while the ALP demands PM Tony Abbott apologise and the ABC lovingly stirs the pot.

The question here is just when did this ABC/Guardian coalition really discover these damning revelations considering the so-called Snowden leaks have been about for quite a while, certainly before September 7, 2013, and the spying claims relate to the period of the previous Labor/Green government.

Why now with relations with Indonesia at a critical point, and not at any period of time between 2007, a year Snowden alludes to, and September 6, 2013, the six years Rudd/Gillard/Rudd took turns in the captain's cabin steering us in circles?

The election loss really got up the noses of Labor and the Green lefties and this sort of nonsense designed to detract from the workings of the new government is a good reminder of just why we voted them out en masse.

Fred Perring,
Halfway Creek

Almost as quickly, the Perring version of this conspiracy theory was knocked down in another letter to the editor on 23 November 2013:

No conspiracy

Fred Perring [The Daily Examiner, November 21, 2013] is hot on the heels of what he obviously believes is a possible Guardian Australia-ABC conspiracy, with regard to their reporting of alleged spying on the Indonesian President, his wife and assorted ministers/advisers.

"Why now, with relations with Indonesia at a critical point, and not at any period of time between 2007, a year Snowden alludes to, and September6, 2013, the six years Rudd/Gillard/Rudd took turns in the captain's cabin steering us in circles?" he asks, concerning publication of these news articles.

Now let me see - the public record shows that the original story broke on June 5, 2013, that the US National Security Agency was collecting metadata from internet service providers' records of phone calls.

The whistleblower revealed his identity on or about June 9, and then revealed Australia's links to the spy web, with a map identifying the location of Australian assets assisting American Government covert operations.

Between June 16-27 it became obvious that Snowden had taken a large number of classified intelligence documents and was releasing them to select international media as a single information transfer.

On October 31, the National Security Agency (NSA) admitted that the classified documents stolen numbered somewhere between 50,000 and 200,000 individual documents.

The agency also admitted it had no way of knowing precisely which documents had been accessed until the media reported on them.

ASIO has conducted an audit of documents it shared with foreign intelligence agencies, but the Department Of Defence's Signals Directorate remains silent on whether it was aware that its documents has gone feral, before Guardian Australia and the ABC jointly reported on the directorate's alleged spying activities.

Now, if we take NSA's conservative estimate of 50,000 documents available to the media, a news agency would have to read and check the details of at least 295 intelligence documents a day to have opened all the documents by the day I write this letter.

All of which points to the fact that The Guardian UK did not have these documents before June 5, and has not yet completed reviewing all the documents in its possession.

In fact, according to evidence before a November 19 Senate Estimates Environment and Communications Legislation Committee hearing, The Guardian UK did not give Guardian Australia access to the relevant documents until November, and the ABC was not alerted to the existence of documents outlining alleged spying on Indonesia until approximately 24 hours after Guardian Australia came into possession of these documents.

Senate Estimates evidence also revealed that the ABC consulted with government authorities prior to publication and "in light of representations that were made, a decision was made to withdraw some elements" of these sensitive documents.

So on the basis of the publicly available timetable of the Snowden leak, it was impossible for the ABC to publish any details between 2007 and September 6, 2013; and therefore Mr Perring's conspiracy theory fails.

JUDITH M. MELVILLE

Yamba

APN gets a jump-start on news events

At 6.45pm Eastern Daylight Saving Time on Monday 25th November APN websites carried tomorrow's news.

What's next? Can readers look forward to seeing tomorrow's race results today? The punters would certainly look forward to seeing them.

Read tomorrow's news today here.

Court case reveals Clarence Valley Council's poor management practices

In Collins v Clarence Valley Council (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1682 judgment went in Council’s favour.

However, the case exposed a numbers of flaws in its policies and processes that councillors need to address.

Excerpts from the judgment:

1 At about 3.00pm on Friday, 9 April 2008, the plaintiff, Dr Ann Collins, was riding her bicycle along the Bluff Bridge. She was participating in an organised charity ride. The Bluff Bridge is a wooden bridge and forms part of the Orara Way. It straddles the Orara River at Lanitza, New South Wales. The front wheel of Dr Collins' bicycle became stuck in a gap between planks on the bridge. Dr Collins fell over the low guardrails on the side of the bridge, with the bicycle still attached to her feet. She fell into a rocky ravine adjacent to the river. Dr Collins suffered significant injuries. It is common ground that if she was to succeed in these proceedings she would recover damages in the amount of $822,632.00 less any deduction for contributory negligence.

7 To some the success of the Council in defending Dr Collins' claim may appear counter-intuitive. While riding her bike in a proper and lawful manner she encountered a wooden bridge on a public road in a poor state of repair. Dr Collins responded to the risk that she perceived was posed by the bridge in a reasonable manner, namely by weaving her way across her side lane of the bridge to avoid her wheels becoming trapped. Yet the accident still happened. The Council is able to avoid liability primarily because of its own ignorance of the risk posed by the structure whose responsibility it was to maintain and the limits on its own resources. Its ignorance of the risk does not reflect well upon its own practices. Whether the limits on its resources exist because of its own inefficiencies or because of factors beyond its control cannot be inquired into. However all of these matters reflect policy choices made by the Parliament in enacting the CLA. Whether those choices reflect a sensible approach to loss distribution that encourages efficient and safe practices of public bodies is not a matter for the Court to assess.

197 ....I have already noted the concession by Mr Bailey as to his state of knowledge of the use of the Orara Way by cyclists and the inadequacies of the bridge for use by cyclists in [54] and [64] above. Clearly Mr Bailey's inspection was less than adequate. What is the point of conducting inspections on a road if an obvious defect that can cause danger to a known category of lawful users of the road is not identified and reported upon?... 

206 The findings that I have made above necessarily mean that the test posed by s 43A(3) is not satisfied in relation to all of the suggested precautions save for a sign (and an inspection). However in relation to a sign I am satisfied that the test in s 43A(3) is made out. Objectively considered there was no rational reason to confine Mr Bailey's inspection in February 2008 to the risk posed by motor vehicles. Why exclude motorcycles and bicycles given that they are common on roads? Even a cursory inspection of the bridge as at that time would have revealed that the bridge was a potential danger for cyclists. Further, as at March 2008 the Bluff Bridge was ranked eleventh most in need of replacement and six of the bridges ahead were scheduled (and funded) for a complete rebuild. The local cycle club had nominated the area of road including the Bluff Bridge as its preferred area for at least its annual race and possibly monthly outings. While a sign was hardly a perfect response it was cheap and easy to undertake and was likely to ameliorate the risk faced by at least a significant group of the likely cyclists traversing the bridge. If the Council did not propose to take some step to repair or rebuild the bridge then it was unreasonable in the sense used in s 43A(3) for it not to have at least erected a sign as it did subsequently. (I make the same finding in relation to the inspection conducted by Mr Bailey for the reasons noted at [197]. However, as noted, this conclusion does not advance the matter beyond the conclusion that the Council should have placed a sign at the southern entrance to the Bluff Bridge.)

207 Thus Dr Collins has succeeded in establishing the Council was negligent in satisfying s 5B(1)(c) and overcoming s 43A in failing to placing a sign of the kind that they subsequently erected on the southern approach to the Bluff Bridge. However for the other reasons I have stated her case fails.

209 For the sake of completeness I will address the allegation of contributory negligence. The Council contended that Dr Collins' own negligence contributed to her accident in that she failed to dismount either before or while she was on the bridge, she slowed down at the crucial time and it is submitted that she must have not been keeping a proper look out at the point she fell over. I reject all of these contentions. I have already found that prior to entering the bridge she observed the gaps in the planks and decided to cross the bridge at a diagonal, bearing in mind the need to avoid the middle of the road because of the potential threat posed by logging trucks. To suggest that Dr Collins should have taken some further steps for her own safety beyond that is to truly engage in hindsight analysis.

Abbott's a-burning in 2013

 

AT HOME IN OCTOBER....

 

AND ABROAD IN NOVEMBER

* Photographs found at Google Images

John gets mail about eco zombies

Apparently climate change deniers are not content with writing letters to the editors, they also like to drop the odd note to members of the twitterverse if this example received by John Iser of Armidale NSW is any indication: