Akerman plays fast and loose with the truth again

Under the guise of an opinion piece, The Daily Telegraph's Piers Akerman misrepresents the history of the David Hick's matter and tries to smear Labor MP Maxine McKew by association using an incredibly long bow.

Given the subject of his blog was the imminent release of Hicks, why on earth was it relevant to mention that Maxine McKew received favourable comment from GetUp! during the election campaign?

It seems poor Piers is still unable to come to terms with his Liberal Party hero's fall from grace and is indulging in a little nasty and misdirected payback.

The Daily Telegraph on Wednesday:

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/piersakerman/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/convicted_terrorist_to_walk_free/

Noel Pearson tries to claw back credibility and influence

Noel Pearson made a real goose of himself during the recent federal election campaign and lost much of his credibility, when he used every opportunity to buttress the Howard Government and uttered statements regarding the Labor Party such as "Understand the heartless snake here. If you harbour any hope that these buggers are going to do anything courageous in relation to Indigenous affairs, then you're living in an illusion."

ABC News Noel Pearson on election eve: 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/23/2099795.htm

The Australian and Pearson on Kevin Rudd:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22809264-601,00.html

 

The Howard Government's subsequent resounding electoral loss left Noel Pearson out on a limb.

It is sad to see him in the media attempting to use the tragic circumstances of a rape case in order to revive his own political agenda concerning 'passive welfare' and reassert his influence with federal government. It may have been wiser to do a little quiet, behind the scenes fence building with the new Rudd Government instead.

 

There has been extensive media coverage of the Court's judgment in the Arakun rape case.

The Australian on edited sentencing submission in The Queen v Names Withheld:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22907436-5006786,00.html

The Courier Mail on Indictment No.146 of 2007 Cairns District Court;

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22911515-953,00.html

Andrew Robb almost admits abuse of Senate power led to Coalition defeat

Did I hear right? Yes I did. On the tellie last night Andrew Robb came close to actually admitting that the Howard Government abused its Senate majority and carried legislation further than was prudent.

This is the first time anyone in the Liberal Party has come close to voicing the underlying cause of its electoral defeat.

Perhaps the Coalition is finally beginning to face the truth about its utter disregard of the wishes of the Australian majority over the last eleven years.

Well, I can hope can't I?

Who does Robert McClelland think he's fooling when it comes to David Hicks?

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland has refused to confirm or deny that he has signed the initial papers authorising the imposition of an interim control order on David Hicks.

He tells us all that the Attorney-General only performs "an administrative function" in relation to any control order.

News.com.au today:
 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22918115-29277,00.html

 

That's a heap of hot, steaming manure he is shovelling our way. Applications for interim control orders require the consent of the Attorney-General. In 104.3 of the C'wealth Anti-terrorism Act (No 2) 2005 as amended, there is a clear indication that the Attorney-General has choice in signing off on any interim application by the Australian Federal Police. This clause begins "If the Attorney-General consents". This phrase is repeated throughout the Act in relation to control orders.

See:

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/Act1.nsf/0/4ED7D914ED94BAC9CA2572960010BEF8/$file/1442005.pdf

 

To put it crudely - the new Attorney-General appears to be running scared and whipped when it comes to a very right-wing Australian Federal Police.

 

David Hicks broke no Australian law existing at the time of his original capture and detention. His sentence by a US military tribunal showed that this court clearly saw him as being a minimal threat.

 

Enough is enough Mr. McClelland. Australia deserves better than to have Federal Labor continue to impose John Howard's distorted view of our society and values.

Vote on Rudd's performance at Bali

The Sydney Morning Herald is running an online readers poll today on Kevin Rudd's diplomatic performance at the Kyoto conference at Bali this week.

So far this morning the vote is running heavily in favour of Rudd's performance being statesmanlike.

Voting is at:

http://www.smh.com.au/polls/politics/form.html

 

I have to say I was pleased that Kevin Rudd's address to the conference further differentiated Australia from the US position on climate change. However, he really needs to go further and stand up to America's attempt to force any mention of target percentages out of the final draft of the Bali declaration.

The Prime Minister would be foolish if he believed placating the Bush Administration will keep the US onside except momentarily.

The US will turn on Australia sometime in the next three years, because the Rudd Government has indicated that it will not play lickspittle and American's have never understood Labor Party philosophy.

With most American's believing in their heart-of-hearts that God is a white American male and that their country dominates by divine right, diplomacy by others is next to useless.

A show of strong leadership by our Prime Minister and a less narrow focus on climate change allegiances it required.

America is no longer a great and powerful friend, rather she is a major impediment to constructive change and international stability.

 

The Sydney Morning Herald article on Rudd in Bali:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/rudds-choice-be-diplomat-or-leader/2007/12/12/1197135557585.html

I keep hearing the Nats say that nothing has changed

The new urban myth for NSW North Coast Nationals appears to be that even though the Coalition lost the federal election it doesn't really matter, because Kevin Rudd won't change things much.

A strange way to console themselves for losing at the polling booths on November 24.

WorkChoices is being dismantled, Kyoto was ratified, the Code of Ministerial Responsibility was expanded, reporting of political contributions was returned to pre-Howard criteria, Australian Law Reform Commission recommendations on Commonwealth sedition laws are on the agenda to be revisited, the NT Intervention is to be reviewed, the Australian Government is going to apologise to the Stolen Generation, there is a broad timeline for complete combat troop withdrawal from Iraq and cooperative federalism is the order of the day under a Rudd Labor Government.

Everything the former Howard Government would have hated to see happen.

No matter how you huff and puff, that's big change fellas! 

Is Morris Iemma turning into the new John Howard?

Premier Morris Iemma waited, until New South Wales was preoccupied with the federal election and State Parliament had risen for the final time in 2007, to begin putting the building blocks in place to privatise this state's electricity suppliers.

He gave an unworkable guarantee that the sell-off of public assets would not affect ordinary consumers and then ignored regional NSW by promising that sale money would be first spent on giving Sydney a brand new metro rail system.

This tactic was worthy of John Howard at his best. It seems the example of his highhanded approach continues to contaminate politics at all levels.

During the last ten years NSW Labor has moved so far to the right that it makes middle of the road voters like myself seem positively Red.

Morris Iemma should take a good look at all those voters who swung against the Coalition at the recent federal election. They are the same voters who will sweep NSW Labor from government if he keeps this up.