Conspiracy update

Do you remember “Peter”? For those who don’t:

If you think there’s been a media campaign to discredit the Gillard Government, then you’re on the mark. It has not been your imagination. A source, a senior media executive I cannot name but for the sake of this article I will refer to as ‘Peter’, has revealed the strategies used and the motivation behind them.

“The Murdoch media has been leaning to the right since the Whitlam days but the anti-Labor meme was really ramped up just before the 2010 election. The catalyst was Murdoch’s luncheon with Tony Abbott, where the NBN (National Broadband Network) must have been the main talking point as the very next day Abbott publicly announced that he’d rip up the NBN”.

“He pissed a few of us off by jumping too soon, thinking that people might tie the announcement to the meeting with Murdoch, which luckily they didn’t. The NBN will effect Murdoch’s profits, and let’s be very clear on that, so the reason to back Abbott was clearly motivated by money for the media empire”.

Well it looks like he has some friends also prepared to come out about his employer:

Yes, there is some breaking news… Tony Abbott has lunch at News Ltd HQ every week. Incredulous I asked the person to repeat it.

“EVERY week, in private,” to discuss the latest “Get Gillard” strategies. No wonder there’s such a seamless segue between what News writes and what Abbott parrots. He’s dealing with the enemy. They’re writing the script for him.

It’s not a fuck-up. It’s a fucking conspiracy.

But, sources must remain confidential. I’m not going to tell youse just WHO told us that bit of news.

I have it on the very highest authority, however, given without hesitation… in fact, volunteered by someone with no ostensible axe to grind, but should should know it to be true. It’s this person’s job to know Abbott’s movements, in detail.

It may very well even be “Peter” himself. Regardless of who it was, it’s starting to get very interesting. You just can’t keep a good story down. The delicious irony is that this story links straight back to Murdoch himself.

English: Rupert Murdoch at the Vanity Fair par...

Rupert Murdoch (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

252 comments on “Conspiracy update

  1. “…………………..But when the real article appeared, the gaggle outside, about 100 strong, waiting in the (by now) dark and pouring rain, started cheering. TV lights were switched on. I suppose she answered some questions. All that kerfuffle must have been for something. Rousing cheers from the Faithful, stern unblinking looks from the Protective Detail. I asked one “How close can I get to the car?” No answer from The Professional. He’d have let me know when I was too close, I’m sure.

    And so now we come to the end of the evening.

    Julia, in “C*1″, saying thanks and gidday to all the cheering throng, got caught in one of Barry O’Farrells’ traffic jams, just like the rest of us did. Lined up behind a couple of dozen cars, she had to wait her turn too.

    As I said, what a country!

    *************************

    Post Script: Yes, there is some breaking news… Tony Abbott has lunch at News Ltd HQ every week. Incredulous I asked the person to repeat it.

    “EVERY week, in private,” to discuss the latest “Get Gillard” strategies. No wonder there’s such a seamless segue between what News writes and what Abbott parrots. He’s dealing with the enemy. They’re writing the script for him.

    It’s not a fuck-up. It’s a fucking conspiracy.

    But, sources must remain confidential. I’m not going to tell youse just WHO told us that bit of news.

    I have it on the very highest authority, however, given without hesitation… in fact, volunteered by someone with no ostensible axe to grind, but should should know it to be true. It’s this person’s job to know Abbott’s movements, in detail.

    Remember:

    When they really ARE out to get you, it’s NOT paranoia.

    http://pbxmastragics.com/2013/03/03/among-the-true-believers/

  2. What a non Story with the only evidence for this claim coming from an anonymous source in an unknown blog, Michael I expect better from you than this sort of wishful thinking.

  3. Certainly not Crowey , I just don’t believe this flimsy conspiracy for so many different reasons, like where is the evidence for these so called “private lunches” and or the content of any “discussions” and anonymous bit of scuttlebutt in an obscure blog does not cut it in the veracity stakes.

  4. Iain Hall, then you could claim much of what we read in the media is/was a ‘non story’ seen as most writers refuse to name sources of their (mis)information!

  5. “Help me. I’m weak and not terribly bright. I can’t speak in public. I’ve got no policies (at least, none that I’d like the public to know about before the election). I’m unpopular. I lie.”

    “That’s alright. Let’s do a bargain. We’ll guide the flock through the booths to you. In return you give us what we want. Deal?”

    “Oh, yes, thank you Master! Whatever you wish, Sir!

  6. Iain Truth, on many occasions you have been asked to supply evidence regarding truthful Tony , and what’s the results, a blank reply.

  7. Min – clean up your act , your language is a disgrace to publish on any site.
    There is no conspiracy – when the media has so much muck to select from.
    Ms Dillard gets off lightly.
    Comment of the day ‘ you cannot fool all of the people all of the time’

  8. I didn’t realise the Murdoch’s had such discerning taste in Luncheon guests. Better Abbott than associating with the criminals in the ALP.

  9. You just can’t keep a good story down.

    Unless of course you own the distribution means of that story. I’ve only been harping on about this blatantly obvious synchronicity between the media and the libs for years. Many said I was paranoid, then the Leveson enquiry began to unfold. Guess who’s laughing (crying) now.

    See the way they kept the good story about ashby down, and are now ignoring sinodinos, in comparison to the witch hunt into Gillard and 20 year old matters that revealed nothing.

    Whether ‘Peter’ exists or not, their is still much in this story. Lets hope ‘Peter’ has as many unsourced reports as do Labor backbenchers (cough)

  10. Oh look, all of the Right Wing trolls are out in force today, applying their usual double standards. After all, they’ve been quite happy to spread the most scurrilous rumours, on behalf of their lord & master Abbott, on the basis of far less evidence than is presented here.

    BTW, Curry, how is it “discerning” to have dinner with a man who has been charged with 2 counts of assault & 1 charge of vandalism, & who was directly involved in a conspiracy to have an innocent woman thrown in jail on trumped up charges? Oh, & how is it discerning to associate with a political party with a long history of misusing tax payers money, misusing ministerial positions for personal gain & covering up the biggest bribery scandal in Australian history?

  11. Tom, good word..synchronicity..

    It has long been recognised that news.com in particular do little else than republish Liberal press releases, however while the weekly strategy meetings come as no surprise, something that does surprise me is how anyone could suffer through a weekly meeting with Tony Abbott.

  12. something that does surprise me is how anyone could suffer through a weekly meeting with Tony Abbott.

    Actually, it needn’t be that unpleasant. Could even be fun! Just ask him one simple unscripted question. Then sit back and enjoy the dozens of seconds of stupified silence and head-nodding unhingement…

  13. how anyone could suffer through a weekly meeting with Tony Abbott.

    It’s called alcohol Min. It has enabled many people to talk with me, even if only briefly 😉

  14. I don’t know, I reckon I’d need to be anaesthetised to meet almost anyone from the upper echelons of News Corpse.

  15. This is, if it’s true – and I have no absolutely no reason to doubt your story Migs – an incendiary device of the highest order. Light the blue touch paper and stand clear…

  16. if it’s true

    In light of the Leveson inquiry, (and what we see daily in our msm) there appears to be more meat to this story than anything related to Gillards time as a lawyer, and yet, I have a haunting suspicion that we will hear more of that than this.

  17. Much of the reaction to your blog could be dealt with by the use of dated photos. Should be possible.

  18. Migs, love the postscript to Bushfire Bill’s piece..

    When they really ARE out to get you, it’s NOT paranoia.

  19. From Bushfire Bill
    [url=http://pbxmastragics.com/2013/03/03/among-the-true-believers/]What’s up in Western Sydney[/url]

    Yes, there is some breaking news… Tony Abbott has lunch at News Ltd HQ every week. Incredulous I asked the person to repeat it.

    “EVERY week, in private,” to discuss the latest “Get Gillard” strategies. No wonder there’s such a seamless segue between what News writes and what Abbott parrots. He’s dealing with the enemy. They’re writing the script for him.

    It’s not a fuck-up. It’s a fucking conspiracy.

    But, sources must remain confidential. I’m not going to tell youse just WHO told us that bit of news.

    I have it on the very highest authority, however, given without hesitation… in fact, volunteered by someone with no ostensible axe to grind, but should should know it to be true. It’s this person’s job to know Abbott’s movements, in detail.

    Remember:

    and in the comments (from BB)

    The person said it once voluntarily and then, asked by all three of us to repeat it, did so without demur. It was as if everyone knows it.

    Either that or they wanted to unload it off their conscience.

    And it wasn’t just some dumb partisan. It was a quite senior member of the Press Gallery.

    We were all quite shocked, asked a few questions, and the person stood by their statement without hesitation.

  20. Brilliant..

    I accused him (Mark Simkin) of treating politics like politicians were children in a sandpit. He retorted that if they acted that way, that was the way he was going to cover it. We replied that if he treated them this way, what choice did they have? Around and around it went. We complained about all the time wasted n Ruddstoration He countered by saying that he was in receipt of calls. What could he do? Ignore them, we said. They’re bullshit anyway.

    Simkin eventually confirmed that News (and lately Fairfax) are out to get Gillard and claimed that the ABC is going much easier on her than the other media organizations.

    I wondered how they could work to destroy what she and the government have built up, simply because of lazy groupthink… especially when Abbott is the alternative.

    Are they mad?

    No, just full of indolence and nihilism. Nothing matters to them. “Nation” is a dirty word in their lexicon.

  21. Iain Hall calls for ‘evidence’

    How amusing, we never allow ‘evidence’ to get in the way of a good piece of gossip when it’s anything about his beloved Coalition friends do we?

    How very shallow of you Iain

  22. What I need to ask the doubters is why they don’t have a problem with the possibility of an American billionaire conspiring to bring down a foreign government.

    The American billionaire: Murdoch.

    The foreign government: The Gillard Government.

  23. This is pedantic perhaps, but it’s disappointing that people purporting to be journalists etc don’t even appear to have the time to proof-read their articles. It might only be a minor ‘fail’ but it’s still a ‘fail’ in my book.

  24. The Get Gillard strategies have been noted here on numerous occasions..to me the worst of them would have to include the hidden and not so hidden sexist messages. This is done deliberately so as to give what she says far less credence. A typical putdown when attacking a female would be statements such as, if it’s too hot then get out of the kitchen. Yes folks even though we’re in the year 2013 the way to attack a woman is to attack her via gender.

  25. Iain Hall,
    Just to let you know, nice try at obfuscation around the point being made about Abbott’s weekly strategy lunches with the staff of News Ltd publications.

    I was there.

    I can verify the statement that was made by a Press Gallery veteran.

    I heard it.

    I questioned the provider of the information.

    It was verified.

    Now, off you go, behind your computer there, and, might I add, nowhere near the source of the truth of this matter, as I was last night, and spin for all you’re worth.

    Which is two bits, in my estimation.

    As you have exposed yourself here today as just a Yellow shill for the Conservatives.

    Who can’t be trusted to tell the truth.

    I know that for a fact.

  26. C@tmomma
    Are you saying that you were at one of these mythical lunches or that you were told about them by someone else who claims to have been there?

  27. hear·say
    /ˈhi(ə)rˌsā/
    Noun

    Information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated; rumor.
    The report of another person’s words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

    Synonyms
    rumour – rumor – report – gossip – whisper – scuttlebutt

  28. Gee, that’s funny Factless Troll, it never stops you or your fellow LibTard mates from posting hearsay as facts when it gives you the opportunity of smearing the current government, yet you hate it when it’s used against your corrupt mates in the Fiberal Party.

  29. Iain Hall, day after day, story after story, headline after headline, the media give us scoops based on hearsay. I’ll be looking at their articles to see if you’ve left any comments being critical of their methods.

  30. Marcus
    If ever I commit such sins does that absolve those like yourself for the sins that you and your cronies now commit?

    Look at this claim logically for just a minute, why on earth would political player as canny as Abbott risk all for a regular chat with Murdoch or his subordinates? He must after all know that he is being watched by the entire nation and that meetings of the nature claimed could be harmful for his electoral prospects. It just makes no sense at all and on that basis alone I call bullshit on the whole conspiracy theory.

    WHERE IS THE HARD EVIDENCE?

    THERE HAS BEEN NONE PRODUCED SO FAR.

  31. Roswell
    I don’t as a rule leave comments on newspaper websites, that said you must be desperate to be running with a story like this one.

  32. “Look at this claim logically for just a minute, why on earth would political player as canny as Abbott risk all for a regular chat with Murdoch or his subordinates”.

    LOL, Factless Troll. Abbott, Canny? The guy’s a total moron, but his stupidity & gormlessness has only been hidden all this time by the Mass Media’s refusal to report on any of his dickish behaviour. This fact can easily be explained if these strategy meetings are a fact-& yes I could see Abbott doing this if he thought it would get him the job of Prime Minister, just like his stupid promises to the Independents. The reality is that there is far, far more evidence-circumstantial & otherwise-to back up these claims than to back up the multitude of crap that you & your fellow LibTards spout around here & on your Lunar Right blogs.

  33. “I don’t as a rule leave comments on newspaper websites”.

    Yeah, but we bet you & your LibTard mates didn’t criticise any of the constant leadership rumours & Gillard/AWU crap on your Lunar Right blogs. No, if anything, you morons spread these stupid rumours & then extrapolate upon them to ludicrous degrees.

  34. Yet Hall posts on his own website stories from the News Ltd articles, like an article about Climate change, and the article says, “Senior Government sources have confirmed for the weekend Australian”

    No Names here Hall.

    Hypocrite

  35. Yeah, I still don’t understand why Factless Troll wastes everyone’s time on this blog site. Is he just feeling incredibly lonely over at his own Lunar Right site?

  36. Iain Hall,

    Are you saying that you were at one of these mythical lunches or that you were told about them by someone else who claims to have been there?

    Yes.

  37. Hall bases 99% of his post from newspaper articles from news ltd papers, which 99% of those sates unnamed sources.

  38. This article is based on as much fact or even more than what we are being fed each day in the media.

    Is more believable as well.

  39. Even they give unnamed sources as well, Hall as for unnamed sources who are these unnamed spivs and shysters that you keep claiming you know that the government is paying in relation to climate change.

  40. Does he go to these meetings in the early hours of the morning, like he does, when he visits the Cardinal.

    The Cardinal that is presently making a fool of himself in Rome.

    Maybe that is why he goes on those bike rides before dawn. Wonder who else he visits.

    Maybe he should lead by releasing his diary each day, as they are demanding the PM does.

    I noticed that since January, the wife is also taken up the bike. May be this is the only way she can see him.

  41. Paul
    As will be obvious to any reader of my humble page just because I cite something does not mean that I accept as gospel any claims there in, in fact the opposite is very often true.
    FU
    the only reason that you find this story believable is that it is consistent with your own prejudice.

  42. Iain ‘Spurious Reasoning a Specialty’ Hall,

    Yes. The information came from someone who is there every week.

  43. Iain, you have no prejudices.

    That is going to be an enlightment to many,.

    You are one of the most prejudiced and opinionated contributor to this site.

  44. So there is a big conspiracy to bring down the fantastic Gillard government involving weekly strategy lunches between Abbott and News Ltd. Almost as ridiculous as Gina pulling Tony’s strings.

    Here’s the challenge…name four consecutive weekly lunch dates. Shouldn’t be hard if your sources are in the know.

    Oh, by the way…rang Tony’s office and they will be looking here to see this evidence. You are on dangerous ground, Migs.

  45. Scaper, since when has it been “dangerous” to quote somebody else. Perhaps it’s you who should be cautious, about false accusations.

  46. Yes, scrapper you are correct Abbott and his ilk are very quick to take legal action when things are said against them.

    One has to only see Pyne leap to his feet, even when the mildest criticism is made of about, demanding immediate redress. The speaker takes little notice of him though.

    Yes, good at giving it out, but like all bullies, cannot take it.

    That is a problem for Abbott, as this PM is good at lobbing all insults back. The PM generally hits the spot, when she does so

  47. C@tmomma

    Yes. The information came from someone who is there every week.

    Yeah someone like you who is not prepared to put their real name to the allegation

    Its BULLSHIT all of it and as the person making the allegation its up to you to prove it or withdraw the whole claim.

    Michael
    I really think that you are taking a big risk running this spurious story and It may be wise to consider pulling it. If its true you need more proof than has so far been offered and if it is as I suspect just some anonymously authored nonsense you risk your personal credibility by standing by it. Either way its a DUD.

  48. Iain, is it. You seem to be taking the bait. To my way of thinking, that is success of the highest order.

  49. Iain, I have considered this matter carefully and it is my opinion that there is nothing defamatory in the story. In fact I have seen worse from yourself in this regard. There are no allegations of criminal activity which compares with the numerous allegations pertaining to Gillard, Thomson and Slipper from “unnamed sources” emanating from others of your ilk.

  50. Why should I prove anything to you, Iain Hall, when you and scaper will just run to daddy about it? I’m sorry but I don’t want to get that particular person in trouble with their employer. I care about people you see. I am a Labor supporter.

    Prove me wrong by giving ME detailed accounts of Abbott’s movements, day by day, minute by minute, for 4 weeks in a row. Shouldn’t be too hard, should it, seeing as you are so far up his behind you should be intimately aware of his movements. 🙂

  51. And you’re happy to put me on it, Scaper. That’s disappointing.

    Funny, this is the same guy who was happy to make the most disgusting accusations about the PM over ‘stuff he’d heard’ (which all came to naught), but is screaming for ‘evidence’ for a lunch.

    Well, apparently, the ‘evidence’ is stronger than anything related to Gillard, although, it’s all just hearsay

    That’s a pretty accurate description. We were standing around and got chatting.

    Then this person said, wtte, quite casually,

    “You know Abbott has lunch at News Corp every week, don’t you?”

    Blogger: “DOES he?”

    Another blogger: “Is that right?”

    Senior Press Gallery Person: “Yeah, every week.”

    Blogger: “Co-ordinating strategies I suppose?”

    Senior Press Gallery Person: “Of course!”

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/03/02/seat-of-the-week-capricornia/?comment_page=36/#comment-1564212

    Of course, ‘Senior Press Gallery Person’ could be replaced with ‘inside source’ and any newspaper would run it. Wouldn’t it? 😯

  52. Its another wet day here FU and I have nothing better to do than argue with you lot
    as for your gif well Tony out helping clean up Australia is a good news story even if he took a tumble, its better than Gillard’s Rooty hill Junket , because while Abbott was picking up rubbish Gillard has been producing it by the bus load.

  53. Michael
    I am not threatening anyone here least of all you, I’m just suggesting that this whole story is dodgy, very dodgy indeed. There are lots of political stories out there that far better pedigrees than this bit of empty scuttlebutt and I would hope that you would be discerning enough to realise that.

    C@tmomma @ 2:38 pm

    Why should I prove anything to you, Iain Hall, when you and scaper will just run to daddy about it? I’m sorry but I don’t want to get that particular person in trouble with their employer. I care about people you see. I am a Labor supporter.

    No that is a furphy , and a rather lame one at that you made the allegation so the onus of proof lies with you.

  54. I’ll let Chris Mitchell and Tony Abbott judge if this is fair commentary as both are informed of this thread.

    Again, I challenge your source to produce dates.

  55. Just to clear this up
    Yeah, well, the source was mine. The person who gave the information about weekly lunches was a VERY senior Press Gallery person, and there were two other witnesses.

    The information was volunteered in the course of a general discussion on how the media operates.

    We asked the person to repeat what had just been said, and it was repeated, quite definitely and explicitly.

    This was someone who knows Abbott’s movements and is with him a lot of the time for obvious professional purposes.

    It was not Cafe Whispers “Peter”.Of that I can be quite sure, but I’m not saying why I can’t be quite sure.

    I wish to protect the identity of the source simply because I don’t want to cause the person any trouble, as unlikely as that possibility may be.

    I’m not making it up. It happened. What I reported was 100% accurate.

  56. Given that the source has been identified as a

    Senior Press Gallery Person

    I hope no “sting” has been involved ❓
    I wouldn’t put it past that mob of liars. 👿

  57. No that is a furphy , and a rather lame one at that you made the allegation so the onus of proof lies with you.

    You’re blowin’ it out your arse, Iain.

    C@tmomma, myself and one other person were there and the person said what they said. When asked, they repeated it, seriously.

    I know you’re saying it’s unsubstantiated, but given the veracity of the witness, and the definite nature of the statement, plus its repetition when asked for clarification, I believe it.

    You weren’t there. You didn’t see the very serious look on the person’s face, and you don’t know quite how senior in the Press Gallery this person is. If anyone knows what Abbott gets up to, it’d be this person.

  58. bushfirebill

    That is still an entirely unfounded allegation from an anonymous internet identity that is entirely without any backup Its just empty scuttlebutt and a rather shallow attempt to Smear Tony Abbott.
    Produce the proof or withdraw the allegation

  59. I hope no “sting” has been involved
    I wouldn’t put it past that mob of liars.

    Unlikely to be a sting, but possible.

    In any case Abbott can always deny it by pointing out one week when he was away, or otherwise not near a News Ltd. office…. a “non-denial denial”.

    The essential assertion is that Abbott’s office has direct, weekly contact with News Ltd. for the purposes of synchronizing stories and straightening out lines of attack on the government.

    When you see just how often these lines, right down to exact wordings coincide, it’s not surprising information at all.

    Just nice to have it confirmed.

  60. We won’t be seeing scaper back here.

    I don’t take too kindly to public threats. Scaper has had my email address for over a year and he thus had every opportunity to email me privately.

    Iain, I have known C@tmomma for a number of years and I trust everything she says. You have no right coming here demanding answers from her. End of story.

    BB, thanks mate.

  61. Produce the proof or withdraw the allegation

    What do you want, Iain? A photograph? CCTV clips? Abbott’s weekly signature in the visitor’s book?

    That won’t be forthcoming, pal.

    We’re not revealing the source’s identity. We put the information out there as delivered to us and confirmed, seriously and after due consideration.

    It’s no more unethical than the “anonymous sources” used by the media all the time, anyway.

    Your bluster is impressive, but empty. I saw what I saw, and I heard what I heard. The source was impeccable. In my judgement, the information is correct.

    It’s for others e.g. the media to take it and seek further confirmation.

  62. Bushfirebill, no surprises whatsoever at least not from my perspective as you say, too many coincidences. For example, Tony’s “surprise visit” is always accompanied by an entourage of cameramen and reporters..it seems that although many might be “surprised”, the press never is.

  63. I should make note that it would be considered unethical to reveal the name of a person who has asked to remain anonymous. Blogmasters do have information about people such as email addresses, correct names, locations etc and it is upon us as Admin to respect the privacy of others. In this Iain and scaper have been unfair and unreasonable to demand that others reveal their details when there would justifiable anger if Admin of blogs revealed theirs.

  64. Iain said:

    bushfirebill

    That is still an entirely unfounded allegation from an anonymous internet identity that is entirely without any backup Its just empty scuttlebutt and a rather shallow attempt to Smear Tony Abbott.
    Produce the proof or withdraw the allegation

    I say: Withdraw that demand.

    You have to right to come here making demands on others.

  65. Min, would that language be English and truthful as opposed to the language of the Liars Party that Voyager espouses.

    Interesting that Iain still insists that Gillard lied wrt a carbon tax, when we all know that she did no such thing.

    Then there’s the lies about BER and HIP which he’s quick to keep spruiking, despite the the evidence which does not support the Liars and msm bullshit. Reports from international pundits also support the FACTS, not the unmitigated bullshit spruiked by the Liars and their enablers.

    Fed up @2.08pm, I believe you are right wrt most of what the msm pumps out. They disseminate their fiction as rumour, smear and innuendo.

  66. Hall of you lived by that rule youe hateful factless black soul would not scibe a dot. Don’t come in here and make demands, you wrote one article that would duly quality as a failure out of courtesy. Your far from a credabile swinging Dick in here. Bill is supplying this info in good faith. Say you dont believe it by all means its your right, makeing demand most certainly is not. Bill has credability you have zero.

  67. Hall

    As will be obvious to any reader of my humble page just because I cite something does not mean that I accept as gospel any claims there in, in fact the opposite is very often true

    Actually Hall, you defend your post very hard, your post against Muslims, refugees, Julia Gillard, you are constantly defending your posts. Anyone one who is against your post you call them anti this or anti that, following the green religion, anything you can think of.

  68. I can’t understand why you let these trolls run interference on this website. I skip over them but then find that the decent posters have been distracted by their tactics which is exactly what they want. Please get rid of them!

  69. Scraps said that he’d rang Tony’s office and that the Abbortt would be look’n in on the Cafe to see whats being said…….. well, we know that won’t be happen’n ’cause Tones dosn’t read anything 😀
    …but just in case.. 😉 :- Tony Abbortt, your a traitorous piece of botoxic scum… how dare you lie, manipulate and bullshit to the Australian people…… come to Broken Hill cobba and I’ll give you a boxing lesson that will put the creases back into your over-hanging brow you arrogant pert pretensious priggish peacock. 😆 ( p.s. Oh how we love to laugh at your fake he-man walk 😆 )

  70. Don’t you just love it when the trolls who are ever ready, eager and willing to spruik any lie, unfounded allegation, smear and innuendo about the PM, get themselves in a lather when a source from the Press Gallery, vouched for by Bushfire Bill and C@tmomma, exposes the sleazy dealings between their beloved LOTO and the Murdoch press to unseat a democratically elected government and to smear and besmirch the reputation of the Prime Minister of this country.

    It’s a pity that the source is too afraid of reprisals to go public, but I suppose s/he knows only too well that the msm would kill the whistle blower’s story before its birth.

    However, now that the cat is out of the bag, the rumour mill may make it impossible for the corrupt enablers and their clients the equally corrupt Liars Party to keep the lid on it.

    It should only take a couple of questions to be asked at pressers and for Liealot’s usual response of taking to his heels, for more questions to be asked and answers demanded.

    Hopefully getting one of the gormless clowns in the shadow ministry to front the questions will be seen for what it is-a hollow pathetic attempt by an unworthy pretender to avoid scrutiny.

  71. LOVO, what a laugh. scaper offers up Liealot and Chris Mitchell as reliable sources of information. If you’re into giving any credence to the likes of those two lying toerags.

    I’ll add my two bob’s worth to yours. Liealot, you haven’t garnered that name for nothing. You are a disgrace-a corrupt serial liar and misogynist.

    An arse clown who will hopefully be dragged through every court in the land along with those other pieces of excrement, Prissy, Brough, Hockey and Brandis for attempting to pervert the course of justice.

    A grub and a failure. You will be remembered as a laughable idiot who was exposed as the corrupt lying mongrel you are.

  72. News of Tony Abbott’s weekly meetings at News Ltd is no great surprise. Rupert Murdoch has been trying to destroy the hung parliament since 2010. He hates the Greens more than Labor, and said words to this affect “whatever you do don’t let the bloody Greens mess it up”.

    Just remember the criminal lengths Mr Murdoch went to in the UK phone hacking scandal. No one, not even the parents of a murdered school girl were off limits to Mr Murdoch, and his son James, in the name of profit. Lord Justice Leveson found that Mr Murdoch was “willfully blind” to the criminal activities his journalists used to get information.

    The unresolved Ashby/Lewis/Brough scandal reeks of the tactics of the Murdochistan empire. Mr Abbott has said that he “would do anything to be Prime Minister” and it appears that he is.

    What a disgrace and a threat to democracy!

  73. On the subject of suing, I am assuming that this pertains to defamation. The defence against this includes truth/justification (in the public interest) and fair comment. The latter pertains especially to public figures as compares with private individuals. On the other hand, threats to sue are a criminal matter.

  74. Maybe if one is worried about the truth of the allegations, one could ask Mr. Abbott directly.

    Of course we all know he would answer truthfully. Just make sure he has not got his fingers crossed behind his backi. What is so bad about being accused of meeting someone. Surely that is not illegal.

  75. Maybe if one is worried about the truth of the allegations, one could ask Mr. Abbott directly.

    Fu, somebody posted on Facebook that they contacted Tony Abbott’s office and the story was denied.

    So there we have it. The twooth.

  76. Migs..well that would be normal routine..”a story originally denied by X, however it was later confirmed that…”.

  77. Mayvbe we should play the kids game of I spy with my little eye, a…. Could limited it to spot the lie while watching the TV.

    One today, the furthy that Labore reneged on 80% funding of the Pacific Highway, in the north. Yes, during the GFC, Labor did fund some on 80-20 on a one off bsis.

    Mr. WIndsor and Mr Albanese has proven beyond doubt that there was never a offer made promising this. The norm is I believe 50 / 50.

    The one yesterday, Mr. Abbott says there was productivity under Howard and none under Labor.

    Has anyone else spotted any lies with their little eye.

  78. Iain Hall
    March 4, 2013 @ 4:45 pm
    Please check your email Michael

    Hall of you lived by that rule youe hateful factless black soul would not scibe a dot. Don’t come in here and make demands, you wrote one article that would duly quality as a failure out of courtesy. Your far from a credable swinging Dick in here. Bill is supplying this info in good faith. Say you dont believe it by all means its your right, makeing demand most certainly is not. Bill has credability you have zero.

    Oh dear that predictive text has slammed me, If you’re going to complain to the teacher let me correct my mistakes now I have a computer and glasses.
    Hall if you lived by that rule you hateful factless black souled hypocrite, you would not scribe a dot. Don’t come in here and make demands. You wrote one article that would duly quality as a failure, it was not well received and you were given a post out of courtesy. You’re far from a credible swinging Dick in here. Bill is supplying this information in good faith. Say you don’t believe it by all means, that’s you’re prerogative; making demand most certainly is not. Bill has credibility which we respect, you have zero by way of your own making. You make take into account that respect is earned. I am outraged by your demands and if you think this is a personal attack on you, its just a statement of fact. Furthermore I feel you owe Bill an apology, but I know for one you are not big on those Karma man.

    Thank you Bill for your candid truth, I respect your judgement not to reveal the source and can understand their frustration even if Hall cannot.

  79. In the face of an outright denial from Tony Abbott and a total lack of evidence to the contrary I suggest that those here who are getting all excited about the scandal they have long dreamed might be saving Gillard had better take a very cold shower…
    I hear that liquid nitrogen has a very bracing effect….
    😉

  80. So did I Ricky. Yet another one who states they will do something then shortly after doesn’t do it, breaking the pledge they had only just made.

    The thing is after so blatantly undertaking a false premise they expect us to take the lies and distortions they spruik as fact. They have just proven to everyone in spades why they have absolutely no credibility and what they say is worthless.

  81. Well Iain, you might have a point. Does that mean when the PM says “no”, the matter should be dropped.

    I suspect not, it does not even matter with the PM, even when the evidence disproves the allegations and innuendo, the attack continues.

    We now have Abbott protecting, Ashby, Bough and Sinodinos and I suspect the scandal that is raising its ugly head in victory. We have the many allegations that also involve Mr. Abbott which he fails to explain.

    No, Iain, I am sure it we replaced Abbott with the PM, you would be leading the attack.

    No this will go on, until someone comes up with the smoking gun,. Will
    Abbott apologizes. No he will not. He will gat that funnyt look, shake his head, and walk off with a smirk. That will be the last we hear of the matter.

    The same as he was caught out,, making false claims about actions that the miners took. When it was pointed out the truth of what was said, his excuse was that he did not read it. The norm for the course when it comes to Abbott. Listen to nothing, read nothing, and one can sau what they like.

    If that does not work, he will freeze, I believe with anger or flee.

    The one thing he will not do, is stand still and take responsibility for his actions.

  82. Don’t be so obviously thick, lain…unlike the SMS. texts or the secretive mobile calls..this was a face to face…so the person was identifiable to three people..if he/she was faking it or making it, it would be reckless to be so flippant if it wasn’t true!

  83. FU

    Well Iain, you might have a point. Does that mean when the PM says “no”, the matter should be dropped.

    In the absence of substantial evidence, or with the sort of evidence claimed here I would be equally dismissive. But when it comes to the former sins of Julia Gillard there is a paper trail and witnesses who have been willing to put their names to the allegations.

    Here you have nothing, but your own desire that this fanciful tale be true. Its no where near enough.

  84. Jaycee
    you are getting the story mixed up, the claim is being made by one unnamed “senior journalist” and reported by two anonymous bloggers, None of them are willing to put their names to the claim. So of these three so called witnesses we only one is claimed to have witnessed these so called meetings and the other two are passing on what this first person is purported to have told them, by the time it gets here we have hearsay about hearsay which adds up to nothing.

  85. There are non so blind as those who refused to see.

    What is the difference with what is said about Abbott and how the MSM and the likes of yourself, treat the PM.

    Not a thing. You have no evidence it is not true.

    Evidence is put up, showing the PM is not guilty as charged by the court of popular opinion. The abuse of the PM continues.

    I believe you do indeed protest too much.

    Iain, do yourself a favour. Go back and read what you have written.

    I suspect this is what this thread is about. One can say what they like about the PM, but never criticise Mr. Abbott.

    As I said, if one replaced Mr. Abbott’s name with Ms. Gillard, we would not hear a peep out of you.

  86. On Sunday, I heard what Abbott had to say at his daily stunt.

    Later in the day. I caught up with Bolt. I could not believe the words that came out of his mouth.

    Both Bolt and Abbott spruiked the same message, nearly word for word.

    How could this happen, unless they were reading from the same script.

  87. Iain, how long do you think you can milk this one. Cannot see what you are contributing. May be other can put me right.

  88. Thanks for clearing that up, BB :cool
    Given abbott’s record entirely believable.
    Given the troll’s record in spruiking any and all rumours concerning the PM, climate science and scientists, and any others it deems “incorrect”, it certainly indicates its hypocrisy with its novel demands for EVIDENCE, something it generally avoids as the plague. 😈

  89. Go to the relevant sites and read the entire posts, lain….then retract your foolishness. (if just this once!).

  90. I’ll let Chris Mitchell and Tony Abbott judge if this is fair commentary as both are informed of this thread

    .

    Dear oh dear, Walter Mitty is at it again. Even offers ‘legal opinion’. Please. LOL. But not surprised. Delusion is as delusion does.

    As I recall he ‘instructed his solicitors to take action re Traveston Dam. And so on.

    As for the veracity of the claim (and I won’t be at all surprised if it’s true because there’s a track record of Murdoch political power plays), I’ll wait ’till Abbott is asked on TV. Not with one question which he could easily brush away but a series of ‘probing’ questions.

    But I fear it won’t happen. So sad.

  91. Still arguing the point I see?

    The statement was made. It was real. The person who made it repeated it. The person is a senior Press Gallery member. There are witnesses.

    End of story.

    No amount of bluster from this Iain Whatshisname will change that.

  92. Just to clarify. I’m not doubting as to whether the claim was made or not, what I’m interested in the ‘veracity’ of the claim.

    Press gallery journos are full of egotists. Don’t trust them regardless of ‘claims’

    For me, it’s not the end of the story. Just the beginning.

  93. Actually, it was BB and two witnesses to what was said. Three in all, plus the one who said it.

    And if BB and C#tmomma say it happened, it happened.

    After the Leveson Inquiry, I would’ve entirely surprised if it didn’t.

    Now I wonder where next week’s lunch will be?
    😆

  94. It’s a slick schtick this Iain Hall character has got,huh? (And doesn’t his gravatar remind me of that troglodyte Liberal mate of Bruce Billson who heavied the little,old Greens supporter out of the stage-managed Billson ‘Community’ meeting and onto the street in tears?)

    Mr Iain has convinced himself that only HE is right, via his circular logic and attempts to intimidate with bluff,bluster and BS, anyone who disagrees with his assessments, that what I, Bushfire Bill, and one other, heard and saw with our own eyes, is just not true.

    What a goose!

    Nice try, Iain, but no one but you believes you!

    Except for scaper. Who has been laying on the anti-Labor BS with a trowel since Jack the Insider’s blog began.

    Guys, I think it’s called a Circle Jerk. 🙂

    That I know to be true.

  95. Iain, the paper trail you refer to doesn’t exist.

    Every time some loony like pickering shoots off his yap about more reams of paper he’s trailing behind him like Bo Peep’s sheep and NEW EVIDENCE peddled by yet another “witness”, the “witness” turns out to be some conman like pickering who lives o/s to avoid prosecution for fraud, theft or running a ponzi scheme.

    And the paper trail inevitably turns out to be last week’s menus from the kebab shop that the printer botched and got chucked in the skip.

    And frankly given the choice wrt honesty and truthfulness, BB & C@tmomma win hands down over the truthiness of Liealot and his barrackers.

  96. Mobius maybe we should get Hall the serial insulting, factless troll if it was a core or non core promise /blood or piss oath. Maybe its not Karma , maybe Hall had been reincarnated as a dignity deficient parrot.

  97. Col, we won’t be seeing scaper back here again

    That’s a real pity. He is always a laugh a minute. You know, off to WA to ‘pull off deals'(pulling off is his speciality) and yet he’s home in the middle of the day (WA time) always ready to ‘inform’ one side of politics, when, in his own words, he thinks all sides are crap.

    Actually he’s more to be pitied rather than ridiculed. For that I apologise.

    But he really is a dill, writ large.

  98. I wonder just how low Abbott and his conspirators would stoop in order to gain power? Where would they draw the line and how many within their ranks approve of the current dishonesty and deviousness their leader is displaying? Very worrying.

  99. Just my guess, if this `Journo-X` was sensed as trying to bullshit you guys, my bet is you guys would be letting everyone know X is a bullshit propagandist by name.

  100. 730, same as the MSM hey.. 😉 Where as soon as the blazing headlines declaring this and that are found to be lies wild exaggerations, they are immediately retracted with large headlines and apologies to all concerned. But wait a moment, they don’t do that do they, but rather the MSM allows the known fabrication to be built up and built upon.

    But on the other hand what is there to retract in this story? It’s a clear case of claim as to what not just one but 2 people were told, with the opposite parties fully capable of placing a denial while providing factual evidence that there is no substance to the story. Any written contra evidence will naturally be printed, and in fact Migs has already written that someone (apologies, I don’t know who it was) contacted Abbott’s office where the story was denied, even though this could be classed as unsubstantiated because it was Abbott’s “office”..who? the cleaning lady…

  101. Supporting a piece defaming the PM written “elsewhere” is ok but a piece reporting that meetings are held between Mr. Abbott and media cronies brings howls of outrage and threats that the blogowners will be sued.

  102. Hypocrites much, aren’t they AntonyG?

    Something I’ve been highlighting about them for a while now.

  103. BB

    The statement was made. It was real. The person who made it repeated it. The person is a senior Press Gallery member. There are witnesses.

    You can repeat that l8ine until the cows come home but that won’t alter the simple fact that you have NO first hand knowledge of the events that you are insisting are true. Without that you have nothing.

    C@tmomma

    Mr Iain has convinced himself that only HE is right, via his circular logic and attempts to intimidate with bluff,bluster and BS, anyone who disagrees with his assessments, that what I, Bushfire Bill, and one other, heard and saw with our own eyes, is just not true.

    You heard hearsay, and no matter how much you believe that story (confirmation bias in action!!) you have no actual evidence that the story told to you is true, as I said what you offer us is hearsay about hearsay which amunts to absolutely nothing in the real world.

    Ricky

    Do you understand what projection is?
    Because I see so much of it in the myriad of comments that you make denouncing me personally. I don’t hate you at all though because hating you, or anyone else for that matter, takes far too much energy and you are just not worth the effort.

  104. Mobius Ecko,

    Scaper is a fairly harmless loonie from my observation. It’s quite ironic that scaper says that he meets weekly with Gina but it’s not on that Tony Abbott meets with Murdoch representatives.

    Hall on the other hand is a serial troll whose presence I personally would not tolerate, sly and underhand is his methods.

  105. You can repeat that l8ine until the cows come home but that won’t alter the simple fact that you have NO first hand knowledge of the events that you are insisting are true. Without that you have nothing.

    If there’s nothing there, you’re spending an awful amount of time on nothing, Iain.

  106. you’re spending an awful amount of time on nothing, Iain.

    It’s really all he has BB, time and nothing.

  107. Iain Hall and,

    ..you have NO first hand knowledge of the events that you are insisting are true.

    I would class that as an unsubstantiated accusation and an unwarranted attack.

  108. I would class that as an unsubstantiated accusation and an unwarranted attack.

    But that’s different Min, it’s only unwarranted when it doesn’t suit ians world view.

    Yes, it is fun watching those who were most vociferous about any unsubstantiated smear against a sitting PM have conniptions over a similar story but with the target sitting elsewhere.

    I also don’t dispute that this is what has been told to bushfirebill and C@tmomma. And, if true, has real implications for our political debate.

    Unfortunately, nothing will come of it, the msm have proven again and again that there are certain feathers that will not be ruffled, even though it appears that abbott does have questions to answer.

    Of course, it appears that the msm would take the word of blewitt over the word of one of their own. It’s all so contextual in it’s application.

  109. Tom, clearly there is nothing illegal about the LOTO having pre-organised meetings with media identities who have clearly made their political preferences known, however rank hypocrisy for the MSM to continue with their pretence of impartiality.

    I really don’t see why this should be such at shock to some as it seems to be standard procedure..eg Mal Brough’s meetings with Steve Lewis to work out strategies on the Ashby affair. This is of course not just a rumour but came out during the Slipper/Ashby court case.

  110. Typical Tory. Shameless liar and obfuscator.

    Iain Hall, fyi,
    You heard hearsay, and no matter how much you believe that story (confirmation bias in action!!) you have no actual evidence that the story told to you is true, as I said what you offer us is hearsay about hearsay which amunts to absolutely nothing in the real world.

    Wrong again, me old china.

    I heard the statement straight from the horse’s mouth. No hearsay about it.

    To verify, I asked the person giving us this information to confirm the statement.

    Readily and confidently done.

    Evidence of the truth of the matter was sought and given to us.

    ‘Real World’ evidence.

    As opposed to your cack-handed bluff, bluster and BS, and feeble attempts to intimidate.

    I mean, like I would believe a Liberal stooge, as opposed to the word and evidence of a Senior Press Gallery member with nothing to lose and nothing to gain by a frank, off the record, admission.

    I pity poor Migs that he has to put up with a tendentious Liberal tart like you on a regular basis.

  111. The MSM would take similar rumors about the PM, as right to question her.

    I am aware some in the media are aware of what this site is saying. I know, because the allegations have turned up on the twitter sites of journalists. Has anyone heard Mr. Abbott is being questioned. Thought not.

  112. Iain, methinks you do protest too much. If the PM name was replaced in this story, would we be hearing from you.

    Do you really find it hard to believe that Abbott would not behave in this manner, and has no contact with the media.

    I take it, you also believe there are fairies at the bottom of the garden.

  113. Time he has, as he does not believe in working.

    A house father is a wonderful thing.

    The excuse wears thin when the kids are nearly full grown.

    Even house mothers go back to work at this stage.

  114. Min. Bough contact with media indenties came from court documents, that were signed under oath.

  115. Interest rates kept on hold. Does that mean the economy is travelling well. That nothing has to be done, to adjust it up or down.

  116. C@tmomma

    Typical Tory. Shameless liar and obfuscator.

    I am being entirely honest and succinct here

    Iain Hall, fyi,
    You heard hearsay, and no matter how much you believe that story (confirmation bias in action!!) you have no actual evidence that the story told to you is true, as I said what you offer us is hearsay about hearsay which amunts to absolutely nothing in the real world.

    Wrong again, me old china.

    I heard the statement straight from the horse’s mouth. No hearsay about it.

    What you claim to have heard is not being questioned by me, but that claim is about events that are purported to have happened and you personally were not at those claimed meetings, in law we call such testimony “hear say” and it is almost universally excluded from any trial or other legal process. It is a claim of no consequence in law and it is a claim of no substance in this context.

    To verify, I asked the person giving us this information to confirm the statement.

    Readily and confidently done.

    Evidence of the truth of the matter was sought and given to us.

    Repeating hearsay does not improve its veracity, no matter how many time it is repeated, now what “proof of the matter are you talking about, now of you are not willing to present that evidence I think its entirely fair to suggest that it does not exist.

    ‘Real World’ evidence.

    It takes more than empty assertion fro such claims to be credible

    As opposed to your cack-handed bluff, bluster and BS, and feeble attempts to intimidate.

    I mean, like I would believe a Liberal stooge, as opposed to the word and evidence of a Senior Press Gallery member with nothing to lose and nothing to gain by a frank, off the record, admission.

    You see besides the point that I am not the member of any political party, I am not the one trying to propagate a conspiracy theory about Tony Abbott, you are and as such you have the onus of proof that requires you to make your case. Frankly you are failing miserably to do so. The fact that your unnamed source won’t go “on the record” suggests that he is having a very big lend of you and my guess is that he is reading your attempts to peddle this story through the social media as one of the greatest jokes of 2013 and I bet his colleges are enjoying the Joke as well

    I pity poor Migs that he has to put up with a tendentious Liberal tart like you on a regular basis.

    I’ll give Michael credit where its due. He is a true believer and I respect him for that.

    FU
    I have already said that I would take the same attitude to this story if it was about Gillard rather than Abbott.
    But as it happens I do not think that any senior player would risk being seen going cap in hand to the HQ of News ltd for any reason, and certainly not on the basis of suggested in this allegation. heck I don’t think that even Gillard would be that stupid.
    You see this conspiracy fails on that measure alone, even if Abbott was in consultation with the Murdoch press it beggars belief that communications would be done in such a way that would be so open to discovery and negative consequences.

  117. “I have already said that I would take the same attitude to this story if it was about Gillard rather than Abbott.”

    Iain, I have big trouble with that statement. Just give us one example of were you have done so.

    I do not believe you can.

  118. As usual, I do not expect my request to be answered. Has a habit of ignoring things that he does not like.

  119. FU
    I know of no story of the same ilk (suggesting that Gillard is conspiring to manipulate public opinion through the MSM) about which I would have reason to question the veracity of the information.
    I suspect that you are seeing a parallel between the Slater and Gordon allegations, well they are actually a fish of another flavour entirely and we do have some hard evidence, like Gillard’s own exit statement from her employment, documents prepared by her in relation to that slush fund, heck compared to this story we have evidence many levels of magnitude better. That said I have never really rated the Slater and Gordon matter as being much more than a bit of a sideshow and reactions to it from both sides of politics are little more than a canned laugh track as far as I’m concerned.
    You see I actually think that our politics not being driven by the insistence of moral perfection for our players is a good thing.

  120. C@tmomma
    I pity poor Migs that he has to put up with a tendentious Liberal tart like you on a regular basis.

    To show how credible his word is he said he was leaving this site and we all cheered, but like other right wingers he was not true to his word and came back.

    Credibility zero, yet has the gall to not only question but but insinuate the veracity of others is suspect. It’s standard for this person, that and never conceding he is wrong even when he is.

  121. Iain Hall,
    Let me simplify your ouvre for you. It will save us all a lot of time having to read the bilgewater you pump out on behalf of Team Abbott:

    Black is White. 2+2=5. If Tony Abbott says so. And I will defend to the death his right to say it.

    Have a nice day! You’re not worth my wasting any more of my precious time on.

    You see, the Conservative trick of baiting the Progressive with a Gish Gallop, doesn’t work on me. 😉

    TTFN! :kiss: :kiss:

  122. The conspiracy for me is how Australian journalists let Abbott parade around with a plan that has no details and never press him for details. Just check out this clip from The Project:

  123. Not just that Alex, they never pull him up on any of his many blatant lies. If they did that he would have been out a long time ago. But he is a molly coddled protected species that through stupidity and a slow thinking brain tries to make himself extinct. It’s only the MSM that keeps him active and parades him out for people to gawk at.

  124. Mr. Hockey and others are still saying they cannot trust what Labor is saying.

    Seems it was Labor that was spot on last time. Why would not this year be the same.

    I am sick of Abbott;s excuse that he cannot promise anything until after the election because they cannot trust the figures.

    It appears it is Abbott’s figures that one cannot trust.

  125. Iain, why are you still here. You do not appear to have anything new to add. You are repeating yourself.

  126. I know of no story of the same ilk (suggesting that Gillard is conspiring to manipulate public opinion through the MSM) about which I would have reason to question the veracity of the information.

    You would-have-to-be-kidding. On a similar “ilk” try Abbott’s many and various attempts “to manipulate public opinion through the MSM” being spreading lies and rumours, standing (proudly) in front of a sign stating Bob Brown’s B*tch, but most especially all those visual images eg holding a dead fish suggesting that he is somehow “the worker’s friend” while failing to provide one skerrick of detail, just improbable brain f*rts such as turning the boats around and “ripping up” the NBN.

  127. Hall the great man of conviction, the attention seeking boomerang returns to bask in this own fecal opinions at the expense of dignity. I guess once a liar always a liar. Ask yourself whisperers why hall is in here, he does not agree with our ideology, he never provides facts and he is constantly proven to be completely wrong. He has never swayed anyone’s opinion. He’s the guy that crashed the party in the corner. everyone avoids because he is a tedious boring know it all. I will tell you why he trolls here. His blog is an intellectual desert because of his faulty logic and he wants to be associated with a popular blog. He is more to be pitied than despised.
    Ho can anyone respect the opinion of a dog that returns to eat its own vomit.

    Just to be clear why I have written this, I remind the good people here at whispers Hall said he left whispers and now he is back
    Despite me having a dig, I never would wish anyone harm. I take that stuff very very seriously. Its not in my DNA. People dish out banter all the time, hey thats fine. There is a marked difference when you share something and the respond with intent and malice. Then they laugh it off, tell you to get over yourself, like its your problem with no apology or retraction whatsoever. I’m sorry, that is not acceptable. So hall fuck you…I would like you to take a good look at my Karma and think about why you are here and what you are.

  128. Ricky
    I just love the way that you entirely blow out of proportion what was a throw away remark, that was not even wishing you harm, I think by my back of the envelope calculation about twenty times that you have reiterated what is essentially the same comment. Every one of them attacking me personally. Its very dull stuff and you should have worked out by now that I am unmoved by your message.

    Min

    You would-have-to-be-kidding. On a similar “ilk” try Abbott’s many and various attempts “to manipulate public opinion through the MSM” being spreading lies and rumours, standing (proudly) in front of a sign stating Bob Brown’s B*tch, but most especially all those visual images eg holding a dead fish suggesting that he is somehow “the worker’s friend” while failing to provide one skerrick of detail, just improbable brain f*rts such as turning the boats around and “ripping up” the NBN.

    The allegation here is that Abbott is a puppet of Rupert Murdoch, and there is no evidence to substantiate that claim. You are attempting to conflate the long serries of public appearances that Abbott has made in an effort to rehabilitate the Coalition’s public image with the voters with this conspiracy claim and I don’t think you have succeeded in making your case.

    Möbius Ecko

    I think that what actually I said was “so long and thanks for all the fish”

  129. Iain, as per always you read into things which suit your own personal agenda. At no time has it been suggested that Abbott is a Murdoch-puppet, however you having suggested this perhaps there is some truth to YOUR RUMOUR.

    As the implication is obviously far beyond your ken, Abbott meeting regularly with representatives of the Murdoch media so as to thrash out strategy has a major implication: that the media is not the impartial observer/reporter of facts that they pretend to be.

  130. Your unmoved by anything hall you have no moral, principal or intestinal fortitude. Your attempts to laugh this off as a throwaway line and blow it off as me over reacting is a good example of what and who you are. You don’t even have the guts to admit that you are addicted to protagonist dramatic bullshit to make yourself feel tall. Your a disgraceful failure of a man who enjoys bullying people. We constantly ask what are you here? Ask yourself why have you returned. You are obviously mentally ill and again as I said before seek some fucking help. You twist things to make yourself always right. I pity that kid of yours, You would never have the balls to say that shit to me in person, why say it here; your a coward. Ugly inside and out…I don’t care if your moved or not, you’re a nobody. I do care that you are in my community, attacking people who are like minded with the single intention to spoil and antagonise people. For what you accomplish nothing? YOU ARE NOT ANDREW BOLT DICKHEAD GET THAT THROUGH YOUR DEFECTIVE BRAIN. Why don’t you just fuck off like you said you were going to do. No you return, why because you have a sick obsession. I will keep on reminding people what you are and what you said because you deserve everything you get…fuck you.

  131. Hall, no one here is interested in reading your metre-long trolls. Save yourself the time and embarrassment.

  132. Michael
    this thread is an interesting example of rumour run riot with wishful thinking and confirmation bias on social media and the only reason I am here is to explore that issue with logic and reason.

    If anyone is disrupting the thread its Ricky with his dull personal attacks upon me.

  133. Miglo
    March 5, 2013 @ 8:13 pm
    Iain, I’m convinced that you are here for the sole purpose of disrupting this thread.

    No this site. What has he added? Nothing he said his piece, he just keeps repeating himself. He is saying Bill and yourself are liars. I realy consider that maybe it was time he was sent to the naughty corner Migs. I for one am completely sick of this bloke. First , I’m nice, where are your facts?. Then for months on end the same old shit, opinion, rhetoric no facts. He is here to derail things. I am, as is everyone else at the point where we just scroll over his posts. He is not here to debate or enlighten. He is a nasty little troll. Ultimately it is your decision. He likes democracy, I say pick 10 or so people and vote or better still start a thread and ask if e should keep him here. Its takes a lot to piss me off. This guy is derailing this place and making him the topic of decent. I’m a bit over it, the insults, the antagonism and the disgraceful views.
    You may note that he has put it back on me again. This guy has no boundaries.

    For fuck sake this guy can’t even explain what he is. For his own good ban him and don’t encourage his addiction.
    Put it to a vote I say, lord of the flies his ass.

  134. Iain, I await with baited breath your attempt at reasoning and logic. You not only call authors here rumour mongers but make threats about “dangerous ground”.

  135. This comment from the same Crikey thread as BB’s is equally significant, and disturbing. (It was repeated a few comments under BB’s by Confessions, but I do not know whose comment it originally was.)

    One of the very “senior” journos we contacted confirmed that the stories start at News, then to the ABC to launder them clean (the ABC is “Respected” as a news source, after all), and then back to news and Fairfax, then out to the mugs.

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/03/02/seat-of-the-week-capricornia/?comment_page=37/#comment-1564226

  136. I have already said that I would take the same attitude to this story if it was about Gillard rather than Abbott

    Unless of course it was smear about her involvement with AWU

    Bagman Ralph Blewitt wants to reveal all in the Bruce Wilson – Julia Gillard AWU fraud scandal.
    http://iainhall.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/17175/

    Clearly there is more than a little pain in this story for Julia Gillard and the government that she leads and that brings me great joy.

    Yea, I believe ya 😉

    But as it happens I do not think that any senior player would risk being seen going cap in hand to the HQ of News ltd for any reason

    Nope 😉

    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/conspiracy-update/#comment-139396

    As I said, you are a walking, talking, typing hypocrit.

    this thread is an interesting example of rumour run riot with wishful thinking and confirmation bias

    😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

  137. Meanwhile, I have no idea if what this ‘journalists’ alleges is true or no. I just find it interesting that it agrees with what I ahve been saying for years now.

    We only need to look at the 457 stories today. Apparently, putting in place measure to ensure that Australian workers are chosen before looking for overseas workers is some form of a ‘dog whistle’, yet barely an eyelid is batted when morrison equates asylum seekers with sex offenders.

    It is more than passing strange that, until recently, the media have been happy to push the ‘protect Aussie jobs first’ line, until of course Labor does just that, and the msm, and the libs, in unison, cry racism.

    Yea, paranoid, maybe, but people like Leveson, Gretch and Ashby make it that way. Not only is there a history of this behavior, but what we see daily points directly towards ongoing evidence of this behavior.

  138. Min

    Iain, I await with baited breath your attempt at reasoning and logic.

    OK Min
    lets look at what we have here by way of evidence firstly

    We have the claim that “a senior member of the Press gallery” is the “off the record” source for the claim in question that its “off the record” means that this person is unwilling to prove the claim or put their name to it or provide any evidence to back up the story.
    Said anonymous bloggers now insist that because there was more than one of them who heard this story, and that they got the “source” to repeat it and to affirm its “truth” means that the original story is therefore proven, beyond all doubt.

    Now anyone with a background in the law will be familiar with the concept of hearsay, although many on this thread seem to be having a great deal of difficulty with the concept so here is a definition for you to work with. Now I know that this thread is not a court of law but having the same sort of evidential expectations on such claims in a discussion about an alleged conspiracy involving the leader of the opposition is entirely reasonable.

    You not only call authors here rumour mongers but make threats about “dangerous ground”.

    I have not been making any threats here, instead I have been trying to warn you and Michael that running with this story could attract the ire of others who may seek redress through the courts. Its a serious allegation and that you and he as publishers of the blog could be held liable. As this story has unfolded though I have seen just how flimsy and silly the whole conspiracy theory is and I think that it will be laughed at rather than inspire a writ so I withdraw the suggestion that there is any dangerous ground to be found here.

    Finally I was under the impression that you endorse robust debate and treating commentators equally I do not think that calling the propagators of rumours “rumour mongers” is either inaccurate, inappropriate, or even being insulting by the standards that you otherwise allow here,see the comments from Ricky above and note the level of straight out personal abuse that does not draw your ire.

  139. You are all wrong. The wonder that is reb, says that I am, not Iain, the one responsible for disrupting the threads.

    It appears to him and another, that I have no idea what I am about.

    Therefore, I must apoligise to all.

    How could I get it so wrong. Why, did I ever believe that one does not have the right, no the entitlement to say and disrupt sites.

    I am terribly sorry. Yes, reb, it is my fault, all my fault.

  140. Tom R
    You are comparing apples and oranges here. In the first instance I am expressing some mild amusement that a bad PM is having to twist and turn in a most undignified manor at revelations of her past behaviour and in the second I am expressing incredulity at the baseless accusations made about Tony Abbott. That you can’t tell the difference does you no credit.

  141. victoria
    Posted Monday, March 4, 2013 at 12:46 pm | PERMALINK
    Son of Foro

    It is the same Tony Knutt named in the original Summons by Ashby against Slipper . And now implicated in the Baillieu scandal

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/capital-circle/tony-nutt-to-be-director-general-of-victorian-cabinet-office-in-ted-baillieu-government/story-fn59nqgy-1226000063

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/03/02/seat-of-the-week-capricornia/?comment_page=37/#comment-1564226

  142. I’ll help you get a job … I know Gina
    TED Baillieu’s top adviser repeatedly promised a former adviser to Police Minister Peter Ryan he would help him get a new job – revelations at odds with the Premier’s assurances.

    In a phone conversation recorded on July 10, Mr Baillieu’s chief of staff, Tony Nutt, even told Tristan Weston he knew Gina Rinehart, indicating he’d approach her to give him work.

    Mr Weston said he was interested in doing security assessment work in the mining industry, and Mr Nutt said he was happy to oblige.

    “There’s a lot of … people … I know in the mining industry … I’m a Perth boy originally, you know. I mean, I know Gina Rinehart,” Mr Nutt said in the call.

    “I’ve met a lot them, and the ones I don’t know, I know the bloke who knows the bloke who set up the company 30 years ago, or something. So you know, I know a lot of those people.”

    The call to Mr Weston came a day after Mr Weston told Liberal Party

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/ted-baillieus-top-aide-tony-nutt-pledged-support-to-former-adviser-tristan-weston/story-e6frf7kx-1226589569246

  143. In the first instance I am expressing some mild amusement that a bad PM is having to twist and turn in a most undignified manor at revelations of her past behaviour that are baseless accusations and in the second I am expressing incredulity at the baseless accusations made about Tony Abbott.

    That you can’t tell the difference does you no credit.

    😉

  144. Tom R, how dare you take Iain to task. Don’t you know he is never wromg. It is us, who criticise him that are at fault. Don’t you know, he is entitled to come here and say what he likes.

  145. Although it looks like my formatting has gone awry, but you get the picture.

    That you find baseless allegations amusing on one side, and so outrageous on another is illuminating. That what BB has passed on is an observation from a senior journalist, and another an actual allegation without merit but broadcast widely from his safe seat in America doesn’t seem to worry you in slightest.

    Personally, I find all of this ‘innuendo’ sickening, But, when you are fighting in the gutter, it’s time to use mud. Just remember who stepped down there in the first place.

  146. Don’t you know, he is entitled to come here and say what he likes.

    I don’t know about ‘what he likes’, it would be nice to have some level of common decency. ian has shown he cannot do that.

    He is welcome to voice his political opinions. It isn’t our problem that he looks more and more hypocritical the more he does this. And crying like a stuck pig when this is pointed out just raises the hypocrisy bar.

    For a long time now, the anti Government sectors have run on fear and smear, even though the evidence points the other way. The outrage shown over a story which to me has been self evident for a long time is just laughable. If there was anything to laugh about. Leveson certainly isn’t laughing.

  147. FU & TomR

    Its all about the facts and there are some facts to support the Slater and Gordon questions, no mater how flimsy or shrouded in the mist of time they are they are far more substantive than the “facts” that underlie the conspiracy story here.

    That is indisputable even by the proponents of the story.

    TomR

    You give away just why you believe this wild imagining:

    For a long time now, the anti Government sectors have run on fear and smear, even though the evidence points the other way. The outrage shown over a story which to me has been self evident for a long time is just laughable. If there was anything to laugh about. Leveson certainly isn’t laughing.

    The phrase I have emboldened is clear evidence that you are believing this story because of your confirmation bias rather than any factual or substantive evidence.

  148. The simple fact that for a long time now I have been pointing to clear cases of collusion between the msm and the liberals doesn’t make the story told by a journalist right or wrong ian, but it rings true to me.

    The phrase I have emboldened should help you understand the passage. Or not.

    Dare I ask, the ‘evidence’ about AWU? All we learned was …..that Gillard was a lawyer? Nothing said since has exposed anything of any substance or actual implication. All it is is scraping over every detail of every event, and trying to find an occasion when the PM has stated something that, removed of all context, might imply something else. I mean, the loto accused the PM of criminal behavior over the whinings of someone like blewitt, who could or couldn’t have met with liberal mps, but no-one cares. Gillard didn’t open a file (pretty standard practice apparently for smaller jobs in larger companies that are not billed)

    But, keep the opinionating over what ‘could’ have happened there, while you continue to have conniptions over a statement from a senior journalist over what ‘could’ have happened elswhere

  149. Debate by definition requires the parties to make opposing points. Dull, boring repetition of Liberal party slogans such as “a bad PM” is not a discussion point without having some substance to it. In other words Hall, either enter into a valid debate by proving your points or —> there is the door.

  150. Tom R
    I have repeatedly conceded that the evidence fro the AWU stuff is weak, which only goes to show that the evidence for this conspiracy is actually weaker than that so by all logic if you are prepared to defend Gillard by citing the paucity of evidence of her wrongdoing then by the same token you should be entirely dismissive of this silly story.
    as for the “statement from a senior journalist” unless its on the record and he is willing to put his name to it we are all entitled to believe that it does not in fact have any veracity at all.

  151. Tom, in addition something which might have happened in the 1990’s while Gillard was a lawyer has little bearing on why Abbott deserves to be Prime Minister in the year 2013.

    This is one of those cases where the media tries to instil sexist suggestions: note that when speaking about the incident MSM insists on calling Bruce Wilson her “boyfriend” and not her partner. Have you ever heard a male MP’s partner referred to as “a girlfriend” rather than as a partner?

  152. Iain, as you clearly believe that the story has no likelihood whatsoever of having even one single element of truth to it..then why are you bothering to continuously comment on it?

    Unnamed sources is a valid journalistic tool which is used as a convention by the MSM and is just as valid at this place.

  153. if you are prepared to defend Gillard by citing the paucity of evidence of her wrongdoing then by the same token you should be entirely dismissive of this silly story.

    I have stated in this very thread that I don’t put any credence to any ‘hearsay’, but, after years of attacks on the Government from nothing BUT hearsay, I call open slather on it. You wanted a smear, lets go for it.

    What I have said is that what has been reported is nothing but a confirmation of what I have been saying for a long time. I am not saying it is totally accurate, but I am saying that it fits in with my observations on patterns of collusion.

    I have repeatedly conceded that the evidence fro the AWU stuff is weak

    Even if that is true, it hasn’t stopped you from jumping on for the ride.

  154. Have you ever heard a male MP’s partner referred to as “a girlfriend” rather than as a partner?

    Another low in an already record low Min

  155. Min
    like the curates egg there may well be some truthful elements to the story told by your anonymous friends, but for those of us outside that comfy loop have no way at all of judging what parts of this claim are true and without “proof” why should we believe this story?
    You and its other proponents say that you know and trust those who have told you this tale, which is an appeal to their authority, an authority that has no substance for those who don’t know their secret identities, secondly they themselves are making an appeal to the authority of their source by insisting that the source is a “senior journalist” which they won’t name.
    see here just why such arguments fail:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

  156. Iain, as you clearly believe that the story has no likelihood whatsoever of having even one single element of truth to it..then why are you bothering to continuously comment on it?

    Exactly, Min. I for one am getting very bored with it.

  157. Coincidence?

    A couple of weeks ago, Labor announce a crack down on 457 Visa’a,citing evidence that they are being abused. Nothing really said about it.

    Return to now, and scott morrison equates asylum seekers with sex offenders, and all of a sudden, both sides are playing the race card.

    If this is the alleged dog whistle by Labor, why was it not cited as being that when it was first announced? Why did the assembled throng wait until a xenophobic statement by morrison, which has been supported by abbott, appeared to cry ‘dog whistle’?

    Yea, no collusion going on here I can see 😉

  158. I for one am getting very bored with it.

    I’m just astounded at the rank hypocrisy being displayed by ian. And the apparent obliviousness to it as well. Now that is what I call blinkered.

  159. Migs, Iain tried the same thing on my latest post on the same subject, and after he had his say numerous times, I just asked him to not reply again on that thread, as he had been given a fair hearing and I was losing patience.

    Cheers 😀

  160. There are only unfounded and unproven allegations, innuendo and gossip in the AWU matter.

    More than one investigation over twenty years has revealed any criminal behaviour by the PM.

    There is even no proven evidence that her partner committed any crime.

    Why his signature was not even on that trust document.

    Any proven evidence that is available, points to the innocence of the PM. She is till respected by the chambers where works for, to the extent they have named a room after her, and invited her back as welcome guest each year.

    It appears that many businesses paid money, through Blewitt to buy industrial peace, and gain advantages over their opponents, at the expense of the worker.

    That has not sopped many continuing with the myth that the Opposition and MSM have created.

    Why not, those who condemn Labor and this PM, turn their eye to the present allegations that appear to be backed up by evidence to that of Sinodinos and Nutt. Both members of Mr. Howard’s cabinet. Why not look at Nutt and his involvement, which was mentioned in the Ashby court documents. Yes, Nutt was the bloke that was going to get Ashby and Doane jobs. Seems that was his speciality. In the tapes released, he promised to do the same for a Victorian cop.

    Yes, Iain, I might not know what I am about and out of my depth, but how about talking about some of the allegations being made against the Coalition, that are happening today but in the distant past.

    Why not look at all the present day political scandals that have been a mark of Cando government in Queensland. There is enough there to write a post each day for weeks.

    Write about how Mr. Abbott changes what he says each day. He has a version on everything for all seasons.

    Demand that something be done about the shocking way we treat asylum seekers. Demand that all parties involved get them self-back to the table and come up with a more humane policy.

    Demand that the MSM begin asking questions that many want answers for. The first should be what the waste that you are going to cut is.

    Where are the questions on his Direct Action? Do as the interviewer did last nice, with a Coalition senator. That is not the question I asked. You are confusing me. That is not fact. Just a little of that will do.

    Stop describing every announcement of the PMs as spruiking. Once the ABC was very particular about how the English language was used. Seem that the standard is now in the gutter.

    Start using the correct titles, when addressing and talking about the PM. Just PM Gillard said…will do.

    Iain, you say that you treat both the PM and Abbott the same. It would be wonderful if you began doing this.

    Yes, the PM is not perfect. Funny that, as she is like all of us, only humane. The PM is not as bad as you portray either.,

  161. Migs, you have had some success in this story spreading. It is showing up across twitter, on many sites.

    Goes to say, how easy it is to spread rumours in this day and age.

    Seems that many are taking it at face value. Could that be, that many have a low opinion of the man, that they would not put anything about him.

    There is some evidence that the story is probable. When one listed to the daily stunt, then tune into the MSM, one is met with the words of Abbott being played over and over by many so called journalists, long before Abbott has spoken.

    Just watching the PM. Would advise many to take the opportunity to listen to what she has to say. Not rely on the MSM interpretation of what she says and thinks.

    Like the comment she just made, if we trained nurses, we would not have to rely on 457 visas.

    The one thing you do not get from the PM three words slogans and then flee. The PM is standing there, answering all that is aimed at her.

    The PM does indeed have the measure of the press. The whine in their voices prove that.

  162. As hall is consistently bringing nothing more to the table but obstinate repetitive parroting and we get the fact that he disagrees I suggest that nobody fuels this guys addiction. I am beyond bored with him.
    Seeing he is “amused” by pictures of the PM with dido’s and such, Like Truth
    here is my last word on the subject

    http://bit.ly/10c2cXM

  163. What is ignored by some, is their opinion carries no more weight than others that take the time to comment.

    What is ignored by some, is that all comments deserve to be respected.

    Yes, one should agree to disagree and leave that at that. We do not need lectures from any. Most are too long in the tooth for that.

    If some cannot see where they insult and upset, I suggest that should be their problem, not ours.

    Geoff Shaw is leaving the Liberal Party in Victoria. Story getting better.

    Most pull back, when many say their comments are not welcome. Not this one, it just fires him up more.

    I suspect most do not question his right to say as he wants, but are plain sick of hearing it over every post that is put up, until the paste becomes about him, and a couple of fellow travelers.

    Are we here to give him and fellow travelers a platform to spread his hate of the PM from. That is all it is about.

    We have no doorstop from Abbott yet. Has attended similar meeting with the PM

    Then he doesn’t have much luck lately with his doorstops. Either contradicts himself or other shadow ministers.

    When Iain I cornered, he retorts he is addressing the topic.

    If so, why the long responses that names every one, Why not just address what they have said. No need for names or comments on their mental abilities and character.

    What I didn’t notice except for a couple, who also do the same, anyone rushing to his defence.

    I am one who is quite happy to go to his site, if I wish to hear what he has to say

    No need for him to hog this one.

    I have said elsewhere and been condemned as not knowing what I am about and the right for them to say,what they want, every post on these two sites ends up at this spot, talking about and replying to Iain.

    Is that the aim of Migs, to give Iain and his ilk a platform to spruik their venom.

    Victorian government could be in strife. Only has one seat majority. Shaw has moved to cross bench.

    NPC Gender Agenda with Bishop, minister for health and others.

  164. Michael
    Are you really going to be party to Ricky and FU/CU propagating what amounts to a rather childish personal attack and defamation against me and which greatly lowers the tone of this blog?

  165. So let me get this right. It’s ok for the PM bits its not ok for you? Interesting philosophy. Fed up, sometimes one must resort to different means to expose supreme hypocracy a point I hope is not lost on you. Interesting use of the word childish a d tone 🙄

  166. Ricky, I thought you were having a go at me.

    Do not worry Rick, I am the one to blame for all that is wrong. If I go, or if Migs decides to bar me, as they are asking, all will be well.

  167. Your conspiracy to derail this thread by circular division and laboring the same point , like your hypocrisy has been revealed. You just see yourself on the point of a Dick, not the actual point.

  168. Min
    I have repeatedly held my tongue in response to Ricky’s endless rants about me here and elsewhere and if he will “play nice” then so shall I but he is the one in need of disciple and a bit of maturity here.

  169. Iain, you are here to derail..your tactics such as lengthy comments addressing people individually instead of respecting the author’s topic are well known. I would advise all to ignore unless there is a point made where the person feels honour bound to correct a lie or distortion.

  170. Scroll the Inain loopy trailer trash poor of an excuse for an Australian..Inain 🙄 ….the embarrassment of the fifth estate……an embarrassment to the Southern Cross Flag waverers society 🙄 ………… Inain, your not unlike a weevil…… a cereal pest 😀 . just say’n,…….. while waiting for Migs to give you a ‘spray’ …. ( So Iain, ‘this’ is how you ‘spend’ your one time around.. 😯 )

  171. Have you taken the time to re-read the thread?

    I did. You were just as hypocritical and pointless the second time around

  172. Trolls such as Hall are inherently dishonest, as illustrated by their use of flawed logic, lies and misrepresentations as they attempt to “argue” obstruct and divert any discussion.

    A corollary, and consequence of such dishonesty, is that the trolls (wrongly) assume that such behaviour is universal, and judge others, according to their own “standards”, assuming that others are just as dishonest in their arguments.

    Projection at work.

  173. as they attempt to “argue” obstruct

    should be
    as they attempt to “argue” obstruct…

  174. pterosaur1

    I invite you to look at my discussion here about the topic and explain how and where I have been dishonest.
    Hint: I haven’t been dishonest at all .

  175. Iain, I know you have stated that it is not your intention to disrupt any of our posts, but your presence here gains nothing for any of us.

  176. Not even it now occurring to you that you need more evidence to substantiate this story?
    I would have thought that it was a good thing to consider when we have any story offered to us on the internet. I am all for scrutinising all politicians and the machinations to both obtain and remain in power but you would have to admit that this story is very flimsy, Now I know I have kept banging on about the lack of evidence but we have to have the evidence, the only thing of any substance on this entire thread is a picture purporting to be Tony Abbott about to use an escalator, It might be Abbott but its hard to tell from the back of his head, heck it might even be in the News building but that too can’t be certain either from that one shot. Now even if both of those things are assumed to be correct in relation to the photo that photo does not establish at all the claim of “weekly private meetings”. There could be entirely benign reasons for Abbott being in that building occasionally. The photo is not
    I understand that you and so many here want the story to be true but wanting something to be true will not make it so.

  177. Well here’s another unsubstantiated story doing the social media rounds at the moment. It seems a journo was paying housos to heckle the PM.

    It’s apparent that the tattooed lady who bad mouthed the PM was seen to be slipped $50 by a journo. More on tonight’s news.

    Of course the MSM aren’t in league with Abbott in trying to bring Gillard down because they are so scared their puppet’s strings might break and he will be left to think on his own.

    Says an awful lot about how bad Abbott is as a leader that he needs this large scale constant assistance from the media and others to get over the line. He certainly can’t do it on his or his parties merits.

  178. Möbius Ecko

    If your story is true all that it proves is that the journalist in question was seeking s juicy sound bite.
    If you think Abbott NEEDS stunts like that you must have rocks in your head and be unaware of the state of the Polls.

  179. You know what Tom, I could be totally wrong about the AWU matter I have no trouble admitting that however even you have to admit that the allegation against Gillard is more substantive than this thing. Now I have commented on and enjoyed the whole AWU saga I have not ever claimed that the whole thing is unambiguously true. In any event I am also not appealing to any authority here but logic and primacy of having evidence.

  180. Says an awful lot about how bad Abbott is as a leader that he needs this large scale constant assistance from the media and others to get over the line. He certainly can’t do it on his or his parties merits.

    To get 50% of the vote the lousy Liberals need 90% of the news media doing propaganda for them.

    If there were a level media playing field, the Liberals would never win another election.

    You watch their embedded media mouthpices’ hostility to The Guardian when it starts publishing online here…

  181. you have to admit that the allegation against Gillard is more substantive than this thing.

    No, unless you can actually name an allegation against Gillard. Everything is just Gossip, with no real aim but to smear. At least this article has an accusation, and specific accounts of where and from what type of source. The more you actually think about it, the more this one stands up.

    Now I have commented on and enjoyed the whole AWU saga I have not ever claimed that the whole thing is unambiguously true

    Perhaps not, I wouldn’t know, but you haven’t treated it with the same attitude at all, have you? As evidenced by my link above. Which makes your statement previously about your attitudinal intentions to be quite incorrect. To put it mildly.

  182. Not to blow my own trumpet, but I saw the link between the Murdoch meeting and the anti NBN announcement almost immediately (just from intuition alone). It’s no secret that Murdoch hates the internet — it’s the medium which is killing his print media (and TV too) and it’s the medium which he has continually failed to break into (in any monopolising way, which, let’s face it, is his obsession). Also, the internet provides MORE INFORMATION than print and TV ever will (particularly information of certain political persuasions which he doesn’t agree with) … subsequently, the last thing he wants is for this medium (which is damaging him business-wise and in many areas contradicting his view of the world in ways he’s never seen before) to grow stronger and be more accessible to more people. Don’t forget, Murdoch isn’t just a corporate tycoon, he’s also a politician — an extremely far-right, conservative one — and he’s found a way in which he can be one without officially running for office.

    It’s not just Australia, he does this everywhere. See the doco ‘Outfoxed’ which displays how biased his views are in American politics, and which received little to no advertising at all in Australia — just like with the Phone Hacking scandal, Australia was the last country to mention it in the media. He owns nearly all of the media in this country anyway, and he wants to buy the rest. Howard tried to sell him the ABC and I assume Abbott will do the same (which might explain why the ABC is following much of the MSM message, bullyboy tactics, etc), and since he failed to win the last election and can’t destroy the NBN, he’ll just do everything he can to sell it all to him.

    Remember when Abbott first became leader of the Liberal Party (BY ONE VOTE!!!!) he said : “Judge me from this day forward, not on my past.” This sound familiar???? Let me remind you, back when Mark Latham became Labor Leader in 2003 (ALSO BY ONE VOTE!!!) he said the same thing virtually, however the MSM NEVER stopped bringing up his past, they also constantly implied how divided the Labor Party were because of the one vote margin … the total mirror opposite to how they’ve treated Abbott … FOR GOD’S SAKE when Mark Reilly put the first and only bit of pressure applied to him (re: the ‘shit happens’ remark) the entire MSM were rambling on about how “the media was being too harsh on poor Tony Abbott” … what a pathetic, biased, fascistic load of bollocks!

    Remember when Crean was Labor Leader and was doing poorly in the polls (in the preferred PM aspect) but the 2 party preferred basis was good? The MSM frequently implied how that was irrelevant and didn’t matter because all that mattered was who you wanted to lead the country … well, for roughly a year Gillard was thumping Abbott in the preferred PM aspect but 2 party preferred wasn’t good … you know how this goes, don’t you? The MSM flip-flopped and now state that preferred PM doesn’t mean anything and that it’s the team that counts … and they actually have the F***ING audacity to criticise Labor politicians for using spin. Again, what a load of pathetic, biased, fascistic bollocks!

    I have a very reliable source who works in Canberra who states that for years Margie Abbott has wanted a divorce because she can’t stand Tony and his sexist views. But Tony, being the good Catholic boy, doesn’t believe in divorce and therefore will not grant her one. So instead, they’ve been living separate lives for many, MANY years. And now she’s been roped into his campaign because she’s probably worth 2 or 3 percent of the vote … who knows? perhaps he’s promised her that in return for help in the campaign he’ll finally grant her the divorce she’s wanted for so long. So, it’s okay to criticise Gillard because she’s in a de facto, but it’s forbidden to even raise this very legitimate question: are Tony and Margie locked in a loveless marriage?

    (whew! glad I got that off my chest!)

  183. Every time I see Abbott and his wife together, her body language seems to be saying, be a good boy. I get this feeling she is going to give him a pat on the head.

    The family photo ops just do not look natural.

    Take ones mind back to photos of Rudd with his family, one could sense the concerns that his wife and kids had for him.

    I do not get this with Abbott. The girls may as well be props cut out of cardboard, standing behind him.

    It would be much cheaper for the taxpayer, if the photographers just change the scenery behind him, than flying him all over the country.

    No matter where he is, it is the same worn out slogans and stunts. How many times can “carbon tax” repeated.

    Especially when business is asking that we move on to the price on carbon emission quicker.

  184. Pingback: Fair media Alliance is One Week Old | Fair Media Alliance

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s