Gillard's AWU/Wilson past about to haunt her?

[harmesy 37]

Irrelevant to this topic are, amongst other things: Thomson, Arbib, Obeid, Williamson, .

Don't you get it?

I am giving you too much credit intelligence wise obviously if I have to join the dots for you. It is all "mates rates" re corruption. They are all linked.

How did Gillard get in power and become prime minister?

Have you heard of Mark Arbib- he gave her the job.

How did Arbib and Williamson and Obeid get their wealth?

Who paid for Thomson's lawyer bills? the NSW Labor Party as instigated by Arbib. Is this too complicated for you? Who protected Thomson in parliament for over 1 year ? Gillard...why did she protect him? as she had links with Wilson who had done the same type of stuff. Don't you get it? surely a fanboy such as yourself can see it now?


They are all rats swimming around beating corruption charges as the law, and media people (who are not doing their job -eg Grattan, Malcolm Farr, Lenore Taylor) are indirectly protecting them. Where is a newspaper article from Grattan and Taylor critical (without mentioning Abbott) of Labor corruption?


If it wasn't so serious I would find it sickening, but the corrupt prosper as we are seeing right now with Gillard and her mates as everyone closes ranks. Corruption is widespread within the Labor party but if you would prefer to be blinkered and not discuss it as it deals with subjects you would prefer go away- so be it. That is on your conscience as you go to vote for Labor at the next election.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/link-by-link-the-powerbrokers-of-the-right-emerge-20111121-1nr08.html

 

[Brown Bottle]

Again, you're taking liberties and connecting dots that don't connect. Sure, Arbib was a powerbroker, but I think it's trite to suggest that he just decided JG should be PM and snapped his fingers. As for how they all made their money... well it may be through legitimate endeavours and it may not. I'm happy for them all to be called to account, just as I'd be happy for many on the other side of the fence to answer to the poor old ACCC (if it had any teeth).

I don't believe I've stated anywhere that those issues don't warrant investigation, but they are unrelated to the topic of this thread.

 

[Pessimistic]

I am sure that is what you fanboys would prefer and that it is all covered up. Whitewater is your hope I am sure.

However, the EVIDENCE is already out there with Gillard, as it is with Thomson, as it is with Mark Abib, as it is with Eddie Obeid, as it is with Williamson. It will be fascinating to see if the law does there bit or will they be protected as they are powerful labor politicians.I reckon Abib will get off, the others...we will have to wait and see.

Gillard created faulty accounts, kept it hidden from her partners, there is documented proof that she went to WA to ensure people signed up to Wilson's dodgy fund etc etc,. You can't back peddle out of this evidence once it is there. Gillard has consistently lied on everything including the AWU account.

The only thing Clinton consistently lied about was oral sex. Also, they didn't find any evidence that could implicate him, so really the comparison is null and void despite the wishes of the fanboys.

Tricky dicky was stuffer for things he did/controlled while in power not 20 years ago.

The Clintons kept bad company and did some legal work - thats the corrolation

 

[Pessimistic]

I am sure that is what you fanboys would prefer and that it is all covered up. Whitewater is your hope I am sure.

However, the EVIDENCE is already out there with Gillard, as it is with Thomson, as it is with Mark Abib, as it is with Eddie Obeid, as it is with Williamson. It will be fascinating to see if the law does there bit or will they be protected as they are powerful labor politicians.I reckon Abib will get off, the others...we will have to wait and see.

Gillard created faulty accounts, kept it hidden from her partners, there is documented proof that she went to WA to ensure people signed up to Wilson's dodgy fund etc etc,. You can't back peddle out of this evidence once it is there. Gillard has consistently lied on everything including the AWU account.

The only thing Clinton consistently lied about was oral sex. Also, they didn't find any evidence that could implicate him, so really the comparison is null and void despite the wishes of the fanboys.

Tricky dicky was stuffed for things he did/controlled while in power not 20 before.

The Clintons kept bad company and did some legal work - thats the corrolation

 

[cancat]

They waited until they actually uncovered a crime before publishing a word too, they didn't report innuendo and smear on the basis of "questions" that need asking. The asked the questions, got the answers and THEN went public. You know, what real journalists, not gutter dwelling gossip mongers, do.

There are some similarities with Watergate. The US media did not "crack the case", but they kept it alive in the public eye for long enough that evidence accumulated for different charges to be laid and the full extent of the cover up to be revealed.

There are not many real investigative journalists around these days. Hedley Thomas has uncovered plenty of new evidence and over the last few month's has changed the public's perception of the issue from Gillard's narrative "I was young and naive" to a quite detailed analysis of her involvement. Michael Smith continues to gather new evidence and post it on his blog. Evidence like tape transcripts, sworn affidavits, first hand testimony. I believe it was his report to the Victorian Police of an alleged crime that initiated their current investigation.

Having said that, I doubt there is any "smoking gun" that will kill Gillard. It mainly comes down to questions about her character. Her actions saw fit for her law firm to lose trust in her and subject her to a long tape recorded interview. She appears to not care in the slightest about union member's money going missing. And it is clear that she has been evasive about many aspects of her involvement.

 

[Dry Rot]

There are some similarities with Watergate. The US media did not "crack the case", but they kept it alive in the public eye for long enough that evidence accumulated for different charges to be laid and the full extent of the cover up to be revealed.

There are not many real investigative journalists around these days. Hedley Thomas has uncovered plenty of new evidence and over the last few month's has changed the public's perception of the issue from Gillard's narrative "I was young and naive" to a quite detailed analysis of her involvement. Michael Smith continues to gather new evidence and post it on his blog. Evidence like tape transcripts, sworn affidavits, first hand testimony. I believe it was his report to the Victorian Police of an alleged crime that initiated their current investigation.

Having said that, I doubt there is any "smoking gun" that will kill Gillard. It mainly comes down to questions about her character. Her actions saw fit for her law firm to lose trust in her and subject her to a long tape recorded interview. She appears to not care in the slightest about union members going missing. And it is clear that she has been evasive about many aspects of her involvement.

There are some interesting FOI requests to the WA cops.

 

[harmesy 37]

Here's a nice PR piece from Gillard's PR Consultancy firm (otherwise known as The Age).​

​

Michelle Grattan - the best PR consultant the Labor Party can buy.​

​

Who would have thought the Age would be back on the old gender issue...because apparently if you are a female you should vote labor as Julia isn't a mysoginist, and Abbott is (according to Julia anyway)​

All this gender stuff was front page news on the same day that a newspoll came out..what a coincidence..wow! It is much better in this article to refer to a november poll especially as public relations consultants you have to refer to old news if it is good news.​

​

Anyway- apparently corruption (eg Thomson and Williamson) and links to corruption (eg Gillard) is no longer important to voters (at least 35% of voters say go ahead with corruption- we will vote for the Labor Party anyway). "Corruption is ok -we approve" is the new catchphrase at The Age.​

​

​

PM cosies up to mummy bloggers

Date
December 10, 2012
Michelle Grattan

Julia Gillard. Photo: Peter Rae
JULIA Gillard will host about 25 ''mummy'' and other bloggers who write on the internet for women at Kirribilli House, as she gears up to use gender issues to maximum advantage in the coming election year.
These sites reach about 2.5 million people. Similar sites were important in US President Barack Obama's successful appeal to female voters in his re-election campaign this year.
The Monday function follows Ms Gillard's previous morning tea with mummy bloggers in June, and comes after Labor strategists increasingly have seen gender working for Ms Gillard and against Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, especially since the PM's ''misogyny'' speech in October, which received international coverage.
The November Nielsen poll again highlighted that Ms Gillard does much better among women than among men.
Labor's primary vote was 34 per cent, but 36 per cent among women and 31 per cent among men. The PM's approval rating among women was 52 per cent, and only 43 per cent with men. On preferred PM, she was favoured by 54 per cent of women to 47 per cent of men.
Mr Abbott, in contrast, had an approval rating of only 31 per cent among women, compared with 40 per cent among men; just 38 per cent of women, but 45 per cent of men, preferred him as PM.

Next year's campaign will have centre stage several issues with particular resonance among women, including education, childcare, disability insurance and parental leave, on which Mr Abbott is offering a highly generous scheme.
The gender question has also become entwined with the character issue in Labor's attacks on Mr Abbott, so is likely to be more important at this election than in 2010.
Among the news sites represented at the prime ministerial drinks will be Fairfax's EssentialBaby, the largest online parenting site in the country; iVillage, for which Mamamia, created by Mia Freedman has the local licence from the US site; Women's Agenda, created by Crikey journalist Angela Priestley; Kidspot, a News Ltd site that aims to simplify parenting and offer mothers a place to talk to each other; and the Fairfax site Daily Life.
Among others invited are Eden Riley whose blog was named by the Sydney Writers' Centre as Australia's best blog for 2012; the mother of four boys, one with special needs, who writes allconsuming .com.au; Mrs Woog, named in the top 50 Kidspot Australian bloggers for 2011; Nicole Avery, whose site gives tips for organising the chaos of family life; and the writer of My Mummy Daze, who deals with juggling motherhood and a family business.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-cosies-up-to-mummy-bloggers-20121209-2b3gm.html#ixzz2EgNkHuxe

 

[Pessimistic]

Copy a successful election strategy ? the absolute hide of some people !!!!

Threading together some interest groups - sounds like a strategy Howard would approve of too

 

[harmesy 37]

I missed the part in that, where you showed that the ALP was controlling the media, and that the statistics are false compared to your findings from a reliable source?
And you clearly missed this gem of journalism that you are so ardent to support.... http://www.news.com.au/national/pm-...o-the-lodge-menu/story-fndo4eg9-1226516662829

This story gave reason to have a headliner of "Gillard Eats Victims" ......

The Age used statistics from a November Nielsen poll. Why refer to an OLD poll ? Why not refer to a poll from 2008, 2007 or any other year or month if you are going backwards in time?

There was a new poll which was more current that Grattan completely ignored as the figures weren't favourable for her public relations client (the labor party) and because it was commissioned by another paper.

The so-called "gender issue" is being fostered by papers like this based on false premises - eg Gillard's assertion that Abbott hates women. Show me the evidence and make your claims credible. Instead Grattan wants to spread "smears" to follow the language of her idol Julia Gillard that there is a "gender-issue" and the more it is discussed by her the more her sychophants (the age readers) pick it up.


In more news in today -another person linked to Labor corruption had no idea that 7.5 million was put in her account. Julia Gillard had no idea she was setting up a slush fund for her boyfriend apparently and this young lady had no idea that she was had Obeid's dirty money in her account, it is amazing how little all these people know when it comes to money.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...5m-in-my-account/story-e6freuzi-1226535722468


Grattan's new catchphrase is "Corruption is ok, we approve, go for it Labor Party"

 

[King Elvis]

I find the entire gender issue to be a pretty disgraceful fabrication.

 

[Pie eyed]

I find the entire gender issue to be a pretty disgraceful fabrication.

Point being?
I find the entire Coalition platform a total fabrication. Unfortunately our media is so starved of content and/or talent they will give any idiot and their "policy" airtime for a chance to continue to exist, as irrelevant as they are.
Abbott and his cronies are the politics version of "X-factor" contestants with slightly less credibility.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Both were shockers NB Howard and his brother. Relevance? Do these past dodgy actions make Gillard's any better?

Why do you ALP fanbois continue to fall into this stupid trap?

I was never comfortable with the ALP's attempts to damage Howard though his business involvement (vaguely shady as it may have been) with his brother. Same goes for the AWB oil for wheat 'scandal'. Sure, I loathe Howard and the conservatism he stands for, and it is true that there were more legs in the the AWB scandal than the Gillard AWU issue. But that is beside the point. I dislike more watching any opposition rely soley on smear and scandal, regardless of the party or persuasion. I especially detest it when the smear cannot be backed up by real legal process (yet this is the real nature of the 'smear'). I loathe smear - it is the lowest form of opposition. We have seen far too much of this lamentable strategy from the current opposition. I say either develop some alternative policy or **** off. ATM the Coalition are just wasting our time and money on potential scandals that might get them into power.

 

[Pie eyed]

I was never comfortable with the ALP's attempts to damage Howard though his business involvement (vaguely shady as it may have been) with his brother. Same goes for the AWB oil for wheat 'scandal'. Sure, I loathe Howard and the conservatism he stands for, and it is true that there were more legs in the the AWB scandal than the Gillard AWU issue. But that is beside the point. I dislike more watching any opposition rely soley on smear and scandal, regardless of the party or persuasion. I especially detest it when the smear cannot be backed up by real legal process (yet this is the real nature of the 'smear'). I loathe smear - it is the lowest form of opposition. We have seen far too much of this lamentable strategy from the current opposition. I say either develop some alternative policy or **** off. ATM the Coalition are just wasting our time and money on potential scandals that might get them into power.

Howard was and is a liar pure and simple, on par with any other leader, but his biggest crime was murdering Australian soldiers to ingratiate himself with the US, mindlessly and fraudulently involving our country in the illegal invasion of another sovereign state.
He single-handedly destroyed our standing as a peaceful country for personal gain.

 

[Dry Rot]

Howard was and is a liar pure and simple, on par with any other leader, but his biggest crime was murdering Australian soldiers to ingratiate himself with the US, mindlessly and fraudulently involving our country in the illegal invasion of another sovereign state.
He single-handedly destroyed our standing as a peaceful country for personal gain.

What was shadow minister Rudd's policy at that time?

 

[Pie eyed]

What was shadow minister Rudd's policy at that time?

I doubt that it was to felate the nearest US politician.

 

[Dry Rot]

I doubt that it was to felate the nearest US politician.

Check it out mate before you post that crap.

 

[Pie eyed]

I posted Howard's actions.
Whether you think it's crap is no concern to me.

 

[Dry Rot]

I posted Howard's actions.
Whether you think it's crap is no concern to me.

What was the ALP's position then on going into Iraq?

 

[medusala]

What was the ALP's position then on going into Iraq?

Outsource it to the French and Russians. Oh so cunning.

 

[GuruJane]

I doubt that it was to felate the nearest US politician.

 

[Grin]

Had the Labor opposition at the time been lied to about WMDs like the Australian public?

The fact is that Howard's lies led to the death of our soldiers.
Something which Liberal Party drones on this thread seem to think is a bit of a giggle.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Had the Labor opposition at the time been lied to about WMDs like the Australian public?

The fact is that Howard's lies led to the death of our soldiers.
Something which Liberal Party drones on this thread seem to think is a bit of a giggle.

Can I question this?

I was under the impression there were no Australian soldier deaths in Iraq, except for the one guy who accidentally shot himself while fooling around with his gun. But none due to enemy action.

 

[Gough]

Caesar Isn't it about time this thread was shut? Even Mike Smith seems to have given up on it.

 

[Dry Rot]

Caesar Isn't it about time this thread was shut? Even Mike Smith seems to have given up on it.

Maybe wait until the Vic cops finish their investigation?

 

[Gough]

Maybe wait until the Vic cops finish their investigation?

Tell me man, what are the Victorian cops going to find?