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

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Joined
Sep 21, 2009
Posts
8,817
Likes
7,223
AFL Club
St Kilda
All three - Gillard-Craig Thomson and Obeid are up to their necks in corruption, yet somehow Gillard has earned the right to lead their party. Why not give Thomson a go at the top job? It is a merry go round of ex-union officials/mates who lead the Labor Party.

I would disagree with your comment. I don't think Gillard is fit to lead the Labor Party. Her antics in parliament only further demonstrate the bile and muck that she brings to politics. "Smear and mud buckets" etc- I swear on Thursday she mentioned those words 50 times. How many times were Julie Bishop's questions answered? none.

What qualifications has Gillard brought to the job prior to entering politics? She is qualified in setting up fraudulent funds that distributed fraudulent money to her mates (oh, apparently she didn't know it was happening/i believe fish jump to the moon too). She cost her company a major account and yet somehow she is fit to lead this country because she was deceptive and lies well...see a pattern here with her job as "prime minister".

Gillard stands for govt regulation on the media, Abbott stands for a free media, Gillard stands for bureacracy and govt controls on YOUR life, Abbott stands for individual freedoms, Gillard stands for destroying farmers lives along the murray river, Abott doesn't. I would say there are quite a few differences.
I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. Do I just enter my email address at "Ivnofuknidea.com"?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Nankervis brothers

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Posts
4,321
Likes
4,398
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
Okay,
Lets say I am a swinging voter, unlike yourself. Are you seriously suggesting that the Craig Thompson and AWU abuse of union money isn't going to put me of voting for the labour party.

If you realy think that then you are an idiot.
So what you are saying is that others actions in unions, such as Thompson, Wilson, and Blewiitt (none of whom reflect the majority of peoples actions in unions or the union movement itself, let alone anything actually proved about Gillard while a lawyer 20 years ago) will or should reflect badly on the current government. You are essentially saying the swinging voter's choice at the next election will be based on hearsay and smear. Nice. And pretty cynical!

I find it really, really sad that people like you can't rise above your party allegiance and realise that a prime minister (it was bad enough when it was just a minister in thomson) took action that directly resulted in fraudulent activity and money laundering.



"Real evidence" -exit interview, her reference to the letter to wa commission, her comments repeatedly being discredited by documented facts. When you and your mates repeatedly say "smoking gun" - do you know how childish that sounds?


It sounds as about as childish as a leader (Trained by a UK spin doctor McTernan) to say "sleaze and bottom of barrel" more than 50 times in question time.The question I have for you is - who is really running this country? Gillard or McTernan?



Also of importance is this:

Did you realise that your cherished leader effectively wants to eradicate free speech? unless that free speech benefits the labor party that is.
Do you agree with that comrade? soviet russia's freedom of the press works really well, eh! That is the perfect model.

I quote:re the Ficklestein inquiry

"Any regulation of the media that blights the free flow of information and opinion is a form of official state censorship."

"Given that the government is contemplating taking the unprecedented step of regulating the media - which is usually done only in autocracies and Third World oppressive regimes."






http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...l-go-to-the-dogs/story-e6frerc6-1226457673557

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...inquirys-secrecy/story-e6frg71x-1226452095360
The first bolded part of the above post is a claim to which no evidence can be attached. It is hence a bad claim and hardly worth arguing unless there is evidence that can prove the fraud you are so sure exists. Nothing in the rest of your post offers such evidence or anything new that Gillard herself hasn't batted away like so much shit.

The second bold part is just bizarre. What does Soviet Russia have to do with any of this? You are clearly a nutter.

Actually, the whole of the above post is just so bizarre, so paranoid, so far removed from both the actual issue and the political reality we live in here in contemporary Australia that is not really worth a response.

No doubt conspiracists like yourself find this hoopla compelling. I'll leave you to your parallel universe until (and if) something concrete arises.

Another funny post. She described it as a slash fund at her exit S&G interview, and has referred to it recently, saying IIRC she regrets calling it that.
Oh you are too kind! Try as I might I could never match your own hilarious posting. You are a comedy genius, DR. Being such a non-partisan follower of politics, and holder of high values as far as political character goes, you were no doubt angered at the AWB oil-for-wheat Scandal, and also concerned at J Howard's involvement in his brothers shady dealings. Or was that all a bit different?

Yawn. No I didn't.



Blah blah blah.
Wow. What a counter argument you have going here.
 

MaddAdam

Cancelled
Joined
Jun 8, 2011
Posts
25,430
Likes
31,985
Location
In the not so distant future
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This is a bullshit story. I have worked as a political journo and I'll tell you now there is absolutelty n othing in it.

Why?

Because if there was, Gillard's own rivals in the party would have used it to knife her a long, long time ago, like when she was going for pre-selection.
 

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,404
Likes
8,344
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #1,654
Oh you are too kind! Try as I might I could never match your own hilarious posting. You are a comedy genius, DR. Being such a non-partisan follower of politics, and holder of high values as far as political character goes, you were no doubt angered at the AWB oil-for-wheat Scandal, and also concerned at J Howard's involvement in his brothers shady dealings. Or was that all a bit different?

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?
 

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,404
Likes
8,344
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #1,655
This is a bullshit story. I have worked as a political journo and I'll tell you now there is absolutelty n othing in it.

Why?

Because if there was, Gillard's own rivals in the party would have used it to knife her a long, long time ago, like when she was going for pre-selection.
Where's Lindsay Tanner when you need him? Or Bob Smith?
 

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,404
Likes
8,344
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #1,656
Gillard's angle that she was an unwitting pawn in the whole scandal is not at all credible. It's clear from this story that she was not just sitting in an office at Slater and Gordon's acting on Wilson's instructions.


Hm, "a trust deed has been stamped".

Who drafted that?

And what happened to the money afterwards?
 

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,404
Likes
8,344
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thread starter #1,658
I believe the Essendon supporting prick is demonstrating his lifelong commitment to Labor values by working for an international merchant bank.
A bit like Bob Carr's last job?

Why did Tanner continually oppose Gillard's preselection?

Why did Bob Smith (then of the AWU) plead with Brumby not to appoint Gillard to his staff?
 

Upton Sinclair

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Posts
5,441
Likes
2,033
AFL Club
Collingwood
Unless the questions were asked before voting intention then the 54/46 number was not pushed polled.
I don't think anyone is quibbling the TPP - it pretty much sits with the margins of the recent trend. I'm just interested in how they framed the questions and how the figure actually break down, as opposed to the kind of vague interpretation reported in the #LtdNews media.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Upton Sinclair

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Posts
5,441
Likes
2,033
AFL Club
Collingwood
Oh gawd. You Tea Party morons just aren't going to give up are you?

Haven't checked it yet this morning but I trust you will all have voiced your outrage over in the Abbott' criminal slush find thread, right? :rolleyes:
 

harmesy 37

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Posts
3,116
Likes
716
Location
Princes Park
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
CFC, Bluebaggers, Blues, No EPLteam
The second bold part is just bizarre. What does Soviet Russia have to do with any of this? You are clearly a nutter.

Actually, the whole of the above post is just so bizarre, so paranoid, so far removed from both the actual issue and the political reality we live in here in contemporary Australia that is not really worth a response.

No doubt conspiracists like yourself find this hoopla compelling. I'll leave you to your parallel universe until (and if) something concrete arises.
If you can't argue the points- it is much better to throw mud and call me names "a nutter" living in a "parallel universe". I wonder where I have seen this before? Oh that is right in parliament with Gillard accusing everyone of being "mud buckets" or full of mud or whatever it is, slime and sleaze...when in fact she is describing her own actions. It must be easy for her to name call when she is basically describing her own actions.
 

Brown Bottle

Seasoned Campaigner
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Posts
12,372
Likes
8,069
Location
Browntown
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Side Hawks
If you can't argue the points- it is much better to throw mud and call me names "a nutter" living in a "parallel universe". I wonder where I have seen this before? Oh that is right in parliament with Gillard accusing everyone of being "mud buckets" or full of mud or whatever it is, slime and sleaze...when in fact she is describing her own actions. It must be easy for her to name call when she is basically describing her own actions.
What's to argue? Your posts evidence such staunchly held beliefs and extreme views that no-one in their right mind is going to see any point in trying to convince you of anything else.
 

Todman

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Posts
6,310
Likes
3,873
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Cut and pasted of Bolta's blog this morning
Her advice offended against section 8 of the WA Associations Incorporation Act 1987, which provides that an association cannot have a name “likely to mislead” as to the object or purpose of the association – it was a slush fund for elections, not about safe workplaces.
The name was also “identical with or likely to be confused with” the name of another entity, in this case the AWU.
There were only two members of the association, Wilson and Blewitt, and not the requisite “more than five members”.
Not surprisingly, the Commissioner of Corporate Affairs questioned the application.
Gillard wrote to the commissioner “arguing for its incorporation"… Using the authority of her standing as a partner in a law firm, Gillard was able to convince the commissioner that the association had the authority of the AWU, that it was for the purpose of workplace safety, and that it had more than five members.
It is an offence under section 43 of the act to knowingly make false and misleading statements.
Once the association was registered, it is alleged that Wilson fraudulently obtained hundreds of thousands of dollars from building companies, who believed they were dealing with the AWU, for workplace safety and training purposes.
The fraudulent activities continued with various twists and turns but the existence of this slush fund was not detected until 1996.
The federal opposition contends that in relation to the setting up of the incorporation, Wilson, Blewitt and Gillard have a case to answer under Section 43 of the act.
Section 170 of the Criminal Code is also relevant, which provides that “any person who being required ... to give information ... knowingly gives information .. that is false in a material particular is guilty of a crime ... “
Section 409 of the Criminal Code sets out the elements of the criminal act of fraud.​
 

Brown Bottle

Seasoned Campaigner
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Posts
12,372
Likes
8,069
Location
Browntown
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Side Hawks
Seems like the same merry-go-round that Bolta's been on for a few weeks now. If the coalition could make the case wouldn't charges have been laid? Why offer immunity to one of the two blokes who is actually directly implicated? Oh, that's right... because no-one can prove any material claim against the PM but there is plenty of potential for smear. I guess Bolta's campaign will continue unabated, and fools will continue to pay to access the Hun's pay-for-view.
 

Upton Sinclair

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Posts
5,441
Likes
2,033
AFL Club
Collingwood
"@BernardKeane: Essential asked about AWU impressions: 39% of voters rated PM's handling good, 35% poor. The Opposition: 20% good, 49% poor. Media - 20%/37%"
 

Upton Sinclair

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Posts
5,441
Likes
2,033
AFL Club
Collingwood
60% said they had read or heard a lot or some about the Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s involvement with the AWU when she was working as a lawyer 20 years ago, 25% said they had read/heard a little and 12% had read/heard nothing.

Those most likely to have read/heard a lot/some were men (65%), aged 55+ (78%) and Liberal/National voters (67%).

Those most likely to have read/heard a little/nothing were women (42%), aged 18-34 (53%) and Greens voters (57%)

...

39% think Julia Gillard’s handling of the issue has been good and 35% think it has been poor. Among Labor voters, 71% think it has been good and 7% poor and among those who have read/heard a lot about the issue, 39% think it has been good and 49% poor.

20% think the Opposition’s handling of the issue has been good and 49% think it has been poor. Among Liberal/National voters, 41% think it has been good and 21% poor and among those who have read/heard a lot about the issue, 26% think it has been good and 58% poor.

20% think the media’s handling of the issue has been good and 37% think it has been poor. Among those who have read/heard a lot about the issue, 25% think it has been good and 43% poor.

...

38% say the issue has made them feel more negative about Julia Gillard as prime Minister while 59% say it has made little or no difference or made them feel more positive.

Among Labor voters 89% say it has made them feel more positive or made little or no difference.

64% of Liberal/National voters say it has made them more negative while 35% say it has made little/no difference or made them more positive.

Those most likely to feel more negative about Julia Gillard were aged 55+ (45%)


http://essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport
 

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,959
Likes
6,230
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Because if there was, Gillard's own rivals in the party would have used it to knife her a long, long time ago, like when she was going for pre-selection.
A large number of ALP mp's are ex unionists. How many of them do you think have clean hands? Their factions will stitch up preselection to the extent Jack the Ripper could get the nod. Libs not too different either.

Oh, that's right... because no-one can prove any material claim against the PM but there is plenty of potential for smear.
She has clearly misled the public over the work she did on the mortgage/WA application. Howard supposedly did it over something utterly irrelevant ie no claims of fraud and the fanbois went beserk.

Magnificent hypocrisy.

NB how much was on Reith's phonecard?
 

Grin

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Posts
11,990
Likes
12,217
Location
Port Adelaide
AFL Club
Richmond
Unfortunately this issue has shadowed large amount of legislation that was passed this week.

For example, the Liberal party lost in their opposition to a deregulated wheat market.

I haven't seen any of the free market fundies on this board come out and criticise Tony for this one.

At least while the Labor party are getting heaps of legislation through parliament, the Liberal party is getting with the job and releasing positive, detailed, well thought out and honestly costed policies, not just spurting mindless platitudes aimed at the very dim, such as the Government under Tony (presumably a communist one) will create a million Jobs.

Well done Tone. Keep up the hard work :thumbsu:
 

cancat

Cancelled
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
5,707
Likes
581
AFL Club
Geelong
http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/t...fael-epstein-and-patricia-karvelas-meet-press


HOST: And we will talk about that, Prime Minister, but there’s a Galaxy Poll this morning in the News Limited papers – it finds 31 per cent believe you’ve been economical with the truth. Thirty one per cent believe you’ve lied. Only 21 per cent think you’ve been completely honest. And the poll says 60 per cent want a full account in the Parliament. Will you deliver a full account in the Parliament?

PM: I don't comment on opinion polls, Paul. I’ve answered questions about this matter for the best part of 20 years. I’ve answered them in the Parliament this week and in other weeks. I’ve answered them publicly. I’ve told the truth about this matter, and I didn't do anything wrong.


Only 21% of the electorate believe Gillard has been completely honest. That's 79% who think our Prime Minister has not been completely honest.
 

Pessimistic

TheBrownDog
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
66,367
Likes
26,076
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/t...fael-epstein-and-patricia-karvelas-meet-press


HOST: And we will talk about that, Prime Minister, but there’s a Galaxy Poll this morning in the News Limited papers – it finds 31 per cent believe you’ve been economical with the truth. Thirty one per cent believe you’ve lied. Only 21 per cent think you’ve been completely honest. And the poll says 60 per cent want a full account in the Parliament. Will you deliver a full account in the Parliament?

PM: I don't comment on opinion polls, Paul. I’ve answered questions about this matter for the best part of 20 years. I’ve answered them in the Parliament this week and in other weeks. I’ve answered them publicly. I’ve told the truth about this matter, and I didn't do anything wrong.


Only 21% of the electorate believe Gillard has been completely honest. That's 79% who think our Prime Minister has not been completely honest.
and dividing a three question poll into two and coming up with 78% isn't being 'economical with the truth' ?

No way would a straight yes/no produce a 78-21 result
 

harmesy 37

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Posts
3,116
Likes
716
Location
Princes Park
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
CFC, Bluebaggers, Blues, No EPLteam
Seems like the same merry-go-round that Bolta's been on for a few weeks now. If the coalition could make the case wouldn't charges have been laid? Why offer immunity to one of the two blokes who is actually directly implicated? Oh, that's right... because no-one can prove any material claim against the PM but there is plenty of potential for smear. I guess Bolta's campaign will continue unabated, and fools will continue to pay to access the Hun's pay-for-view.
Is it the coalition making the case or the "free" media?

You can't have it both ways...apparently it a Liberal "smear campaign" but they are not the ones getting the information- it is the media.

So perhaps it is an Age and Australian newspaper "smear campaign"? Which is it? Or are they all guilty of smearing? Everyone's smearing apparently. It is all unjust. Our poor PM, Craig Thomson, Obeid and Williamson are all being smeared unjustly. We need the ABC to defend them.



Are you following the Ficklestein report as pretty soon there won't be a free media -the content will be regulated by an "independent" panel chosen by the govt. That way you won't have to worry about independent thought from "nutters" such as Bolt- everyone will just agree with Laurie Oakes and Michelle Grattan.

Craig Thomson and Gillard both have something in common- their defence for everything is "I did nothing wrong". Odd defence, but seems to work.


Also, I guess it is quite common for $5,000 to be put in someone's account in $100 bills. That is just par for the course out there in the fantasy land thinking out the ABC/inner city cultural elites.
 

Brown Bottle

Seasoned Campaigner
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Posts
12,372
Likes
8,069
Location
Browntown
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Side Hawks
1. This thread is not about Williamson, Thomson, Obeid, etc. Why don't you start a separate thread if you care so much about them? They are irrelevant here.
2. Someone is feeding the "free" media. I wonder what's in Tone & Jules' "Gillard & AWU" folder that hasn't found its way onto p.14 yet?
3. No, I'm not following the Ficklestein report, and I don't see how it's relevant to this thread.
4. Can you provide the evidence that the money was deposited? If you can, can you also disprove the claim that the money was won at the casino? I once deposited c.$10k in $100 bills into my wife's account following a Melbourne Cup. It happens.
 
Top Bottom