• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Julia Gillard - liar

lionking said:
Thanks for that. Abbott a liar as well as an idiot:


Quote:
Have you actually read BHP's statements?

TONY ABBOTT: No,


The electorate is seeing through this clown. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he doesn't lead the Coalition to the next election.

Abbott: liar and fool.
Click to expand...

Actually a bit of sneaky editing there, lionking. What Leigh Sales actually said was
LEIGH SALES: I'm going on the facts that Marius Kloppers said today when he was directly asked if the decision on Olympic Dam was affected by Australia's tax situation and I'm going on the facts that are outlined in their results statement that they've issued. Have you actually read BHP's statements?

TONY ABBOTT: No,
Click to expand...

The results statements are the preliminary results found here
http://www.bhpbilliton.com/home/inv...-Results-for-the-Year-Ended-30-June-2012.aspx
. A rather lengthy document that I doubt anyone on the front bench of either party has read.

It was rather dishonest of the ABC and Julia Gillard to try and spin that into saying he hadn't read the press release on Olympic Dam.

But what can you expect from a woman who sets up slush funds and then accepts free renovations work in exchange?
 
Good try at defending your hero, but a massive fail.

This was the question:

Have you actually read BHP's statements?
Click to expand...

Two pages. And how do you reconcile the no answer yesterday and the yes answer today?

Nope, caught lying. And how about the mining tax impacting on the Olympic Dam expansion? Even people like Hugh Morgan, a dyed in the wool conservative, acknowledges that it's a lie.
 
Her Grey Eminence said:
What cannot be denied was that Con was one of the signatories of accounts linked to the slush funds that she established.

Oh wait, it can be denied, but not in good faith.
Click to expand...

AN article in today's The Australian reported that Prime Minister Julia Gillard had set up a trust fund for her then boyfriend 17 years ago.

This is wrong.

The Australian apologises for the error.
Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/apology-to-the-prime-minister/story-e6frg6n6-1226456413608

Not very good at this are you.
 
lionking said:
Nope, caught lying. And how about the mining tax impacting on the Olympic Dam expansion? Even people like Hugh Morgan, a dyed in the wool conservative, acknowledges that it's a lie.
Click to expand...

Probably the funniest (and most pathetic) part of Abbotts' performance was the "BHP just doesn't want to make thing worse for the government" shtick.

Really Tony? This is a perfect chance for a huge mining company to put the boot into the govt. on a range of things that they haven't been happy with and they just decide to play nice? :rolleyes:

I think Tony has been reading his own press releases for too long.
 
Laton said:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/apology-to-the-prime-minister/story-e6frg6n6-1226456413608

Not very good at this are you.
Click to expand...

OK does this satisfy you:
First and foremost, the terminology that you used in your question, which was terminology [slush fund] I used in the discussion with Peter Gordon and Jeff Shaw some 17 years ago, is terminology with a particular overtone which I don't think helps with understanding these events. I'm not going to use it again. I will be far more precise than that. I was a solicitor at Slater and Gordon. I assisted with the provision of advice regarding the setting up of an association, the workplace reform association that you refer to.
It was my understanding that the purpose of the association was to support the re-election of a team of union officials and their pursuit of the polices that they would stand for re-election on.
Click to expand...

So in 1995 it was a slush fund - the sort that all unions have - in 2012 it is a workplace reform association.

So Laton, in the interests of compromise lets combine the 1995 and 2012 terminology.

She helped established a slush fund/workplace reform association, which resulted in monies being misappropriate from union accounts and mysterious donations from firms with heavily unionised workforces.
One of the signatories of one of the associated accounts of this SF/WPRA was the a contractor who renovated part of her house.

Are we agreed?
 
lionking said:
Good try at defending your hero, but a massive fail.

This was the question:



Two pages. And how do you reconcile the no answer yesterday and the yes answer today?

Nope, caught lying.
Click to expand...

He believed that Leigh Sales was referring to the results statements for the trading year - you keep editing her statement in order to conceal this.
 
Her Grey Eminence said:
OK does this satisfy you:


So in 1995 it was a slush fund - the sort that all unions have - in 2012 it is a workplace reform association.

So Laton, in the interests of compromise lets combine the 1995 and 2012 terminology.

She helped established a slush fund/workplace reform association, which resulted in monies being misappropriate from union accounts and mysterious donations from firms with heavily unionised workforces.
One of the signatories of one of the associated accounts of this SF/WPRA was the a contractor who renovated part of her house.

Are we agreed?
Click to expand...

Do you have a point with this rambling?

Or for that matter any kind of allegation backed up by, you know, actual evidence?

'Cause at the moment you're flailing.
 
lionking said:
Er, his lie about the mining tax? You keep avoiding this second, much more significant, lie.
Click to expand...
Oh sure that was not accurate - a lie if you like.

But politicians are always lying like that - like when Julia Gillard said Tony Abbott was going to rip money out of public schools because he says there is no money for the Gonski report. She was accusing him of ripping out money that she doesn't have to put in in the first place.

So it seems we have reached consensus - as I assume you agree now with my reading of Leigh Sales.
 
Laton said:
Do you have a point with this rambling?

Or for that matter any kind of allegation backed up by, you know, actual evidence?

'Cause at the moment you're flailing.
Click to expand...
Sure, you will find Con mentioned here
http://pickeringpost.com/mediax/resources/Affidavit2.pdf
Signatory of one of the Slush Fund/Workplace Reform Association accounts which Julia Gillard helped establish.

If I understand Gillard's 1995 interview correctly, if she accepted something as a freebie she complained how terrible the work was or said she had never asked for it. Hence she was not "obliged" to pay for it. And as she said, she did have "some receipts at home."

There's a fine legal mind for you. Still, if you are happy with that as your standard bearer, your choice.
 
I'd be careful with claims about the truth of the BHP statements, unless you want to accuse them of misleading the ASX.

With all the discussion of Abbott (my own posts included), perhaps we should expand the title/topic of the thread to "Honesty of Australian politicians" or similar? I don't know what the process for that is.
 
Her Grey Eminence said:
So it seems we have reached consensus - as I assume you agree now with my reading of Leigh Sales.
Click to expand...

No.

If Abbott was anywhere approaching competent he would either have read the whole statement before commenting on it, or at least got any number of his lackeys, perhaps the poodle, to read it for him.

He's hardly renown for his work ethic, this worst opposition leader ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom