Tony Abbott, we get that you’re embarrassed that you said you didn’t want jetlag and that you think it’s an admission of weakness. But you need to let it go because that’s one giant shovel you’ve got in your hand and no amount of digging is going to make you win this one.
Leaving aside the fact that the headline doesn’t represent the story: Soldiers thrown to wolves, says Abbott:
The Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, has attacked Tony Abbott for claiming the government was stabbing soldiers in the back by allowing three commandos to be prosecuted for manslaughter.
Mr Smith said neither the government nor the Opposition Leader had any business interfering in an independent military process which, he pointed out, was established in 2005 by the Howard government, in which Mr Abbott was a minister.
The clash came as Mr Abbott continued to claim that Julia Gillard had set him up by leaking that he had declined her offer to accompany him to Afghanistan.
This, he contended, had lulled him into making his infamous excuse that he rejected the offer because he did not want to arrive for a conference in London suffering jet lag.
We found out earlier that the leak did not come from Gillard’s office, so why are journos still letting him get away with this lie? Oh, that’s right, because apparently our job is now simply to report what someone says, rather than actually check the truth of the claims being made. We are just mouthpieces serving the news makers rather than our audience.
And Smith is right – politicians have no business interfering in military prosecutions. According to the SMH article, the three commandos have been charged with “manslaughter, dangerous conduct, failing to comply with a lawful general order and prejudicial conduct” after a “raid in February last year in Oruzgan province in which five Afghan children were killed”. Would Abbott prefer it if Australian soldiers were above the law? Woops, five kids were killed, oh well, doesn’t matter. Hell, why don’t we just shoot all the civilians – would save us the trouble of being in their country in the first place. We don’t know if the commandos are guilty or not. That’s why we have this independent military process.
Anyway, the bit I want to talk/rant about is this:
While Ms Gillard said yesterday she no longer intended to comment on the saga and thus fuel it, Mr Abbott said he needed to keep defending himself because he was the gatekeeper of the nation’s values.
”One of the things that so disappoints me about the election result is that I am the standard bearer for values and ideals which matter and which are important and … as the leader of the Coalition, millions and millions of people invest their hopes in me and it’s very important that I don’t let them down.
”When I am unfairly attacked, I’ve got to respond and I’ve got to respond in a tough way.”
Abbott and Pyne have accused Gillard of “low bastardry” and “back alley bitchiness” and he’s the one being unfairly attacked? You’ve got to be fucking kidding me.
And what’s this shit about being the gatekeeper of the nation’s values? I’m guessing that’s a self-appointed position. A man who believes women are inferior to men, that a woman’s virginity is a gift that she should give to someone special, that refugees should be demonised, that climate change is crap, certainly does not represent ANY of my values.
Oh, and Abbott, since you didn’t win the election, that means there are more people who didn’t invest their hopes in you than those who did. Deal with it, and stop your whining.