Crikey, that's spin
An alternative reality Crikey summary of the Canberra tent embassy protester fracas:
Tony Abbott made provocative remarks about a group of people protesting for indigenous rights. [Abbott's remarks were provocative only because he was misquoted.]The summary is just the sort of shameless spin its provider, genius media expert Jeremy Sear, claims to aim to debunk. Lefties are incapable of rationality when it comes to Abbott.
He then attended a public function right near that group of people.
Somebody told the protesters he was nearby at a public function. [Protesters were informed by a Prime Ministerial aide via a trade union official. What was the intent of the information providers?]
They went to protest to him directly. [Fair enough.]
They banged on windows and called him a “racist” and suggested he should feel “shame”. [The fracas was both ugly and threatening.]
Which part of this is a scandal other than
- the AFP massively overreacting; and [The Prime Minister's security detail and summoned police reacted as they saw fit in the circumstances.]
- Tony Abbott’s hostility to the aboriginal protesters? [How, exactly, did Abbott display hostility.]
I don’t care who told them he was nearby – they were perfectly entitled to go and let him know what they thought of his remarks on the television.
posted by Anonymous at 6:08 PM |
13 Comments:
Sear has it arse about. There was nothing wrong with Abbott's comments. Also, the protesters targeted Gillard as well as Abbott. And they behaved very poorly indeed, though not threateningly. Which leads me to this point:
The Prime Minister's security detail and summoned police reacted as they saw fit in the circumstances.
No, they responded in a fashion that either showed a lack of understanding about the situation, or was meant to exaggerate the dangers it posed. Not only that, the heavy-handed response of security/AFP showed a clear lack of respect for the offices of prime minister and opposition leader, undermining their personal and professional dignity.
Note that Marilyn Sheperd is commenting on the Crikey post.
John,
I don't support Julia but I don't think her dignity was underminded by this - presuming, of course, that she had nothing to do with the decision to contact the protesters.
I don't think that we are in a position to second guess her security detail.
"No, they responded in a fashion that either showed a lack of understanding about the situation, or was meant to exaggerate the dangers it posed. Not only that, the heavy-handed response of security/AFP showed a clear lack of respect for the offices of prime minister and opposition leader, undermining their personal and professional dignity"
Wow 'John' you really are a genius. Apparently now you are a leading expert on close personal protection techniques and able to magically understand the intent and capabilities of a hostile crowd of 200+ whipped into a frenzy. (And how that exactly happened is still under review)
How interesting.
I imagine you'd do much better given that responsibility, maybe you should be a consultant in these matters. Like the Americans say, a Monday morning quarterback.
Like we say an arrogant, pompous d*ckhead with no insight.
What a Walter Mitty you are. (look it up as I'm sure you don't understand)
Keep up the comedy mate, it's a laugh a minute.
Having read that linked 'article' and the first comment I just have to shake my head. What a slimy pair of ass clowns.
And I can just picture Mr Bean coolly leading the PM to safety with an outstretched hand and confident smile.
What a joke these guys are.
I'd just like to shake the hand of the security dude who shoved her head into the car door jam before bundling her into the car. Just a pity he didn't back her up and give it another whack....for Australia.
That's not very nice young Boris.
Wow 'John' you really are a genius. Apparently now you are a leading expert on close personal protection techniques and able to magically understand the intent and capabilities of a hostile crowd of 200+ whipped into a frenzy. (And how that exactly happened is still under review)
No champ, I am not a 'leading expert on close personal protection techniques'. I very much doubt that you are either. And playing some idiotic PS3 game or watching In the Line of Fire doesn't mean you are.
What I am capable of looking at two different sets of video of the incident and noticing that there were about six times more police, security agents and cameramen within their proximity than there were protesters. Not to mention the fact there was nothing being thrown, there were no weapons, no arrests, etc.
This is called 'using your eyes and your brain', you whiny little prick. You should try it sometime, because it's patently obvious from the crap you post here that you seldom do.
Boris seems like a nice chap who should fit right in here. You, Beck and Dan could make a new friend.
"Not to mention the fact there was nothing being thrown, there were no weapons"
Really? And you know this how?
The job of the 'security agents' (lol) is to prevent harm from any potential risk either percieved or possible in the circumstances. Which off course you knew better from news footage.
But I understand complex lateral thinking is a problem for you John, as evidenced by your other angry bleating. You do seem to lose your little temper...
I know that the last time you probably faced real physical harm 'John' was up against competing sperm, but surely even a dunce like you doesn't really believe your own drivel?
I know I know you saw some news clips and you know better than professional law enforcement and you alone could predict any risk effectively - like Walter Mitty. If only you were available for security advice to the professionals everyone would be better off. And hopefully if you were at risk you'd be wearing an adult nappy for everyones sake.
And re the PS3 game reference, once again I think you have much more experience with computer games than myself. Much more. Line of Fire? Now I see where you gained your incisive insight. Ha ha ha.
Ha ha ha ha.
I dub thee Walter Mitty. Consultant to the professionals.
Do you think referring to Walter Mitty makes you sound intelligent or well-read, "foxy"? Bad news - it isn't working.
Most of your drivel I can't be bothered with, except for one point. If there was a weapon, or reports of one, then by now they would and should have said so. They have not, nor have there been leaked reports of a weapon or any direct threat, nor has the AFP made any arrests.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of people, "flunky". There are 'People A' who worship the military, the police and men with guns, and who shout 'nothing to see here, move along' every time they cock something up. The kind of people who think that the guards at Abu Ghraib were just a little exuberant, and that William Calley copped a bad rap. The kind of people who get sexually aroused whenever they see a big gun.
Then there's people like me, who respect the military and police but believe that like all professions, they should be held to account when they get something wrong. The kind of people who believe in transparency, accountability and professional standards. The kind of people who think that elected politicians shouldn't be tossed around because a few boozed-up natives start banging on windows. The kind of people who don't buy the bulls**t you are trying to disingenuously peddle here today.
Well in addition to being Mr security advisor to the professionals Walter Mitty, you also apparently have X Ray vision to scan people at a distance and ESP to read their minds.
Or I go for option 3./ you're just a dickhead with an agenda sounding off because it suits you, trying to second guess professionals when you don't have a clue.
As for your alleged respect for the military and police, don't me laugh, you're a posturing joke.
But it takes all types and you're certainly a stand up comedian if anything.
Walter Mitty aka Johnny Dangerous.
ROTFLMAO
"because a few boozed-up natives"
I just noticed that racist little description Johhny Dangerous.
What evidence do you have the people there were 'boozed up'?
as for the bigoted 'boozed up natives' description, your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
Oh FFS.
John & Foxy, just get a room already.
Neither one of you are as clever or witty as you seem to think you are, and it's getting old.
John,
There were widespread reports of protesters holding large rocks, sticks and other potential weapons, and the AFP were called because her security detail believed the mob was about to break through the glass of the building. Plus you don't mention the widely seen footage of bottles (some of them were plastic, sure) being thrown at the PM and Abbott as they left, and at the car as it left.
A glass bottle with a kilo of liquid in it is a weapon in my book - talk to a trauma surgeon about the damage that could cause if you think that's not dangerous.
As someone who worked in security (some work in close personal security, but not all) you are either wilfully ignoring evidence or have no clue what you are talking about.
Ask yourself one question - if it was Obama in there, how many Secret Service guys would there have been rushing him out?
We are talking about our National leader being attacked by a violent mob - singing kumbaya is not an option when people's lives are at stake.
If you have never been in such a situation, where someone's life is potentially in your hands you are a Monday morning Quarterback, and one that is ignoring evidence which the rest of us have seen.
Post a Comment
<< Home