Jewish News October 23

Danby: About as concerned with human rights as his friend Andrew Bolt

Michael Danby is in the Jewish News page 3. It says he opposes Rudd’s language – but not his policy. How brave. But the AJN then quotes paraphrases him again: “Danby did not badmouth Rudd, but did single out the Opposition leader”. Great, so he supports the policy of his party, doesn’t speak out about his party’s rhetoric, but asks the Liberals not to let their rhetoric get too inflammatory. How principled. It says he rejected the idea he was a rogue backbencher. “I’m not the Petro Georgiou of the ALP,” he said “I’m a lot more constructive than that.” More constructive than the Liberal who led the way in reforming the Coalition’s barbarous treatment of asylum seekers, you see. He then proved he is not a “soft-liner” by mentioning his speech calling for Obama to send more soldiers to Afghanistan.

In the real world

The Human Rights Commissioner has slammed our treatment of asylum seekers. Note how progressives in Australia don’t react to criticisms of our government by throwing hissy fits.

THE Human Rights Commissioner, Catherine Branson, has criticised conditions on Christmas Island and demanded the Rudd Government stop detaining people there immediately. She also slammed the Government for its failure to overturn laws that excise thousands of islands from the country’s migration zone.

More on Christmas Island here.

Paul McGeough on Afghanistan

This is a telling quote:

I was taken aback on a recent visit to Gardez, in Paktya Province, when a US military intelligence officer invoked the film Deliverance in describing the people and their culture. “This is the West Virginia of Afghanistan,” he told me. “They moved to the mountains and they did not evolve.” And I was shocked when one of his colleagues shared sections of a classified study, commissioned from three anthropologists, which likened the local Zadran tribe to others in the border region before stating, and I quote: “…from which we may infer that they are utter savages.”

Meanwhile, Clive Hamilton is apparently running for parliament on a Greens ticket. Why? Why become a politician??

Andrew Bolt took the opportunity to write up what he doesn’t like about him. Bolt has no shame, and is of course dishonest about him.

There are other aspects of Hamilton’s philosophy that will be fun to tease out. For instance, he declares he’s running in part on this policy:

With our country once again a laggard nation in response to global warming, and the government and opposition competing to vilify asylum seekers, never has a national and international standpoint been more sorely needed.

Yet only three years ago he preached this:

a policy of zero net migration

Sounds inconsistent, right? What did Hamilton say?

Under a policy of zero net migration we could allow in perhaps 40,000 people each year, because that is how many Australians leave the country. This gives us plenty of scope to meet our humanitarian obligations and we should use it to increase the number of asylum seekers and political refugees.

Whoops. Looks like Bolt deliberately truncated the quote to mislead his readers into thinking Hamilton took a position opposite to the one he advocated.

Still, Bolt is good at exposing Labor hypocrisy. Such as Danby.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: