Below is a transcript of q&a on the abc with regards to our then prime minister admitting to acts of treason...... I have added editorial comments Adam Marsters asked the PM: “..following WikiLeaks’ publishing of classified documents last year, you labelled the organisation’s actions ‘illegal’ despite being unable to identify any law which had been broken. Given the increasingly vocal support for WikiLeaks, do you now regret such comments?” PM: “….We are supporting Julian Assange the same way we would support any Australian citizen who got into a legal difficulty overseas. “We support people who are accused of drug trafficking. We support people who are accused of murder….I’m sure everyone here would say, “Well, drug trafficking is wrong. Murder is wrong…” “So my view about the conduct is neither here nor there in that sense. He’s getting the same support someone called John Smith would get in the same situation. But I do have a view about the merit and morals of the act and I simply don’t see the moral force in it. “…I know enough about American history to know the history of Watergate and Deep Throat did the right thing getting that information into the public domain…At the centre of WikiLeaks, I don’t see that moral purpose.” Then host Tony Jones took a question coming in on video online. It was Julian Assange calling. “Prime Minister, you just got back from Washington but what Australian citizens want to know is: which country do you represent?” “Do you represent Australians and will you fight for Australian interests? “Because it’s not the first time that you or a member of your cabinet has been into a US government building and exchanged information.” “In fact we have intelligence that your government has been exchanging information with foreign powers about Australian citizens working for WikiLeaks.” “So, Prime Minister, my question to you is this: When will you come clean about precisely what information you have supplied to foreign powers about Australian citizens working or affiliated with WikiLeaks? “And if you cannot give a full and frank answer to that question, should perhaps the Australian people consider charging you with treason?” Unfair point? “I honestly don’t know what he is talking about so I’m afraid I can’t help him with full and frank disclosures. I don’t know anything about exchanging information about people who work for WikiLeaks.” How’s that for an unknown unknown? Fabio wouldn’t melt in her mouth, let alone butter. Host Tony Jones pressed the point: “So, it hasn’t happened to your knowledge?” “To my knowledge it hasn’t happened,” said the PM. “But on the more broad allegations he makes about do we exchange information about Australian citizens with foreign governments, yes, we do sometimes.” Editorial As examples, the PM cited drug trafficking and terrorism. As if we don’t watch Judge Judy, NYPD, CSI, Blue Bloods and Two and a Half men. “What about espionage, which of course, is the charge the United States would like to lay at the feet of Julian assange" “Mr Assange hasn’t been charged with anything relating to WikiLeaks……..He’s got some legal issues relating to personal conduct questions – alleged personal conduct questions in Sweden – and no-one in the United States raised with me, Mr Assange. No-one.” Editorial And thus it went. Except the next morning the sun arose to a wall of outrage from some sections of the media and politicians asserting Tony Jones and Q and A had ‘ambushed’ the Prime Minister by ‘setting her up’ and having Assange call in. The fact that any Prime Minister or President for that matter would be rendered insensible by appearing on a television show whose very ID is based on taking audience and online questions is laughable. Is the Prime Minister really incapable of taking a question without notice from one of her citizens, albeit one who wears a tracking device and is under house arrest in a foreign country? For a start, why weren’t Julia’s minders on the ball? After all, when former Prime Minister John Howard, Dubya’s old best friend in the Coalition of the Killing, was on the same show last year spruiking his autobiography (don’t they all?) not only did an audience member chuck his shoe at Howard (remind you of something?) but Gitmo survivor David Hicks called in via videolink to ask Howard a question. I don’t recall Howard instigating supporters to bleat public outrage on his behalf. Nor do I recall a particularly virulent level of media criticism directed at Q and A. To mix metaphors, even though the shoe didn’t fit, Howard wore it. If Gillard can’t stand the heat, then I suggest she get back into the kitchen cabinet.
Posted on: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:30:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015