Witless Conroy's Shameful Attack

[silverfaun]

This witless little incompetent should be sacked, removed from the Labor party and Shorten should distance the party from this pathetic union hack.

This, on the day Labor was shown up for their shameful defence of Craig Thomson,  now we are subjected to this appalling insulting  of an honourable serving Officer on national TV and not having the intestinal integrity to apologise for his attack:

THE government has demanded Bill Shorten discipline frontbencher Stephen Conroy for breaking with convention in a “cowardly”, “unprovoked” and “outrageous” attack on a senior serving army officer.

Coalition senator Ian Macdonald shut down a Senate estimates hearing after Senator Conroy, Labor’s defence spokesman, launched an extraordinary attack on the head of the government’s border protection operation, Lieutenant General Angus Campbell, accusing him of being involved in a political cover-up.

Senator Conroy likened General Campbell to the fictitious Colonel Nathan Jessup from the movie A Few Good Men for his approach to restricting the flow of information on the interception of asylum-seeker boats.

“That is called a political cover-up, a political cover-up, you are engaged in a political cover-up,” Senator Conroy yelled from the bench.

The most bitter exchange began after General Campbell said it was necessary to keep details of Operation Sovereign Borders secret to avoid damaging Australia’s relations with its neighbours and to prevent people-smugglers from gaining an advantage.

Senator Conroy retorted: “Can’t we handle the truth?”

General Campbell responded: “It kind of sounds like a movie, senator.”

Senator Conroy: “It is a movie, and we are living it, Colonel Jessup. I mean seriously, you can’t tell us the truth, you can’t tell the Australian public the truth because you might upset an international neighbour. That is called a political cover-up.”

General Campbell remained calm during the incident but said he wanted to put on the public record that he took “extreme offence at that statement”.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/hearing-shut-down-over-stephen-conroys-attack-on-campbell/story-fn59niix-1226837720898

[monman12]

"Just because the bloke is in uniform doesn't give him some special dispensation."

The  "bloke" in uniform PCT is  a long term professional senior soldier,  who has achieved his position after many years  of service to his country,   The Senate hearing (from a non Coalition controlled Senate) is currently  a political outlet for the ALP by politicians who mainly are unknown ,  party hacks, and mostly civilians in earlier times.

Yes he deserves consideration,  because all he can (must) do is remain quiet when "attacked", or act as a mouthpiece for the Minister, another civilian, like most here.

nɥºɾ

[lakeland27]

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

---

@izabsmiling wrote:

maybe he does and has already done that. 

The greater the level of secrecy the less people may have to admit to ...

---

no he is hiding behind parliamentary privilege, where he is protected from being sued for slander

if he believes he is right and has the proof to back it up, call a press conference outside of the house and repeat it.

a lady in western australia commited suiside after being slandered in our parliment. name was Penny Eason from memory

---

 in order to sue for slander he has to say something slanderous. he accused the fellow of secrecy,  hardly slanderous considering he is being secretive. ?

[izabsmiling]

he wouldn't be the first person to hide behind parliamentry priviledge I suppose.

There were claims about our Navy shooting into the air at Asylum seekers boats which Scott Morrison denied...did that happen or not ?

If so could Conroy use that as an example ?

they can do so now 

The Royal Australian Navy has been authorised to fire over the bows of asylum-seeker boats as part of "escalation of force" measures to turn back boats to Indonesia.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/20807659/navy-can-fire-to-turn-back-boats/

[lakeland27]

---

@monman12 wrote:

"Just because the bloke is in uniform doesn't give him some special dispensation."

The  "bloke" in uniform PCT is  a long term professional senior soldier,  who has achieved his position after many years  of service to his country,   The Senate hearing (from a non Coalition controlled Senate) is currently  a political outlet for the ALP by politicians who mainly are unknown ,  party hacks, and mostly civilians in earlier times.

Yes he deserves consideration,  because all he can (must) do is remain quiet when "attacked", or act as a mouthpiece for the Minister, another civilian, like most here.

nɥºɾ

---

 i agree. the military is not there for morrison to hide behind, why not send morrison a letter expressing displeasure at his exploitation of service personnel for political ends ? the only innocent in this situation is the officer himself, and unfortunately for him he has been made the pawn. like i said , write to morrison and express that .

[freakiness]

Penny Easton and her husband were both guilty of using parliament to dig the dirt on each other in relation to their divorce. 

She was an adult.  I don't believe that blame for adult suicides should be thrown at other people.

[donnashuggy]

hardly slanderous considering he is being secretive. ?

best laugh i have had today 

[freakiness]

---

@donnashuggy wrote:

Did you hear the BBC interview Julia Gillard this morning?

The guy who interviewed her could not believe the things she had to endure being said to her, he really didn't believe it!

---

Yes, I did. I thought I might post it for John to point ot the poor me element of the interview. 

He seems to think that other people commenting on what she put up with was her crying poor me.

[tall_bearded]

Australian service personnel, irrespective of rank, are required to abide by the will of parliament as expressed in various legislations such as the Defence Force Discipline Act and the Official Secrets Acts to name but two, as well as policy decisions which they are required to implement.  That is, the decision not to disclose information was not made by the Navy.  It was made by the Parliament.

Now as a civilian, if you no longer want to work for your boss you can leave.  In the military, during peacetime, it’s called Absent Without Leave and if you leave, when you get caught, you can spend time in a military corrections establishment (jail).  As civilian, if your boss does something you don’t agree with you can tell them to go and get stuffed.  In the military that’s called insubordination and off to jail you go.  As a civilian, if your boss tells you do something you don’t agree with you can tell them to bugger off?  In the military, it’s called disobeying a lawful command and you go to jail.   That is military service involves relinquishing right which everyone else doesn’t give a second thought to, one of which is the rights to publically  criticise or contradict government policy which you don’t agree with.

Now before people cry cope out, please think again.  The reason why it is the way that it is for your protection.  The people in the defence force are the people with the guns and the knowledge of how to use them, and Egypt and Fiji are just two examples of to what happens when they (the military) get into their head they can ignore or refuse to implement policy that they don’t agree with.

So to those who advocate that General Campbell should just disregard his oath and answered the question, I say be careful as to what you ask for, because one day you may get it, only to find just how dangerous is the thing which is behind the door you just opened.

[tall_bearded]

Already have.

Also to Conroy telling him in no uncertain terms who grubby his conduct has been, and why he is now unfit to hold the office of Opposition Defence Spokesman.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@donnashuggy wrote:

I thought it was a valid attack considering how the public are treated.

---

It's wilful and viscious slander

---

Only if it is untrue - and if we are perpetually treated like mushrooms, how are we supposed to make an informed decision on that score