Tuesday 25th of June 2024

great scott! a limerick by tony abbott...

great scott

An independent Scotland would not be in the best interests of the international community, Australia’s prime minister has warned.

After a long-running referendum campaign featuring live television debates, leaflet drops and doorstepping, Scots will finally get to answer the question, “Should Scotland be an independent country?” on September 18.

Tony Abbott became the latest international leader to wade into the debate after US president Barack Obama said his administration had a “deep interest” in ensuring the United Kingdom remained united.

Mr Abbott, who spent two years at the University of Oxford, told the Times: “What the Scots do is a matter for the Scots and not for a moment do I presume to tell Scottish voters which way they should vote.

“But as a friend of Britain, as an observer from afar, it’s hard to see how the world would be helped by an independent Scotland.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/16/tony-abbott-tells-scotland-a-yes-vote-for-independence-is-not-in-worlds-interest


flying a dog's breakfast...


A spokesman for Scottish first minister Alex Salmond, who is leading the pro-independence campaign, said Mr Abbott had "put his foot in it".

"Tony Abbott has a reputation for gaffes, but his bewildering comments have all the hallmarks of one of the Westminster government's international briefings against Scotland," he said.

"Many Australians, including the great number with close Scottish connections, will look on in bafflement at these remarks - Australia is a country that has gained its independence from Westminster and has never looked back."


Never looked back?... Wrong... With Tony Abbott-the-Glorious-Turd at the helm of this fair country, Australia might be joining the United Kingdom Union soon... Imagine the blue cross of Scotland being replaced proudly by a gathering of southern crosses on the UK flag... A dog's breakfast at best...

And yes, I know, limericks "come" from Ireland... in the INDEPENDENT part, away from Mother England...


a gaffe a minute — no laughs though...





But it’s not like it is only Abbott and Hockey who are floundering away, leagues out of their depth.

No, you only need to listen to Employment Minister Eric Abetz make a link between abortion and breast cancer on national TV, then hear him the next day attempt to categorically deny he'd said what everyone in the country heard him say; or Attorney General George Brandis expound upon our unalienable right of to be bigots, or blither and blather about “metadata”, to become painfully aware of the profound levels of incompetence at the top of the Abbott machine.

I used to think they were mad — but then I realised I was wrong. Madness might suggest there's a spark of genius lying somewhere within them — but this mob certainly don't have any of that.

No, now I just think they are stupid. Oh, and petty, and venal, and nasty, and malicious, to be sure — but mostly just demonstrably dumb.

How did we get into this fix?


How did it come to pass that Australia ended up with such a ragtag bunch of clowns, fools and cartoonish villains holding the levers of power in Australia and making critical decisions about our collective futures?

How did we end up with people in power who are more ‘gaffe-a-minute’ than government?

Of course, we could always blame the media, but even they couldn’t fully obscure the now blindingly obvious nature of this Federal Government. And there were plenty who were warning about them before they became the Government ‒ some rather loudly, like IA ‒ but the public voted them in just the same.

Hopefully, the pain will not last too long — although heaven help us if they are voted in again.

For now, there is nothing else to do but sit back uncomfortably and wait for the next mortifying public utterance; the next embarrassing, nation-shaming gaffe.

It won’t be long now.

read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/the-abbott-gaffernment,6786

see also: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/27912


Note to David Donovan: AND THIS IS NOTHING NEW... We all knew Tony was a lying idiot for years... But with the help of a spin doctor (Uncle Rupe) and his cohorts of ultra right-wing neo-fascist scribes plus a certain person called Rudd with an ego the size of an exploding Qasar that destroyed the Labor party (his ego of course massaged by Uncle Rupe until Uncle Rupe shot him in the guts), this is why we are here, in the loony tune land of the giant Turds, where nastiness, zealotry and idiocy rule...


Note: though I meant Quasar, I think Qasar is also Appropriate...:

Granted territories by the khan, Genghis Khan's full brothers Qasar, Khajiun, and Temuge formed the Left Wing of the Mongol Empire in the eastern edge of Inner Mongolia, while Genghis Khan's three sons, JochiChaghatai, and Ögedei, made up the Right Wing in the western edge. The Right Wing saw a significant expansion to the west but the Left Wing did not have so much land to be conquered. Hasar's mother, Hoelun defended him against accusations of disloyalty stemming from Teb Tengri, a shaman. Stiffened by his mother Hoelun and wife Börte, who saw Teb Tengri as threat to the dynastic succession, Genghis allowed Khasar and Temüge to kill Teb Tengri in a wrestling match. (thanks to Wikipedia...)

alien abbott...


Why is the PM's chief of staff so desperate to prevent proof emerging about whether Tony Abbott is eligible to sit in Parliament? Sydney bureau chief Ross Jones reports.

You don’t want to be blocked by Mal Brough — look what happened to Peter Slipper.

It happened to Tony Magrathea when he posted a message to Brough telling him there was a serious cloud hanging over the legitimacy of his leader, Anthony John Abbott, to hold the highest public office in the land.

Magrathea is a Sunshine Coast-based blogger who doesn’t normally get involved in the political arena. He refers to himself as ‘The Ideas Man’ and his blog normally covers technology issues.

Born in England, Magrathea is about the same age as Abbott and, like Abbott, came to Australia as a £10 pom. Abbott arrived in 1960 aged three.

Before the last election, Abbott made a few comments that piqued Magrathea’s interest in Abbott’s progression from England to Australia, then back to England to Oxford, then back to Australia and a life in politics.

Magrathea noticed an odd thing: Abbott had been apparently granted Australian citizenship back in 1981 — as he was entitled to do, because while his father was British and he was born in London, his mother was Australian. This apparent change in status meant Abbott was now a dual British/Australian citizen.

1981 was the year Abbott ‘matriculated’ to Oxford, but he did so as a British citizen.



Section 44 of the Australian Constitution is clear when it says:

Dual nationality is considered an acknowledgement of allegiance and entitled to the privileges of citizenship of a foreign power disqualifies people from standing for parliament.



read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/the-strange-and-suspicious-case-of-tony-abbotts-citizenship,6859


the most dangerous thing of all - hope...

Of all the bad arguments urging the Scots to vote no – and there are plenty – perhaps the worst is the demand that Scotland should remain in the union to save England from itself. Responses to my column last week suggest this wretched apron-strings argument has some traction among people who claim to belong to the left.

Consider what it entails: it asks a nation of 5.3 million to forgo independence to exempt a nation of 54 million from having to fight its own battles. In return for this self-denial, the five million must remain yoked to the dismal politics of cowardice and triangulation that cause the problems from which we ask them to save us.

“A UK without Scotland would be much less likely to elect any government of a progressive hue,” former Labour minister Brian Wilson claimed in the Guardian last week. We must combine against the “forces of privilege and reaction” (as he lines up with the Conservatives, Ukip, the Lib Dems, the banks, the corporations, almost all the rightwing columnists in Britain, and every UK newspaper except the Sunday Herald) – in the cause of “solidarity”.

There’s another New Labour weasel word to add to its lexicon (other examples include reform, which now means privatisation; and partnership, which means selling out to big business). Once solidarity meant making common cause with the exploited, the underpaid, the excluded. Now, to these cyborgs in suits, it means keeping faith with the banks, the corporate press, cuts, a tollbooth economy and market fundamentalism.

Here, to Wilson and his fellow flinchers, is what solidarity meant while they were in office. It meant voting for the Iraq war, for Trident, for identity cards, for 3,500 new criminal offences, including the criminalisation of most forms of peaceful protest. It meant being drafted in as political mercenaries to impose on the English policies to which the Scots were not subject, such as university top-up fees and foundation hospitals. It meant supporting every destructive and unjust proposition advanced by their leaders: the brood parasites who hatched in the Labour nest then flicked its dearest principles over the edge. It’s no surprise that the more the Scots see of their former Labour ministers, the more inclined they are to vote for independence.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/yes-vote-in-scotland-most-dangerous-thing-of-all-hope


See dope at top...

but what about the poor banks?...

Evidence of a surge in support for Scotland breaking away has prompted some people to seek reassurance from banks that their savings are safe.

While banks have not reported evidence of withdrawals in the lead up to next week's vote, senior executives have held meetings with the Bank of England to discuss the possible scenarios.

In the event of a "yes" vote, banks are urging regulators to remind customers that Scotland will remain part of the United Kingdom for 18 months while the terms of the secession are negotiated.

Market complacency 'shattered'

The political, economic and social implications of a breakaway are massive, prompting global banks to warn clients that any transition might not be smooth.

Deutsche Bank"Be afraid, be very afraid. The implications of a yes vote would be huge, and are magnified by the sense of institutional unpreparedness. A 'yes' vote could easily derail the UK economic recovery."

Goldman Sachs"The near-term consequences of a 'yes' for the Scottish economy, and for the UK more broadly, could be severely negative."

UBS"Significant risk" of bank deposits fleeing Scotland within days of a "yes" vote.

Citi"With the lessons of the eurozone debt crisis still fresh in investors' minds, a currency union may weaken sterling in the same way it weakened the euro." Concerned that a Scottish exit will raise the chances of Britain leaving the EU within years.

Societe Generale: "Market complacency on Scotland is shattered."

As part of the caution, ratings agency Standard & Poor's has flagged that an independent Scotland might have trouble supporting its banks in the event of a financial emergency.

The Royal Bank of Scotland is considering the implications of a "yes", while Lloyds has confirmed it might move its registered office from Edinburgh to London.

Australian banks are not immune. National Australia Bank owns the troubled Clydesdale Bank.

The concerns of global banks are based on investment uncertainty surround the future of the British pound in Scotland and the tax and regulatory hurdles of Scottish independence.

read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-10/banks-alarmed-about-increasing-prospect-of-scottish-independence/5733088


See dope at top...

a pommy tony bastard


The situation in Australia is different. Not for the first time, we have a foreign-born Prime Minister. This is neither a legal nor political problem. The constitution does not even mention the prime minister, let alone direct that the person holding that office be born in Australia.

The Australian constitution does, however, require all elected members of Parliament to only hold Australian citizenship. That is, if you want to take up an elected position in our democracy and become part of the highest governing authority in the country, it is illegal to do so if you also hold allegiance to a foreign power in the form of citizenship of another nation. You must be neither a non-citizen nor a dual citizen. You must be an Australian citizen and an Australian citizen only. This is in section 44, which sets out the conditions and requirements of election to the Commonwealth Parliament.

Section 44 of the Australian Constitution lists the grounds for disqualification on who may become a candidate for election to the Parliament of Australia. It states in particular:

44. Any person who -

(i.)  Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power: or

(ii.) Is attainted of treason, or has been convicted and is under sentence, or subject to be sentenced, for any offence punishable under the law of the Commonwealth or of a State by imprisonment for one year or longer: or

(iii.) Is an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent: or

(iv.) Holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth: or

(v.) Has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than twenty-five persons:

shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.

Here’s the thinking behind the provision on foreign powers. While the states run day-to-day internal matters such as health, education and policing, the Commonwealth must deal with external affairs on behalf of all Australians.

So if a member of the Commonwealth Parliament holds dual citizenship, they immediately risk a conflict of interest where the Australian government is negotiating, or going to war against, a foreign power. This is an unacceptable level of risk, because of national security.

So to stand for public office as a dual citizen is in breach of our founding legal document, the law that authorises all other Australian laws. Again, this is not necessarily a problem.

If the constitutional breach is seen as inadvertent, a mere oversight, we extend the principle of charity. This is the same rule that gives the batsman the benefit of the doubt. People make mistakes all the time. Where there are humans, there is human error. In the first instance, we give them the benefit of the doubt. They said it was an oversight, and it probably was. It’s a small problem with a simple solution.

Renounce the other citizenship, become an Australian-only citizen, if necessary hold a by-election. If you win the by-election after renouncing the non-Australian citizenship – the citizenship of a foreign power – both the legal and political problems are resolved. That’s it.



Note "pommy bastard" is a term of endearment which I soon learned after my arrival in this fair country. The Pom who shared our house in Bondi was calling himself and others like him "pommy bastards" all in good spirit...  It's time for Tony Abbott to show us he was not elected contrarily to the Australian laws. If he was, his present position is not tenable. He has to go and get new election vote him back him (which is a shoe in on the north shore)... BUT IT HAS TO BE DONE. But before this he will have to explain why his knowledge of the constitution is so poor as either having made an oversight or being careless or gun-ho about Australian politics. 

tony pommy


a challenge to tony abbott...


WA Greens senator Scott Ludlam has resigned after realising he has been ineligible under the constitution to sit as a senator for the past nine years because he holds dual citizenship.

Key points:
  • Scott Ludlam held dual citizenship which made him ineligible to sit as a senator
  • He has resigned and says he will not fight to stay on in Parliament
  • Mr Ludlam takes responsibility for the "ridiculous oversight"


The Senate is expected to refer the matter to the High Court for its consideration, but the rules appear clear cut and it is likely his election will be ruled invalid.

Section 44 of the constitution disqualifies potential candidates from election to the Parliament of Australia if they hold dual or plural citizenship, and under the rules Mr Ludlam should have renounced his New Zealand citizenship before he nominated for pre-selection 10 years ago.

Mr Ludlam, 47, who was also co-deputy leader, was elected to the Senate at the 2007 federal election, with his term beginning in August 2008.

In November last year, Mr Ludlam announced he would take a leave of absence from Parliament to treat depression and anxiety.

read more:



It's time for Tony Abbott to show us his renouncement to the British kingdom — and when. 


Read from top...