In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round.
In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia.

Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame?

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 9:37am:

In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round. In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame?

What was in the bag now seems a distant light on the hill eh bogy.
He has got you worried.
Speaking of not remembering what one has said

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckcH0Wrmy74

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 9:37am:

In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia.

No he isn't.

/thread

Is this another of your exercises in pedantics. What about military conflict then? That's how everybody has reported it.
Whatever, he says the first thing that comes out of his mouth to suit the audience. He has no consistency.
I don't know who is the bigger lier between him and Gillard.

bogy had Kev [ i will return] rudd

told us how he intends to stop the boats????
so far when ever I have seen his asked that question he raves on about what Abbott plans..

I would be interested in knowing what he plans.. seeing as how the whole bloody mess is down to him..

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 9:37am:

In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round. In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame?

Nope. He said it could potentially cause conflict. He didnt say armed. Seriously abbott is talking about sending these boats to indonesia - they obviously dont want them - conflict.

SOB

http://spotofborg.com/files/persecution5.jpg

Yes except Indonesia has said it won't accept turned back boats. 

Hence the conflict. 

Don't really understand why ppl find this such a hard notion to understand.  Its really quite simple.

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 9:37am:

In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round. In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame?

In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia.

Clearly not what he said.

So Liberals have a problem with language now???

As posted by Froggie yesterday


Quote:

MORRISON: "Well you can only go on the incredible rate of arrivals and others as you have done today make that judgement. But this government has given up on it. There is no sense of urgency about this and what will be required if there is a change of government later this year is a very, very stark contrast not just in policy which there of course will be but where the stark contrast will be is in the sense of resolve. It was the resolve of the Howard Government that stopped this last time, not just the policies. We will need to go to war on this thing and we will." http://www.scottmorrison.com.au/info/speech.aspx?id=633&page=-1

I look forward to you calling for his resignation Bogarde

Dnarever wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 11:47am:

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3rd, 2013 at 9:37am: In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round. In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame? In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Clearly not what he said.

Clearly?  Actually what he initially said was "“I really wonder if he is trying to risk conflict with Indonesia . . . there have been some pretty rough times in the relationship, I never want to see that again,” he also said "I really wonder if he is trying to risk conflict with Indonesia, you really need to have some pretty cool hands on the tiller when you are dealing with the international relationship."

The addendum of "diplomatic conflict" only occurred later when he and others realised that he had in typical Rudd fashion over egged the cake.

So no, not clearly.  First statements were very unclear obviously inflammatory and needed to be explained and qualified. 

He is not the messiah  ;D ;D

Funny how the newly rusted-on Rudd supporters - those who were pillorying him a week ago - are pontificating about his form of words in 2013 but carefully ignoring his words in 2007.
Consistency is a quality unknown to Labor.

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 12:23pm:

Funny how the newly rusted-on Rudd supporters - those who were pillorying him a week ago - are pontificating about his form of words in 2013 but carefully ignoring his words in 2007. Consistency is a quality unknown to Labor.

If I'm rusted to anything it keeping Abbott out of the lodge & people like Mirrabela/Morrison/Bernadi away from the levers of power.

You decided to ignore the fact Abbott has consistently changed his mind on EVERYTHING, even this week on the referendum on local government. Yet wish us to hold others to words spoken years ago not 2 weeks ago.


Quote:

In the past 24 hours, the Coalition has ceased to support the referendum on the constitutional recognition of local councils. It was only a few weeks ago that federal parliament passed laws, with strong bipartisan support, to allow the referendum to go ahead in conjunction with the coming election. Local councils around the country were delighted. Yesterday Christopher Pyne said he believed it would be voted down, while Tony Abbott encouraged Australians to vote no if they don't understand it.

Now the word conflict is apparently unacceptable yet the word WAR is fine, when talking about the same subject.

HYPOCRISY THY NAME IS LIBERAL

I sincerely hope the coalition formally changes its mind on the referendum, which every sane person should realise is a grab for more centralised power.
I am not interested in word games on the other matter.
Rudd clearly was implying some serious conflict with Indonesia and has since pulled his head in.
More importantly is his direct about turn since 2007 which is of "no carbon tax" proportions. The man is unstable and cannot be trusted as leader of this country.
Indeed, this is a view shared by many of his colleagues.

Kevin Rudd’s choice for Immigration Minister, Tony Burke, had this to say about Kevin Rudd last year:

“The stories that were around of the chaos, of the temperament, of the inability to have decisions made – they are not stories”.
(Tony Burke, 22 February 2012)

Rudd’s new Youth Minister, Kate Ellis, said of him:

“Kevin Rudd is the person who has been talking down the Prime Minister (Gillard) in deeply personal ways for well over a year, during the last election campaign and since then”.
(Kate Ellis, 24 February 2012)

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said:

“If you wanted one sentence why the Cabinet and the Caucus and the party moved away from Kevin, it was because it became increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to work difficult issues through with him”.
(Stephen Smith, 23 February 2012)

And most extraordinarily, the person who Rudd asked to preside over our nation’s critical mining industry, Resources Minister Gary Gray, had this to say only ten days ago:

“He (Rudd) doesn't have the courage and the strength that's required to do this job. What he can do is spread confusion. What he can do is get himself into the media. What he can do is create a lot of torment. What he can't do is govern and what he can't do is lead the Labor Party”.
(Gary Gray, 21 June 2013)

Dnarever wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 11:47am:

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3rd, 2013 at 9:37am: In 2007, as opposition leader, he said if boats carrying people from Indonesia intending to come to Australia were intercepted outside territorial waters, the boats would be turned round. In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Does the man have no memory or does he have no shame? In 2013 he is saying this would provoke armed conflict with Indonesia. Clearly not what he said.

Yep, quite clear indeed.

The Libs are very frightened at the moment.  In the next few months they'll lie about anything they can if they think it will help them.

Gonna be an interesting few months.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 12:58pm:

Gonna be an interesting few months.

How can it not be!  8-) The last three years have been a hoot and its just getting better. 

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2013 at 12:48pm:

Rudd clearly was implying some serious conflict with Indonesia and has since pulled his head in.

What else would you call it?

Tony says he'll tow boats back
Indonesia say they won't accept them
What else would you expect to happen?
Is not an ARGUMENT just another word for CONFLICT within the verbal sense?
Would you have been OK if Rudd says it would cause arguments with Indonesia?

Perhaps you might spend a few minutes reading this & realising like any sane person that Abbott is lying to you, then ponder your response to Gillards apparent lie & why you defend 1 & vilified the other.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tough-talk-rocks-the-boat-with-indonesia-20130702-2p9vn.html

The Topic should have been called What Kevin didn't say.