So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia".

As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.

Or was it?

Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really?

Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong?

To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself.

Thoughts?

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:18pm:

Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal.

Because he (Abbott that is) is an idiot?

Why not?? His son, Prince Charles got one in 1981.

Gee it couldn't be because he (Prince Phillip) is the husband of the Monarch of Australia, could it???

I didn't think it was a big deal, I couldn't care less about this one. The guy has done a lot for Australia it isn't real outrageous.

Abbott said that he would only give awards to Australians to keep his consistency on election promises this means that he had to give one to a non Australian and their is probably not a lot of other possibilities..

Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls.

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:22pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:18pm: Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. Because he (Abbott that is) is an idiot?

Abbott’s a warrior of the far-right who has never been known to do things by halves.

The Abbott-as-idiot line was displayed on the front page of last week’s Courier Mail with the mock-up of Abbott as a court jester. This, however, only explains the audience reaction, not the motives themselves.

Abbott knighted two men: a distinguished ex-commander of the ADF, and a cantankerous, racist old bastard in mothballed suits. One of these men is a complete irrelevance, and always has been.

Apart from Philip’s use as future fossil fuel, what reasons could Abbott possibly have to knight him?

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:28pm:

Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls.

Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim"

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Why not?? His son, Prince Charles got one in 1981. Gee it couldn't be because he (Prince Phillip) is the husband of the Monarch of Australia, could it???

1981 was the year of Royal Wedding fever. Charles got a knighthood for selling Packer’s magazines and Murdoch’s tabloids.

Who in their right mind would ever give out a knighthood - the way of elevating commoners for their service - to the husband of the monarch of Australia?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:27pm:

I didn't think it was a big deal, I couldn't care less about this one. The guy has done a lot for Australia it isn't real outrageous. Abbott said that he would only give awards to Australians to keep his consistency on election promises this means that he had to give one to a non Australian and their is probably not a lot of other possibilities..

All Philip’s ever done for Australia is try to look inconspicuous on boring trips meeting spear-throwing  natives and complain that he can’t even get a decent cup of tea.

The idea that he’s a distinguished Australian has been well and truly put to rest. The question is why Abbott would put his neck out by awarding him with Australia’s highest honour.

1981 is not 2015.

That was the time when we had a conservative PM who put on a pompous British accent for crying out loud. Australian citizens were still subjects of the British Empire if you can believe that.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:22pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:18pm: Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. Because he (Abbott that is) is an idiot? Abbott’s a warrior of the far-right who has never been known to do things by halves. The Abbott-as-idiot line was displayed on the front page of last week’s Courier Mail with the mock-up of Abbott as a court jester. This, however, only explains the audience reaction, not the motives themselves. Abbott knighted two men: a distinguished ex-commander of the ADF, and a cantankerous, racist old bastard in mothballed suits. One of these men is a complete irrelevance, and always has been. Apart from Philip’s use as future fossil fuel, what reasons could Abbott possibly have to knight him?

They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit but goodness me if one takes a step back and digests your comments they're so unbelievably cutting , well done  :)

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:43pm:

1981 is not 2015. That was the time when we had a conservative PM who put on a pompous British accent for crying out loud. Australian citizens were still subjects of the British Empire if you can believe that.

No, we weren't...we were still 'members of the Commonwealth', just like we are now. But we haven't been British subjects since 1901.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:28pm:

Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls.

Sure, it was definitely a way to assert his authority. But why would he waste such precious political capital on such an irrelevant call?

Keating called Abbott a "young fogey". He argued that there’s few in Australia as socially conservative as Abbott.

But this is pomp at its most hollow and superficial. It’s so meaningless no one can understand the reason for it.

I’m wondering if it was meant as a kind of Situationist prank like making himself Minister of Women’s Affairs just to piss off JuLiar.

But I doubt Abbott jokes about "serious" subjects like nearly-dead royals.

wrong again gizmo:


Quote:

Australian law retained the status of British subject until the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 removed Part II of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on 1 May 1987.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject

I know, I couldn't believe it when I first heard it either.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:42pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:27pm: I didn't think it was a big deal, I couldn't care less about this one. The guy has done a lot for Australia it isn't real outrageous. Abbott said that he would only give awards to Australians to keep his consistency on election promises this means that he had to give one to a non Australian and their is probably not a lot of other possibilities.. All Philip’s ever done for Australia is try to look inconspicuous on boring trips meeting spear-throwing  natives and complain that he can’t even get a decent cup of tea. The idea that he’s a distinguished Australian has been well and truly put to rest. The question is why Abbott would put his neck out by awarding him with Australia’s highest honour.

Well he won't get a Job in Australia when he gets the arse , perhaps he apires to be genuine court jester, articulating the  humorous dialogue won't present any problems, no script required ,a funny suit , and abort will have a job for life, I hear those royal toffs don't mind compensating their abstract comedians handsomely.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:53pm:

wrong again gizmo: Quote: Australian law retained the status of British subject until the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 removed Part II of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on 1 May 1987. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject I know, I couldn't believe it when I first heard it either.

That article also says:
"From 1949, the status of British subject was also known by the term Commonwealth citizen, and included any person who was one of the following:

A citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies
A citizen of any other Commonwealth country
One of a limited number of British subjects without citizenship

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:53pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Sure, it was definitely a way to assert his authority. But why would he waste such precious political capital on such an irrelevant call? Keating called Abbott a "young fogey". He argued that there’s few in Australia as socially conservative as Abbott. But this is pomp at its most hollow and superficial. It’s so meaningless no one can understand the reason for it. I’m wondering if it was meant as a kind of Situationist prank like making himself Minister of Women’s Affairs just to piss off JuLiar. But I doubt Abbott jokes about "serious" subjects like nearly-dead royals.

The clue may lie in the announcement by the liberal backbencher to introduce a private members bill to abolish knighthoods and dames altogether. That sounds to me like deliberate sh*t stirring - and Chris Uhlman agrees with me. I have a theory that this issue has been used as a weapon to undermine Abbott behind closed doors. I can imagine Abbott's response:

"oh you think you can bully me over knights?? Really?? Well how do you like this for a f**cking knighthood!!" *proceeds to knight Prince Phillip* - "whatyagonna do about it biaatchh??"

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:59pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:53pm: wrong again gizmo: Quote: Australian law retained the status of British subject until the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 removed Part II of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on 1 May 1987. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject I know, I couldn't believe it when I first heard it either. That article also says: "From 1949, the status of British subject was also known by the term Commonwealth citizen, and included any person who was one of the following: A citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies A citizen of any other Commonwealth country One of a limited number of British subjects without citizenship

Australians were British subjects under Australian Law up until 1987. Deal with it.

Its time wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:27pm: I didn't think it was a big deal, I couldn't care less about this one. The guy has done a lot for Australia it isn't real outrageous. Abbott said that he would only give awards to Australians to keep his consistency on election promises this means that he had to give one to a non Australian and their is probably not a lot of other possibilities.. All Philip’s ever done for Australia is try to look inconspicuous on boring trips meeting spear-throwing  natives and complain that he can’t even get a decent cup of tea. The idea that he’s a distinguished Australian has been well and truly put to rest. The question is why Abbott would put his neck out by awarding him with Australia’s highest honour. Well he won't get a Job in Australia when he gets the arse , perhaps he apires to be genuine court jester, articulating the  humorous dialogue won't present any problems, no script required ,a funny suit , and abort will have a job for life, I hear those royal toffs don't mind compensating their abstract comedians handsomely.

Probably not, since Prince Phillip 'getting the arse' only actually happens AFTER he dies...

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:00pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:59pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:53pm: wrong again gizmo: Quote: Australian law retained the status of British subject until the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 removed Part II of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on 1 May 1987. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject I know, I couldn't believe it when I first heard it either. That article also says: "From 1949, the status of British subject was also known by the term Commonwealth citizen, and included any person who was one of the following: A citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies A citizen of any other Commonwealth country One of a limited number of British subjects without citizenship Australians were British subjects under Australian Law up until 1987. Deal with it.

Well I really don't care, but I'm pretty sure that, other than on paper, neither England nor Australia actually thought that.......it just took a while for the people in Canberra to get around to amending the 'official' rule.

Much like it's still illegal in NSW to drive a motor vehicle on the road without a person walking in front waving a red flag...

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:59pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:53pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Sure, it was definitely a way to assert his authority. But why would he waste such precious political capital on such an irrelevant call? Keating called Abbott a "young fogey". He argued that there’s few in Australia as socially conservative as Abbott. But this is pomp at its most hollow and superficial. It’s so meaningless no one can understand the reason for it. I’m wondering if it was meant as a kind of Situationist prank like making himself Minister of Women’s Affairs just to piss off JuLiar. But I doubt Abbott jokes about "serious" subjects like nearly-dead royals. The clue may lie in the announcement by the liberal backbencher to introduce a private members bill to abolish knighthoods and dames altogether. That sounds to me like deliberate sh*t stirring - and Chris Uhlman agrees with me. I have a theory that this issue has been used as a weapon to undermine Abbott behind closed doors. I can imagine Abbott's response: "oh you think you can bully me over knights?? Really?? Well how do you like this for a f**cking knighthood!!" *proceeds to knight Prince Phillip* - "whatyagonna do about it biaatchh??"

The decision was made months ago - long before his barnicles and back-flips and all the backbench blood.

This was a decision made by Abbott at the top of his game - at the crown of his career. That, I think, is what makes it so surreal.

Abbott was sending out some strange monarchist mating call with the decision - a code only he, David Flynt and Alan Jones understand.

Of all of Abbotts errors this would have to be the most benign.

.......

Is this a possible reason, remembering Abbott is a devoted lapdog monarchist at heart.  As we know many years ago royal honors were abolished and replaced with the order of Australia. This incenses Abbott. So much so that maintaining and strengthening our connection with the British monarchy becomes one of the things to do on his "To Do List" should he ever become PM.  Then he becomes PM and in amongst the rest of his agenda he keeps faith with himself and (1) restores the Royal Honors and then (2) considers who should be his first choice for a Knighthood, keeping in mind that it must be someone who by his very stature gives renewed prestige and respect (in the eyes of Australians) to the award and the monarchy. And who better to choose then someone from the Royal Family itself.  Unfortunately for most people the Royals still hold a place and although the Prince Consort is a bit of an old racist, the public generally hold him in high esteem. So Abbott decides on Prince Phillip and thereafter nobody can talk him out of it.  I'm guessing that's how it went down.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:04pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 11:00pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:59pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:53pm: wrong again gizmo: Quote: Australian law retained the status of British subject until the Australian Citizenship Amendment Act 1984 removed Part II of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on 1 May 1987. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject I know, I couldn't believe it when I first heard it either. That article also says: "From 1949, the status of British subject was also known by the term Commonwealth citizen, and included any person who was one of the following: A citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies A citizen of any other Commonwealth country One of a limited number of British subjects without citizenship Australians were British subjects under Australian Law up until 1987. Deal with it. Well I really don't care, but I'm pretty sure that, other than on paper, neither England nor Australia actually thought that.......it just took a while for the people in Canberra to get around to amending the 'official' rule. Much like it's still illegal in NSW to drive a motor vehicle on the road without a person walking in front waving a red flag...

Try going to England and declaring yourself a British citizen. Back in the day, any white Australian could do it. Barry Humphries, Germaine Greer, Clive James.

Good luck now.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:10pm:

Of all of Abbotts errors this would have to be the most benign.

Not for Abbott. For him, such issues are at the heart of why he entered politics.

He couldn’t care less about the whole Liberal economic reform agenda, which is why "his" budget must be such a heavy crown to bear.

For Abbott, bringing back the honours system will be one of his crowning achievements - no doubt akin to Rudd’s apology to the Stolen Generation. It would seem that Abbott really does want to take Australia back to the Menzies years - as literally as possible.

This is not whether the decision is harmful or not, it’s about the motives of the decision. Why do you think he did it?

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:11pm:

Is this a possible reason, remembering Abbott is a devoted lapdog monarchist at heart.  As we know many years ago royal honors were abolished and replaced with the order of Australia. This incenses Abbott. So much so that maintaining and strengthening our connection with the British monarchy becomes one of the things to do on his "To Do List" should he ever become PM.  Then he becomes PM and in amongst the rest of his agenda he keeps faith with himself and (1) restores the Royal Honors and then (2) considers who should be his first choice for a Knighthood, keeping in mind that it must be someone who by his very stature gives renewed prestige and respect (in the eyes of Australians) to the award and the monarchy. And who better to choose then someone from the Royal Family itself.  Unfortunately for most people the Royals still hold a place and although the Prince Consort is a bit of an old racist, the public generally hold him in high esteem. So Abbott decides on Prince Phillip and thereafter nobody can talk him out of it.  I'm guessing that's how it went down.

I think you’re getting there, but we’re still lacking a compelling reason for taking such a stance.

Remember, the Prime Minister’s Office doesn’t make public decisions like this without a lot of debate, and usually, market research.

Abbott has clearly gone against this grain, and with huge cost. What’s telling, however, is that he thinks like this in the first place. No other Prime Minister in the post-war era has been so out of touch with public opinion on such things - possibly since federation.

NZ's rightwing government did it in 2012

Canadia's rightwing government did it in 2013

Australia's rightwing dipstick did it in 2015.

He was just following the mob.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:48pm:

But we haven't been British subjects since 1901.

I think you'll find that the change occurred with the proclamation of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 on Australia Day 1949 rather than in 1901.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:10pm:

Abbott was sending out some strange monarchist mating call with the decision - a code only he, David Flynt and Alan Jones understand.

Very good Karnal ... but there's an equally strange conflict in Abbott's monarchist affection though. He's not Church of England! lol

Perhaps the Knighthood was really for the Bank of England ... or he felt a need to carry on Bob Menzie's tireless affection for the Royal Family

From now on Lib Lab voters would do well to vote for Aussies only.

____ wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:35pm:

NZ's rightwing government did it in 2012 Canadia's rightwing government did it in 2013 Australia's rightwing dipstick did it in 2015. He was just following the mob.

Well there you go. I think you got your answer. He's a monarchist at heart. Other conservative governments in the C/W have done the same thing because they're all monarchist sycophants as well and so Abort does it thinking he will get away with it.   

____ wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:35pm:

NZ's rightwing government did it in 2012 Canadia's rightwing government did it in 2013 Australia's rightwing dipstick did it in 2015. He was just following the mob.

Well there you go. I think you got your answer. He's a monarchist at heart. Other conservative governments in the C/W have done the same thing because they're all monarchist sycophants as well and so Abort does it thinking he will get away with it.   

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:18pm:

So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia". As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or was it? Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really? Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong? To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself. Thoughts?

Comrade, you're over-analysing things again. Just call Abbott a racist, sexist or bigot and be done with it. This is progress.

Abbott's a conservative and a Monarchist. They believe in rank orders. End of story. Move along.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 11:10pm: Of all of Abbotts errors this would have to be the most benign. Not for Abbott. For him, such issues are at the heart of why he entered politics. He couldn’t care less about the whole Liberal economic reform agenda, which is why "his" budget must be such a heavy crown to bear. For Abbott, bringing back the honours system will be one of his crowning achievements - no doubt akin to Rudd’s apology to the Stolen Generation. It would seem that Abbott really does want to take Australia back to the Menzies years - as literally as possible. This is not whether the decision is harmful or not, it’s about the motives of the decision. Why do you think he did it?

You do understand that in all probability Tony is still very much a British citizen and likely entitled to vote in British elections etc, Phil really is Tony's prince.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:14pm:

Try going to England and declaring yourself a British citizen. Back in the day, any white Australian could do it. Barry Humphries, Germaine Greer, Clive James. Good luck now.

Yes this is a very interesting topic there was a lot involved in the decisions in this period and mostly reciprocal to what was occurring in the UK.

One of the Mods here regularly whines about his parents losing their automatic rights in Australia as British citizens at the time.

The UK were joining with the European community. This meant that Australia had to be dropped as a major trading partner.

The UK also put an end to Australians having automatic access to the UK as British citizens.

Australia later reciprocated this decision.

Just info - Around 1950 a little earlier maybe there was no such thing as an Australian citizen - we were all British. My parents were born in Australia but were British subjects. This was only an administrative change Australian's were still recognised as British subjects. This legislation was only made so that there would be a difference between Australians and visitors from the UK - Before 1950 there was no way to tell the difference.

Note: there are still some pre 1984 British citizens in Australia who are allowed to vote. When the change was made anyone currently registered to vote were allowed to continue.

Maybe this:

---

Karnal,
have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party.
He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later.

The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia,

Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within.

He is NOT A DUMMY.

He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable.
He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way).

You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation.
This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals

Why don’t you and all the Lib shills on here take some responsibility. Choosing Abbott as Leader was an act of lunacy, of putting winning above policy.

Mind you, the neocon experiment has about run its course, but blaming Labor for Abbott? Complete abdication of responsibility!

Woukd be nice if the Lib shills on here recognised Howard’s profligate spending which with Costello’s no longer sustainable tax cuts are the source of our Budget problems, while their whipping up a real estate boom and feeding it with the pork and tax cuts means we have a highly indebted private sector handicapping economic activity and growth. Then add the Lib trash talking of the economy and a harsh and unfair Budget for destroying confidence.

Then we can argue on some sort of sensible, realistic level.

Quote:

Why did he do it?

Abbott sees himself as a subject of the British Empire rather than an Australian.

Note that he still fails to prove renunciation of British citizenship  -  even Obama eventually produced a birth certificate.

.....

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 6:59am:

Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals

OK I don't want to hear you accusing anyone of mindlessly following stupid conspiracy theories ever again. 

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 7:59am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 6:59am: Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals OK I don't want to hear you accusing anyone of mindlessly following stupid conspiracy theories ever again.

;D ;D

yeah, maybe an exaggeration.

every now and then, I get a kelpie that looks like its the real deal, but it just has a brain snap and starts killing chooks and goes completely "off the reservation"

its no good pretending its going to get better .

Its better to admit, I made  a mistake, the things gone feral  .  And then get the vet to bring out the lethobarbitone injection.
Its the only humane solution really.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 12:38am:

Well there you go. I think you got your answer. He's a monarchist at heart.

And he is the head of Government in a nation that voted to preserve its monarchy... No anachronism there.

Where else would you expect to find an overtly monarchist PM if not in a monarchist state?

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 6:59am:

Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals

The strange thing is, dear, Tony Abbott is trying to do the exact opposite. I can understand how you’ve come to your conclusions though.

Would you like to take a stab at the question of why Abbott did it?

Remember, these honours lists aren’t secrets. They’re national announcements.

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:03am:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 7:59am: aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 6:59am: Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals OK I don't want to hear you accusing anyone of mindlessly following stupid conspiracy theories ever again.  ;D ;D yeah, maybe an exaggeration. every now and then, I get a kelpie that looks like its the real deal, but it just has a brain snap and starts killing chooks and goes completely "off the reservation" its no good pretending its going to get better . Its better to admit, I made  a mistake, the things gone feral  .  And then get the vet to bring out the lethobarbitone injection. Its the only humane solution really.

Herding instinct is a misdirection of the dog predatory instinct. Why not offer the dog to the RSPCA for rehousing in the cities?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:06am:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 12:38am: Well there you go. I think you got your answer. He's a monarchist at heart.   And he is the head of Government in a nation that voted to preserve its monarchy... No anachronism there. Where else would you expect to find an overtly monarchist PM if not in a monarchist state?

Almost nowhere. Outside the Melbourne Club and Aboriginal communities, there are few monarchists left in Australia.

Australia never voted for a monarchy. It rejected a politically appointed head of state. Australia is not a comfortable monarchy, unlike Jordan or Thailand, for example, where the King is deeply popular. Australians don’t really care either way.

Which is what makes Tony Abbott’s monarchist convictions so inscrutable. No one understands Abbott, or knows where he’s coming from.

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:09am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 6:59am: Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals The strange thing is, dear, Tony Abbott is trying to do the exact opposite. I can understand how you’ve come to your conclusions though. Would you like to take a stab at the question of why Abbott did it? Remember, these honours lists aren’t secrets. They’re national announcements.

he has been in politics all his life K.
he MUST have known this would embarrass his party and cost Campbell votes.
he MUST.

even the stunt free horse and the Light would know that.

Therefore, as a student of greek logic, he did it to
DO MAXIMAL DAMAGE TO HIS OWN PARTY.

he is a deeply conflicted individual.
You would have to be to be a Jesuit priest and head of the liberal party.

His persona is fragmented.
He is a rudderless ship my friend.
He is a hazard to shipping.
He needs to be sunk  ;)

St George of the Garden wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:11am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:03am: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 7:59am: aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 6:59am: Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals OK I don't want to hear you accusing anyone of mindlessly following stupid conspiracy theories ever again.  ;D ;D yeah, maybe an exaggeration. every now and then, I get a kelpie that looks like its the real deal, but it just has a brain snap and starts killing chooks and goes completely "off the reservation" its no good pretending its going to get better . Its better to admit, I made  a mistake, the things gone feral  .  And then get the vet to bring out the lethobarbitone injection. Its the only humane solution really. Herding instinct is a misdirection of the dog predatory instinct. Why not offer the dog to the RSPCA for rehousing in the cities?

of course that's what we do George. ive never killed a dog in my life . I have trouble sending the cattle to market  ;).  was just illustrating that some critters , despite good genetics, turn out to be "not useful for the purpose for which you originally intended them to be"  abbott is such an individual.
Labor should (and are) to their credit, not attacking him. He is their star performer  ;)

The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement.

Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party?

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:25am:

The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement. Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party?

if he didn't know this, he is truly lost.
a state premier who doesn't know the rate of the GST and a prime minister who cant see the stupidity of this act.
They really need to get out more .
(as a side note K, did you know Malcolm fraser, when he left politics , had to learn how to dial a phone....he had always just been told to pick up by his trusty secretary).
I still think tony must have known....
he mixes with cyclists, firefighters, lifesavers, his daughters seem like cool kids.
He couldn't be that naïve.....gulp...could he??

Tony wants all state ALP govts, so there is less, or diluted, animus against the Federal Lib govt. THAT is what Sir Phil the Greek was about. Tone is not subtle.

St George of the Garden wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:39am:

Tony wants all state ALP govts, so there is less, or diluted, animus against the Federal Lib govt. THAT is what Sir Phil the Greek was about. Tone is not subtle.

this is possible.

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:17am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:06am: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 12:38am: Well there you go. I think you got your answer. He's a monarchist at heart.   And he is the head of Government in a nation that voted to preserve its monarchy... No anachronism there. Where else would you expect to find an overtly monarchist PM if not in a monarchist state? Almost nowhere. Outside the Melbourne Club and Aboriginal communities, there are few monarchists left in Australia. Australia never voted for a monarchy. It rejected a politically appointed head of state. Australia is not a comfortable monarchy, unlike Jordan or Thailand, for example, where the King is deeply popular. Australians don’t really care either way. Which is what makes Tony Abbott’s monarchist convictions so inscrutable. No one understands Abbott, or knows where he’s coming from.

Don't deconstruct the irony... Leave it intact...

Whatever the reason for the preservation of the monarchy, the nation got what it wanted... The consequences therefrom come with the choice.

Yes, Australia (with regard to its political system) is a crypto-Republic (or schizophrenic monarchy).

well we are all talking about the knighthood and not the dire economic circumstances Abbotts failed budget has placed the country in. Wheres Hockey? I would say Abbott has done very well as far as instruments of dstraction go and I will suggest he is not 1 step away from his puppet master Howard at any stage, Credlin  and Howard are running this country, not Abbott and Hockey.

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:25am:

The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement. Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party?

Who knows, you wont get the answer from  Abbott, better to ask who made the decision. The Australian public still cant see the elephant in the room.

rhino wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 10:22am:

well we are all talking about the knighthood and not the dire economic circumstances Abbotts failed budget has placed the country in. Wheres Hockey? I would say Abbott has done very well as far as instruments of dstraction go and I will suggest he is not 1 step away from his puppet master Howard at any stage, Credlin  and Howard are running this country, not Abbott and Hockey.

A power–mad woman and a failed PM&Treasurer are running the country? No wonder they are making such a mess of things!

rhino wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 10:22am:

well we are all talking about the knighthood and not the dire economic circumstances Abbotts failed budget has placed the country in.

Maybe thats it - maybe this was a deliberate distraction from Abbott - reasoning that ridiculing him over a triviality is better than ridiculing him over things that matter. And that we'd all end up having a jolly laugh over it - "Oh Tones" we'd all say with an affectionate smile.

Trouble is, everyone has simply seen this as reinforcing his ineptitude on all leadership matters - big and small.

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:21am:

St George of the Garden wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:11am: aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:03am: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 7:59am: aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 6:59am: Karnal, have I not been saying for some time that big spending , ex catholic priest, Tony Abbott is a labor mole in the liberal party. He has played his role well, almost like those Russian "sleeper" spies who were raised with American families and "activated" decades later. The Jesuit priesthood tony tried to join is the ABSOLUTE COMPLETE OTHER END OF THE UNIVERSE  to the the business council of Australia, Tony has been reactivated and now seeks to destroy the right side of politics from within. He is NOT A DUMMY. He knew this would be the master stroke to foil Campbell and ensure that compassionate, big spending labor won in QLD and the big business (which at his core he despises) would be thwarted. His timing is impeccable. He will wreck the liberal party (which he despises...even if only in a subcounscious way). You are a smart guy K.  Surely you can see this is a deliberate strategy of termiting his own organisation. This is obvious to me. I'm sure if you wash the dust from your eyes you will see tony for the complex DLP type person that he is.  The Bob Santamaria  seeking vengeance on all that old money , blue blood liberals OK I don't want to hear you accusing anyone of mindlessly following stupid conspiracy theories ever again.  ;D ;D yeah, maybe an exaggeration. every now and then, I get a kelpie that looks like its the real deal, but it just has a brain snap and starts killing chooks and goes completely "off the reservation" its no good pretending its going to get better . Its better to admit, I made  a mistake, the things gone feral  .  And then get the vet to bring out the lethobarbitone injection. Its the only humane solution really. Herding instinct is a misdirection of the dog predatory instinct. Why not offer the dog to the RSPCA for rehousing in the cities? of course that's what we do George. ive never killed a dog in my life . I have trouble sending the cattle to market  ;)

Good. My bloody dog has killed three of my chickens (a terrier so in her nature. A good ratter too.)

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:33pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim"

LOL

Rupert Murdoch and Liberal backbenchers Andrew Laming and Warren Entsch lead charge to abolish knights and dames

Tue 3 Feb 2015, 12:46am


http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8UjLhwCEAAKyrd.png


Liberals "disappointed" with parts of the Prime Minister's speech at the Press Club in Canberra are mounting a push to abolish knights and dames.

Queensland backbenchers Andrew Laming and Warren Entsch had wanted Tony Abbott to scrap the titles completely in the wake of the controversial decision to give Prince Philip a knighthood on Australia Day.

During his speech on Monday, Mr Abbott conceded he "probably overdid it" and said that all future knighthoods would now be decided by the Order of Australia Council.

But Dr Laming said it was "not enough" and that he now had "no other option" but to introduce a private member's bill to try and stop any future titles.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-02/laming-entsch-lead-charge-to-abolish-knights-and-dames/6064132

Yadda wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:07pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:33pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim" LOL

Just for the record, that joke's not original - it was originally penned to describe Sir Joh's misfortunes with the media in the 80s.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:13pm:

Yadda wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 1:07pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:33pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim" LOL Just for the record, that joke's not original - it was originally penned to describe Sir Joh's misfortunes with the media in the 80s.

And yet, unoriginal jokes still have the power to amuse me.






.....or to outrage me,

"ISLAM rejects terror and promotes peace and harmony."
- The Muslim Council of Britain

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:13pm:

Yadda wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 1:07pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:33pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim" LOL Just for the record, that joke's not original - it was originally penned to describe Sir Joh's misfortunes with the media in the 80s.

I first heard it about 20 years ago, with Bill Gates as the 'water-walker'.

Yadda wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:22pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 1:13pm: Yadda wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 1:07pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:33pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:28pm: Someone (can't remember who) posted a recent article on the drum with an interesting theory. She basically says that with all this undermining of Abbott's leadership going on he feels the need, every now and then, to make these completely random "captain's calls" to tell his colleagues who's boss, and to reassert his authority. Knighting Prince Phillip was supposedly one of these random calls. Yeah, but that is from the drum...if Abbott went for a walk across Lake Burley Griffin, the ABC headlines would be "Tony Abbott can't swim" LOL Just for the record, that joke's not original - it was originally penned to describe Sir Joh's misfortunes with the media in the 80s. And yet, unoriginal jokes still have the power to amuse me.

Yadda is OUR "unoriginal joke"


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6Lr7X7kVf5Y/UQZKMIKcvpI/AAAAAAAAGI8/hkyp9_Ln60k/s320/shut-the-bugger-up.jpg

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 5:14am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:18pm: So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia". As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or was it? Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really? Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong? To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself. Thoughts? Comrade, you're over-analysing things again. Just call Abbott a racist, sexist or bigot and be done with it. This is progress.

Good propaganda, comrade. You've described the correct party response, but as an International Socialist, what's your take on Abbott's knighthood of Prince Philip?

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:35am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:25am: The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement. Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party? if he didn't know this, he is truly lost. a state premier who doesn't know the rate of the GST and a prime minister who cant see the stupidity of this act. They really need to get out more . (as a side note K, did you know Malcolm fraser, when he left politics , had to learn how to dial a phone....he had always just been told to pick up by his trusty secretary). I still think tony must have known.... he mixes with cyclists, firefighters, lifesavers, his daughters seem like cool kids. He couldn't be that naïve.....gulp...could he??

Do you think he'd sabotage his hold on power simply to honour the Queen's Consort?

Yes: if Abbott didn't have any idea of the possible reaction to this decision, he is truly lost.

I'm wondering why he made such a decision in the first place. What was he trying to do?

So far, no one's even come close to explaining such a bizarre decision.

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:35am: Karnal wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:25am: The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement. Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party? if he didn't know this, he is truly lost. a state premier who doesn't know the rate of the GST and a prime minister who cant see the stupidity of this act. They really need to get out more . (as a side note K, did you know Malcolm fraser, when he left politics , had to learn how to dial a phone....he had always just been told to pick up by his trusty secretary). I still think tony must have known.... he mixes with cyclists, firefighters, lifesavers, his daughters seem like cool kids. He couldn't be that naïve.....gulp...could he?? Do you think he'd sabotage his hold on power simply to honour the Queen's Consort? Yes: if Abbott didn't have any idea of the possible reaction to this decision, he is truly lost. I'm wondering why he made such a decision in the first place. What was he trying to do? So far, no one's even come close to explaining such a bizarre decision.

In one (+) word/s.....ingratiation to those he seeks personal approval from.  He's been doing that all his life.

Karnal wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:18pm:

So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia". As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or was it? Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really? Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong? To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself. Thoughts?

If you've been keeping pace with the UK media, you'll connect Abbott's actions with what appears a determined campaign being run by the media to finish of Britain's royal family.  Thousands of reader comments want the royal family gone

To be suspected therefore is that Abbott used reverse-psychology when he knighted Prince Philip, knowing there would be a backlash and very probably damage to Prince Philip and the royals as a group in addition to stirring up republican sentiments in Australia

So, was Abbott's supposed knighting of Philip actually a sledge-hammer blow aimed at the royals, rather than the 'honour' it purported to be ?

Aussie wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:28pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 3:25pm: aquascoot wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:35am: Karnal wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 8:25am: The thing about this issue, dear, is that Abbott DIDN’T know knighting Prince Philip would be seen as so ridiculous, which is why it pierces through the heart of his judgement. Abbott was telling us something with this award. Was it, as Gandalf suggested, a three finger salute to the republicans in his party? if he didn't know this, he is truly lost. a state premier who doesn't know the rate of the GST and a prime minister who cant see the stupidity of this act. They really need to get out more . (as a side note K, did you know Malcolm fraser, when he left politics , had to learn how to dial a phone....he had always just been told to pick up by his trusty secretary). I still think tony must have known.... he mixes with cyclists, firefighters, lifesavers, his daughters seem like cool kids. He couldn't be that naïve.....gulp...could he?? Do you think he'd sabotage his hold on power simply to honour the Queen's Consort? Yes: if Abbott didn't have any idea of the possible reaction to this decision, he is truly lost. I'm wondering why he made such a decision in the first place. What was he trying to do? So far, no one's even come close to explaining such a bizarre decision. In one (+) word/s.....ingratiation to those he seeks personal approval from.  He's been doing that all his life.

Alan Jones? David Flynt? Maybe you’re right. It gives a whole new twist to the grown-ups back in charge.

Not that there’s anything wrong with it.

PZ547 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:39pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:18pm: So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia". As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or was it? Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really? Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong? To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself. Thoughts? If you've been keeping pace with the UK media, you'll connect Abbott's actions with what appears a determined campaign being run by the media to finish of Britain's royal family.

Oh, I have. But strangely enough, Herbie’s UK Daily Mail.articles don’t mention anything about the royals. Apparently the whole of Great Britain and most of Europe is obsessed with the despicable Muselmen in their midst. Apparently, Europe has become a war zone.

I blame Rupert, but I know we’re supposed to be blaming someone else.

According to Herbie, I’ll be gassed for saying this - in the fullness of time, of course.

B.A Santamaria. 



.....and many more.

Karnal wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 3rd, 2015 at 5:14am: Karnal wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 10:18pm: So far, no one’s even suggested why the husband of the Queen would be awarded a knighthood by an antipodean Prime Minister. The Duke of Edinburgh Awards don’t come close as a reason for "services to Australia". As a student back in the 70s, Tony Abbott posted pictures of the queen and the pope around Sydney Uni as a reaction against the left’s pictures of Che Guevara. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or was it? Tony Abbott has not even bothered to suggest why he would knight a senior British royal. He says now it was all a big mistake, but was it really? Could it have been an attempt to resurrect a debate on the monarchy? Was it part of a campaign to consolidate support for the royals in what, in the Queen’s final years, will result in the succession of Charles IV? Was Tony Abbott simply making a sincere gesture of gratitude towards a senior royal in the last stages of life? Or was his "captain’s pick" simply his authoritarian loyalist streak on display in a bizarre Oedipal prank gone wrong? To date, no one’s even questioned the motives - or the reasons - for such a move. Most tellingly, least of all Abbott himself. Thoughts? Comrade, you're over-analysing things again. Just call Abbott a racist, sexist or bigot and be done with it. This is progress. Good propaganda, comrade. You've described the correct party response, but as an International Socialist, what's your take on Abbott's knighthood of Prince Philip?

It's really not that hard to fathom. If you understand Abbott's particular brand of conservatism, the decision makes perfect sense - he's been open on his support for the Monarchy.

Just as if you understand leftardism, you understand why they bang on about equality, tolerance, and all that jazz.

Just look at the guiding principle or 'ideology' of those who speak and the motivations for their desired policies become clear.

Thanks, comrade. We know all about Abbott’s support of the monarchy, but what’s he seeking to do by knighting Prince Philip?

It would be great to hear your view as a "progressive".

Karnal wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 8:50am:

Thanks, comrade. We know all about Abbott’s support of the monarchy, but what’s he seeking to do by knighting Prince Philip? It would be great to hear your view as a "progressive".

Well, as a "progressive" we see this as anaziwhowantstogassixmillionjews. But as a conservative he's merely attempting to reinstate or reaffirm his and the Monarchists in Aus. reverence/pride/love/whatever for the Monarchy. Conservatives believe in rank orders, and the Monarchists' rank order puts the Monarchy at the top. It was bound to piss off "progressives" but that's only a by-product of being conservative, and not its purpose. There's no conspiracy, just look for the simplest explanation.

edit: "Progressives" hate Jews, so just replace Jews with funny little brown people.

It's no worse than what Dillard did by swiping aside an experienced politician to put Nova Peris Assbone into a job she had no experience in. The same job she used to get her black boyfriend out her to bang her on taxpayer money.

...

He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal. If anything, it shows the power leftards have now got via social media outlets. There was no outrage over Hawke's decision, not to this extent anyway.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:19pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 8:50am: Thanks, comrade. We know all about Abbott’s support of the monarchy, but what’s he seeking to do by knighting Prince Philip? It would be great to hear your view as a "progressive". Well, as a "progressive" we see this as anaziwhowantstogassixmillionjews. But as a conservative he's merely attempting to reinstate or reaffirm his and the Monarchists in Aus. reverence/pride/love/whatever for the Monarchy. Conservatives believe in rank orders, and the Monarchists' rank order puts the Monarchy at the top. It was bound to piss off "progressives" but that's only a by-product of being conservative, and not its purpose. There's no conspiracy, just look for the simplest explanation. edit: "Progressives" hate Jews, so just replace Jews with funny little brown people.

Good point, comrade: it was bound to piss off the "progressives".

Do you think, like his posters of the queen and the pope at uni, that was his sole aim?

I’m interested in your views as a deconstructionist.

..

Karnal wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:34pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:19pm: Karnal wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 8:50am: Thanks, comrade. We know all about Abbott’s support of the monarchy, but what’s he seeking to do by knighting Prince Philip? It would be great to hear your view as a "progressive". Well, as a "progressive" we see this as anaziwhowantstogassixmillionjews. But as a conservative he's merely attempting to reinstate or reaffirm his and the Monarchists in Aus. reverence/pride/love/whatever for the Monarchy. Conservatives believe in rank orders, and the Monarchists' rank order puts the Monarchy at the top. It was bound to piss off "progressives" but that's only a by-product of being conservative, and not its purpose. There's no conspiracy, just look for the simplest explanation. edit: "Progressives" hate Jews, so just replace Jews with funny little brown people. Good point, comrade: it was bound to piss off the "progressives". Do you think, like his posters of the queen and the pope at uni, that was his sole aim? I’m interested in your views as a deconstructionist.

Not as bad as your picture of Ayatollah Khomeini hanging in the living room next to the pictures of hubby and the Econovan.

..

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:31pm:

He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal.

I can’t believe Bob Hawke awarded Prince Philip for military reasons. Amazing.

But as a deal, it’s now as big as it gets. Our hero, Mr Abbott, won’t survive it.

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:44pm:

..

Good propaganda, comrade.

Karnal wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:54pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:31pm: He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal.  I can’t believe Bob Hawke awarded Prince Philip for military reasons. Amazing. But as a deal, it’s now as big as it gets. Our hero, Mr Abbott, won’t survive it.

Read it here: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/honours/honour_roll/search.cfm?aus_award_id=879385&showInd=true

Where's all the leftard screeching?

Karnal wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:54pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:31pm: He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal.  I can’t believe Bob Hawke awarded Prince Philip for military reasons. Amazing. But as a deal, it’s now as big as it gets. Our hero, Mr Abbott, won’t survive it.

Now this really is progress

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:54pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:31pm: He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal.  I can’t believe Bob Hawke awarded Prince Philip for military reasons. Amazing. But as a deal, it’s now as big as it gets. Our hero, Mr Abbott, won’t survive it. Read it here: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/honours/honour_roll/search.cfm?aus_award_id=879385&showInd=true

With the ironic subtitle "Australians Celebrating Australians"

          Name: PHILIP, Prince Philip

          Award: Companion of the Order of Australia

          Post-nominal: AC

          Date granted: 13 June 1988




Ah yes! Dumb we may be, but stupid we're not!

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

Karnal wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:54pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 4th, 2015 at 7:31pm: He's received many awards, from dozens of countries (48 I think). Bob Hawke gave him the Companion of the Order of Australia in 1988. It's no big deal.  I can’t believe Bob Hawke awarded Prince Philip for military reasons. Amazing. But as a deal, it’s now as big as it gets. Our hero, Mr Abbott, won’t survive it. Read it here: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/honours/honour_roll/search.cfm?aus_award_id=879385&showInd=true Where's all the leftard screeching?

Oh, I read it. Did you say "leftard" screeching?

We "progressives" believe in solidarity, comrade.