Australian Politics Forum - Will Tony Stand aside?

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #45 - May 16^th, 2012 at 4:48am

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:30pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:12pm:

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

Glad you asked a relevant question. It was getting boring pasting that statement in.

Here y'are Soren, read it and weep:

Quote:

It is therefore incumbent on the Prime Minister, who used her numbers to install Mr Slipper as Speaker late last year, to require him to stand aside until these matters are concluded before the courts.

http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/story/2012/04/21/pm-must-act-slipper-abbott...

Be careful what you wish for, righties. Cheesy

Context, git, context. The matters Abbott is talking about are the sexual harassment AND the potential criminal changes relating to misuse of money.

I would like to see Gillard or anyone on the Labor side to stand up and say that Abbott should stand aside because he said Setka conducted non-medical home visits. I want to hear what Labor has to say. Defending a union heavy would blow up in their faces like you've never seen it before. This will damage Labor, not Abbott. Mark my word.

I'd have to agree with you on that one. It seems Tony is getting a lot smarter at picking his mark.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26513 Australia	Re: Will Tony Stand aside? Reply #46 - May 16^th, 2012 at 8:29am Armchair_Politician wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm: Abbott didn't say anything untruthful, so why should he stand aside? How would you know? There wouldn't be a lawsuit if it was truthful now would there? SOB
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged

corporate_whitey Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 8896 Archivist	Re: Will Tony Stand aside? Reply #47 - May 16^th, 2012 at 8:32am JuLIAR is trying to buy the invaders votes with massive handouts - thats why they have hundreds of thousands of people invading our borders every year...,we are robbed of our own wealth and assets.
Back to top	World Wide Working Class Struggle IP Logged

angeleyes

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 615

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #48 - May 16^th, 2012 at 8:34am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:29am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

Abbott didn't say anything untruthful, so why should he stand aside?

How would you know? There wouldn't be a lawsuit if it was truthful now would there?

SOB

Betcha it won't get to court. It will be withdrawn by the union hack.

Remember the Thomson case?

Back to top

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #49 - May 16^th, 2012 at 8:35am

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 5:40pm:

Swagman wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 5:36pm:

Even if the unlikely event that the Thug Standoverman isn't a Thug Standoverman, defamation is a civil matter and not criminal, so TA has effall to worry about comrade pinkos. Cheesy

Civil, not criminal? You mean like the Slipper charges?

TONY SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE HOUSE!!! THE LIEBERAL PARTY SHOULD RENOUNCE HIS LEADERSHIP IMMEDIATELY!!

Note: I won't mention Thomson as there are no charges.

OH LOL, yes EXACTLY like Slipper only difference is phony Tony is the sold gold conga lines hero.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

angeleyes Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 615	Re: Will Tony Stand aside? Reply #50 - May 16^th, 2012 at 8:41am Note: I won't mention Thomson as there are no charges. What have I missed? Has Abbott been charged with something?
Back to top	IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #51 - May 16^th, 2012 at 9:02am

angeleyes wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:41am:

Note: I won't mention Thomson as there are no charges.

What have I missed?

Has Abbott been charged with something?

Abbott has been charged with the exact same thing as Slipper, IE, sweet FA. Are you outraged phony Tony has not stood down???? you are calling for Slipper to, you are not that big a hypocriter are you mel????????

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 16^th, 2012 at 9:14am by skippy. »

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #52 - May 16^th, 2012 at 9:07am

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 11:34pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

Abbott didn't say anything untruthful, so why should he stand aside?

IRRELEVANT!

Er... actually, telling the truth cannot be defamation. SO it is not irrelevant. As I pointed out earlier, defamation has to meet certain criteria and there are certain defences that rule out defamation. Truth is one. (this is why, BTW) Bolt was not sued for defamation but for hurting feelings under the discrimination laws. Setka can't resort to the discrimination laws because unionists are not yet a protected minority But he will not be able to prove defamation as his reputation, established before Abbott's comments, was already as described by Abbott. Defamation is ENTIRELY a matter of interpretation, unlike all the various offences Slipper and Thomspon are tainted with.

I understand that progs can only see the words 'legal action' on both sides and so imagine that they are identical, but that's progs for ya. You will repeat the mantra 'irrelevant' to every attempt to show you the differences between the various cases but since you do not understand any of it you will carry on chanting.

Interestingly, there was no mention of this Setka case on the ABC news today. It seems that the Government ae not as stupid as you, after all. Small mercies, what?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #53 - May 16^th, 2012 at 9:16am

Soren wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 11:34pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

Abbott didn't say anything untruthful, so why should he stand aside?

IRRELEVANT!

Er... actually, telling the truth cannot be defamation. SO it is not irrelevant. As I pointed out earlier, defamation has to meet certain criteria and there are certain defences that rule out defamation. Truth is one. (this is why, BTW) Bolt was not sued for defamation but for hurting feelings under the discrimination laws. Setka can't resort to the discrimination laws because unionists are not yet a protected minority But he will not be able to prove defamation as his reputation, established before Abbott's comments, was already as described by Abbott. Defamation is ENTIRELY a matter of interpretation, unlike all the various offences Slipper and Thomspon are tainted with.

I understand that progs can only see the words 'legal action' on both sides and so imagine that they are identical, but that's progs for ya. You will repeat the mantra 'irrelevant' to every attempt to show you the differences between the various cases but since you do not understand any of it you will carry on chanting.

Interestingly, there was no mention of this Setka case on the ABC news today. It seems that the Government ae not as stupid as you, after all. Small mercies, what?

He was accusing the guy of illegal stuff. If it is true then there would be charges. If not then he is slandering like he does.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59148 Here Gender:	Re: Will Tony Stand aside? Reply #54 - May 16^th, 2012 at 9:39am Armchair_Politician wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm: Abbott didn't say anything untruthful, so why should he stand aside? There has been no conviction against Slipper or Abbnott. Abbnott has insisted that Slipper stand aside till the case is concluded. By his own standards (if he had any) he should do the same.
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #55 - May 16^th, 2012 at 10:19am

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

I agree that Abbott should be made to stand aside...

after FWA has come out with its report in 4 years time
after the party has taken a further 4 years to vacillate on the matter
after Abbotts workplace has been raided

sounds quite fair to me.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

lisa.greek

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1595
Cairns QLD

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #56 - May 16^th, 2012 at 10:29am

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:19am:

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

I agree that Abbott should be made to stand aside...

after FWA has come out with its report in 4 years time
after the party has taken a further 4 years to vacillate on the matter
after Abbotts workplace has been raided

sounds quite fair to me.

It would be fair IF the thread were discussing Thomson and Abbott. But it isn't - it is discussing Slipper and Abbott both of whom are now caught up in civil court actions. Slipper stood aside to allow due process in the courts. Why isn't Abbott?

Back to top

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #57 - May 16^th, 2012 at 10:34am

lisa.greek wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:29am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:19am:

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

I agree that Abbott should be made to stand aside...

after FWA has come out with its report in 4 years time
after the party has taken a further 4 years to vacillate on the matter
after Abbotts workplace has been raided

sounds quite fair to me.

It would be fair IF the thread were discussing Thomson and Abbott. But it isn't - it is discussing Slipper and Abbott both of whom are now caught up in civil court actions. Slipper stood aside to allow due process in the courts. Why isn't Abbott?

Great points, but don't expect an answer.

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #58 - May 16^th, 2012 at 10:36am

lisa.greek wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:29am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:19am:

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

I agree that Abbott should be made to stand aside...

after FWA has come out with its report in 4 years time
after the party has taken a further 4 years to vacillate on the matter
after Abbotts workplace has been raided

sounds quite fair to me.

It would be fair IF the thread were discussing Thomson and Abbott. But it isn't - it is discussing Slipper and Abbott both of whom are now caught up in civil court actions. Slipper stood aside to allow due process in the courts. Why isn't Abbott?

Slipper has a CRIMINAL investigation in progress. PLus, the civil suit is serious while the Abbott defamation suit is frivolous in the extreme. imagaine being sued by a union official with a criminal record for violence because you called him a thug!!!

so If I sue Gillard for breach of promise, shoudl she resign?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

lisa.greek

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1595
Cairns QLD

Re: Will Tony Stand aside?
Reply #59 - May 16^th, 2012 at 10:49am

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:36am:

lisa.greek wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:29am:

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:19am:

Soren wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:06pm:

Gist wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Irrelevant Soren. Tony is now a defendant in a court matter. Under the new integrity rules as laid down by Tony himself, he MUST stand aside until this is cleared up by the courts.

THOSE ARE TONY'S RULES. TONY HAS TO LIVE BY THEM.

Where did he say that if a parliamentarian is sued for what he or she has said, he/she must stand aside?
I can't find any such pronouncement from anyone.

In any case, I though Gillard made Thopson stand aside and Slipper volunteered. You've heard differently?

I agree that Abbott should be made to stand aside...

after FWA has come out with its report in 4 years time
after the party has taken a further 4 years to vacillate on the matter
after Abbotts workplace has been raided

sounds quite fair to me.

It would be fair IF the thread were discussing Thomson and Abbott. But it isn't - it is discussing Slipper and Abbott both of whom are now caught up in civil court actions. Slipper stood aside to allow due process in the courts. Why isn't Abbott?

Slipper has a CRIMINAL investigation in progress. PLus, the civil suit is serious while the Abbott defamation suit is frivolous in the extreme. imagaine being sued by a union official with a criminal record for violence because you called him a thug!!!

so If I sue Gillard for breach of promise, shoudl she resign?

The newspaper article alludes to a lot of other things Abbott is supposed to have said which prompted the civil action by the respondent. Regardless of criminal investigations for Slipper- those investigations are yet to
come up as actual charges - so he is innocent there until proven guilty. On the civil matter, both Slipper and Abbot are defendants in a court action against them - once again they are both innocent until proven otherwise. The issue is though - Slipper stood down whilst the actions are in progress. Abbott did not..

As for suing Julia Gillard, I am sure the Liberals would be screaming for her to stand down to allow action to go ahead in the courts If you agree she should, then you must agree that Abbott should stand aside also!

Back to top

IP Logged