Sunday, May 10, 2009


Two of three of today's PP posts are on Andrew Bolt by Jeremy Sear (how unusual) with the third, just for something different, a critique by Scott Bridges of a Miranda Devine article on the departure of Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty:
You see, according to Devine, Keelty did good things for Australia (true enough) but “mistakes were made” regarding Mohamed Haneef and the Bali Nine cases. And — catch this — those mistakes were “trivial by comparison with the security benefits of his reign”. Trivial! Try telling that to Dr Haneef and the Australians now serving life sentences in Indonesian prisons.
Not "trivial", "trivial by comparison". A doctor inconvenienced and drug smugglers jailed overseas are indeed trivial when compared to the disruption of terrorists convicted of plotting to kill as many innocent Australians as possible. In any event, Bridges doesn't bother to explain what he's complaining about, including no links that might bolster his case.

Bridges continues:
Miranda’s argument seems to be that Australians should accept “trivial” threats to their liberties and rights because it’s a small price to pay to “[push] terrorism down the threat list”. And what example does Devine use to prove her case? Why, the Herald Sun’s favourite MCG Terror Threat beat-up.

The Hun loves this story because it really hits readers where it hurts: football. The thing is, there was never a scrap of credible evidence led in court that Benbrika and his associates had picked the AFL grand final as a target. One prosecution witness said it, and then that same witness was so thoroughly discredited during cross-examination that the judge warned jurors that it would be “dangerous” to convict anyone on the basis of this witness’ evidence.
Now I could be wrong, but the way I read it, the sole source of the MCG terror threat evidence was not discredited during cross-examination; rather, the presiding judge, Mr Bongiorno, warned the jury that the witness's testimony must be regarded as possibly suspect owing to the fact that he was part of the conspiracy but had decided to cooperate with the prosecution.

Bridges continues:
When the men were arrested they were in possession of precisely zero explosives equipment and the terrorists’ equivalent of pocket change in cash. Were Benbrika and co. a future threat? Possibly. Were they an imminent threat? No.
That those ultimately convicted of a terrorist conspiracy had little money and no explosives is irrelevant: the 9/11 terrorists also had little money and no explosives.

Bridges also objects to this from Devine:
But such is the current climate that when the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, praised the police taskforce for “the most successful terrorist prosecution that this country has seen”, he was howled down by a toxic combination of civil rights groups, defence lawyers and an opportunistic Opposition Leader, Malcolm Turnbull.
Bridges swerving off on a tangent:
And the judge, Miranda. McClelland made the above comment during the trial, which any grade eleven legal studies student can tell you is a really dumb thing to do. Justice Bongiorno said the comment was unnecessary and said it had the potential to cause problems with the trial.

Defend Keelty all you like but don’t diminish his mistakes in the process. And try to get across the facts of court cases before you use them to bolster your argument.
There's no getting around the fact that the Attorney General praised praised the AFP for an investigation resulting in a successful prosecution. It's irrelevant that McClelland's comments came after 10 terrorists were convicted but one trial remained to be conlcuded -- Mr justice Bongiorno rejected the defense's request that McClelland's remarks warranted the trial being stopped. Bridges shouldn't criticise Devine when he's the one who misrepresents the court cases. Another fail for Pure Poison.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Defending terrorists again Scotty.

8:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Always anticipation love can the instantaneous appearance. Has been searching. May also say that has complied with that sentence: The man loves woman's process is: Likes - fearing bothersomely -; But the runescape accounts woman loves man's process is: Does not matter - cares about - is dead set on. the runescape money aquarius's woman as if very vacant is loving, no matter the object is the day scorpion or other, does not have the security sense, as if is the feeling which all thermoses have. Could not find own position, was at a loss how to proceed. Present's I am this at runescape power leveling least. drops, turns head in no way looked. Said left, came back in no way. But in the caring, forgets oneself at heart thinking, one kind suffers, from thought that person is waiting for you in there, the result is actually, he already turns around.

9:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi, nice post. I have been wondering about this topic,so thanks for sharing. I will certainly be subscribing to your blog.

9:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeremy, Scott and the other PP Boyz are just beyond cringeworthy sometimes.

They dig, dig, dig themselves into a huge hole of wrongness and then perform all sorts of crazy gymnastic feats to either try and get themselves out of the hole, or at the very least to try and distract lookers-on from the fact that yes, that's the PP Boyz at the bottom of a hole again...

At least this one finally was about something other than Bolt. What percentage of their posts from Day 1 mention either peripherally or as their main subject either Tim Blair or Andrew Bolt? I'm kinda wondering why they didn't just keep the name BoltBlairWatch.

1:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"a snarky little pay-per-click "I really really hate X and XX and this is why!!!!111!!!!!" leftard revenge site run by and for a handful of vendetta-deranged adolescents".
Hah! Anon#3 nailed them. What the hell does Jonathan Green think he's achieving by fostering such a strange little mob? Is it a "sheltered workshop" kind of thing, like through Centrelink?

5:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This man is a teacher?

7:48 AM  
Anonymous Anon #3 said...

"You see, I identify myself as left-leaning..."No worries, Evan. I identify myself as right-leaning, but I know plenty of sorta left-leaning and centrist types in real life and they're just ordinary people - some smart, some not, some wonderful and kind-hearted, some not. But Jeremy & Co are just like no one I've ever met before. (Thank goodness).

The PeePee Boyz are almost like internet cartoons of obsessed, possibly mentally deranged, Leftists, which is what makes them so much fun to laugh at - that said, the 'Right' has a few cringeworthy internet and media bedfellows as well.

Jezza & Co really are in a league of their own in the "obsessed with someone you purport to dismiss as stupid and irrelevant" stakes though. Can't be good for their health.

Anyway, good pickup there.

6:52 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home