Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum banner

41 - 60 of 67 Posts

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
I can't believe how quiet you lot are being on this!

Really QUITE the indictment really! You're all as quiet as the Libs since it happened. The only uttereances have been from Hockey and at least he didn't deny being there with Brough and Palmer.

Really quite odd.......................you MUST be hurting!!!

:p
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Seen Fed Court decision?

The whole Ashby thing was politically motivated and Slipper's expenses to be covered by C'wealth if other parties don't pay.

I wonder if they'll identify the 'Parties' involved?

Interesting commentary on the gross misuse of the legal system for a political witch hunt.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
Seen Fed Court decision?

The whole Ashby thing was politically motivated and Slipper's expenses to be covered by C'wealth if other parties don't pay.

I wonder if they'll identify the 'Parties' involved?

Interesting commentary on the gross misuse of the legal system for a political witch hunt.
Your double standards know no bounds, do they? On the one hand, you claim to be the saviour of all those who have ever been harassed, abused or discriminated against, then on the other hand you will defend some sleazebag who was clearly trying to get in the pants of one of his staffers.

We already know about the political leanings of the so-called judge who made this call - he appears as crooked as a bent nail. And now Labor have decided to stump up for his costs to stop the said sleazebag from going bankrupt.

As someone on this forum used to say: "Whatever it takes!":rolleyes:
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Your double standards know no bounds, do they? On the one hand, you claim to be the saviour of all those who have ever been harassed, abused or discriminated against, then on the other hand you will defend some sleazebag who was clearly trying to get in the pants of one of his staffers.

We already know about the political leanings of the so-called judge who made this call - he appears as crooked as a bent nail. And now Labor have decided to stump up for his costs to stop the said sleazebag from going bankrupt.

As someone on this forum used to say: "Whatever it takes!":rolleyes:
What about the finding that it was a political conspiracy NOT a genuine civil case? You don't see that as an abuse of process and a threat to a democracy?

Slipper was a dead duck in the water, there was no need for this type of repugnant action. Brough would have walked in to pre-selection and the election. Brough and his cohorts should be ashamed.

Slipper's no saint and I doubt history will judge him well, but this type of grand Machievelian conspiracy is demonstrative of a sick system and even sicker participants. Those responsible should have the guts to fall on their swords. But we ALL know they won't.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Your double standards know no bounds, do they? On the one hand, you claim to be the saviour of all those who have ever been harassed, abused or discriminated against, then on the other hand you will defend some sleazebag who was clearly trying to get in the pants of one of his staffers.

We already know about the political leanings of the so-called judge who made this call - he appears as crooked as a bent nail. And now Labor have decided to stump up for his costs to stop the said sleazebag from going bankrupt.

As someone on this forum used to say: "Whatever it takes!":rolleyes:

If Ashby had 'kept it real', the judge would have not been able to decide this way. He scotched his own action by playing around with politics and he got burnt. I wonder if he'll drop a dime on those other conspirators or just get a comfy job somewhere?

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
has this dung puncher got aids and died yet?
Obviously not!

Have the vile swine who sought to corrupt our political and judicial systems been brought to account?

Not YET!

Obviously 'whatever it takes' is more politically universal these days as opposed to mono-partisan.

The difference between your position on this and mine is that while you are willing to overlook the (arguably more serious accusations of) conspiratorial conduct, I am not. And obviously the judge feels the same.

If Slipper can be proved to have sexually harrassed Ashby, he deserves what the court (civil or criminal) dishes out. But the true motivation for Ashby's action is political conspiracy and ALL those involved need to be exposed.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
The Googlest, Apparently!
Joined
·
16,499 Posts
ED is right BBM, your double standards are something else.

You quote from the guardian, a paper that only unemployed coal miners around Manchester read (and they are out of work because the unions sent coal mines to the wall and they never recovered) and what’s more the article you hold up is written by Dave Marr.

This is the man who published articles from Dave Hickie on Robert Askin accusing him of throwing in with organised crime, allegations that to this day have never been proven. (on the day he was being buried no less, thus showing what a really nice caring, sharing socialist limp wrist he is)

(gee Dave, sure seems to be a lot of Dave’s' around who will spout anything made up, as long as it has a left lean).

I would say the only reason he lashed into Askin was because he was the man who got rid on a 27 year old strangle hold on govt in NSW. Sore loser…

Then here you are shouting down every one who says anything against Slippery because the allegations against him are not proven in a court of law.

Shows you could not care less about due process as long as your source of reference is in your favor.

And you wonder why we don’t reply to your posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
If Ashby had 'kept it real', the judge would have not been able to decide this way. He scotched his own action by playing around with politics and he got burnt.
So are you implying that the judge can go either way with such a decision and base it on somebody's political leaning, rather than on the law or likelihood of truth? Regardless of how or from whom Ashby got his advice, he was trying to deal with allegations of sexual harassment and the judge failed to acknowledge that.

That is like judges of old dismissing a rape case because the victim was asking for it, was inappropriately dressed or asked a priest for advice before going to the cops!

Once again your double standards seem to play havoc with your sense of justice, fair play and 'due process' when Labor is threatened in any way!:rolleyes:

And after the way Slippery threw in his lot with Labor, don't be surprised if people see Labor's decision to pay his expenses as payment for services rendered. Puts a whole new meaning to the term 'wages of sin'.
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
So are you implying that the judge can go either way with such a decision and base it on somebody's political leaning, rather than on the law or likelihood of truth? Regardless of how or from whom Ashby got his advice, he was trying to deal with allegations of sexual harassment and the judge failed to acknowledge that.

That is like judges of old dismissing a rape case because the victim was asking for it, was inappropriately dressed or asked a priest for advice before going to the cops!

Once again your double standards seem to play havoc with your sense of justice, fair play and 'due process' when Labor is threatened in any way!:rolleyes:

And after the way Slippery threw in his lot with Labor, don't be surprised if people see Labor's decision to pay his expenses as payment for services rendered. Puts a whole new meaning to the term 'wages of sin'.
No implication required; the judge appears to have simply accepted evidence that the motivation for Ashby's civil action was more than being genuinely aggrieved and indeed politically motivated.

For a judge to find in such a way, there must have been significant evidence to that effect. Judges work on FACTS not political leanings, as you all well know. If he had been influenced by his own political affilliation (unlikely in this country) that would be as big a travesty as allowing for a politically motivated civil action to get through.

Hypocrisy? I just commented a thread that hasn't had any comment since Dec last year, whose subject has just hit the news due to the court finding. Any of you could have commented that you thought it was sh it, but you prefer to ignore it.

A Federal Court judge found after listening to all the evidence (that we never hear) that the civil suit was politically motivated. It has NOTHING to do with ANYONE'S political leanings; yours, mine - or the judge's despite E.D's ridiculous implication.

Let alone some accused hypocrisy of mine. Isn't it more hypocritical to ignore something like a major news story when it doesn't suit your argument? I've got more respect for benno's 'argument' than your collective spin and accusations of hypocrisy!

The story is the FACT that the judge found that the civil suit was POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. That is no longer up for debate - it's a fact and a major finding with implications. For a conspiracy, there must be more than one conspirator. I wonder if they'll dig further AND ehat they'll find. And WHO?

As far as people seeing it as Labor paying Slipper off; firstly it's demonstrably false, unless you believe that the seperation of the govt and judiciary has broken down (which it hasn't) and secondly, anyone who believes it would have to be a rusted on Conservative who has lost contact with the real world. Or just ignorant.

Some of your comments just compound into your not liking anything that's not in your political view, correct. If you're going to start thinking Federal Court judges are politically bent, that's really sad.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
ED is right BBM, your double standards are something else.

You quote from the guardian, a paper that only unemployed coal miners around Manchester read (and they are out of work because the unions sent coal mines to the wall and they never recovered) and what’s more the article you hold up is written by Dave Marr.

This is the man who published articles from Dave Hickie on Robert Askin accusing him of throwing in with organised crime, allegations that to this day have never been proven. (on the day he was being buried no less, thus showing what a really nice caring, sharing socialist limp wrist he is)

(gee Dave, sure seems to be a lot of Dave’s' around who will spout anything made up, as long as it has a left lean).

I would say the only reason he lashed into Askin was because he was the man who got rid on a 27 year old strangle hold on govt in NSW. Sore loser…

Then here you are shouting down every one who says anything against Slippery because the allegations against him are not proven in a court of law.

Shows you could not care less about due process as long as your source of reference is in your favor.

And you wonder why we don’t reply to your posts.
Aside from the obfuscation about the credentials of the source, readers and the author, due process IS the issue.

If Ashby had made a genuine complaint it may have been found. If that had happened and a finding was made against Slipper, then Ashby would have got a righteous judgement. BUT he made a CHOICE, for whatever reason, to turn it into a political move.

Whether that was to get in good with Liberal overlords for future political favours or that was the only way he was going to be able bankroll civil action (likely if you look at it as favourbly as possible) and the paid advice was poor, who knows.

Slipper has been proven to be the victim of political conspiracy, I wonder what will happen with Thompson? It's gone criminal so it will be harder to prove (beyond reasonable doubt as opposed to balance of probabilities) but if he's exonerated, what then? It looks like the Libs have involved themselves in not one but two hatchet jobs based on less than the truth.

Talk about 'whatever it takes'!

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,976 Posts
For all this due process rubbish, where is the due process For slippery's electorate of fisher to elect a Lnp member only to get a labor pawn?
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
For all this due process rubbish, where is the due process For slippery's electorate of fisher to elect a Lnp member only to get a labor pawn?
Due process is a bit different to electoral accountability BUT the people of Fisher will get their chance to vote LNP again..........and elect Mal Brough who is up to his nuts in this.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #56
Hypocrisy? I just commented a thread that hasn't had any comment since Dec last year, whose subject has just hit the news due to the court finding. Any of you could have commented that you thought it was sh it, but you prefer to ignore it.
This is idiocy at its best! Some of us commented on the judgment at the time, in this very thread. Most people have simply been waiting for the case to return to court so no need to keep on about it. The fact that Labor has now chosen to fund Slipper speaks for itself: Roxon was instrumental in getting this decision made so no matter how you look at it, the Federal Court has been tainted by this judgment and the political interference.

And here are a couple of posts that are at least as valid as some of the rubbish you refer to and that show there is indeed an unhealthy link between the judge and Labor:

Justice Rares hands down judgement countersigned by AG Nicola Roxon in the Peter Slipper James Ashby matter | Kangaroo Court of Australia


Justice Rares does a runner from hearing the Peter Slipper v James Ashby costs application | Kangaroo Court of Australia

Justice Rares has clearly gone into protection mode to limit the damage that was done to his own reputation when he handed down his judgement in December last year. This site has played the main part in outing Rares for being corrupt and obviously he does not like it and I am sure the court and other judges did not like it either.

For obvious reasons it is always the judge who has heard the matter who also determines the costs. The obvious reason is that the hearing judge is the one who is fully briefed on the matter and does not have to start from scratch studying the case although it must be noted a cost claim is decided on a narrower set of facts then the original hearing which is meant to deal with all the facts.......
AG Nicola Roxon gives instructions to her subordinate Justice Steven Rares in the Peter Slipper / James Ashby case | Kangaroo Court of Australia
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon has been using the media to give instructions and try to influence Justice Steven Rares in the Peter Slipper / James Ashby matter currently before the court. While there has been plenty of media attention on the matter and some criticism of Nicola Roxon there has been no summary of Mrs Roxon’s clear and blatant interference in the judicial system......

Judges are meant to be independent of the government but they are not. It is a fallacy. The relationship between Nicola Roxon and Justice Rares is one of employer and employee as it is with other federal judicial officers.
Labor. Rotten to the core!:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,976 Posts
Due process is a bit different to electoral accountability BUT the people of Fisher will get their chance to vote LNP again..........and elect Mal Brough who is up to his nuts in this.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
If he wanted to be anything but Lnp he should have resigned and then run again in the by election. It's a miscarriage of justice
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
If he wanted to be anything but Lnp he should have resigned and then run again in the by election. It's a miscarriage of justice
Same for the Qld state LNP members who have jumped ship? Odd how it's LNP members leaving..........

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,976 Posts
Same for the Qld state LNP members who have jumped ship? Odd how it's LNP members leaving..........

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
I agree, that Scott Driscoll is one sad sack o ****e, I could also point out Craig Thompson but his pointer has already got him into enough trouble already
 

·
Resident Social Democrat
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
This is idiocy at its best! Some of us commented on the judgment at the time, in this very thread. Most people have simply been waiting for the case to return to court so no need to keep on about it. The fact that Labor has now chosen to fund Slipper speaks for itself: Roxon was instrumental in getting this decision made so no matter how you look at it, the Federal Court has been tainted by this judgment and the political interference.

And here are a couple of posts that are at least as valid as some of the rubbish you refer to and that show there is indeed an unhealthy link between the judge and Labor:

Justice Rares hands down judgement countersigned by AG Nicola Roxon in the Peter Slipper James Ashby matter | Kangaroo Court of Australia


Justice Rares does a runner from hearing the Peter Slipper v James Ashby costs application | Kangaroo Court of Australia

Justice Rares has clearly gone into protection mode to limit the damage that was done to his own reputation when he handed down his judgement in December last year. This site has played the main part in outing Rares for being corrupt and obviously he does not like it and I am sure the court and other judges did not like it either.

For obvious reasons it is always the judge who has heard the matter who also determines the costs. The obvious reason is that the hearing judge is the one who is fully briefed on the matter and does not have to start from scratch studying the case although it must be noted a cost claim is decided on a narrower set of facts then the original hearing which is meant to deal with all the facts.......
AG Nicola Roxon gives instructions to her subordinate Justice Steven Rares in the Peter Slipper / James Ashby case | Kangaroo Court of Australia
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon has been using the media to give instructions and try to influence Justice Steven Rares in the Peter Slipper / James Ashby matter currently before the court. While there has been plenty of media attention on the matter and some criticism of Nicola Roxon there has been no summary of Mrs Roxon’s clear and blatant interference in the judicial system......

Judges are meant to be independent of the government but they are not. It is a fallacy. The relationship between Nicola Roxon and Justice Rares is one of employer and employee as it is with other federal judicial officers.
Labor. Rotten to the core!:rolleyes:
You are seriously using 'Kangaroo Court of Australia' as a SOURCE? How would THAT be viewed on your University lecturing days if a student submitted that as a reference?

FFS! You might as well quote disaffectedredneck.com.au!!

Yep, the seperation of powers has clloapsed and no one has noticed but that fool.

JEEZUS E.D.! Dragging down the std of debate or what??

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
 
41 - 60 of 67 Posts
About this Discussion
66 Replies
13 Participants
bigbluemav
Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum
Patrol 4x4 is the best Nissan Patrol forum to discuss the SUV’s specs, parts, accessories, reviews, problems and more. Join now!
Full Forum Listing
Top