Sunday, November 18, 2018

Morrison's 'Circle of Trust'

Paul Kelly, the Australian's editor-at-large, gives the thumbs down to Morrison's Israel embassy fizzer. Although he gets many things right, it seems that he's wrong when he claims that "nobody" had "sought or requested - neither the US nor Israel" shifting our embassy in Israel to Jerusalem:

"The first truth is Australia didn't need Indonesia to tell it this is an unwise decision - the originating problem is not Indonesia's reaction but Australia's bad judgment. The second truth is that it is folly for Australia to embark on a Middle East policy change that nobody has sought or requested - neither the US nor Israel - that was taken without any proper assessment, that was recommended by no government agency and that will damage our critical relations close to home." (There is no upside in Jerusalem shift, 17/11/18)

In a truly stunning revelation Guardian Australia's Katharine Murphy contradicts Kelly in no uncertain terms:

"Roll forward now to mid-October, the week before the Wentworth byelection, and a growing sense of alarm that the government would not hold Turnbull's vacated seat... Morrison consulted his leadership group (but few others, as it turned out, although one of the people in the circle of trust was the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu) and then flagged the embassy shift publicly." (Morrison's Israel embassy policy cannot be fathomed - and risks his political survival, 17/11/18)

If the Israeli PM was behind the decision to move our embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, why isn't this news all over the msm?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

This revelation should be front page, headline news in every paper! How does consulting Netanyahu on this, equate to 'Australia's national interest'? At last we have some explanation as to why Morrison et al. are promoting the embassy move, and perhaps it also explains Turnbull's sudden departure.

Anonymous said...

Morrison, Netanyahu's voodoo doll.

Anonymous said...

I am not happy now that BIBI calls on my bedchamber more frequently than of old. As it is, I now endure but two calls a week and when I hear his steps outside my door, I lie down on my bed, close my eyes, open my legs and think of Israel.

With apologies to,

Lady Alice Hillingdon (1857 - 1940)

Grappler said...

The Guardian often gets things wrong, though usually with a pro-Israeli bias. If it is indeed the case that Netanyahu is in ScoMo's circle of trust, then we have a serious crisis. We have recently had the spectacle of several MPs being forced out of Parliament because of dual citizenship issues and the possibility of conflicts of interest. Now it appears that the PM of another country advising out PM. This ought to bring down the government. Agreed Anonymous, if true it should be front page headline news. But it won't as we all know.

Anonymous said...

Is it anti-semitic to ask why Josh Frydenberg donned his kippah while being sworn in (and quickly removed it before most press photos)? I have never before seen any Federal minister declaring his faith in similar manner. Is this flaunting Jewish power in Australia, making a statement, or what?

Now, he comes out with statements on the citing of the Australian embassy in Israel as though he is a neutral Australian without a dog in the fight. Disgusting.

Grappler said...

Recall this conversation:

'“I cannot bear Netanyahu, he’s a liar,” Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on ...
“You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you,” Obama replied.'

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-netanyahu-sarkozy/sarkozy-tells-obama-netanyahu-is-a-liar-idUSTRE7A720120111108

But he's part of our ScoMo's 'circle of trust'. It says a lot about ScoMo.


Anonymous said...

You all know how the voodoo legend ends right? Let me just say, it ain't good for the doll!

Anonymous said...

Anon 4. I find that your comments regarding Frydenberg's religious attire to be completely beside the point. You can be religious and still have 'a dog in the fight'. One does not preclude the other. Let's not descend into rank prosthelitising.