Australia’s refugee problem has attracted global attention. This from the New York Times.
Mungo: Get off the pot Chris Mitchell
|
It’s time for Chris Mitchell, The Australian’s Editor in Chief, either to p-ss or get off the pot. For weeks now his paper has been beating the hell out of what it describes variously as a gaffe, a blunder and a major security leak, which, it claims, has destabilised the Australian government, irrevocably damaged its relationship with the United States and generally rendered Kevin Rudd unfit to conduct international diplomacy. Yet Mitchell himself, a key witness in the event which led to these charges, resolutely refuses to testify. Well, he can’t have it both ways. If the situation is even half as serious as he claims, then he owes it to the Australian public to tell them the truth. Unfortunately this may get in the way of a good beat up, but that’s journalism. Or it used to be when I worked for The Australian. The facts of the matter are that on October 10 Rudd hosted a dinner at Kirribilli House for a number of guests, one of whom was Mitchell. Sometime in the course of the evening he left his guests in the drawing room to take a phone call from George Bush in the adjacent study. A fortnight later The Weekend Australian ran a story by-lined Matthew Franklin saying Rudd had been astonished to find that Bush apparently did not know what the G20 group of countries was. The story was immediately proclaimed as a major embarrassment not for Bush, but for Rudd, who was accused by the opposition of deliberately leaking it for his own self-aggrandisement. In spite of denials, both from Bush’s office and from Rudd’s office, that the reported exchange had ever taken place, the accusations got shriller, culminating in a demand for a senate inquiry, thankfully vetoed by the Greens. And at the weekend, a month after the alleged offence took place, the papers splashed photograph of Rudd shaking Bush’s hand — at the G20. The fact that it was not the kind of homoerotic embrace regularly accorded to Howard, meant, declared the pundits, that the lame duck president was deeply annoyed with our leader. And through it all, Chris Mitchell, well he lays low and sez nuffin. Quite early in the saga it was suggested that if Rudd was using a speaker phone and if the door to the study was open, his guests may well have overheard at least part of the conversation; in spite of Malcolm Turnbull’s certainty, the leak may have come from somewhere other than Rudd’s office. Franklin has correctly refused to divulge his sources, as is his right and duty as a journalist. But Mitchell enjoys no such protection: he was present as a guest, not as a journalist, and he did not write the story (well, did he?). It is perfectly legitimate to ask him, or any of the other guests, whether the conversation was overheard, whether it was discussed, whether Rudd mentioned it later. Mitchell is entitled to remain silent, but when he does so the rest of us are free to speculate as to his role in his paper’s scoop. The opposition, of course, has not done so; Mitchell is after all one of their most valued political assets, an important agent of influence. But it is a pity the rest of the mainstream media have also largely let him off the hook. When journalists become involved in politics they should not be immune to the scrutiny they demand of others, especially if their involvement seems to work to their advantage. News Limited Boss John Hartigan is leading the campaign for more transparency and disclosure by governments. Perhaps someone should point out to him the very black pot named Mitchell sitting in his own kitchen. And speaking of pots and kettles, last week I received a personal (well, personalised) email from our beloved Prime Minister which opened with the sentence: “Dear Mungo, As a supporter of the Kevin07 campaign, I wanted you to be the first to hear about my new website: Kevin.PM.com.au.” It was hardly surprising to learn that Mr Rudd was a supporter of the Kevin07 campaign; indeed I was myself, which is I think what he was trying to say. English usage 101: Adjectival phrases should be placed adjacent to the noun or pronoun which they qualify. Correction: “Dear Mungo, I wanted you, as a supporter of the Kevin 07 campaign, to be the first to hear…” If required, your schoolmistressly Education Minister Julia Gillard will elaborate. Roll on the education revolution. And I have spent most of the last week on my knees, praying for the strength to watch The Howard Years on the ABC. We had to live through the bloody things; do we really need to have them regurgitated in our living rooms? The only people apparently looking forward to the experience are the unreconstructed Howard-huggers in the media, who are already opining that the filthy socialist ABC will use the opportunity to traduce their hero’s impeccable record. And they may well be right: from the teasers broadcast it would appear that quite a few of Howard’s former colleagues are lining up to claim that there were times during those 12 years when they themselves had their doubts. Of course, in the interests of party loyalty, cabinet solidarity and the continuing good of the nation they said and did nothing at the time, but, well, they would now like to put on the record that they were not quite the cowards, sycophants, and a-selickers that they appeared at the time. Well, maybe not, but they were certainly willing accomplices. Perhaps the main interest in the series will be in seeing how many now plead the Nuremberg defence — we were only obeying orders — and how many fall back on the streaker’s defence: it seemed a good idea at the time. |
|
|
9 Comments
Just one further error among the many in this Mungo silliness:
Chris Mitchell the editor, writing for first time about this matter over the weekend, essentially saying that whilst he was at Kirribilli House on the evening when the phone call took place,
1. He didn’t breach confidence.
2. He stands by the version of the story that the paper printed
Having sat through the Hour of Howard I think one of the most interesting aspects is the presentation of Reith as an inveterate liar - both ‘back then’ and now. Back then it was politically opportune and skin-saving but it is hard to see why he persists now unless he failed to realise that others were going to be more forthcoming than he was prepared to be.
On the substantial issue he was involved in - waterfront reform - the overall objective of much more efficient ports was worth fighting hard for. But he and Howard gave the battle a harsh class warfare edge that was unnecessary but typical of their divisive style.
In twenty years time, or less, This so called gaffe will be forgotten. Oz-the land, is not the subject of world speculation or opinion. Logic tells me it wasn’t Rudd who was responsible. The man was a career bureaucrat on the diplomatic scene. This is not the sort of person to leak anything. The Oz newspaper would perform fellatio on anyone whom Rupert Murdoch ordered them to. They would do it on a bed of thorns whilst being bitten by March Flies; then they would beg Rupert to be allowed to it again. So are they likely to lie? Not much.
That the so-called offense was to hurt the worst lame-duck American president in the annals of US history. A man who lies have led to death and misery on a scale to equal Saddam Hussein, seems to be imagined as being the offended party-by the Oz press is lying on a scale as Bush himself would do. The Oz should put up or shut up. Play the tape or pi*s off.
IF ten years had passed since we had experienced the Howard Years in the flesh, then *perhaps* it would be worth watching. But one year?! The scars are still too fresh.
Zachary, Rudd and Mitchell are friends. Rudd is godfather to Mitchell’s son.
Mitchell has spoken at last. He says essentially:
The story is really a non-event.
But 1. He confirmed that he was there at Kirribilli House but not who else if anyone.
2. He didn’t breach confidence, i.e. he did not publish a story that was not ok’ed by the source
3. He stands by the version of the story that the paper printed.
Now it is firmly established that Bush never said “What’s the G20?”
Therefore The Australian was lied to by this source……..and was given the false impression that Rudd had to masterfully persuade Bush who was reluctant, ignorant and incredibly stupid.
Who was this source……. that lied and endeavoured however ineptly to give the impression that Rudd was an adroit statesman dealing with a reluctant idiot in the interests of the ‘war’ against the global financial crisis ?
Don’t bother praying for the strength to sit through ‘The Howard Years’. Give in to the temptation to gib=ve it a miss. We’ve all suffered through more than enough Howard, who’d want to sacrifice a few more hours of life watching it all rehashed? I’ll be spending my viewing time catching up on my shiny new DVDs of Rome Season 2. Much better political drama, much, much more blood and much more exciting skullduggery than Howard and his band of boring cowards, sycophants, and a-selickers could ever provide.
And honestly, who gives a rat’s rear end about what Mitchell told Franklin about what Rudd said Bush told Rudd. As if we didn’t already know that Bush wouldn’t know which way round to put on his undies if Laura didn’t help him out, let alone understand what a G20 was. The Oz needs to ditch this garbage and find some real news to report, they shouldn’t find that too hard, surely.
Typical half-arsed Mungo:
“The facts of the matter are that on October 10 Rudd hosted a dinner at Kirribilli House for a number of guests, one of whom was Mitchell”
No the facts are that Rudd did not host a dinner at Kirribilli House that night.
Perhaps if MacCallum had actually read the reports in The Oz that he so ineptly criticises, then he would already know that.
I think the alleged G10 leak has been most amusing as it has at least given The Man Who Would be King something to fume about in Parliament as lets face it, he has little else to say. Not an alternative policy-just attacks, so any little titbit helps. In a way it’s like the Australian has created it’s own news story by first claiming it’s true and then screechng about it non-stop and gives your famous ‘dancing bears” a reason to live, afterall, with Howard no longer there the future looks rather bleak for most of them.
The fact that the Aussie public couldn’t give the slightest toss about George W.Bush or his sensibilities and can’t wait to see the back of him as the majority of Yanks think likewise, it’s clear the Aussie media is losing the plot. Time for them to grow up and have a look at just why their circulations are plunging. Perhaps they might like to consider the quality of their content but I suppsoe that’s just wishful thinking.
I still can’t work out why the PM would want to have Mitchell present at any social gathering he hosted. The man is a well known critic of Rudd and Labor, employs a bunch of lame attack dogs, Albrechtsen, Shanahan etc to throw his muck and did as much as any editor to try and steer the electorate away from voting Labor at the last election. If this mornings poll tells us anything the public dont give a stuff about the bloody phone call and its time the media, the Opposition and some big noting blog contributors got the message.