Federal

May 29, 2014

Aussies dead in drone strikes — and Brandis does not care

The government has no view on whether the killing of two Australians by US drone strikes in Yemen was illegal, inappropriate or concerning, George Brandis reveals.

Bernard Keane — Politics editor

Bernard Keane

Politics editor

George Brandis has had a rough time of it since achieving his dream of becoming Attorney-General. He was found out billing taxpayers for attending the wedding of failed shockjock Michael Smith; his apparently inexhaustible taxpayer-funded appetite for books became a running joke in politics; his attempts to amend the Racial Discrimination Act have collapsed in a heap, and according to one report, he even suffered the ignominy of Malcolm Turnbull, a far better and far more successful lawyer than Brandis will ever be, correcting his work in cabinet.

13 comments

Leave a comment

13 thoughts on “Aussies dead in drone strikes — and Brandis does not care

  1. paddy

    I watched Brandis sneer and pout, as Ludlum asked him about the two Australians who had been killed last night.
    Truly awful stuff. (I really recommend watching the “Ludlam asked Brandis” clip that BK has provided.)
    On so many fronts, this Govt is just trashing Aust’s reputation around the world.
    Deeply depressing.

  2. Pedantic, Balwyn

    Wikipedia defines bigotry as the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust or hatred on the basis of a person’s ethnicity, evaluative orientation, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics. I guess that explains Brandis’s position, he doesn’t like them so he doesn’t care!he

  3. klewso

    “Turnbull the Crumb Sweeper”?

    And that “spare” money that Beetle and the Boys redirected to further fund their “Pink Batts Witch-hunt” – in this “financial crisis”, couldn’t that have been better saved, or redirected to more urgent areas than one of their “an anti-Labor exercises”?
    Or put to an inquiry into why his government under Howard took us into Iraq – which cost billions more and how many lives?

  4. Kevin Herbert

    klewso: you’ll have to wait until the Home Insulation Program Royal Commission Report is handed down, before making judgements about its bona fides.

    One of the key outcomes to emerge is the culture of fear among SES public servants at the possibility of disagreeing with their political masters….surely something that should be aired publicly.

    Another is the trashing of the delivery sector of the national insulation industry by the errant stupidity of the Rudd/Gillard governments.

  5. aswann

    Thanks for the efforts to bring this story into the light B.

  6. fractious

    Thanks Bernard. Given what’s been documented here and elsewhere, it’s to know what to even say.

  7. CML

    Good one, Bernard.
    Even if these two men were ‘known’ terrorists, don’t they deserve a charge, an appearance in a court of law and to be found ‘guilty’ before being blown to smithereens.
    We are turning into uncivilised assassins like our great and powerful friends!

  8. A.Blot

    This sort of behaviour reeks of an affliction among the Federal Liberal ministry, commonly called psychopaths.
    Probably show by the way they crawled to the voters until they achieved their aim and now treat them with distain.

  9. The Old Bill

    Slightly off topic but important to say because of some of the comments:
    Am I the only person to wonder why there is a Pink Batts Inquiry that isn’t looking at the real reason people died. That of course is the failure of our workplace safety laws and construction licensing system. If the people licensed by the States had trained their workers and obeyed their workplace safety requirements, we would still be insulating hand over fist. Not one person seems to have asked the question, who gave these idiots the required builders licenses in the first place?

  10. klewso

    You’re not Bill, and those causes are all well and good, but that sort of stuff doesn’t “embarrass Rudd/Labor”.
    Was looking for that sort of “reasoning” in the Limited News Party government’s terms of reference of this commission of embarrassment?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...