THE prominent QC Julian Burnside has apologised after appearing to accuse the federal Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, of paedophilia.

The refugee advocate's Twitter post of ''Paedos in speedos'' appeared in a string of tweets about the Liberal leader, whom he accused of being a liar, a hypocrite and ''a dangerous man with no moral compass''.

Several of the tweets referred directly to a book by Susan Mitchell, Tony Abbott: A Man's Man. The book, released this week, is critical of Mr Abbott who is known to don the distinctive swimwear.

''Great book; terrifying portrait of a truly dangerous, unprincipled person: a liar and a hypocrite,'' Mr Burnside tweeted before a meeting in Hobart.

My list of disagreements with Tony Abbott is extensive. It includes the treatment of asylum seekers, the republic, religion, abortion, stem cell research, homosexuality, global warming, a worrying tolerance for hate speech and his encouragement of noisy contempt for one's political opponents. So I should be the ideal reader for a new critical book on the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition.

Both as a feminist and as a publisher specialising in books about politics, I was interested to read Susan Mitchell's Tony Abbott: A Man's Man. It relies heavily on Michael Duffy's study of Abbott and Mark Latham and Abbott's own manifesto, Battlelines. Having since published books by both Abbott and Latham, I am disappointed that Mitchell's book provides little new insight.

Mitchell's message is ''sisters beware''. Abbott is an ideological throwback to the 1950s, dependent on and manipulated by a catalogue of conservative male mentors from B.A Santamaria to Christopher Pearson. Paul Keating did not require 176 pages to sum up Abbott as a ''young fogey''. Pop psychology gives Abbott a father problem, but one doesn't have to reach into the lineage of Australian politicians to find male bonds. Bob Hawke is surely Exhibit A. And like Abbott, Hawke had both a mother and father who believed in his destiny. No one would argue that Hawke doesn't adore women, but Mitchell is sure Abbott's Oedipal thingy is a pointer to profound misogyny.

Abbott the author is unfailingly gracious, reflective and responsive to editorial suggestions. To be sure, as with every politician we have published, Battlelines is the product of calibrating the political consequences of every phrase. My own experience, across the ideological chasm that divides us, is not of the ''bully boy'' of Mitchell's derivative account, and there's nothing like authoring a book to inflame egoism and ignite self-importance.

The gap between Mitchell's reading and my acquaintance makes me reflect on the disjunction between the public performance and the private reality. Just as I do not recognise Abbott in this book, I do not recognise the Prime Minister in At Home With Julia. The gap between the real Prime Minister and the fiction is vast. This was obvious at the recent book launch of Christine Nixon's Fair Cop. Having been delayed by a malfunction which trapped her momentarily in her official car, she gave an excellent speech reflecting on the challenges for women leaders concluding by mistakenly naming the book Top Cop. Unsurprisingly, the commercial television networks coverage focused on the mechanical glitch and a faux pas and paid scant attention to the substance. What I had observed was a smart Prime Minister alive to the atmosphere, a politician with flair and instinct. That encounter with the ''real'' Prime Minister is not congruent with the ham-fisted automaton invented by the mass media.

Maybe this is in the nature of modern politics. The performance required of leaders is devoid of subtlety. The practice of politics has manufactured an idea-free public sphere with a shadow play of aggression and point scoring. So we have a ''lame, gay, churchy loser'' and an unmarried, childless, atheist who hopes to win by privileging heterosexual marriage, Bible stories and deporting children seeking refuge. Does any of this make sense?

Abbott affectionately calls me his left-wing publisher. I support his paid parental leave scheme as I support Gillard's price on pollution. Both policies, whilst obviously an impost on the big end of town, are social necessities. However, in the debased currency of political debate, both leaders are accused of lacking policy substance. What if Abbott actually recognises childcare as a perennial challenge for families? What if Gillard judged the emissions trading scheme to be a landmine for the Rudd government but six months later felt able to prosecute the case? What if both politicians actually believe in these reforms?

In the era of beige politics, I live in hope that Abbott and Gillard are allowed to come out.

Time to get real and cut out the cartoon caricatures

My list of disagreements with Tony Abbott is extensive. It includes the treatment of asylum seekers, the republic, religion, abortion, stem cell research, homosexuality, global warming, a worrying tolerance for hate speech and his encouragement of noisy contempt for one's political opponents. So I should be the ideal reader for a new critical book on the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition.

Both as a feminist and as a publisher specialising in books about politics, I was interested to read Susan Mitchell's Tony Abbott: A Man's Man. It relies heavily on Michael Duffy's study of Abbott and Mark Latham and Abbott's own manifesto, Battlelines. Having since published books by both Abbott and Latham, I am disappointed that Mitchell's book provides little new insight.

Mitchell's message is ''sisters beware''. Abbott is an ideological throwback to the 1950s, dependent on and manipulated by a catalogue of conservative male mentors from B.A Santamaria to Christopher Pearson. Paul Keating did not require 176 pages to sum up Abbott as a ''young fogey''. Pop psychology gives Abbott a father problem, but one doesn't have to reach into the lineage of Australian politicians to find male bonds. Bob Hawke is surely Exhibit A. And like Abbott, Hawke had both a mother and father who believed in his destiny. No one would argue that Hawke doesn't adore women, but Mitchell is sure Abbott's Oedipal thingy is a pointer to profound misogyny.

Abbott the author is unfailingly gracious, reflective and responsive to editorial suggestions. To be sure, as with every politician we have published, Battlelines is the product of calibrating the political consequences of every phrase. My own experience, across the ideological chasm that divides us, is not of the ''bully boy'' of Mitchell's derivative account, and there's nothing like authoring a book to inflame egoism and ignite self-importance.

The gap between Mitchell's reading and my acquaintance makes me reflect on the disjunction between the public performance and the private reality. Just as I do not recognise Abbott in this book, I do not recognise the Prime Minister in At Home With Julia. The gap between the real Prime Minister and the fiction is vast. This was obvious at the recent book launch of Christine Nixon's Fair Cop. Having been delayed by a malfunction which trapped her momentarily in her official car, she gave an excellent speech reflecting on the challenges for women leaders concluding by mistakenly naming the book Top Cop. Unsurprisingly, the commercial television networks coverage focused on the mechanical glitch and a faux pas and paid scant attention to the substance. What I had observed was a smart Prime Minister alive to the atmosphere, a politician with flair and instinct. That encounter with the ''real'' Prime Minister is not congruent with the ham-fisted automaton invented by the mass media.

Maybe this is in the nature of modern politics. The performance required of leaders is devoid of subtlety. The practice of politics has manufactured an idea-free public sphere with a shadow play of aggression and point scoring. So we have a ''lame, gay, churchy loser'' and an unmarried, childless, atheist who hopes to win by privileging heterosexual marriage, Bible stories and deporting children seeking refuge. Does any of this make sense?

Abbott affectionately calls me his left-wing publisher. I support his paid parental leave scheme as I support Gillard's price on pollution. Both policies, whilst obviously an impost on the big end of town, are social necessities. However, in the debased currency of political debate, both leaders are accused of lacking policy substance. What if Abbott actually recognises childcare as a perennial challenge for families? What if Gillard judged the emissions trading scheme to be a landmine for the Rudd government but six months later felt able to prosecute the case? What if both politicians actually believe in these reforms?

In the era of beige politics, I live in hope that Abbott and Gillard are allowed to come out.

Time to get real and cut out the cartoon caricatures

By all means criticise Tony Abbott for his conservatism and neoliberalism. But let's be clear. Tony Abbott is likely to become Australia's next Prime Minister because Labor's reactionary policies give credence to his.

The way to fight Abbott is not just to bag him out. It is to build any fight back that might arise  today against Labor. 

http://enpassant.com.au/?p=11193

Despite the fore-disclaimer, the discourse above leads to believe that Tony Abbott is as worthy as Julia Gillard...

It's rubbish of course.

Abbott may have one or two "policies" that could make sense, but all are lies — lies to get the power, then these will be diced off like smelly socks or reworked into opposites to suit a rabid conservative bent (study his team carefully, apart from Malcolm).

Louise Adler who wrote the piece above is the publisher of Abbott's manifesto... One thing is that in private, Abbott could be charming. Hitler in private was also charming and was making sense to those prepared to share some time with him.

"To be sure, as with every politician we have published, Battlelines is the product of calibrating the political consequences of every phrase. My own experience, across the ideological chasm that divides us, is not of the ''bully boy'' of Mitchell's derivative account, and there's nothing like authoring a book to inflame egoism and ignite self-importance."

Rubbish. Total rubbish...

Like some academics eager to analyse all available angles till it hurts, Adler is conned and misses the most important point. Abbott can tell whatever tall story he wishes with the grandest of tricky chumminess, and as he has done before, "change his mind" (which in reality would be going to where he wants) and take this country backwards at the service of an ignorant ritewingnuttery (Barnaby Joyce — a case in point). He is dangerously belligerent and contrary to a proper future. Abbott does not really believe in climate change, for example... He thinks it's a lot a hogwash but he gives it a lip service so he does not appear too ratbaggy on this subject — but he will join and stir up the rabid rightwingers who still believe the earth is flat, on the steps of Parliament. As soon as he could, Abbott would help his mate Murdoch by scrapping the NBN... And help his mate Packer by opposing any forms of limit on gambling. He would scrap much of the advances, those that the media does not want to talk about by fear (or suport for) of Abbott, made by Labor — Labor presently with the "lowest of opinion polls" driven down by the drivelling shock-jocks and media bias.

Abbott is a lowly ratbag... Don't make any mistakes. Comparing "At home With Julia" with Susan Mitchell's work shows how low Louise Adler has fallen from the perch of common sense.

Remember for example when Abbott commented on Bernie Banton — dying from asbestos induced cancer, but then apologised to him when the public put some heat under his butt... This sums up Abbott, even far more than Paul Keating "young fogey" comment.

And yes he has an Oedipus complex — that of being the spiritual son of Bronwyn Bishop...

Abbott is a caricature, a dangerous caricature of what a politician should be...

Confidential police reports have detailed the suicides of at least 40 people sexually abused by Catholic clergy in Victoria, and have urged a new inquiry into these and many other deaths suspected to be linked to abuse in the church.

In a damning assessment of the church’s handling of abuse issues, the reports say it appears the church has known about a shockingly high rate of suicides and premature deaths but has "chosen to remain silent."

Written by Detective Sergeant Kevin Carson, the reports state that while conducting lengthy inquiries into paedophile clergy, investigators have discovered "an inordinate number of suicides which appear to be a consequence of sexual offending.

"The number of people contacting this office to report members of their family, people they know, people they went to school with, who have taken their lives is constant. It would appear that an investigation would uncover many more deaths as a consequence of clergy sexual abuse," one of the reports states.

The revelations will increase pressure on Premier Ted Baillieu and state Attorney-General Robert Clark to respond both to the growing calls from victims for a broad inquiry into clergy sexual abuse, and to the February recommendation of Justice Phillip Cummins for a formal inquiry.

The reports by Sergeant Carson were dated September last year and February this year. The most recent report  details the "premature deaths of young men in the years following sexual assault by Catholic fraternity".

The report links at least 40 suicides to the sexual abuse perpetrated by a small number of paedophile clergy, including Gerald Ridsdale, Bryan Coffey, Paul Ryan, Robert Best and Edward Dowlan.

One of the reports includes a list of victims' names, dates of births, manner of death and the locations where the abuse is suspected or known to have taken place, including St Leo's secondary school in Box Hill, St Joseph's in Geelong and St Alipius in Ballarat East.

Among those named as suicide victims are brothers Damien and Noel Walsh, and their cousin Martin Walsh. Another brother, Rob Walsh, who was also sexually abused by Best and Ridsdale and testified against them in court, told The Age  last night that an inquiry was needed because of "the church's disregard for the law and disregard for victims".

Most of the victims, who include a student who was dux of his school, were abused between the 1960s and late 1980s.

Sergeant Carson wrote that at the end of last year, "the sheer number of young men who were abused/suspected to be the victims or abuse, and who had met a premature death, continued to grow... The list does not take into account the deaths of other ex-students at the various schools the [paedophile] Christian Brothers taught at.

"The list does not take into account the many, many attempts of suicide made by victims of [clergy] sexual assault.

"Needless to say, those many, many victims have met troubled lives — marriage break-ups, abuse of alcohol and drugs and endless contact with police."

Sergeant Carson's inquiries link the deaths of 34 people to  Ridsdale and Best, who are both serving lengthy sentences for sexually abusing young boys.

"While speaking to victims who had been abused by Ridsdale and Best, it was apparent the majority of suicides were committed subsequent to abuse having occurred at St Alipius, Ballarat East," one report says.

"A similar pattern appears to have followed the two [Ridsdale and Best] when they were appointed to other [school] placements — suicides of people attending primary school at Box Hill and Horsham.

"I point out that these facts have only come to investigators' attention while investigating the sexual abuse in the aforementioned matter and would by no means be complete.

"It would appear that the organisation in charge of... Best and Ridsdale (Catholic Church) would be well and truly aware of the existence of these figures regarding these two clergy and would no doubt be aware of many other similar deaths, however have chosen to remain silent on the matter."

A spokesman for the Melbourne Catholic Archdiocese last night said: "The only information the Archdiocese of Melbourne has about such suicides is what has appeared in the media. We don't have access to any information that links suicides with sexual abuse."

The police reports argue for a wide-ranging coronial inquiry to examine the deaths. The church spokesman also said the coroner should be given "evidence of suicide by victims of abuse".

But last night, victims and their relatives called on Mr Baillieu and Mr Clark to create an inquiry with royal commission powers to examine sexual abuse involving religious organisations.

Helen Watson, whose son Peter was 15 when he was sexually abused by a Catholic priest in Ararat,  said the abuse sent her son on a "path of self-destruction" that ended with him taking his  life at 24.

"The priest would take those young boys, give them alcohol and watch movies" before abusing them, Ms Watson said.

"I would do anything in my power [to force a full inquiry]," she said. "The church has gotten away with far too much for too long."

Rob Walsh and his brothers and cousin attended the St Alipius church and boys' school, where all were sexually abused.

Rob Walsh is the only one of them still alive. He was a 12-year-old altar boy when he was raped. It was not until many years later, after problems with alcohol and truancy, that he was able to tell anyone.

Noel Walsh, 19,  died in a single car crash which Mr Walsh only later determined — by talking to police, doctors and classmates — had been suicide.

Martin Walsh was about 22 when he shot himself, and Damien Walsh was 46 when he hung himself in his garage.

Rob Walsh says he is now aware of about 12 other boys from the same school who were sexually abused.

"It was going on for about 10 years," he said.

"You're talking about maybe 20 to 30 per cent of the school. Even now, you don’t know the full extent [of what happened]."

Victim's advocate and author Chrissie Foster, who has written a book about the abuse of two of her daughters — one of whom, Emma Foster, died at 25 of a medication overdose — said Mr Baillieu should stop stalling and show the courage to call an inquiry.

Barrister Vivian Waller, who is representing 45 men suing the Christian Brothers over the abuse committed by Best and Ridsdale, said an inquiry would discover "an epidemic of abuse".

A small number of Catholic priests have also recently spoke of the need for an inquiry. In March, The Age revealed that a senior church adviser, Father Tony Kerin, had told Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart that an independent review would clear the air and should be held.

Church's Suicide Victims

Read from top...

See also:

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/28547

http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/35393

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/5410

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/9787

and plenty more...