Zed appalled the Greens don’t share his Parkwood outrage

johnboy 14 March 2012 43

Liberal Leader Zed Seselja has been silent on whether he supports animal cruelty, but he is letting people know that the Greens have not shown what he believes is sufficient outrage for the Parkwood Egg sabotage:

Both Shane Rattenbury and Caroline Le Couteur have refused to condemn or even comment on the apparent destruction of property at a Canberra egg farm. ACT Opposition Leader Zed Seselja today called on Meredith Hunter to show leadership and denounce this attack.

“Shane Rattenbury and Caroline Le Couteur have been given every opportunity to condemn this activity but have chosen not to, even going so far as to refuse to comment at all and suggest they hadn’t seen the details,” Mr Seselja said today.

“Just last year, Shane Rattenbury refused to condemn the illegal destruction of $300,000 worth of CSIRO genetically modified crops by Greenpeace.

“We absolutely condemn this destructive activity which has thrown the livelihoods of the farms’ workers into doubt overnight.

UPDATE 14/03/12 11:40: This comment in from a Greens’ Spokesperson:

Firstly, notice no quotes in Zed’s release. Caroline has actually condemned the incident quite clearly when asked -noting her particular concern about property damage and acid endangering hens. Shane refused to comment because he had been hot air ballooning from 5am and hadn’t seen the newspaper – he didn’t know the first thing about it so he declined to comment, but when asked hypothetically if he would support someone pouring battery acid on a facility he said clearly: “Of course not”.

This is desperation from a soon to be ex-leader who is in serious trouble himself and looking for deflection.

The Greens remain proud of multiple attempts to legislate the phasing out cage egg production in the ACT, something that Mr Seselja has voted against.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
43 Responses to Zed appalled the Greens don’t share his Parkwood outrage
Filter
Order
jimbocool jimbocool 11:31 am 15 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

Stevian said :

HenryBG said :

chewy14 said :

Breaking the law in our society because you personally don’t like something is never excusable.

Yeah, that Oscar Schindler had no excuse for smuggling Jews to Sweden.

Godwin?

Although it does make the point that absolute statements rarely hold up for very long

They’re good for 1,000 years, surely?

Just to be clear, Oskar Schindler didn’t smuggle Jews into Sweden, that was another Righteous Gentile, Raoul Wallenberg, who as a Swedish diplomat in Hungary saved tens of thousands of Jews by issuing them with fake passports and other documents, as well as sheltering them in various Swedish diplomatic properties.

p1 p1 10:21 am 15 Mar 12

poetix said :

Jim Jones said :

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

I’d love to join in but I have to go and invade Poland now.

Hitler invaded Poland,
Hitler was a Nazi,
Therefore all vegetarians invade Poland,

What infallible logic.

Nifty said :

PS, Johnboy. Do I qualify for a Godwin’s law fail with oak leaves for my second Nazi allusion in the one thread?

Golden Oak Leaves, Swords, and Diamonds if you can somehow explain the negative correlation between Nazis and Reptoids.

Erg0 Erg0 8:51 am 15 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

Come on dude – it’s Greenpeace, not Baader Meinhof.

That seems like a pretty spurious argument, the fact that it could be worse doesn’t make it ok.

c_c said :

The point was it’s like asking a question you already know the answer to for the mere sake of saying the question out loud.

I believe the commonly used term for this is “politics”. Like our friendly neigbourhood protesters, Zed is just finding a vehicle for his message.

nobody nobody 8:19 am 15 Mar 12

Nifty said :

Jim Jones said :

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

You said it. Actually, it’s the stormtrooper tactics that accompany theself-righteousness of these self-appointed zealots that worries me.

Shane Rattenbury is an elected legislator. He is one of 17 Canberrans who has the privileged opportunity to change any laws he doesn’t like through a vote in the ACT Parliament. He and the other Greens need to decide whether they will respect all the laws made through the Parliamentary process until they are changed by the Parliament. If they can’t do that, they should in all conscience resign from the Parliament.

PS, Johnboy. Do I qualify for a Godwin’s law fail with oak leaves for my second Nazi allusion in the one thread?

Sorry to see you have been sucked up in Zed’s media storm.
http://act.greens.org.au/content/greens-statement-parkwood-egg-incident

Also, the 17 MLA’s, including the 4 Greens, were all elected not self appointed.

HenryBG HenryBG 7:37 am 15 Mar 12

Nifty said :

You said it. Actually, it’s the stormtrooper tactics that accompany theself-righteousness of these self-appointed zealots that worries me.

“Stormtrooper tactics”?

You mean, like, the use of gliders? Well-designed small arms with a high ROF? Natty uniforms?
That sort of thing?

You definitely qualify for something, Nifty, only probably not what you think you qualify for.

Nifty Nifty 8:13 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

You said it. Actually, it’s the stormtrooper tactics that accompany theself-righteousness of these self-appointed zealots that worries me.

Shane Rattenbury is an elected legislator. He is one of 17 Canberrans who has the privileged opportunity to change any laws he doesn’t like through a vote in the ACT Parliament. He and the other Greens need to decide whether they will respect all the laws made through the Parliamentary process until they are changed by the Parliament. If they can’t do that, they should in all conscience resign from the Parliament.

PS, Johnboy. Do I qualify for a Godwin’s law fail with oak leaves for my second Nazi allusion in the one thread?

c_c c_c 7:41 pm 14 Mar 12

All this stereotyping about Germany and Hitler and Nazis is just wrong.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to take my Volkwagon in for a service, the sat-nav keeps changing the destination from “Woden” to “Warsaw”

Deckard Deckard 7:23 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

Nifty said :

Will “Tomorrow Belongs To Me” become the anthem of the Greens Party and their even more extreme fellow-travellers?

After all, Hitler was a vegetarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_vegetarianism) and his party put animal welfare ahead of the welfare of humans.

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

Hey, I’ve never seen the greens condemn Hitler…

poetix poetix 7:21 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

Nifty said :

Will “Tomorrow Belongs To Me” become the anthem of the Greens Party and their even more extreme fellow-travellers?

After all, Hitler was a vegetarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_vegetarianism) and his party put animal welfare ahead of the welfare of humans.

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

I’d love to join in but I have to go and invade Poland now.

HenryBG HenryBG 6:06 pm 14 Mar 12

Stevian said :

HenryBG said :

chewy14 said :

Breaking the law in our society because you personally don’t like something is never excusable.

Yeah, that Oscar Schindler had no excuse for smuggling Jews to Sweden.

Godwin?

Although it does make the point that absolute statements rarely hold up for very long

They’re good for 1,000 years, surely?

Jim Jones Jim Jones 5:46 pm 14 Mar 12

Nifty said :

Will “Tomorrow Belongs To Me” become the anthem of the Greens Party and their even more extreme fellow-travellers?

After all, Hitler was a vegetarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_vegetarianism) and his party put animal welfare ahead of the welfare of humans.

Hitler was a vegetarian.
Hitler was a Nazi.
Therefore, vegetarians are Nazis.

What infallible logic.

Nifty Nifty 5:16 pm 14 Mar 12

Will “Tomorrow Belongs To Me” become the anthem of the Greens Party and their even more extreme fellow-travellers?

After all, Hitler was a vegetarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_vegetarianism) and his party put animal welfare ahead of the welfare of humans.

nobody nobody 4:59 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

And yes, the local government should definitely ban cage eggs in the ACT (anyone know why this hasn’t happened yet?).

Interesting to note that this ‘insane terrorist’ action will probably hasten this occurring by raising it as a public issue in the media.

Neither Labor or Liberal would support the Greens when they tried to ban caged hens.
http://act.greens.org.au/content/greens’-egg-laws-help-canberra-go-free-range

zippyzippy zippyzippy 4:51 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

And yes, the local government should definitely ban cage eggs in the ACT (anyone know why this hasn’t happened yet?).
.

Quoting from the post: “The Greens remain proud of multiple attempts to legislate the phasing out cage egg production in the ACT, something that Mr Seselja has voted against”

My understanding is that the Greens have tried numerous times to ban cage eggs, but both Stanhope and Zed have refused to support.

c_c c_c 4:47 pm 14 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

c_c said :

Of course Mr Rattenbury hasn’t spoken out about this or the Greenpeace attack on the CSIRO.

Mr Rattenbury himself is a member of Greenpeace for starters. His wife is a member of and employee of Greenpeace.

…and you don’t see a problem with this?

Pointing out that a sitting MLA is a member of an organisation that condones criminal action seems like a little more than “a pointless exercise in cheap mud slinging”.

Attacking an MLA who’s a member of that organisation is cheap mud slinging because it’s like accusing Bob Brown of being in the wrong for not speaking out against the protestors who blockaded Tassie Parliament over the Gunns Pulp Mill site. Brown blockaded the Franklin Dam and was arrested for it back in the day.

The point was it’s like asking a question you already know the answer to for the mere sake of saying the question out loud.

And as I said, I’d much prefer Rattenbury who believes in something, even if I don’t concur with that choice, to Zed who seems to believe in nothing.

    johnboy johnboy 4:58 pm 14 Mar 12

    Oh Zed believes in things. He just doesn’t want the Canberra public to know about them.

Stevian Stevian 4:44 pm 14 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

chewy14 said :

Breaking the law in our society because you personally don’t like something is never excusable.

Yeah, that Oscar Schindler had no excuse for smuggling Jews to Sweden.

Godwin?

Although it does make the point that absolute statements rarely hold up for very long

Jim Jones Jim Jones 4:35 pm 14 Mar 12

Erg0 said :

c_c said :

Of course Mr Rattenbury hasn’t spoken out about this or the Greenpeace attack on the CSIRO.

Mr Rattenbury himself is a member of Greenpeace for starters. His wife is a member of and employee of Greenpeace.

…and you don’t see a problem with this?

Pointing out that a sitting MLA is a member of an organisation that condones criminal action seems like a little more than “a pointless exercise in cheap mud slinging”.

Ooooh … excuse me while I clutch my pearls. Pass me the smelling salts before I suffer an attack of the vapours.

Come on dude – it’s Greenpeace, not Baader Meinhof.

chewy14 chewy14 4:32 pm 14 Mar 12

Jim Jones said :

chewy14 said :

Breaking the law in our society because you personally don’t like something is never excusable.

We may not agree on the definition of what is an excusable example of breaking the law, but there are countless historical examples that give the lie to your statement.

Note I said our society. If we lived in a society where there weren’t other outlets for change then I might think differently.

chewy14 chewy14 4:29 pm 14 Mar 12

EvanJames said :

chewy14 said :

OK so if it’s not illegal, then it’s not defined as animal cruelty then is it?

And I think I’d prefer to stick with the legal definition rather than what animal activists think if that’s OK with you.

Breaking the law in our society because you personally don’t like something is never excusable.

It scares me that people who reason in this way are allowed to breed, drive and vote.

What?
Because I believe in the rule of law?
Or because I think that what YOU believe might not be the same as what the rest of our society does?

What scares me is that people like you are willing to rationalise criminal behaviour because you agree with the criminal’s morals. And that you see no problem with your dissonance.

Erg0 Erg0 4:24 pm 14 Mar 12

c_c said :

Of course Mr Rattenbury hasn’t spoken out about this or the Greenpeace attack on the CSIRO.

Mr Rattenbury himself is a member of Greenpeace for starters. His wife is a member of and employee of Greenpeace.

…and you don’t see a problem with this?

Pointing out that a sitting MLA is a member of an organisation that condones criminal action seems like a little more than “a pointless exercise in cheap mud slinging”.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site