This is a typical Politician who thinks He Owns Everything……………..

From an email I received today.

Ian,
I made an enquiry via my ex RAAF connections, apparently KRUDD & the first shiela’s trip to Afghanistan via a RAAF KC30-A A330
Tanker was specifically tasked for just him, wife & media visit to Afghanistan.
The trip went via Perth and was a very quick over & back task.
What a complete waste of taxpayer funds for a photo op with the troops, when we have a massive cutback in defence spending.

This trip will not have come out of No 34 VIP Squadrons funding for Prime Ministerial travel. The KC30-A Tanker belongs & funding
expenditure is allocated by No 33 Squadron at Amberley.

In effect he is stealing funding from defence operations for his own political purposes.
Is there no end to this prick’s selfishness, self aggrandisement, waste and contempt
to the Armed Services and the Australian Tax Payer?

And this while most of my retired military friends are living impoverished lives on their Labor Party deliberately reduced (Defence
Forces Retirement Benefit Fund) superannuation indexation. In my case it is minus $550 a fortnight since I retired and I was a Wing Commander
most of the retired guys were Warrant Officers or lesser ranks and really struggling after serving their country all their working lives.
It’s a bloody disgrace! About $560 million would repay it all back which is about 2 weeks worth of illegal immigrants under Rudd!


Hugh
P.S.
Please pass this on to all your friends Ian, they all need to know before 7 September!
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................

This is the greatest issue of this joker going to Afghanistan. Who should foot the cost of his flying around the world to promote his own agendas? I do not see any problem with who went or the fact they went.

WHO should foot the bill for his frequent flyer points?

 

Nah it's all over the internet at least in Australia - just another made-up email doing the rounds of the willingly gullible. If he was RAAF he'd know what a "jolly" is.

 

I can tell you just quietly that the big wigs in the defence forces are absolutely livid with that trip. Apparently it was not scheduled and not suitable, but heir Fuhrer demanded it. It is said that he chucked a massive in flight tantrum over the lack of a hair dryer on the flight. Apparently only knows two words, one starts with f and the other with c. Once over there he shook some hands and took a heap of footage, then jumped back on the plane and waited for the departure. Totally useless and uncalled for trip.

I am sorry but this fool is a grub. Always has been, always will be.

 

But this one actually happened -

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...owards-to-the-g/2007/06/21/1182019286740.html

 

Well he is that, but I always asked who funded this little party? I still ask, and why should the tax payer fund this jaunt? I am certain that this trip was paid from the military budget but was it uncalled for? This suggests that it was...

I guess I am being little cynical of this twit here, but it seemed to me that he held the election call as long as he could so the tax payer could pay for a good portion of his election advertising as well. This trip seemed much of the same and my only real problem is who paid for it? Obviously, the tax payer but of what account?

 

As ridiculous as that is diuretic , it is hardly the same.

I would imagine the security set up would be far less dificult and last time I looked Melbourne, Sydney, and Canberra were not war torn countries. And I imagine Howard never threw a tantrum over a hair dryer.

I have this on very good authority that this did happen.

As did his tantrum at the last state of origin. Demanding they hold kick off until he arrived, and he wanted his own elevator so he did not have to talk to anyone, and he wanted a corporate box for him and three friends.

when he arrived he had six more guests and demanded a different box. Chucked the biggest birko untill he made the women in charge cry. They asked people in one box to move into the sponsors lounge and refunded their money.

How do I know this, because my step brother was in the box that was asked to move. He said he was livid and emmbarrassed by the stink. Rudd carried on like a spoilt little child.

They all abuse their position, but he seems to do it with an attitude of a movie star. What a fake.

 

So??? Does that make this ok??? As far as party politics one wrong does not make another wrong, right. This is no justification for wasted tax payer funds... Most of all, it does not make the issue of funding from military budget for photo opps any more reasonable...

 

No, I'm saying it didn't happen. It's a meme doing the rounds, a bit like that one that surfaced a few years ago allegedly from an Australian police officer called "Ed" who was warning about firearms control laws in Australia disarming us all and the one from Andy Dunn from the Police Association of SA who allegedly warned about armed criminals (he didn't). It's got no provenance, it's just another piece of propaganda flying around the internet.

 

I don't particularly like the bloke either but I'm afraid that this sort of stuff is treated as truth when it isn't. I don't know who told you about the incident but it's been repeated verbatim in other forums.
That doesn't prove it happened, just that it's a meme. I mean crumbs the RAAF know how to have a good time using their equipment, flying lobsters into the west coast of the US from the east coast of Canada is a good example. Sorry can't tell you who told me, just know it was a regular occurrence between a couple of maritime bases where RAAF personnel were based on exchange.

 

What??? It didn't happen??? Of course it happened, the question is who paid for it? Regardless of if you believe that this is untrue, the fact is you have not answered the question.

 

If you say it happened then can you provide evidence of it? I mean apart from a meme on the internet. Are there any reports in the regular media about it? I'm pretty sure News Corp would be running it if it was true. I'll keep an eye out for it in the mainstream and see if it comes up or if it simply lives in forums.

As far as any questions go they're all one way. Did it actually happen? As I said, I'll keep an eye out.

 

I must clarify, Do you mean the trip??? Or the funding???

If you do not believe the trip occurred...

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...afghanistan-20130728-2qs6t.html#ixzz2bcNFhFZ4
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-...rprise-visit-to-troops-in-afghanistan/4848252
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s-in-afghanistan/story-fn59niix-1226686961380

Now if you’re talking about where to money came from for the trip, So far we have nothing but your claims of discredit due to the fact this email is scatted around the net... SO Without further evidence of were the cost was allocated and if this was not wasted... I think I have all the evidence I need to condemn the situation as plain waste of tax payer funding for simple photo opportunity... Which is the question I am asking, who paid for this junket?

So I think the ball is in your court here and you are swinging and missing.

P.S. I make no claims of slipperies comments, but I have little to make me think he is wrong due to what I perceive his character to be... Sad really, but unfortunately that has nothing to do with his politics...

 

I'm questioning the existence of the email.

As for its contents - if it is accurate then Hugh is talking out of his arse.

But my money says it's a meme.

 

If you're having trouble keeping up, that's not good seeing it's your thread. Of course he isn't saying the "Trip" never happened. He is saying the email is about as believable as any email on the net is. Oh and Garry, I have just been given access to $100 million dollars that was left to me by a great uncle. It's been deposited in a Nigerian bank account and I need a further $10K to pay the transfer fees. You will receive 100 times $10K as commission that will be direct deposited into an account of your nomination with 10 working days of your depositing the $10K in my bank account. If you want to contact me before you send the money I will be in Sydney. If you want to contact me after you send the money, I will be somewhere in the Carabean. For further information call 1800 ibelieveanything

 

The issue is that Kevy thinks he can spend any amount of public money on his personal campaign to remain pm. The Afgahn trip was clearly nothing but a PR trip and photo shoot opportunity for Kevy's benefit, all paid for by the Australian taxpayers.

 

Translation:

I READ IT ON THE INTERNET, IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

ROFL

 

ROFL

 

But it is no more less than any other leader, from most countries. People often see these things as just cost benefit exercises when nothing could be further from the truth. These planes fly constantly, doing various exercises to hone navigation, long distance fly. Flying even disputed airspace. If the PM had not gone on this jaunt. The plane would have been doing something else anyway

 

So trolling is the order of the day???

 

It really is irrelevant to the point I raised. However, just for the kicks... Prove it wrong.

IS the detail wrong???
Is the point of cost Wrong???
Is the point that the trip was created at the whim of Rudd Wrong???
Was the itinerary wrong???
Is the cut in returned services Wrong???

No, just saying it is wrong does not cut it. BUT that being said, regardless of being accurate the question is where did the funds come from for this trip??? Was it out of a military budget (that has been cut) or was it out of the travel expense of the PM's office??? Should the government fund Rudd’s wife for the trip or should Rudd have to front up with her cost(another question)???

The fact the trip occurred is nothing, I do not see major problem with the trip except maybe the intentions of the trip... And that was definitely a photo opp for Rudd. Telling the Australian population HE is going to bring the troops home... Forget the fact that decision was made two years ago by Gillard... However, that too is irrelevant...

So without any evidence this email I received is wrong, I still wait for answer to my questions...

BTY I am not going to release my email address for you to verify I received this email…

 

So diversion from its ordinary duties is fine regardless of how much added cost is involved???

 

Not sure, not a trolling expert, not a coalition supporter.

So does that mean your answer is no?

You guys just keep on amazing me.
I would love to debate you on coalition policies, but to date, if they have any, they aren't sharing. Of course we could debate the "Plan"
Stop the boats. Yes good, we all want that. But when, how, by what methods, what ifs, funding, international relations, morality etc.
Get rid of our debt. Yes good, we all want that. But when, how, by what methods, what ifs, funding, affects on families, effects on social services, infrastructure, employment, education etc
I really am not interested in who sleeps with who, who is gay, who is a misogynist or not, whether Rudd spent more time or more money travelling than Howard.

So what is my interest? Good question. Thanks for asking.

When my grandson is around the age I am now, I would like him to be able to say to his grandchildren, that Australia is such a good country, that the air they breathe is clean, that they are fortunate that back in his grandfather's day, the right decisions were made for the future of the nation and it's people.
Not decisions based on how it would affect their pockets at a time when we are really living a life of milk and honey, but decisions not based on greed, on money, but on humanity, on a clean and viable environment, on sustainable development and sensible use of our resources.

As to my tongue in cheek remarks about your email...lol. You're not seriously putting that up as evidence that Abbott will lead Australia better trhan Rudd surely.

- - - Updated - - -

Not sure, not a trolling expert, not a coalition supporter.

So does that mean your answer is no?

You guys just keep on amazing me.
I would love to debate you on coalition policies, but to date, if they have any, they aren't sharing. Of course we could debate the "Plan"
Stop the boats. Yes good, we all want that. But when, how, by what methods, what ifs, funding, international relations, morality etc.
Get rid of our debt. Yes good, we all want that. But when, how, by what methods, what ifs, funding, affects on families, effects on social services, infrastructure, employment, education etc
I really am not interested in who sleeps with who, who is gay, who is a misogynist or not, whether Rudd spent more time or more money travelling than Howard.

So what is my interest? Good question. Thanks for asking.

When my grandson is around the age I am now, I would like him to be able to say to his grandchildren, that Australia is such a good country, that the air they breathe is clean, that they are fortunate that back in his grandfather's day, the right decisions were made for the future of the nation and it's people.
Not decisions based on how it would affect their pockets at a time when we are really living a life of milk and honey, but decisions not based on greed, on money, but on humanity, on a clean and viable environment, on sustainable development and sensible use of our resources.

As to my tongue in cheek remarks about your email...lol. You're not seriously putting that up as evidence that Abbott will lead Australia better trhan Rudd surely.

 

Yes trolling.

Us guys??? How stupid to start anything on the point of opposite sides before even raising a point.

Good for you, but as time and again many have raised the point of discussing policy and then dragged the debate down to this style of debate, I believe this comment is not exactly a genuine comment. The fact you begin with the predetermind side of any debate demonstrates you do not really want genuine debate on issues but to simply push one side over the other.

I think we know that.

Well you had better start looking for politicians who do not want to buy your vote every three years and look for decent people, But you are dreaming if you think you have or ever will find any...

No, did I suggest that??? You know here lays the biggest problem of political persuasions such as yours. You assume everything is either one way or another and need to fit them into those terms. You cannot get the fact some people actually want any government to represent them regardless of political persuasion. That is only one reason I can demonstrate TV as being a bigot.

This is a question the people of Australia should be demanding answers too. If politicians are wasting tax payer money for their own agenda then the people should be demanding better, regardless of what political persuasion they are. This in no way is an attack on this politicians character, but more to the acceptance of wasted funds used for personal gain. Christ, if you think about it, Howard did this style of thing (as demonstrated in this thread) Rudd, Gillard and I am bloody sure Abbott will too. So when he does, those who complain this as a none issue will scream from the mountains, but will be eating these words. What is the difference with this style of thing than Craig Thompson??? Think about it.

No, this has nothing to do with who is better… It has everything to demanding these politicians represent Australians for the peoples interests.

 

I had a better reply but my connection played up and lost it. After re reading your post I noticed this

and decided it would be a waste of time as you are so arrogant. "political persuasions such as yours", LMAO whats that LNP supporters, because except for the last 4 elections I always voted LNP. Some life circumstances of the sort you wouldn't understand though switched me to run in two elections as an independent and so I voted for an independant and in the last two elections I voted one independant and one Green.

So as you have your head up your Rs and do not even know what a debate is

... Um all debates have predetermined sides,the participants choose either the Affirmative or Negative before the debate begins .. DAH