Caught an ABC radio interview of the Attorney General in August. My reaction after listening? The guy is a slippery eel or a full blown fruitcake.
The Attorney General responds to questions shot his way with a "duck and weave" formula, Blind Freddie would discern unmistakably this official is plainly not an authentic article? You can judge Ruddock is more a Lilliputian; a consequential government employee so he should be an important public servant? But his behaviour is more hired hand! Bet my bottom dollar this fruit cake is a puppet to hegemony seekers outside official public recognition?
The Attorney General’s language is chock a bloc full of distortion, little honesty is injected on the job. An indispensable characteristic of a real attorney general embodies accuracy and honesty; examination of this fruit cake's gazette is such judicious traits have cut class.
Moral and fair defence of the Australian citizen’s rights is abandoned for pathetic fallacious public relations, and a model of arrogance hidden within intimidation and coercian of the citizen whilst prosecuting the pampered darling, an endless war against terror. Ruddock rapes the citizen whilst he pretends to uphold the law - as he interprets its revision for Australia’s constituent police state.
The Attorney General confers sleeze and manipulation; he is a master of sophistry, responds to inquiry with bluster delivered inside non-answers. His public face is tedious and flat; misrepresentation through a string of laborious clarification, mingled with enough legalese to fool most. His is a bluster technique holding authoritative ground with interviewers and listener alike, by autocratic officious puffiness he restrains reality and truth from sight.
A listener grows tired fishing for a cohesive and authentic response. Half expect interviewers to wrap up interviews with Ruddock. Waiting and anticipating Ruddock will eventually reply with at least one straight answer about David Hicks is tiring. With a basic question, “When is Hicks being returned to Australia and what is the Government doing to help the situation?” Its a run around the bush Ruddock adopts to [not] answer the question. The top justice man in Canberra is a slippery eel or a fruitcake.
Asked about the return of David Hicks to Australia from Guantanamo military base after Hicks has been in the lock-up for 5 years? Croaked with nervousness, quivering with deceit Ruddock unhesitatingly clouded Canberra’s position with his I’m not my own man reply. Saying, “…such matters take a long time”. Talk about failure to demonstrate one iota of concern about Hicks case.
I conclude [with legion of others] Ruddock takes inaction to ensure Hicks stays far from Australia for the longest possible time. To the interviewer’s credit she reminded Ruddock of the five years already Hicks has been in Guantanamo and still detained in USA custody, still in jail. By asking, “How much time does it take for Hicks to be returned?”
Judging by Ruddock’s vacuity our Attorney General answers questions in a fashion that betrays him working to a nefarious agenda, a contrived opposing agenda of Australia. He is a puppet, a voice of subservience in obsequiousness to the Bush administration and its liberty killing focus?
