Bits that the cherry-picking Fox edits out,

Kenny says,

"It understandably rankles the Abbott government that it has not been given credit for ceasing the calamitous deaths at sea under the previous administration's supposedly more "humane" policy.

However well intentioned, Labor's approach was a disaster."
[SMH, June13, 2015]

Labor PM Rudd, not someone who would ever take advice and who wantonly destroyed John Howard's successful Pacific Solution, was later to backflip and admit along with his Foreign Minister, Bob Carr and other Labor frontbenchers that it was economic migrants, illegal migrants, who were paying the international people smuggling gangs.

Actually due to the word limit - I usually
try to put in the gist of what the author
stated.

What was also left out was:

"Delivering on Tony Abbott's notorious three-
word commitment to stop the boats turned crucially
on putting another three-point principle
into action: when it came to boats seeking entry
show no weakness, no equivocation, no exceptions.
Vessels intercepted would be turned aroung or their
human cargo taken into custody to be warehoused in
deliberately awful tropical conditions - children
and all. Nobody, but nobody, would be settled here."

As Kenny tells us "delivering the policy brought bitter
criticism on Abbott, but, like it or not, his
absolutism also saw the pernicious people smuggling
trade neutered - and therefor countless deaths at sea
avoided."

According to Kenny - "this was its moral foundation, and
frankly, it was a pretty hard one for the left to crack."

However Kenny goes on to point out -

"Now, however, even that appears to have been inundated,
as the unpalatable politics of immigration anxiety and national security reveal the dangers of unchecked power."

And that is the point Kenny is making in his analysis.

"Like the boats themselves, the revelation that the
Australian government may be secretly paying people smugglers
to turn their boats around, suggests the architects of
policy are as short of a compass as the hapless souls they would
deny."

He sums up, "Whatever it takes is a dangerous idea in any
endeavour, but when carried out in secret and in the
denial of a human crisis, it risks being criminal itself..."

"It is time for a return to proper levels of
accountability."

Poirot,

Now that you have accepted that paying minor criminals to disrupt smuggling activities is common practise on land, what on earth is wrong with doing it at sea? Real answer please, not just your opinion.

Foxy,

If the PM was required to reveal security information at the request of the opposition there would be no security, especially now that there appears to be no crime.

As for Michael Gordon the far left journalist who believes that returning people rescued from a sinking boat to the nearest shore as per international law is crime, he is free to lay charges. As with most drivel that comes from his mouth, I believe he knows he is talking crap and won't go beyond flatulent posturing.

Dear Shadow Minister,

We shall have to wait and see what comes out regarding
this entire issue. One thing is clear - this is not a
matter of national security. That's bollocks.
People smugglers should not be pulling up to
Customs vessels with the expectation that they are a
"floating ATM."

The executive director of the Human
Rights Law Centre, Hugh de Kretser, said the claims
left Australia open to breaching various laws and the
secrecy from the government was extraordinary.

"If true, there are serious questions about whether
these payments breach Australian law, Indonesian law,
and International law." he said.

If you don't like what Michael Gordon writes, there are
plenty of other journalists you can read on social
media.

However, they're all saying the same thing.
You can of course always turn to Piers Ackerman,
or Andrew Bolt. They may be more to your liking.
Kindred spirits and all that!

Dear Shadow Minister,

You raised the topic of flatulence in your last post.

Did you know that your body produces anywhere
from 1 cup to a half gallon of gas a day and as a
result you should be passing gas about 14 times a day.

My advice to you is:

Get a dog!

I agree with TISM:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQShSBhzG40

R.I.P. Tokin' Blackman