Yesterday after the diplomatic effort for Hu was announced as much as could be revealed without compromising the negotiations, Turnbull was calling for Rudd to get involved in a diplomatic effort at the highest levels.

Today it was Julie Bishop’s turn where after it was announced that the diplomatic talks are going on and Smith has seen Hu, Julie said the consular level effort was not good enough and Rudd must immediately make remonstrations to the highest levels of the Chinese government.

Stupid thing about this opposition attack (as stupid as nearly all their attacks on the government) is that if the opposition were in government they would be doing nothing different, and the people know it, so why pretend they would and make unrealistic demands of the government they would never undertake themselves?

Just more grandstanding I suspect.

Turnbull? Grandstanding!? Say it isn’t so!

I thought Rudd handled his response to Turnbull quite well. Then again, he did come from a diplomatic background involved with Chinese affairs – this stuff is probably second nature to him.

Just more grandstanding I suspect.

It appears the charges involve bribery and I suspect the Chinese companies that were complicit will possibly be forfeited by the State.

I believe the PM should stay clear on this and allow the relevant people to look after the situation but that assistance will be limited, opposed to what Turnbull is demanding.

I don’t believe there will not be a fallback in foreign investment, people will have to realise that they have to play by the rules which is expected, no matter what country they are dealing in.

The way I see it, there is mutual need to do business with China but the stockpiling is of some concern, on the face of it, it appears that China is putting their US dollars into the stockpile rather than taking a risk with the currency.

Can they see some eventuality that we don’t?

B.Tolputt, on July 10th, 2009 at 4:18 pm

Agreed.

Tom of Melbourne, on July 10th, 2009 at 4:16 pm

Denied. Your opinion is legitimate AND so is BT’s, or vice versa. It’s not an either/or sityation; despite the false dichotomy you set out to create by demanding someone prove you ‘wrong’ or suffer the ignomy of loss of legitimacy in a fools’ folie a deux by engaging in a futile, Sysyphean task.

Or, to put the apparent thing in the shorter vernacular, “Come and beat me. Ha ha, you can’t because you aren’t me, and can never, ever prove me wrong to me, so I’ve already won. I am such a winner. Yeah.”

More of the good ideas and legitimate opinions, please, especially where those cover unexplored or alternative terrains, and less setting of the cunning ‘traps’ for the not so unwary. Perhaps.

Can we get the discussion back to the original topic of Ben’s post??

Thanks..

Tom, I’m now moderating your comments because you’re just being argumentative and you know it.

Note: this does not mean you have been banned.

Also note: This is based on the recommendation of several others.

When you can behave like normal we might let you have unfettered access again.