Greg Sheridan, as expected has written a glowing tribute to #Pell, in The Australian, of course.
It's an indulgent piece, afforded to Sheridan because he is Pell's friend and in a powerful position at The Australian. Let's drill down.
1/
Sheridan starts by regurgitating the idea that Pell is a victim of 'anti-Catholic Hysteria'.
Sheridan, like others never suggest why complainants, with zero to gain, would voluntarily subject themselves to examination by ruthless Barristers like Robert Richter.
2/
Sheridan, in a deceptive attempt to sound reasonable, acknowledges the scourge of abuse in The Church, but tempers it by suggesting it was the same everywhere.
He ignores the industrial scale protection racket run by the Church and dismisses the Royal Commission findings.
3/
He also ignores the comparative scale of child sexual abuse in The Catholic Church. Dr Vivian Waller who has represented many victims gives critical insight here.
Sheridan goes on to cite the deeply flawed 'Melbourne Response' that short-changed victims as something that should be credited to Pell for being 'forward-leaning'.
Sheridan's comment 'as soon as he (Pell) got any power' is revisionist garbage. I'll tell you why next.
5/
In 2007, Pell was central to the Church's response to the so-called 'Ellis' defence.
Under Pell's instruction, The Church spent $1.5M on this case in order to prevent victims from suing the Church directly.
This is what Pell did with power.
6/
Earlier than that, Pell was using his power to buy the silence of victims. It's not difficult to determine why he was buying silence.
You can judge Pell's demeanour in this interview for yourself.
Sheridan goes on to suggest that many were convinced of 'a stitch up', and supports this by pointing to being interrupted at dinner with Pell, by Pell supporters, 3 times.
This is curious given Pell's name in the trial was suppressed. How did these 3 know?
8/
There are many powerful people and organisations working overtime, determined to re-write history for #Pell's legacy.
Greg Sheridan is one example. Those who've suffered because of the action or inaction of Pell deserve to have this revisionist nonsense challenged.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Liberals lined up to film themselves claiming Labor’s machete disposal bins cost $325,000 each.
They all pushed the same lie.
Let’s take a tour through this political rubbish - and at the end, I’ll show you what the bins really cost 🗑️🧵
How big will their lies be?
/1
Bin watch #1: Jess Wilson posted her $325k bin claim, and did this after the real cost had already been stated in Parliament.
Jess knew the number. She lied anyway.
If you’ll knowingly push a falsehood this brazen, what’s your credibility worth on anything else?
/2
Bin watch #2: Jane Hume, delivering the bin lie with the same energy she brings to railing against working from home - loud, confident, and completely wrong.
You’ll remember the blow-up over Matthew Knott’s SMH piece quoting a Hamas co-founder in what looked like a hit job on Albanese. (Context in the quote tweet below if you aren't up to speed.)
Well, it gets worse, and no one’s noticed. A thread....
/1
After the backlash, and an AFR piece (same parent company, see quote tweet) inadvertently called Knott's article into question without explicitly saying so.
Colleen Harkin from the Liberal Party’s admin committee is behind the court action to block the payment John Pesutto needs to settle Moira Deeming’s defamation case, and avoid bankruptcy.
Harkin backed Israel Folau when he damned gay people to hell, because that’s what culture war crusaders do.
Now she’s backing Deeming and trying to kneecap Pesutto.
Different battle, same culture war.
2/4
Oh, and Colleen runs the Institute of Public Affairs' schools program, whatever that is.
From Deves to Deeming, Folau to factional chaos, Colleen Harkin embodies the culture war conservatism making the Liberal Party unelectable in progressive Victoria.
A legal stoush has erupted on Kew High Street just now after Boroondara Council enforced its directive: one sign per candidate on public land.
Everyone complied except the Liberals who are refusing and have called in lawyers, leaving their signs all over the public footpath.
Another council officer has arrived but the Liberals are digging in further.
I just saw someone try and cross the road and get stuck behind the signs while 4 lanes of peak hour traffic flies by.
Council officers have raised serious concerns about signs on the cnr of Kew High Street and Pakington Street.
They say the signs are obstructing drivers’ visibility, making it dangerous for them to see children crossing the road on their way to Kew Primary School just 30m away.