Selective Listening by Little Johnny, Regime Change, and Ninja.

[thorfinn]

Selective Listening

As I mentioned in a thread inside a previous post of mine about the potential failures of intelligence, the biggest likely failure is when the upstream authority starts directing the questions that the intelligence agency is to answer. I was talking about the CIA in that thread, but, it no less applies to our own agencies. This is pretty clearly what happened with the ONA's assessments on Iraq, and kudos to the DIO for managing to avoid it.

No less than eight articles in today's Age:

• PM's Iraq claims 'not supported'
• Hard to explain ONA changing advice
• Advice not 'sexed up', but ignored: Beazley
• Doubt cast on Howard's reasons for Iraq war
• Report backs Age revelations
• Tough questions remain unanswered
• Weaknesses to be found from the start to the end
• Why we now need a full inquiry

Come the next election, vote against Little Johnny, if you're an Australian Citizen. At this point, I'm going to be putting Little Johnny's party below Fred Nile's mob and One Nation in my preference lists. At least they're honest about their policies, even if they're policies I don't like. And Little Johnny and his friends are all saying that this bipartisan inquiry exonerates them... Which is yet another Big Lie. Sure, it exonerates them of actually just "making shit up", but it quite clearly says that they cherry-picked the reports, and that their announcements were unsupported by the evidence. In other words, they lied by omission, and then they did absolutely nothing to correct what they knew were overblown reports in the media. In short, they lied, and they sexed up the evidence.

---

Regime Change

For more fun, and coverage of the other side to the main news media accounts, take a look at: U.S.-Sponsored Regime Change in Haiti. Don't like a democratically elected regime? We'd better wait until the "freedom fighters" have a go... Then we'll see about "electing" someone we like. Why d'ya think the elections in Iraq have been put off? The U.S. knows full well that someone elected now would be someone that they can't trust to be their patsy. Of course they have to delay elections, in that case. Protecting democracy, hah.

---

Ninja

You can, of course, trust my opinion, because according to the Assassin Webtest, I am a NINJA: I never saw you. You're a professional, but you don't get to take the credit for your work that other assassins do. The night is your only ally, and you wouldn't have it any other way.


Which Type of Assassin Are You? (With Anime pics!)
brought to you by Quizilla

Comments

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

In other words, they lied by omission, and then they did absolutely nothing to correct what they knew were overblown reports in the media.

Sounds like "Children Overboard" doesn't it?

Good to see that the Labor Party has found the nerve to demand a Royal Commission. I would have been thumping the table if they wimped out on that option.

Interested in your comments on Haiti. I have followed Aristade's rise and fall from power for some time and it was interesting that there was very little coverage on who or what his opposition were (apart from being an opposition). Something smells very fishy indeed here.

[thorfinn]

*nodnod* The U.S. does have rather a history of giving democratically elected leaders a push if it doesn't like them. This looks like just the same process.

And yes, exactly like Children Overboard. And I, too, am happy that Labour is hammering for a Royal Commission, and I'll be really upset if they don't keep hammering on the issue.