Still on the subject of Dr Mohammed Haneef, the full transcript of Haneef’s second interview with the Australian Federal is on the Crikey website. All 300 pages. Happy reading.
From the “It must be true” department…
Crikey has brought to my attention a media statement by the Australian Federal Police regarding the Mohammed Haneef case. In part it reads:
AFP Professional Standards has investigated suspected leaks to the media and is satisfied that there has been no unlawful disclosure of information by AFP members. The matters identified as possible inappropriate conduct by officials of other agencies will be referred to the appropriate authorities.
The AFP has acted appropriately throughout the investigation.
Well that’s good then. Some “other agencies” are to blame.
However the statement also says:
The continuing attempts by Dr Haneef’s defence team to use the media to run their case is both unprofessional and inappropriate and the AFP has raised this aspect with the Queensland Legal Services Commission.
Uhuh. And how about an equivalent sentence complaining about the government’s attempts to use the media to run their case? Yes, Ruddock and Andrews, I’m looking at you. Is your behaviour not also “both unprofessional and inappropriate”? No, no equivalent set of words? Oh.
I was under the impression that in Western democracies the police (as well as the “other agencies”) were there to independently uphold the rule of law, not act as the minions of the government of the day. Silly me.
The Kransky Sisters have a website.
The Kransky Sisters now have a website. That is all.
Subtle Thai referendum poster
I like plain, straightforward communication. I therefore love this poster for the “no” case in Thailand’s recent constitutional referendum — the first referendum ever held in Thailand. Click on the image for a close-up.
Do you get the feeling they’d rather I voted “No”?
The referendum itself was on whether to adopt a new constitution, and the result seems to be that it’s a green light. Obviously the subtle poster didn’t work.
Thanks to One Plus One Equals Three for the pointer.
What is my degrading media designation?
Author John Birmingham writes (well, of course he writes, he’s an author):
I recently saw myself described as an ‘overrated misanthropic pot monster.’ I liked that so much I’m thinking of getting a tee shirt printed. It made me think of [writing a column] on the topic of media tags, you know — adjective adjective noun. But I couldn’t get four hundred words out of it. So I thought I’d throw it out here. Invent your own degrading media tag.
I like the challenge. I haven’t thought up one for him. But I’m wondering… What would be a good “degrading media designation” for me? And, for that matter, for the Prime Minister?
(On the latter, “lying rodent” doesn’t count. It has to have two adjectives. Even though a Google search on “lying rodent” gives you… well, look for yourself.)
Quote of the Day, 23 August 2007
“If there’s a lemon in it, it doesn’t count as alcohol.” Discuss.