1)'source must be someone from rudd's inner circle'What proof do...

1)'source must be someone from rudd's inner circle'

What proof do you have anything at all came from rudds inner circle?
This article does not quote anybody just 'Canberra sources' and i see nothing in the article about it coming from rudds inner circle,maybe its just your opinion?

2)'rudd is trying to put some preemptive daylight between himself and conroy - he doesn't need another garrett'

No he is not ,or maybe he his ,no one really knows ,because this is an article written from 'canberra sources'
in other words just someones opinion that may or may not be true and once again i see nothing written in the article that supports your statement

3)"difficult" & "shallow" are quotes

'difficult 'and 'shallow' are NOT quotes from an authoritative source. The word' shallow' is used by ,according to this article, 'There are suggestions' hardly a reliable source of information ,in other words more scuttlebutt.

4)"this hasn't been leaked to one of conroy's lackey hacks"

really? where is your source to make such a statement?


jbcascade there is nothing wrong with having an opinion,quite another to make statements as fact,think before you post and put that it is your opinion,for what it is worth.

When articles use terms like 'canberra sources' and 'there are suggestions' these are NOT facts as much as you would like them to be,they are opinions that may or may not come from a authoritative source,and may or may not be true,no one knows except the writer of the article ,as the 'source' is unknown.