Reader Jason Hall has sent the following letter to Margo and her apprentice, Anthony Lowenstein. It makes interesting reading:
As a citizen far removed from the worlds of journalism and politics, it seems amazing to an outsider that people such as yourselves would champion the cause of ethics, accountability and accuracy in those two crocodile infested fields. Truly a noble undertaking and commendable under the circumstances.
With this in mind, I assume that I will see a frank and open review of the new revelations unearthed in the current senate committee in both the Webdiary and Counterspin.
Talk about getting bitten on the arse, as a mere punter, I'll see if I've got this straight.
Mr Scrafton indicated that he communicated the following points to the PM.
*that the video of the sinking of SIEV4 was inconclusive as to whether any children were thrown in the water,
*that the photographs distributed to the media in early October showed SIEV4 sinking, and not children being thrown overboard
*that no-one of his, Scrafton's, acquaintance in Defence believed that children had been thrown overboard, and finally,
*that the ONA report supporting the 'kids overboard' claim was not based on Defence advice.
His recollection is that he covered the first issue in the first 10 phone conversation, and the following three topics in the second 51 second phone conversation or 17 seconds per topic, now that is clear and concise communication!
Then the kicker, his mea culpa, listed below and taken from here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1190081.htm
Liberal Senator George Brandis made public some details of the Prime Minister's telephone records.
"Those three topics, as you've discussed them, couldn't possibly have been discussed in 51 seconds could they?" he asked.
"I suspect you're right," answered Mr Scrafton.
Labor senators on the committee question the accuracy of the phone records.
The hearing is now adjourned.
The bold is my emphasis, but you get the picture right?
As two people who have filled plenty of column space over this issue, it would seem that Mr Scrafton concurs with the PM on the topic of their call, and has fallen on his sword or more accurately, choked on his own words.
As two individuals, with such high regards for ethics and accuracy, I assume you will be typing up your apologies now and I look forward to reading your own mea cuplas tomorrow.
If you chose to ignore the fresh evidence, then it will be truly "mind boggling" that people should accept anything you say at face value, and perhaps Antony your blog could be called Spin as that may be more appropriate.
The truth will set you free.
Jason Hall - posted by Stanley @ Thursday, September 02, 2004
