Politics, over the top

Here is a grab bag of stories which illustrate the problem of ethically challenged politicians. I’m sorry that it is US centric Bruce that is the way it panned out. The fact is, this mess is reflected worldwide.

Wish We Could Trust Them

I'm tired of political scandals, aren't you? I don't mean that I'm tired of scandalous behavior coming to light. I mean, I'm tired of people in power acting scandalously. Now we're in the midst of the Tom Delay-Bill Frist-Scooter Libby-Karl Rove accusations. Before you start your e-mails, I know that none of these guys has been found guilty of anything. All of the alleged improprieties might turn out to be groundless. But if they are, I guarantee there will be others either in the administration or in Congress who will be found to have committed crimes and/or ethical lapses. That's just the way it's been with all the administrations in recent memory. Now, you can say that some people in all walks of life commit crimes. But doesn't it seem that the people we have entrusted with power are crooks at a higher rate than the rest of the population?

Politicians ethically challenged
A Recent poll of Wisconsin voters shows them increasingly cynical about and weary of the way politicians conduct business.
Almost half, or 47%, said elected officials were representing their own interests, while 41% said public officials are attuned to special interests; 6% didn't respond to the question.
Only 6% of residents said they think elected officials most often represented constituents' interests.
Those surveyed also share the sense that politicians increasingly have become ethically challenged.
Similar to other polls, within and outside the USA, the figures raise a spectre of voters simply losing interest in the system.
Mike McCabe, executive director of political watchdog Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, a government watchdog group said “Frustration among voters is ‘off the charts,’. But the worst possible scenario would be for voters to turn away from the process. That creates a vacuum that these special interests want to fill," he said.

Debra Pickett SUN-TIMES Chicago (Will lessons in hiring make city a class act?) reports:

This week, Chicago aldermen and other top city workers started remedial courses in how to hire people for city jobs.For the most part, though, you have to wonder just how useful these classes will be. It is, after all, pretty hard to argue that a rigorous selection process is needed to find a secretary for the deputy assistant vice commissioner for neighborhood art fairs when, if you're filling a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court, a simple "she's real nice" is supposed to be enough.

Protesters demand refund
A protest at U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2nd District, office in Norwich Friday turned into a brief but heated exchange between the congressman's staff and a protester. District Manager Jane Dauphinais and protester Jim Eaton of Norwich exchanged words as a dozen members of MoveOn.org descended on the office to demand Simmons return campaign contributions from former House Majority Leader Congressman Tom DeLay, indicted in Texas for engaging in illegal campaign fund-raising activities.

Rep. Green refuses to give up

GREEN BAY - Rep. Mark Green is rebuffing calls by Democrats to divest campaign funds donated by former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Green's campaign manager, Mark Graul, says all but $2,000 of the money has been spent and the campaign will keep the money until there is a clear determination of DeLay's guilt or innocence.

Nashville, Metro Council are having problems with an ‘Ethics Bill’, which some regard as ‘too strict’. The new version of the bill requires less frequent and less thorough financial disclosures from council members and their families. But some say it still may be too onerous.
If passed, the bill would require quarterly disclosure of financial interests and place limits on gifts and benefits to council members.
It would ban the meals that special interest groups have traditionally served the lawmakers on the nights they meet to make decisions for the city. And it would make it more difficult for a wayward lawmaker to hide potential conflicts of interest.
The bill comes at a time of low public trust in government, just months after indictments at the statehouse in a federal bribery sting. Some Metro council members flinch when their actions are put in the context of events unfolding on the state level.

Footnote:
You can’t trust them!
What are you going to do about it? People everywhere should be absolutely bloody furious that, having entrusted their representatives, they now face a constant barrage of scandal. No, not simply scandal, theft, bribery, cover up and a whole litany of base criminal activities.
This when we should, as sophisticated nations, be discussing deeply fundamental issues of human progress; or alternatively getting on with our lives in the knowledge that entrusted authorities are doing their jobs.
It seems the lot of this generation to either root out this epidemic corruption and enforce greater standards of behaviour, or cede the future well being of future generations to crooks.
If the current mess doesn’t make you angry enough to act than we truly deserve our miserable fate.

The Bear Pit - Parliament Rules

They call it the ‘Bear Pit’, that is, the Parliament in NSW Australia. Again this week the house lived up to its reputation with debate turning to physical scuffle.
Government leader in the chamber, Carl Scully, argued that "Parliament is a conflict of ideas but it is a conversation, not a brawl”. But drop into question time in Macquarie Street and you could be mistaken for thinking you'd stepped into a classroom when teacher is absent.
There are some who point to the speaker, John Aquilina, saying he has allowed the standard of what passes for debate in Macquarie Street to degenerate so much. No doubt he has done little to help, but the problem is hardly a new one.
This incident began with the usual taunting, albeit over the very serious issue of road deaths on a major highway. A bit of point scoring hit home and the feathers flew.
Andrew Fraser denied he had been drunk on Tuesday night when he lunged at the Roads Minister, Joe Tripodi, called him a "bloody liar" and assaulted him.  Fraser received an eight-day suspension for his outburst.
He hopes that now, at least the incident might get the issue of upgrades on the Pacific Highway into the media.
"All I'd say to you lot, do what you can to get this bloody highway fixed. I mean, you've got the opportunity now, I'm your scapegoat … but go out there and talk to those people who have lost kids, who have lost parents."
Well, it has been the ‘Bear Pit’ for many years now. It is difficult to image any great change in that in the future. Potential members must know what they are getting into. Still, it would be interesting to see the place operate with some sense of decorum.

It is Criminal

Talk around the blogosphere is suggesting that conservative defenders of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby have settled on their No. 1 talking point: the grand jury investigation into the CIA leak scandal represents the “criminalization of politics.”

“According to a database search, every single television reference to the CIA leak scandal as the “criminalization of politics” in the last 30 days has been on Fox. Even more stunning: on every occasion, the phrase was introduced into the segment by a Fox News anchor or correspondent, never by a guest.”

The message seems to be that all those who now find themselves in hot water really didn't do anything wrong, other than engage in rough-and-ready, and successful, conservative politics. Star Tribune

I can accept that such a poorly scripted, ambiguous approach could emanate from the White house minders. Their track record on spin is shaky, after all. What I find difficult is that it would get past Rupert Murdoch and into his media outlets.
Don’t get me wrong, Rupert is right up with the pack in the political dirty tricks department. It is simply that messages sponsored by him are generally better crafted and targeted.
As one commentator pointed out, this message is so ambiguous that the average Fox News viewer will totally misunderstand its intended meaning.
Personally, I like the alternative interpretation, the suggestion that the White House might be ‘criminalising politics’. One thing is very obvious; there is a campaign afoot to criminalise a prosecutors investigation.

Jury out on Judge Harriet

Before the lid is firmly screwed down on Miers background, here are a couple of excellent articles by Jerome R. Corsi of WorldNetDaily.

Miers meant to 'keep lid' on lottery scandals
Is Miers firm under criminal investigation?
Jerome R. Corsi received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972 and has written many books and articles, including the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Unfit for Command – Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry." Dr. Corsi is an expert on political violence and terrorism and founder of the Iran Freedom Foundation.

Australia's Bad Law

Australia’s saga of the fight against phantom terrorism shows the absurdity of introducing draconian laws. Sponsors of the new laws, the Liberal Federal government, are not totally gung ho about the Prime Minister’s new police state.
A call from the high-profile Liberals for an independent watchdog to “Parliament so that any "unintended adverse consequences" of the counter-terrorism legislation were identified and promptly rectified” highlights internal concerns.From Michelle Grattan’s Melbourne Age article, prominent Liberal Petro Georgiou, says; “One concern was that laws that were intended to be non-discriminatory might be applied in a discriminatory way —
"that the security and police agencies will use their powers against people who are suspect because of their actual or presumed religion or ethnic background, not on the basis of information about behaviour of particular individuals".

This is bad law which is becoming increasingly cumbersome and problematic. When you need watchdogs to watch the watchdogs there is serious cause for concern.  In defending the provisions of the proposed anti-terrorism laws, Attorney-General Philip Ruddock, insists that the proposed law has exactly the same power as in the existing Crimes.
If that is the case, and I highly doubt it, then why do we need a new law which duplicates an existing law? A spokesman for Mr Ruddock also played down the need for such statutory monitor, saying a number of "review and oversighting mechanisms" were already in operation.
Not that good old Phil has a great deal of credibility these days. He spends a good deal of time defending Howard’s position, only to find that Howard has shifted while Phil was talking. It must be disheartening for the AG.
The bottom line is that this is draconian legislation from a government with a poor record on civil rights and concerns.
Putting aside the worry of putting such powers into the hands of already tainted police, there are other negative aspects.
Australia’s Muslim community, like any other sector, has its unstable rump. Largely young people, who are on the outer edges of the socio/economic scale, these trouble people have already demonstrated their instability.
Whether intended or not, there is a belief that these laws target Muslims. Rather than control terrorism, the laws threaten to incite those on the fringes; to give them a ‘real’ agenda.
They don’t need to be political or radicals to find this, apparent attack, ample reason to ‘join the fight’. We have already witnessed similar responses from young people on the fringes in Australia, people of all backgrounds.
This is bad law. It does nothing for the security of Australia and Australians. In fact, it does nothing more than harm what security already exists.

TI Corruption Report

Transparency International’s 2005 Corruption Perceptions Index holds no real surprises. Bearing in mind that perception is the keyword in all of this.
TI says “The TI Corruption Perceptions Index is a composite survey, reflecting the perceptions of business people and country analysts, both resident and non-resident.”
Canadian can beat themselves up over their newfound status, but their increase in perception reflects events which occurred over a previous decade. If you don’t see it, it doesn’t exist.
I don’t really know the methodology of this survey, but there are two factors which make me wary of taking the TI list at face value:
First, this is just perception. The list must reflect, in part, expectations for a given country’s behaviour, or conversely an acceptance of some forms of corruption as ‘normal’.
The second issue is ‘what the eye doesn’t see the heart doesn’t grieve’. Canada is now responding to what is essentially old activity. Although having rooted that out there seems to be skeletons in every other closet.
On the expectations issue, you have to wonder if some of the poorer countries feature badly on the list because they can’t really defend themselves through sophisticated PR. No doubt there is more visible corruption in these countries (perceptions?), but the difficulty for them is still one of recourses. That includes the ability to gloss over.
The invisibility issue, which must skew perceptions, seems to be built into some of the more sophisticated economies. I would have thought, from real reports, Australia was at least equal with Canada.
Australia has been dealing with corruption, in a highly visible way, since the 1980s. Perhaps some areas of corruption really do lose their bite with familiarity.
Having said all of that, I applaud TI for making this effort to expose public and corporate corruption and encourage transparency. Pricking the balloons of some of the rich, complacent countries is never a bad thing.

Speaking of unethical laws

Way off in distant BC Canada the Liberal premier Gordon Campbell is screaming ‘you are breaking the law!’ at striking BC teachers.
This is the same Premier who was done for drink driving a couple of years back; the same Premier who sheepishly slid out from under his little encounter with the law.
In doing so, while visiting Hawaii, this premier lawmaker visited shame on his own province.
The difference here Gordon is that drink driving laws actually deliver a positive result for the community. They fall well into the category of sound, just laws.
The Campbell agenda in BC has been notable for a number of other ethical, if not legal, ‘breaches’.
The Liberals ripped up mutually negotiated contracts between employers and hospital workers, nurses, teachers and health sciences workers, despite explicit Campbell’s promises by not to, before he was elected premier.
From doctors to ferry workers to teachers, this government is fundamentally unwilling or unable to allow collective bargaining to work.
He has imposed two contracts on public-school teachers, stripped them of their right to bargain learning conditions and severely restricted their right to strike by designating education as an essential service.
The whole process is one of bullying and overriding acceptable and ethical practices.
For a man who would berate others for breaking the law, Campbell’s record is far from pure.

Legalised Corruption

Legalised Corruption
A case against Magistrate Ruben Galvan has exposed holes in state laws that some people say would allow a judge to demand or receive a bribe without committing a crime.An official from the NM attorney general's office has said that two statutes could let judges off the hook when it comes to bribery.
One of them exempts judges from being charged with bribery, and the other says a public official has to make good on their promise in order to be found guilty of the crime.
Whether New Mexico laws, which apparently allow judges to take bribes, are intentional or inadvertent is irrelevant.
The law is an instrument which people everywhere should be able to trust as ethical and reliable.
The problem is, governments make the law and can do so, at times, unconstrained by ethical considerations. Rather than protecting those of us subject to unethical or unfair law, partisan or ideology driven courts can exacerbate the injustice.
Debate on ethical law making is rare to nonexistent. The system depends greatly on testing law against basic instruments such as constitutions and statements of rights; or to higher authorities in some jurisdictions.
Seldom is there a guiding document setting out the ethical parameters of law making.

The central question is; can governments be trusted to make laws without having a strict ethical code to work within?
The answer, all too often it seems, is they cannot. The New Mexico example, serious as it is, is just one of a long chain of laws which, apparently, legalise corruption in various ways.
The law should not be a ‘political’ tool, but it is. It can be used, or misused, in this way because there are no real restraints in our systems to prevent it.
Maybe it is time to move the focus of anti corruption and consider the hows ands whats of ethical lawmaking frameworks.

More Miller

Just watch the pea and thimble trickery here. Honest spooks at the CIA; information leaked/not leaked to a journalist willing to go to prison rather than tell who did not give her the scoop.
What is really interesting is that the US media and blogs have just caught on to the presence of journalists with ‘classified status while embedded with troops in Iraq’ during the initial assaults.
These reports were bigger than the war story itself in the press of other countries. Reporting on the compromised US media was a major angle. How on earth did that little gem eventually leak out to the US media?
In its breathless report; Judith Miller: The 'Classified' Angle, the Editor Publisher says:
“One must assume that Ms. Miller was required to sign a standard and legally binding agreement that she would never divulge classified information to which she became privy, without risk of criminal prosecution.”
Sorry E&P, one must assume that all embedded journalists were required to sign such documents.
The question of why Miller would assist the Bush Administration, as a supposedly ethical journalist, to execute their war on the dissemination of honest information, still remains.
The world is well versed in the peculiarities of politically partisan media. For the most part this is a transparent process which many real journalists, not the specially selected opinion writers, will always seek to subvert. In places other than the US, that is.
It is nonsense to think that the media, individuals and corporations, did not understand the rules of close involvement in the Iraq War coverage.
Reporters were not rejected on whim or selected at random. The embedded reporting team played by the rules, the others simply didn’t get to play.
The real scandal is that this situation was denied or ignored at the time and that those relying on US news sources were fed on officially cleansed bullshit. But then, perhaps that was nothing more than responding to the public expectation which has be moulded by this kind of misinformation.

Shock Horror

Recent reports have suggested that the CIA have been compromised by dangerous, ‘honest’ spies. There are suggestions that dangerous dissident moles have been subverting the US Governments entrenched policy of lies and disinformation to its people.These moles appeared to work even behind the back of the CIA director to debunk the notion Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
This latest revelation, from the ‘Leaky White House Affair’ casts doubt on the integrity of the worlds premier spy agency. Disseminating truth, it seems, poses a danger to the future of world democracy.
As an old cold war buff your correspondent is surprised that these shadowy, contumacious figures should eventually make their presence felt inside the CIA.
Somehow the suggestion simply seems too good to be true. It strikes more as a plot for a Superman movie than a refection of reality.
What next, truth, honesty and justice in government?

A journalist’s notes

The Miller affair, as recently reported in lengthy article the New York Times, the reference to interview notes was highlighted.
During my time as a newspaper reporter, interview notes were expected to be treated much like tax records. That is, they were filed and kept for a suitable period.
In my case, and it seems with Miller, these notes don’t hold much value as a reference. The real reason for holding them is the potential of future complaints to the newspaper in question.
With no real training, my note taking consisted of an almost illegible scrawl interspersed with my own version of shorthand. The notes were intended, after all, as a short term memory prompt.
In the short time available for most interviews grammar, spelling and full sentences are not an option for some of. Short phrases and key words were the norm for me.
Instances when editors called on my notes to settle a dispute were faced with doubt and a touch of humour. Said notes made most doctors prescriptions look like crafted calligraphy.
Still, to my surprise, the notes satisfied all parties each time. Perhaps it was a case of reading what you will into the mess.
Miller’s showed some of referring back to these notes. Once the story is written, the journalist moves on to the next, and then quickly, to the next. The prompts, useful in the short term are forever lost in the mists of time.
So Miller couldn’t really explain why the words Valerie Flame appeared in those notes. Neither could she explain if this should have read ‘Plame’.
According to the Time article, when the prosecutor in the case asked her to explain how "Valerie Flame" appeared in the same notebook she used in interviewing Mr. Libby, Ms. Miller said she "didn't think" she heard it from him. "I said I believed the information came from another source, whom I could not recall."
Maybe, in fact probably, Millers notes are far more accessible than mine ever were. However, given the importance of this case, are they really good enough to rely on as evidence of anything?
It’s one thing pulling the wool over the eyes of ‘yeoman farmers’ and other yokels in local government. Expecting them to stand up to the scrutiny of teams of Washington lawyers is a bit much to ask.

Scandal Spin

Sorbara case doesn't fit the scandal definition, asserts Ian Urquhart in Saturday’s Toronto Star newspaper.
Before we question Urquhart’s fanciful notions, let’s review the episode.The case involves Mr. Sorbara, who this week resigned as Ontario’s Treasurer, subject to an investigation into companies he was associated with.
The Premier, McGuinty , argues that Sorbara was not the direct target of an Ontario Securities Commission investigation into Royal Group Technologies, a company of which the Finance Minister had formerly been a director.

"I said [last year] that if I became the subject of an investigation, I would step down," Sorbara said, prior to his dramatic move. "This afternoon, I learned that I was the subject of an investigation and I decided to step down."

An RCMP raid took place earlier in the week, on the offices of the Sorbara Group in Vaughn, Ont. Police were acting on a judicial search warrant that names Mr. Sorbara and four other men with links to Royal Group. It alleges the men broke the Criminal Code some time between 1996 and 2002 by publishing for prospective shareholders a prospectus that contained "false" material. Another allegation relates to fraud in the sale of a Brampton property.The first Urquhart assertion questioning whether this is a scandal:

”That depends, of course, on your point of view. If you are inclined to give Sorbara the benefit of the doubt, as I am, you will answer no to the first question and yes to the second.”

No Ian, it depends on the definition of scandal, which certainly does not imply active corruption or misdeeds. It does imply that there are issues, serious or otherwise, which are generating negative attention.
The reason I would jump on this one is that it seeks to dilute our language. The mere fact that a major government figure is implicated in an investigation constitutes scandal.
Now whether there is corruption or not remains to be seen. The police are obviously carrying out extensive investigations, which might in fact clear the former treasurer.
A further aspect of scandal in these issues relates to the weak attempt at cover up by the Premier.
Probity demands open and transparent action on any dubious positions. Sobara did the right thing, but obviously there were the normal thoughts denial or simply riding out the storm.
Urquhart obviously admires the ‘best defense is offence’ approach:

"But if you are one of the many people out there who have been egged on by the corrosive chorus of talk radio and see all politicians as scumbags, your answers will be reversed.
The opposition Conservatives at Queen's Park seem to lean toward the scumbags view. In the wake of Sorbara's resignation, they filed a non-confidence motion declaring that the Liberals must go because Premier Dalton McGuinty "has failed to ensure the highest level of integrity for his ministers" and his government is operating under "a cloud of scandal."

No, Sir, name calling does not alter the truth. To be sure, many out there are addicted to the predigested opinions of mass media. That is why you have a regular column Mr Urquhart.
To draw a conclusion that because the media say it it must be wrong is self defeating.As to the politicians who jump on the slightest whiff of a scandal, well no one ever said that was a smart thing to do.
Unfortunately it has become political capital, and what is sauce for the goose… In the end, it is one of the less edifying of current political tactics.
But you see, Mr Urquhart , we are suddenly arguing a host of different issues here. It seems to me that your initial premise is baseless so we need to be diverted by side issues.
Your thoughts on the mass media rabble and questionable partisan advantage would make an interesting read. Without, I might add the venom and vilification.
This is, to all intents and purposes a scandal! Even by the weakest of definitions: “Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.”
That does not presume guilt, which is basic to your premise.
That baseless charges have, historically, hurt politicians is not the issue.
That politicians might cynically use dirt as a tool of their trade is not the issue.
That the media is not always terribly responsible in a chase for a good lead is not the issue.
The issue you raised Sir, is a question of the definition of scandal, and you missed the mark by a country mile. Regardless of guilt or innocence, the Sorbara affair is a scandal.

Terror Australis

A draft Bill for 'an Act to amend the law relating to terrorist acts, and for other purposes’ Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005, marked: DRAFT-IN-CONFIDENCE This draft is supplied in confidence and should be given appropriate protection, has been leaked to the web.


Since gaining a full majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, earlier this year, the government has been determined to ram legislation through without scrutiny.
Sydney Morning Herald columnist, Alan Ramsey, in this week’s article, explains a little know Senate procedure called the 4:30 rule.

“It is a so-called standing order that forbids a Senate vote of any kind after 4.30pm on the Thursday of any sitting week. The cut-off used to be 6.30pm, but it was amended to 4.30pm after the Government got control of the Senate this year.”

The rule is intended to allow Senates time, when weekly sittings finish each Thursday, to return to their home states that night rather than the following day.
Ramsay reports:

“And smack on the stroke of 4.30 on Thursday afternoon this week, the Government's Senate leader, Robert Hill, got the call and announced: "I move that upon its introduction in the House, the provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005 be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 8 November, 2005."”
This unprecedented move has the effect of “killing any meaningful scrutiny of its proposed anti-terrorism measures, in alliance with state police forces, to detain people for as long as a fortnight without charge and in complete secrecy. The detail is not known. The Government has not released the legislation.”

See the leaked draft version of the Bill.

Tasmania's Bob Brown (Greens)is quoted saying:

"This is an absolutely black day for the Senate and for democracy in this nation. This is a manipulation of the rules in a snide and underhand way by a gutless minister, who has left the chamber, to totally override the democratic principles of the Senate and its review function by effectively abolishing the committee system on a major issue."

At The SMH’s sister paper, The Age, respected commentators, Michelle Grattan and Brendan Nicholson took the story a step further. After revealing the leaked document, they gave a further analysis of its contents: Terror laws 'leaked' to net.
They report that the legislation contains a qualified right to kill in certain circumstances when taking a person into preventive detention or detaining them. In response, Law Council of Australia president John North said the law was "frightening"

"…especially in light of the fact that federal police were not always in uniform and not always identifiable as law enforcement officers. The legislation seems to be couched to cover the London Underground shooting situation and is therefore frightening," he said. British police shot and killed Brazilian man, Jean Charles de Menezes on the Underground in July, in the mistaken belief he was a terrorist.”

The article goes on:
Under the legislation, control orders can be sought from a court where it would assist in preventing a terrorist act or the person has trained with a terrorist organisation.
People under them can also be prohibited from going to specified places, stopped leaving Australia and forced to report in at specified times.
They could be required to be photographed and fingerprinted.
A person faces life imprisonment for financing a terrorist, even if done recklessly, not intentionally.
This government is taking a similar, heavy handed approach to their proposed industrial relations reforms. (See: Australian Ethics?)

A Positive Note

A Positive Note
The recently reported Tasmanian (Australia) mess surrounding member of the State’s upper house, Ivan Dean’s decision to run for Launceston Mayor is having a positive effect.
Sensitive to claims of double dipping, receiving salary for both jobs, Dean pledged to donate the council salary to charity.
Regardless of Dean’s good intentions the plan, inadvertently, constituted electoral bribery.
But there is a bigger issue at stake here, as one commentator put it:“…the situation raised the broader issue of whether it is still either feasible or advisable for one individual to try to hold two senior public offices at the one time.”
These, to ordinary folk, are highly paid positions. Presumably they are highly paid because they require time, effort and a measure of expertise to do the job properly.The questions are; how can anyone do both jobs properly? If they can, do we have too many elected officials on the payroll?
Tasmania is well known to be over governed. Currently there are five Federal MPs, 12 senators, 40 State MPs and 29 councils with around 300 councilors; all of this for fewer than 500,000 people.
Pruning these numbers, at any level, has always been complicated by ego, local loyalties, and no doubt a reluctance to reduce the size of the easy money trough.
If Tasmania cannot shed a few of its surplus, under employed elected representatives, the least they can do is make sure the largesse is spread around fairly.

Choosing Your Freinds

While in Taiwan, President Chen Shui-bian is probably in it deeper than his favourite TV star.  He has pledged to resign if he was linked to a recent scandal involving the Kaohsiung MRT project, which has already claimed the careers of two presidential advisers.As far as your correspondent can determine this falls into the realm of a Rapid Transit construction funded rip off. Chen’s government recently pledged that "All reform will begin with the government's own reform."He was responding to mounting public criticism about his administration's ethical integrity, sparked by the recent explosions of the various alleged scams plaguing the Kaohsiung mass rapid transit construction project.Chen is said to be is surrounded by people picked based on kinship or personal connections, not on their ability and character, they tend to be problematic. Another recent case of impropriety provoked a great deal of public anger and raised serious questions about President Chen's policy of rewarding people with government posts more for his loyalty than for his probity and uprightness.Chairman of China Steel Corporation, Lin Wen-yuan is a long, close confidant of the president. He recently made headlines after a ruling party lawmaker first revealed that Lin has been paid by the dominantly state-owned firm extraordinarily high salaries and dividends.He now gets a yearly NT$8 million in salary from the company, plus an approximate NT$40 million in dividends which in any language sounds impressive to your correspondent.Some feel it is unreasonable that those huge payments should have fully gone into his own pockets rather than to the state coffers.Now we wait to see how this ties in with the Triad and the self abusing TV superstar. With all that wonderful government cash floating around, the tough boys will soon separate it from the wankers in the game.

Sex Scandal or Just a Wank?

They tend to do things a little differently in parts of Asia. The shock, horror revelations of
Taiwan TV superstar, Peng Chia-chia, began with a not so entertaining video of the great man beating his meat.
The co-star in the masturbation vcd caper turned out to be a triad boss's daughter, an B grade actress.
Now we don’t often venture off the political stage with our scandal, but it is Friday. Besides, the scandal ridden Taiwanese political landscape is sure to be implicated somewhere in this particular imbroglio.
Actress Lu admitted on Monday to having filmed a popular TV host naked in her apartment, but denied she used the video to extort money from him.
But what began as a little harmless romp landed the superstar in deep doo doos with the cute Lu’s family. This is not the sort of family you mix with comfortably.Peng said that since August last year he has been blackmailed six times because of the five-minute clip of him masturbating.As one commentator has it:

"We clearly see a love-hate relationship between high-profile entertainers and pistol-wielding gang members. Financial and contractual disputes between artists and their agents are negotiated and solved by some of the most sought-after "big brothers" who are well-connected with the police and the business community.But the sword not only defends, it kills. Gangsters never maintain sincere relations with any superstar or showbiz bigwigs. They are, of course, 100 percent money-oriented while, as the old Chinese saying goes, "the bad guys are in the dark and good guys are in the light."

Well I still think it is all a big wank, but then in Taiwan, who can tell?

And a special blog for Bruce!

Perth, Western Australia is a long way from anywhere, even in Australia. Even distance and relative isolation does not preclude ethical breaches in this ‘wild west’ town.
The very latest, fresh off the presses is that the State’s Sports and Seniors Minister Bob Kucera has resigned from cabinet over a shares scandal.It seems Mr Kucera's wife Susan held nearly 3,000 shares in Alinta Gas, worth more than $20,000, when he did not withdraw from a Cabinet decision to award a consortium, headed by Alinta, a financial assistance package to expand the Dampier-to-Bunbury gas pipeline.
This little affair, in a State well known for its self serving politicians and business leaders, is styled; a breach of the ministerial code of conduct or conflict of interest. You have to wonder how much money must be involved before it becomes outright theft.
However things might have been put in to perspective by Mr Kucera’s statement to Parliament saying he had no alternative but to resign.

"My personal integrity will not allow me to do anything else other than admit that I was at fault," Mr Kucera said. "Integrity has always been the hallmark of my career, but also underpins my belief in the Westminster system and the values this Government operates under. "I believe there is only one option left for me, and that has been to ask the premier to accept my resignation as a minister of the Crown in WA - the premier has accepted that. "

Meanwhile Western Australia's Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) says criminal charges against the former acting commissioner of WA's Corruption and Crime Commission, Moira Rayner, have arisen from her continued conduct during a period in August.That’s right, the former top anti corruption fighter cops it in the head for playing fast and loose.
The sad part about all of this is that like many Australian’s I have grown to admire Rayner as a stalwart fighter for justice and equity.
So what did she do?
The charge is official corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Rayner allegedly tipped off the then Clerk of the Legislative Council, Laurie Marquet. She went to visit him in a Perth hospice and warned him not to use his phone because it may be bugged.
Marquet was under investigation and later charged with more than 50 counts of corruption and theft during his exalted term as Clerk.
This has been a long running, on again off again saga, perhaps reflecting the respect in which Rayner was held.
So there you have it Bruce, a little more political BS from place far flung.

A Ban on Terrorism?

Jemaah Islamiah is the South East Asian version of al qaeda. They work out of countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. Tagged JI, they are the ones reportedly responsible for the Bali bombings and other assorted atrocities in the region.There was reference to allegations of Indonesia’s involvement with JI, see post; Terrorism Bogeyman.To be sure, these allegations were, and remain, unsubstantiated. Circumstantial evidence might abound, but it does not prove fact.The Australian Government, who are well versed at using terror as a public control measure, are today crying that Indonesia will not oblige them on banning JI.For Australia, such a ban would serve to underline their ‘strong’ approach to terrorism issues. The cowered public would no doubt be assured that the ‘deputy sheriff’ in Asia was hard at work.
For Indonesia, with its largely Muslim population, would serve only to weaken the fragile political alliances of the country.
Whether there is any truth to military and police involvement with JI is largely irrelevant to the wider political implications for that country.
The real point, however, is the belief that a ban on JI would have any real effect on what is a secret organization anyway. Not even the risk of driving them ‘underground’ can be a concern when that is how they already operate.
Seeking to ban a shadow organization is just a political nonsense. It is grandstanding of the worst kind.

Terrorism Bogeyman

Indonesian military and police have a well reputation over the years for ‘free lance’ activities. So it was not totally surprising that former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid claims Indonesian police or military officers may have played a role in the first Bali bombing.
Wahid told SBS's [Australia] Dateline program that he had grave concerns about links between Indonesian authorities and terrorist groups and believed that authorities may have organised the larger of the two 2002 Bali bombings which hit the Sari Club, killing the bulk of the 202 people who died.
Needless to say, the claims are being rejected by the current government in Jakarta as well as Australia’s government and various ‘terrorism’ analysts.
Given the vested interests in terrorism, Wahid will need to come up with something concrete to support his claims.
Dateline also reported claims that Indonesian intelligence had close links with many local terrorist groups. "There is not a single Islamic group either in the movement or the political groups that is not controlled by (Indonesian) intelligence," said former terrorist Umar Abduh, who is now a researcher and writer.
The issue goes back many years in Indonesia. Commentators concede: “it is true that at times the Indonesian military has tolerated or even encouraged the radical Islamist movement.”
There is evidence that the military is deeply implicated in fomenting sectarian strife in troublespots like Sulawesi.Evidence of military backing for the Islamic terrorists emerged again in December 2000, when Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) co-ordinated attacks against Christian churches, killing 19 people and injuring 120 in a dozen cities.
Then, ducking for cover; “The military link in Medan, which was never thoroughly investigated, was an anomaly.”
Just as the US is justly implicated with dubious terrorist figures in the past, Indonesia’s authorities also have the dubious honour of consorting with there own home grown brand.

Just how much terrorism and its political capital are manufactured we will probably never know. What we do know is that the constant trickling of allegations cannot be ignored.
Security is a fundamental concern for all, and implying threats on that security has been standard practice for many years.
The sad part is that the general public fall for it over and over. Under the cover of ‘threat to security’ governments can go as far as they please in undermining the rights of their own citizens.
Time and again, the evidence used to support the current ‘war on terrorism’ is found to be faulty or just plain manufactured.
It seems governments can say ‘Boo!’ and compliant citizens will cover their faces and cower in fear.
Until citizens begin to wise up to the games of their political masters, issues like transparency and accountability will remain a dream.

Australian Ethics?

The Australian Government's sweeping industrial relations changes are, predictably, causing a storm of criticism.
That fact doesn’t really concern a government which has the numbers to push this unpopular legislation through.
The big problem with ‘stable’ or full majority government is that it brings the bully tendencies to their highest form.
Not that John Howard’s Liberal Government, which seeks to strip workers of hard won and basic rights, is not fighting back.
Even before this bill has seen parliament, even before any opportunity to scrutinize it, the Government launched a massive ad campaign to sell it.
Now here, as history can testify, is a government which came to power pledging to enforce the most rigorous ethical standards.
Well the wheels fell off that promise early on when a number of ministers and parliamentary secretaries were dumped on various corruption issues.
So the bar was lowered while the rhetoric continued. But that, it is plain now, is all it is – rhetoric.
Respected media commentator, Michelle Grattan, (The Melbourne Age) reflects that: “The Government is behaving as though it is in the middle of an election campaign and the taxpayers' coffers actually belong to the Liberal and National parties. John Howard tries to say it's just about informing the public.” Article here
The massive advertising campaign, launched prematurely, to sell these industrial relations reforms is in itself scandalous.
Grattan also charges: “The revelation that about 60,000 booklets promoting the Government's industrial relations changes were pulped is embarrassing, mostly because it further highlights the Coalition's outrageous misuse of public money.”
This is government which can do pretty much as it pleases, and does. With total control of both federal houses of parliament, ethics is well down the list of considerations.This is also a government proposing to use its power to legislate new electoral laws which will serve to reduce the already tattered democratic process of the country.When any government starts to take the high ground on ethical behaviour it seems like the time to fear the worst.

I don’t think it is very funny

The Only Hot Fresh site is a pain in the arse!
If you are getting as annoyed as me with the spam blog -
Only Hot Fresh Funny Pictures and Jokes click the title and email him or email - jon@funnywebsite.com
Spam him back or just tell him he is a useless piece of shit.

Leaky Old White House 2

The US Protectorate of the Philippines has been stirred by leaks from the White House as well.
A former top Philippines police official was indicted by US federal prosecutors on Thursday for spying and conspiring with an ex-FBI officer to pass on classified documents to Philippine officials.The former FBI officer, Leandro Aragoncillo, 46, was also arrested on September 10 and is accused of using the agency's database to download the documents and giving them to Michael Ray Aquino.Aquino, an ally of senior opposition politicians, was arrested at his New York residence in Queens on September 10. He is accused of passing 150 classified and sensitive documents to three public figures, each identified only as "a former high-level national public official in the Philippines."
Aragoncillo started working at the White House in the vice-president's office in 1999, while it was occupied by Al Gore, and worked there for 31 months.According to the indictment, Aragoncillo passed classified documents to Aquino between February and August this year using cellphone text and e-mail messages. They included assessments of the political situation in the Philippines and political leaders.Aquino, a former police intelligence officer, served directly under Lacson when the senator was national police chief in the 1998-2001 administration of President Joseph Estrada. Shortly after Estrada was ousted in a military-backed popular uprising in 2001, Aquino moved to the United States where he worked as a registered nurse.

That is some of the background to this little side play. But what is it all about?
According to W. Scott Thompson in the New Straits Times, Malaysia, The Filipino political merry-go-round is aburst with their greatest spy scandal ever.
Thompson’s colourful account of this drama takes the spy scandal right to the heart of the White House.

“It may be common knowledge that President Arroyo is stubborn and overrates herself, but for it to come from the Oval Office, or near it, makes it ever so different.” He asserts.
Adding “…But in the Philippines still, what America thinks is of the essence. It is routinely believed that Washington can turn a switch off and on and make or break presidents. And as long as people think it, in a perverse way it’s true.”

Model democracy
As a model for US sponsored democracy, the Philippines is a disaster. The country is riddled with entrenched corruption. Despite a reasonable beginning in the democracy stakes, the wheels fell off with President Ferdinand E. Marcos. At least the latter part of his rule has been described as "constitutional authoritarianism", but was more akin to constitutional plundering of the nation’s wealth.
In 2003 Bush used the Philippines as an example of US-sponsored “liberation” and democracy. The president told the assembled Filipino politicians he was “proud of its [the US] part in the great story of the Filipino people”. It had “liberated the Philippines from colonial rule” when it invaded the Spanish-held archipelago in 1898.Since then there have been strong indications that the Bush administration has been behind efforts to replace President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo with one of the elite factions, together with a bloc of traditional military-business groups
The people of Iraq should have plenty to fear if the Philippines represents the peak model of US sponsored democracy. More so when there is growing evidence that the US administration would actively engage in undermining a democratically elected government in the Philippines for its own cynical purposes.

Roving the White House

There is nothing new or even uncomplicated, about US White House intrigues. It is, of course, the biggest game in town. There is also a measure of secrecy which comes with economically sensitive decision making.
That is not to suggest the aura of secrecy is limited in any way, or even that it is inviolable.
Presidential appendage, Rove, is the kind of personality who will always generate speculation, most of it sordid. As always however, at least part of the secrets, along with a mass of other extraneous smoke screen, will out.
Rove gets to face his accusers soon on the weighty matter of naming sensitive names in an effort to silence a powerful detractor. You all know the story.
The interesting part now is will the appendage fall on his sword, rather than allow the rest of the White House cabal be sullied by further revelations. It is one thing to suspect the involvement of Bush and Chaney in this scandal, but perhaps Rove’s greatest service to his puppets will be to cover for them.
It is one thing to expose a CIA agent for political gain, but exposing the nation’s noble leadership can’t be tolerated…

It seemed innocent enough

When Tasmanian (Australia) member of that states upper house finally announced his intention to run for Mayor of Launceston, he meant to do so in style.
Ivan Dean pledged to donate his potential mayoral salary of $84,000 to charity and youth activities.
"Many people have criticised me for being greedy and wanting to double dip the public purse," he said, referring to his existing parliamentary salary. Dean already earns $104,957 including allowances as a Legislative Councillor.
By holding to his offer, Dean would risk breaching the Local Government Act’s bribery provisions by, essentially, buying votes.
The Act states that a person must not promise, or offer money, in relation to a vote at a poll or the support of a candidate and the Director of Public Prosecutions has decided the matter needs more investigation
"I don't want any controversy, so, of course I will withdraw my offer." A contrite Dean announced.

Putting aside that Dean is a lawmaker, and as such should have a better understanding of the law; this was a noble sounding gesture. There will always be an issue when elected office bearers hold multiple positions.
Apart from the ‘double dipping’ there are also issues of being able to run two offices simultaneously, not to mention the dangers of conflict of interest between the two sectors of government.
Tasmania has often had to face the issue of multiple office holders and perhaps should consider some kind of restriction.
However, the law in this case is quite correct so far as electoral ethics. The other factors being acceptable, the pledge gives Dean an unfair advantage over candidates who are not in a position to donate their salary.
City councils were once, generally voluntary positions, with a small stipend. As city management becomes more complex, the role of councillors has demanded far more time and energy. Hence a reasonable salary often goes with the job.
With that expectation tax payers should, perhaps, expect those who fill these positions to stick with one job at a time. Rather than donate his salary, Dean should consider resigning from parliament to concentrate on his council interests.

Show and Tell

Canadian Prime Minister, Paul Martin, recently promised greater scrutiny of government finances, to address issues of corruption.
Within days we have yet another whiff of scandal emanating from Ottawa. Ironically, the allegations are not of corruption per se, but an attempt to avoid scrutiny.
A deal Indian and Northern Affairs Canada signed with Ottawa-based Totem Hill Inc. explicitly states that "presentations shall be oral with supporting material provided to aid comprehension but not retained by the department."
A spokeswoman for the Treasury Board, which sets government-wide policy for procurement, declined to say whether the "oral" report adheres to the regulations.
But (Media Relations Spokesperson Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat) Michelle Laliberte said Indian and Northern Affairs needs to be able to demonstrate to auditors that the work paid for was in fact delivered.
No doubt the Audit Branch of Treasury will have something to say about the efficacy of this kind of procedure.
Canadians don’t really do corruption all that well, fortunately. If the Federal Government is to establish any kind of credibility in the ethics stakes, transparency and independent oversight are essential.

The Moral Trap

With respect to clarity, and my friend Bruce, I should clearly acknowledge the corruption activity in other developed countries.
America, You Are on Show and other articles focusing on US corruption are making a specific point. That is, the USA has assumed a moral leadership in the world, which requires that malfeasance, is denied, hidden or attention diverted. I merely seek to put the spotlight on that reality.
Having done that, what of other countries:
Australia
It was no easy thing to grow up in Australia and not be aware of public corruption. It was rampant and visible. So much so that a number of very high profile special and royal commissions entertained the populous with gory detail for years.
The emphasis soon became, not how to live with corruption, but how to root it out. Well, given human nature that might never happen. However, given various federal and state responsibilities, a number of very efficient corruption fighting bodies were created.
The primary issues in Australia were:
Police corruption of various types
Political such as ‘jobs for the boys’ or cronyism, expenses and travel rorts (fraud), influence peddling; and in a bracket all of its own, electoral fraud and manipulation. Sadly, in some cases, the latter has been dealt with by legalising it.
Canada
It is difficult to pin a great deal of corruption on the Canadians. To be sure, there is the long running ‘sponsorship scandal’. This was more a nest of corrupt activities, including cronyism, expenses fraud, influence peddling and outright theft.
The various enquiries into these activities looks set to become a scandal in itself, but that is what happens when corruption fighting is used as a political tool rather than for its own ends.
The current government is moving toward greater oversight of public activities, essentially finance related. Perhaps they should be adopting a more rigorous approach, such as fully empowered anti-corruption agencies.
Britain
Here is a country with a tremendous legacy of scandal and corruption. Most notable, perhaps, are those somehow related to the intelligence community. Spying is a strong part of the government culture in Britain and regularly produces scandal.
Electoral fraud still seems to make regular headlines in Britain. Not so much the big money kinds as street level vote fiddling. Like Australia, Britain has tried to legalise various electoral aberrations, but she now has Europe looking over the shoulder, insisting on fair play.
The very powerful local government system in Britain has its own culture of corruption. From development to car parking, the monster is forever raising its ugly head.
Britain identified another species of corruption, more annoying perhaps than actually dangerous: the Job's Worth. These people can exist virtually anywhere within the civil service or even private enterprise. While there is often no gain for them, the job's worth simply like to make things difficult, because they can.
Europe
There is generally some scandal bubbling away across the continent. France, Germany and Italy are well versed in the ugly art.

I do not include the ‘transition governments’, notably Russia and of course a range of African and Asian countries. It is generally expected that transition governments will have a battle with all levels of corruptions until they have sufficient strength and recourses to keep it in check.
Many of these countries have some interesting conditions which make the world view of ethical behaviour problematic. Gifts, for example, look like bribes to us, and most probably are. But they are also part of longstanding, acceptable tradition. Time will tell if they will fall into line with the rest and outlaw gifts.

Finally, none of these countries assume a moral high ground. To be sure, most of the developed countries recognise the problem and take steps to combat it. Steps modified perhaps by political culture and imperatives. Only the US goes into the world waving a flag of moral righteousness. And while they continue to do so, they are fair game for special attention.

Private Thoughts

Government, it seems, are forever trying to increase its surveillance on citizens. Canada is the latest reported to be seeking better coverage with wiretaps and email intrusions.
For many, this news sends a quiver through them as they fear for loss of privacy. The big news is, you probably never really had privacy in the first place.
The good news is, the more ‘private’ information the greater their difficulty in managing it. To be sure, there is software capable of many powerful functions. A compilation of private data might indicate general trends, might flag potential misdeeds, might spoil the fun of careless pedophile groups, (we can only hope) but they do not serve well to pinpoint individual issues.
To find these individuals, computers scan voice and print data for key words. That approach assumes a great many things. It assumes that the baddies are incapable of modifying language. It assumes also, that the cheeky brats of the internet, once becoming aware of key words, won’t flood the system with them.
Overall, however, is the vision of a mass of stored data, creating a mountain of useless information. The more intense the surveillance, the greater your privacy is.

Great read

Having upbraided the US for its attitude toward culture, it is only right to spotlight other side of the coin. Aaron Dyer of The Oklahoma Daily deserves a bouquet for; Corruption and cronyism: political modus operandi by

America, You Are On Show

Send the spin doctors home, face the truth and let us all get on with life.
Business First’s Kevin Kemper, in discussing the current rash of corruption related issues in the US, asks; “…is unethical behavior really growing?  Some say the answer must be provided with the proper perspective.”
What ‘proper perspective’? The USA brags of being the world’s leader of nations. The self righteous, ‘holier than thou’ cant might gall other nations, but without doubt the US is powerful enough to promote its own self image.
Power and its trappings do not come free. The US, because of its assumed position in the world, is obligated to show consequent responsibility.
The response to corruption in the USA is a curious one, reflecting much of the political technique which leads to scandal.
The Republicans are fond of pointing out that the Dems are just as bad. That is not an explanation, nor is it excuse; it is simply minimizing through shared guilt.
More often is the plain self denial, or the vapid “…is unethical behavior really growing?
It is not a question of quantity! That it happens, and happens at a regular pace undermines the very moral authority which the US claims.
This is not the super burger, two for one, early bird world of consumerism; it is the underpinning of social values. If greed, bullying, lying and the other unsavoury aspects of corruption are condoned by those in trust they have the potential to become normal, acceptable behaviour.
America, you are on show! You created the myth, now you must live up to it of face the fallout of rightfully negative opinion around the world.

Power Corrupts

The current Australian Federal Government is a case study in the dangers of unchecked power. The simple fact of making laws does not guarantee justice and equity.
There are two powerful examples currently in the Australian system focusing on workplace and electoral laws. Both radical sets of proposals should be adjudged ethically, if not legally, suspect.
Much has been written on the proposed new labor laws. They are Dickensian, at the very least. They seek to give employers rights which threaten to recreate the appalling work conditions of the industrial revolution.
The electoral law proposals are less prominent, but no less frightening in the way they intend to strip the electorates ‘democratic’ rights.
At a minimum, the new laws will force fewer choices for the voters, and make actually voting increasingly difficult.
The sum benefit of these changes is to the major political parties, the elite club, whose members traditionally share the baton of power in the country.
These kinds of excesses invariably occur when one or other of the major parties hold a majority on both the lower house and the senate. They occur, simply because they can!
The actions of parties with total majorities need not reflect the wishes of the community, merely those of the party in power, and their non elected patrons.
While these type of actions reinforce a negative view of politicians, it is invariably too late for an emasculated citizenry to do more than simply complain.
A strong legislative process, it seems, can only be guaranteed by a divided and relatively unstable house. That might be frustrating for the power club members, but it delivers a measure of safety for an electorate.

Thatcher Rides Again

Maggie Thatcher, well known for her bulldog approach to government affairs, has been caught up in the DeLay imbroglio. A ‘secret’ and highly ‘sensitive’ request to the British authorities, from DeLay’s prosecutors has been leaked to the London press.

"There would be considerable interest in this case if it were to become public knowledge," it noted.
"We have been asked by the US to keep this request `sealed', which we take to mean as confidential as possible. This has been relayed to the Metropolitan Police.
"The Metropolitan Police have been asked to handle these inquiries sensitively given the nature of the individual concerned and the background to the request."

While it might be embarrassing for the ‘Iron Lady’, there is no suggestion of impropriety on her part. Her spokesman suggested that DeLay and his party just dropped in for a friendly cuppa with the former ‘strongwoman’ of the UK.
It’s almost touching that these power suits would care to make time to visit an elderly has been.
The fact that Maggies little boy, Mark Thatcher, was placed under house arrest by South African police for his involvement in a plot to overthrow the government of oil-rich Equatorial Guinea in a coup d'etat obviously had nothing to do with the visit.
Mark wasn’t even arrested until 2004, when the plot was eventually revealed in all its gory detail. It is difficult to believe that a coup involving oil interests would be something Bush’s crew would get involved in.
This is a timely warning of course. If you have any sensitive documents, you would be best not to entrust them the British authorities. It seems like they might have a leak in their system…

God told me to invade, says Bush

The claim comes from the first meeting between the US leader, the Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (also known as Abu Mazen), and his then foreign minister in June 2003.The ministers say that Mr Bush also revealed to them that he had been told by God to create a Palestinian state, according to a new BBC series.
"God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq . . .' And I did.
"And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'.
"And by God I'm gonna do it."
I am still hoping this is a clever satirical piece, but I rather doubt it. The religiosity which pervades the American culture shows all the hallmarks of the fanatical zealots. Those traits which drive the terrorism the USA claims to be fighting.
The unsettling aspect is the ability of the US to drag other, less fanatical nations with it. Not through truth, through any tangible evidence of a need to act, but through lies and deception underwritten by religious revelation.
Not that I am saying revelation in and of itself in particularly invalid. But who is this GOD George talks with? If this GOD is so compelling, why lace his commands with subterfuge and misdirection?
I know it has been said before of Bush, but it bears repeating: "Those who the gods would destroy, they first make mad." Mad, as insane!

Sex Sells

The scandal plaguing Toronto’s City Hall has come to a head with the dismissal of two top managers of the municipal licensing and standards department.
Doubtless there is a sidesplitting side to this cronyism come bedroom farce. There is also a good deal of heart wrenching drama for many of the employees of the department.
The amorous pair had suspended three managers, with no real explanation, leaving them hang while some kind of chargers were found to stick them with.
According to one report ‘the never say die’ Coburn, who dumped on her lover trying to save her own neck, pulled more tabloid drama out of her bag.
Her latest vicious attack featured “a bizarre and unsubstantiated story that somehow implicated her three suspended managers -- in some nefarious plot involving crooked cops and bikers…” A look at the scandal's real 'collateral damage' Globe and Mail
It sold as well as the ‘office romance’ story diversion, that is; Coburn and her ‘lover’ were fired.
The hapless three suspended managers are, apparently, to be restored to their previous positions. Let us hope, with some assistance in putting their lives back together.
If Coburn was not able to distract her bosses by dragging a sex sodden diversion across their trail, she succeeded with much of the media.
These media people know the truth of it; don’t worry about the real story if there is a smell of sex to tantalize readers. So the headlines following the firings went for the genitals:
City fires 'soulmates' Toronto Sun, Canada
Staffers fired over love affair Ottawa Sun, Canada
'Soulmates' fired in City Hall scandal National Post, Canada
Toronto bureaucrats fired for misconduct after affair revealed Thunder Bay Chronicle Journal, Canada
Sexual politics Toronto Sun, Canada
Toronto bureaucrat defends workplace romance with married ... Vancouver Province
Suspended TO official says romance behind her CTV.ca, Canada

If we gave out awards to the good guys, Globe and Mail would get a gong here for focusing on the real story.
We all know that sex sells, but it is heartening to see at least one media outlet willing to risk it and go with the real story. Well done!

Cuffs cause a stir

I didn’t know anyone actually wore cuff links anymore. But I guess if you do you would tend to be a little compulsive.
Not that I want to malign Clayton Croker who spent 50 bucks on a pair of ‘commemorative High Court of Australia’ cufflinks, believing they were a "bargain".
Croker said he bought the gold-plated cufflinks from the High Court's Canberra registry in November 2003.
After 100 years of judicial leadership of the High Court, I thought it might be a good idea to have them as sentimental value," he said. By last August, though, the cufflinks were looking shabby.
He complained to the vendor, The High Court of Australia, and was given a replacement pair, but they also tarnished.
We’ve already suggested the man might have a slight compulsive disorder. After having his claim thrown out by Commonwealth to the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal of NSW he took his case to the NSW Supreme Court.
It was in this august body Associate Justice Bryan Malpass said: "The plaintiff has brought numerous proceedings, both in this court and elsewhere. Despite his lack of success, he is yet to be declared a vexatious litigant."
So it is no real surprise that the court threw this case out, stipulating strict appeal guidelines.
If Croker wants to take his case further, he will have to apply for special leave to appeal to the NSW Court of Appeal, as his claim is for less than $100,000

To be fair and taking account of Croker’s penchant for cuff links and past court record, he does have an issue here.
His point is:

"I see there's a legal issue here - when you get involved in contracts with the Commonwealth, a lot of the time the Commonwealth claims immunity," he said.
"I think it's a public interest matter. I think it should be pursued through the courts."

President of the NSW Law Society, John McIntyre, said it was unlikely that leave would be granted. "The decision of the Supreme Court would not be … a surprise to anyone who has dealt with consumer law before," he said. "If it was a gift shop owned by a separate trader then it would be an entirely different situation.

"Governments get to make the laws and so governments get to exempt themselves from the application of their laws."

The fact that it happens does not make it right. Australia has an appalling record for legislating what would be classed as corruption in any other sector.
I really don’t see Croker having much hope with his claim, but more power to him for binging out the truth about the Australian Government’s approach to legal ethics.

Canada fixing corruption

The dubious dealings at the Toronto City Hall raised the ante on the need for independent corruption agencies in Canada. Prime Minister, Martin, has already signaled a strengthening at national level. The provinces must now follow suit or risk dealing with the fallout of scandal on their own bailiwick.
Sadly the need for these additional bureaucracies has become all too apparent throughout the world. While they no doubt add to the cost of government, if they are effective there are consequent savings and benefits.
Effective is the key word when thinking about anti-corruption agencies. The terms of reference must be clear and free of political and self interest.  
Premier Dalton McGuinty is now facing the music in Ontario. If he is wise his government will adopt one of the successfully operating models and steer clear of adding local content.
Strong oversight agencies do not stop corruption, but they do identify it more quickly and surely. With appropriate powers they can root out corrupt practices with ruthless efficiency.
Canada is a great country with a good reputation around the world. Let’s keep it that way by acting now to put proper safeguards in place.  

10 questions on Intelligent Design

Intelligent design is a viable science?
That is just one of the wild claims being made in the mass media. I agree with one position being put; that people should be able to investigate and think the great issues freely. I just have 10 questions for proponents of ID:
Why do you insist that ID is a ‘theory’?
How do you justify ID as a science?
Why do you want to if you oppose science?
How do you arrive at the implausibility of probability?
Why are you backpedaling on God being the designer?
Why are you now saying this is outside religious belief?
Why do you reject intellectualism?
Why do you wish to impose thought rather than teach thinking?
If it is intelligent design, why am I surrounded by idiots?
Can the terms of intelligent debate be set before it turns into an unholy shouting fest?

The Bully pulpit?

It is not surprising to find in a recent survey that US students in grades six through ten in 2001, 13% reported bullying others, 11% reported being a victim of bullies, and another 6% said that they both bullied others and were bullied themselves. These numbers mean that over five million children are affected by bullying.
The real question is, do they learn it from the countries leaders or do the leaders take the culture of bullying with them through life?
The issue, of course, has everything to do with corruption. If society was generally more attuned to caring about the impact actions might have on others the culture of greed and corruption could not exist.
I do love coming across new (to me) terms during my research. This time ‘bully pulpit’ was thrown up. Strangely, for what should be a pejorative, this term seems to be acceptable for those taking a stand, choosing to fight fire with fire.
More power to those who stand up against bullies, but using their language seems to diminish things somewhat.
I suspect many of the issues of corruption are now ingrained in societies like the USA. Right from their earliest experience children are learning the elements of corruption, although often dealt out quite innocently.
A frustrated parent might be quick to bribe a child to behave in a certain way, or on the other hand, coerce and bully. It seems to be a learned cycle of behaviour which reinforces the naturally, self survival, grasping tendencies of helpless tots.
Without some measure of mitigation along the way these tots become our schoolyard bullies, taking this antisocial behaviour on into the workplace and eventually into positions of power.
The sad part is, the often intelligent, gifted adults who attain leadership in our western democracies still carry this socially destructive burden from their infancy. We might well claim to have the most highly educated populations in history, but it seems that is coupled with an attachment to infantile behaviour patterns.Instead of styling our leaders as highly intelligent it is more appropriate to use terms like clever, smart, streetwise, cunning… Until we, as mature societies, develop the ability to actually grow up emotionally, corruption and bullying are bound to dog our footsteps.

Breaking Corruption

There is a growing unease, generated by an apparent culture of corruption in governments throughout the world. Of course it has always been there, but in the face of another cycle of revelations, particularly in the USA, public awareness is again at a peak.
No doubt the media will soon judge that the public has had enough, and corruption will fade for a while as an issue. But while it is in the forefront issues and possible controls should be addressed. A typical response is: "New Jerseyans are becoming fed up with the political status quo," said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. "They don't trust politicians to clean up the system, which is why they give broad support to proposals that make these officials more directly accountable to the public."
The same article Courier News Gannett New Jersey goes on:New Jersey voters overwhelmingly say corruption is a major problem and they support the idea of having an elected state auditor and an elected attorney general, the poll by Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey newspapers found.
Disconnect
I don’t know if I’m the only one with a problem here. Surely if the problem begins with elected officials, electing more risks increasing rather than controlling corruption. The same dynamic applies, regardless of the position.
Putting aside, for now, the issues involved with appointing Federal and Supreme court judges, appointed oversight and auditing bodies work well in other places around the world and even in the USA.
The real issue, perhaps, is not the oversight personnel, or even how they are selected, it is the legislative or statutory frame work in which they operate. Governments can and do establish commissions and watchdogs for many reasons. Not least is an effort to bury issues before they get out of hand.
Yet there are now well tested guidelines which can be used as a basis for creating effective and essentially independent anti-corruption bodies. To my knowledge none of the effective bodies are elected, all are appointed and given unequivocal powers and responsibilities.
There will always be slip-ups in the best of situations; however I can only recall one breach by a person appointed under strong guidelines. That was within the Crime Commission of Western Australia and was dealt with quickly and efficiently.
Unfortunate Need
Call it human nature, but it seems our systems simply don’t work well without some kind of independent scrutiny. It only takes a few bad apples to spoil good government.
I have reservations about electing people to operate anti-corruption agencies. The electoral process itself tends to breed its own culture of corruption. Money and influence are too much ingrained into the process.
Still, in the end, more important to how an agency and its key personnel are put in place; the rules of operation are the vital ingredient. These must assure independence, fairness and have sufficient sweep and power to reign in corrupt practices.

UnPopularity Contest

Ohio Governor Bob Taft's approval rating has dipped to 15-percent, making him one of the most unpopular politicians in the history of political polls.
Taft is a great-grandson of President William Howard Taft, and was convicted in August of four misdemeanor ethics convictions for failing to report gifts and golf outings. He also presided over the state's wide-ranging investment scandal.The good news for Taft, according to his spokesman Mark Rickel is that: "The governor doesn't govern by polls. He governs by good public policy and making a difference for Ohioans," Nice piece of spin Mark. I wonder how dumb Ohioans really are.

The sex doesn't cut it

Good, juicy sex scandals are hard to come by these days. Most of the variants of official corruption are relatively boring and could use a bit of titillation to make them palatable. Now Toronto, Canada has come to the rescue with a new model for those who might be caught up in some sort of official malfeasance – cry ‘private relationship’, trot out a few salacious, sex related details and hope the dogs follow the false scent.
(Picture: Pam Coburn CTV.ca)
That’s the script for the unfolding cronyism investigation in Toronto’s City Council. Pamela Coburn, the $140,000-a-year executive-director and her second-in-command at the municipal licensing department, Joseph Carnevale, have been suspended while their management of the department is investigated. Under question are politically connected members of licensing department staff, including three relatives of deputy mayor Joe Pantalone, as well as Mr. Carnevale's startling rise from a temporary bylaw enforcement officer to Ms. Coburn's second-in-command, with a six-figure salary, in less than a year.
Ms Coburn’s local supermarket appears to be her favoured recruitment centre for budding city by-law inspectors and taxi driver trainers. It’s understandable that she would favour relatives of councilors for positions; after all, you can never have too much influence when you are a civil servant. The curious part, with the manager of the supermarket her personal friend, is where the benefits might be in hiring shelf stackers and check out chicks for relatively technical positions.
At least one whistle-blower complained that the department, which enforces municipal bylaws and property standards and regulates such industries as taxis and restaurants, had degenerated into a "honey pot of cronyism".
Another commented "There isn't a politician on the floor of council who doesn't owe her."
When Coburn fronted a media conference to put her side of the story, she did so with her teenage children in tow. Media folk scratched their collective heads, wondering what the kids might be able to add in her defense.
After touching, unsatisfactorily on the cronyism allegations, Coburn swung into her real defense; that an illicit affair, with Carnevale, that had been barely mentioned in the media, as a reason for her suspension.
To save her own sorry arse, Coburn destroyed her ‘lover’s’ future and subjected her kids to this sordid sideshow.
Where has this woman been? Who really cares about them getting their rocks off? Sex scandals, those ordinary, man-woman, a romp under the covers or on the office desks, just don’t cut it anymore.
Now if she forced all those questionable appointees to have sex with her that could be a whole new story. If she was providing a stable of supermarket bimbettes (of either gender) for the sexual pleasure of councilors and senior management, well there might just be a hint of worthwhile scandal there.
But no, it’s a simple office romance it seems, "I, like all employees, and all citizens of this city, I'm human, and I cannot regret that I came to care deeply for another person," she said. "I did not choose to feel this way, but it was a life event for me."
I’m looking forward to seeing the real issues unfold, to finding out how she might have benefited from the alleged cronyism.
Meantime, there is a lesson for blokes who get the urge for a bit of a romp on the side; if Coburn is any guide you well be fucked up every which way.

Corruption Nonpartisan

Government corruption is invariably focused on the last major scandal or scandal set. Failure to look at all the components, including historical and seemingly minor events, distorts perceptions and the ability to deal with the phenomenon effectively.
Of course, WE, the people, have a blunt understanding of all this; all politicians are crooks. A simple notion, and potentially reliable, but it doesn’t really solve the issue. Better to try and understand the workings and demand a fix.
Historically, politicians have rarely been interested in fixing the underlying issue. Timely scandal makes good campaign fodder More to the point, unless there is some real value to be had raising corruption charges against political foes, why spoil a good thing; or worse, risk the mud flying back at the thrower?
Australia’s major parties, the conservative Liberals and the ‘pretty conservative’ Labor Party have things too cozy to want to rock the boat too much. Between them they have legislated, and continue to do so, to maintain their own club and keep others out.
Sure, the odd scandal surfaces. But these are most often on ‘ideological’ lines. They don’t touch the real issues. Just look at the latest program to reduce democratic effectiveness; this includes allowing business and individuals to make donations up to $10,000 without disclosure. Legalised corruption has always been the Australian politicians approach.
In the USA, perceptions are skewed by vicious attacks at each new scandal or revelation, drowning memory of the past. Corruption is historically a nonpartisan affair in Congress. It is a live soap opera, where only the last episode and unfolding events gain focus.
It has, perhaps, something to do with the innate arrogance of many sectors of the population. An arrogance demanded by the underlying insecurity built into the nations psyche.
In Canada the ‘sponsorship scandal’ has held the attention of pollies and media for several years now, at the cost of dealing properly with a string of other ethical aberrations, across party lines.
The hope in Canada is that Martin’s promise to fix the underlying factors allowing the opportunity for politicians to plunder the public purse. The recent announcement of an additional 300 (almost doubling the numbers) auditors to monitor expenditure in real time is a step in the right direction.
The scandal Canadians seem to have missed is the vast amounts of money wasted satisfying the Conservatives politically motivated muck raking over the affair.
There are not going to be many key heads rolling from this affair, but there should be a long term fix come out of it.
Where that leaves Canadian politicians in the ‘scandal for political purposes stakes’ will be interesting. There are still issues arising, including former Mint president, David Dingwall.
So you can also be sure that the country will never be a stranger to breaches in ethical behaviour, just a little better protected.

DeLay Tactics

A true story, as reported in The Washington Post in May of 2003: In an upscale Washington D.C. steak house, Tom DeLay and about 30 political supporters are just finishing the main course when DeLay and several others light up cigars. Tom Khandker, the manager of the restaurant, approaches DeLay and respectfully informs him that the building is owned by the federal government and prohibits smoking, entreating DeLay to extinguish his cigar. Tom DeLay, recalcitrant at the plebeian's directive, retorts, "I am the federal government" and storms off with some cronies to fire up elsewhere.
This comes from an excellent opinion piece in the Daily Texan By Joshua Huck

Behind Intelligent Design

While the current court action mocks intelligence, I am always curious to know the people behind this sort of thing. We know this is the work of the religious right, but who are their tools?
In looking for that information I came across far more; court depositions, transcripts, Comments and Analysis. Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District

A half arsed sermon

There is something surreal about the current court case testing the legitimacy of teaching a variant of creationism. This strange construct is akin to bashing square pegs into round holes. Anything, it seems, to fit in with the equally bizarre concept of Christianity practiced be its adherents.
The issue, to my mind, is not creationism (by any name) but the utter corruption of Christian teaching as expressed by the evangelical/fundamentalist movements.
While they claim scriptural authority for all their teaching, including creationism, it is obviously an authority based on selective reading. Only those passages which supposedly shore up their strange notions are chosen as a basis for their ‘Christian’ moral code.
If the Christian religion was truly and wholly scripturally based, adherents would belong to Jewish sects and attend synagogues. As it is, a ‘church’ was created which the Christ did not instruct or mandate. The separate Christian church was most probably the result of the power play between Peter and Paul.
The moral imperatives of the Christian right are equally not rooted in Christ’s teachings. If pushed for scriptural authority the Christian Right will refer to obscure Old Testament and Pauline passages. This amounts to finding any proof to support their argument, no matter how irrelevant that proof is.
It is this pseudo scriptural authority which supports the blatant hypocrisy which marks these odd religionists. So certain are they of the wrongness of killing an embryo, they will kill a grown person to prevent it. So certain are they of the supremacy of white Christians, they will relegate any other race, including that which Christ came from, to lesser mortals or animals. There is no Christian scripture which will authorize these travesties, simply a wrongheaded moral conviction.
Where are the traditional churches in all this? The ones which might also be suspect as to their ‘Christ’ given legitimacy, but open to His teachings nonetheless? Why aren’t they fighting tooth and nail to protect the traditional way?
All too often these are being subsumed by zealots within, to mimic the biblically ignorant Christian Right zealots. If not, they are bound up in a different moral dilemma. They are frozen from speaking out or acting for fear of breaching, their gentle more loving understandings.
Where is the angry Christ who would cleanse the temple of money changers and cleansing the temple? Where is the one who would confront these latter day Pharisees?
And, let’s quote the Gospel here for some real scriptural authority.

“For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:20 RSV).

“The Pharisees perhaps meant to obey God, but eventually they became so devoted and extremist in very limited parts of The Law (plus all that they themselves added to it), that they became blind to The Messiah when He was in their very midst. They saw His miracles, they heard His Words, but instead of receiving it with joy, they did all that they could to stop Him - eventually to the point of getting Him killed because He truthfully claimed to be the Son of God.”

It sounds awfully familiar to me.
So a call to those real churches being persecuted and belittled by the mad ravings of the right: Stand up for yourself, the real scriptures and Christ’s teachings. It is your beliefs which these people undermine.
A final word: There is no biblical or moral directive for these wooly thinkers to force their broken logic on the rest of us, through political or any other means. Look to your own salvation, thank you! I will look after my own.

Bennett on abortion

It is difficult to believe the former Republican secretary of education William J. Bennett would even make such a comment publicly, regardless of his position on the matter. “…abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down”
For a fuller briefing Media Matters for America have excellent coverage with audio clips:
* …abort every black baby
* Bennett defended racial comments with falsehood
The sad reality is that these type of issues are even canvassed, never mind repeated publicly.
As detestable as these thoughts are, perhaps it is better that they are spoken, otherwise we would never know the truth of what they are thinking.

Can I borrow that Ernie?

I’m always on the lookout for those new words and phrases which creep onto the political scene, especially when they are used as a way of trivializing misdeeds.
Kentucky Governor, Ernie Fletcher has recently introduced a gem with his; "noodling out of season."
Ernie used the term in a speech, sometime late in August, when he was “exercising the power conferred upon me by Section 77 of the Constitution of Kentucky to grant amnesty to all persons who might otherwise be charged with violating the merit system laws.”
Unfortunately for good old Ernie, the Grand Jury didn’t agree with that particular power and are investigating the charges anyway.
But you have to wonder if all this wasn’t just a failure to define the terms, a misunderstanding between Ernie and his henchmen.
Ernie thinks he knows what noodling is. He told us in that same speech:

“Noodling is the sport of catching fish with your bare hands rather than bothering to bait your hook.”

So, when his guys told him they were just off to do a bit of noodling Ernie thought they were heading down to the swamp for a bit of harmless R&R. He didn’t know they were going to fire a bunch of regular civil servants and replace them with folks whose primary qualification was being Ernie supporters.
Still believing that it was all just good clean fun, Ernie insisted;

“These folks who have been accused by Greg Stumbo (Kentucky Attorney General) are good people. Some have made mistakes because of inexperience, and a complicated, unclear merit law."

And as Ernie knows as a legislator, if a law is bad you just ignore it, like noodling out of season, and get on with life.
If that’s what he expects of his administration, and of the people of Kentucky, I suppose it makes the concept of a legislature a little redundant. In an odd sort of way, Ernie might be just getting down to the truth of the matter. Why complicate life with all this legislative stuff? Why not just get on and noodle (whichever interpretation) and share the plunder from the state coffers with your buddies? All these laws are so complicated and unnecessary.
But I think I might borrow noodling. I might just set up a noodling award to go with the Snouts in the Trough Award. Seeing as rules are irrelevant it shouldn’t be too hard to rearrange.

The Scandal Files Update

The Scandal Files site has just been updated and now includes the monthly Corruption Roll Call USA
This section grew out of the realization that for many in the USA, corruption is something which occurs elsewhere.
Well, that was so until things really heated up towards the end of September. For the most part, however, corruption is reported locally with only minor references nationally. Roll Call is an attempt to focus all the diverse bits into one picture. At this early stage, while we are working out the parameters, the list might not be fully comprehensive.
Some potential corruption scandals have been omitted, simply because the allegations are not sufficiently supported.
If you think we should feature a looming or real scandal you can contact the editor of Scandal Files with your submission.

The October Snouts in the Trough (SITT) Award has been posted. The lucky winner is Kentucky Governor, Ernie (the Noodler) Fletcher. Ernie’s antics deserve a lot wider attention than they have been getting.
Cronyism is it seems part and parcel of the body politic in the US. Under Ernie’s watch blatant ‘jobs for the boys’ would become a minor misdemeanor rather than a serious ethical breach.