Remaining Transparent Together
24 Jul 2011 ..
REMAINING TRANSPARENT TOGETHER ..
Interesting events in the UK sent this blogger into an email frenzy. Sticky questions were asked of State Police, the Australian Federal Police, and others. The email exchange below is between myself and the Australian Federal Police. AFP.
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011
The body of this, the first email contained three questions asked to the AFP. The questions are not important for the purpose of this post.
The AFP did not answer any of the three questions,
but replied with that below.
Subject: RE: Afp-Media-1 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011
Thank you for your enquiry.
We have not heard of the media outlet listed in your address line. Could you please provide us with some information about yourself?
CLOSE OPERATIONS SUPPORT
AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE
Tel +61(0) 2 61316333
So I replied to this email, with my second email below.
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011
Thank-you for your previous reply.
Your reply included,
We have not heard of the media outlet ***[A]
listed in your address line.
Could you please provide us with some ***[B]
information about yourself?
[A] Proudly, I am not part of the embedded media.
[B] I am an Australian citizen that blogs anonymously as 730reportland.
My blog focus is high lighting the embedded media quackery that takes announce-ables and twists them into factoids that are screeched at full volume.
See for yourself
And the AFP replied to my second email with …
Subject: RE: Afp-Media-2 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011
Thanks for your reply. Please note that the AFP National Media Team are here to respond to media enquiries from accredited members of the media.
Likewise, we are not in the practice of providing information about what the AFP may or may not be doing to people who request it anonymously. If you wish to be open and transparent with us, we might be able to re-visit this point.
AFP National Media.
Now I can guess some folk will be thinking, what a damn cocky anonymous blogger sod. And they would be correct, nearly. Unfortunately this was not the first time I had been asked these type of questions back. I had replied previously to State Police and gave the same reply, word for word, and same link. The State Police accepted my reply and were helpful.
Now let`s look at the second AFP reply and do some comparisons, and draw some conclusions.
“the AFP National Media Team are here to respond to media enquiries from accredited members of the media.“
So, for the AFP, Voters, Taxpayers, Citizens, do not count? Just accredited media?
And the AFP insist, demand to be filtered by the media? No clear, unfiltered AFP news allowed?
“people who request it anonymously.“
Every fake identity caught?
“you wish to be open and transparent with us,“
No blatant anonymous honesty?
Bloggers verses Journalism
Well, clearly today the AFP back `Journalism`.
Massola verses Grogsgamut
This is a no brainer, `Massola`. Could be a dream job here for Massola. The AFP would have great resources for `outing` bloggers. I suspect.
Free verses Unfree
In action, ignoring lip-service, the AFP seem to be on the `Unfree` side.
Transparent, transparency and similar weasle words, are spouted by Clowns of both flavours at Circus Canberra. Point a microphone or camera at them and watch the dribble flow. Each Clown claims he has cornered the market on transparency, and his opponent has none. Ditto for the State Circus`s that do all this as well.
Court transcripts, freedom of information documents and other so-called public records. Already digitalised and paid for by the public. Kept away from us by paywalls and gate-keepers from the truth. Just dumbed down data, drip fed to us in sound-bytes by corporate criminals tapping phones.
Unfortunately, the Australian Federal Police and I do not agree.
Both of us are stubborn, staying in our corners and …
Remaining Transparent Together