What is amazing with the last post is the ostrich like defence of the Police Service. To get prisoners out of jail it requires a warrant signed by a magistrate that the Police believe the prisoner is responsible for committing some crimes. One wonders whether the crimes in question occurred when the prisoners were in jail. One wonders whether the magistrates actually examined the material or went along with the police. To me it appears like an exercise in improving the clear up rates. The damage to the public is that the real criminals are not being chased because the police are doing deals with the prisoners to get confessions for crimes they never committed. Sounds like a dance with the devil.....sound familiar

This is an informative and useful article.

However, one factor not considered is the role that the newsmedia could play in holding Government to account and in a broader sense than focusing on corruption in its narrowest legalistic sense.

The Courier Mail's current coverage of corruption-related issues appears to be exemplary in some regards, but, given the corruption has thrived through much of the 12 years that Labor has been in Government, the question needs to be asked: has the the Courier Mail and other Queensland newsmedia done all they could to prevent this?

The CM constantly reminds its readers of how it blew the whistle on the outrageous 'success fee' of $500,000 paid to Mackenroth after the Airport Link tunnel was awarded to the successful tenderer.

However, it excuses the trampling of the democratic rights of local communities whose lives are now being devastated by the Airport Link project. Read from their editorial "Heavier price of progress for some" of 15 July at http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25782554-13360,00.html

"People who choose to live close to the CBD of a major, growing metropolis, can't always have it both ways. After all, new roads and tunnels designed to cut down commuting times and ultimately make Brisbane a more liveable city have to go through someone's back yard, and in some cases that might be yours."

This essential message was repeated in Paul Syvret's op-ed piece "Brisbane's road upgrade is messy business" of 28 July at http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25841960-27197,00.html

I responded two days ago:

"Paul Syvret, could you explain to your readers, some time, what the concept of democracy means to you?

"Please remind us again, Paul, what are the benefits of population growth that makes all this mayhem, which you acknowledge in this article, necessary?

"Who decided that it would be such a good idea to cram millions more into South East Queensland?

"Who decided to ramp up Australia's immigration rate to its current record level?

"When were those whose lives are now being destroyed as a consequence consulted about this?

"... or is discussion of this off limits to you?"

This has not (yet) been published.

To anyone who doesn't believe there's corruption in offialdom, they should read the following analysis by Quentin Dempster:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/01/2643048.htm

It has been obvious for years that the Beattie/Bligh government and a substantial portion of the public service at senior levels is morally corrupt.This leads to criminal corruption in some cases.Criminal corruption needs to be unearthed and proven in court.That can be difficult.Moral corruption can be deduced from observation.

There are several measures necessary to curb this destructive culture.
Reinstatement of the Legislative Council is one.

Introduction of proportional voting (Hare Clarke) in both the Assembly and the Council will go a long way to strengthening the role of parliament as a voice of the people,not a rubber stamp for big business as it is now.

Reintroduction of the CJC model to enable effective oversight of government.If this was done I am sure we would see quite a few prosecutions of Labor luminaries as happened to the Nationals and Liberals post Fitzgerald.This is one of the main reasons why the CMC will remain neutered under this government.

This theme featured in the 2008 film "Defiance" about a large group of Jews who had escaped from the ghettoes and managed to evade the Nazis in the forests of Byelorussia during the Second World War.

I thought it was dramatically powerful (although my girlfriend, who saw it with me, said the main characters were mostly stereotypical).

It seemed to be a considerably better and more realistic war movie than most, but still had a number of ridiculous flaws and inconsistencies.

If the movie was close to the truth, then it is a truly epic and heroic story on the scale of the Sobibor death camp revolt or the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.

Anyhow, I have digressed.

At one point in the movie the authority of the leader of the group, Tuvia Bielski, played by Daniel Craig, was challenged by Arkady Lubczanski, who thought the partisan fighters were entitled to get more food than the women, children and elderly who remained at the camp.

*-*-* Spoiler Waring *-*-*

Tuvia Bielski reasserted his authority, killing Arkady Lubczanski in the process

*-*-* End of Spoiler Warning *-*-*

During the siege of Leningrad from 1941 until 1944, the front line soldiers got considerably more rations than the civilians.

That would seem to have been necessary. Otherwise, the soldiers would have been too weak to prevent the Germans form over-running Leningrad. A large number civilians did starve to death.

Still, I wouldn't have cared much for the chances of either the front line soldiers or the civilians.