The question is that if there is suspicion of an individual, does the organisation investigate and hand the information to police, or does it draw ranks around the individual and only take action when no other course is available?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/28/3150867.htm

Remind you of the Catholic church?

The reason I posted on this thread was because of the effective challenge to moderation in Ammonite's post of Friday, 22 April 2011 at 10:01:44 AM, constituted by the question:

"How do [Shadow Minister's] discussions get approval?

Being relatively new to OLO, Ammonite may be unaware of the recent attempt to effectively close the site down, an attempt chronicled in this article, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11583 , with that chronicling further developed in the associated comments thread, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11583&page=0 . It can still be gainfully posted to, if one takes the time to read oneself in and post on topic.

That attempt to shut OLO down revolved around a similar contention to that encapsulated by Ammonite's question in this thread.

I would suggest SM's discussion got approved because GrahamY knew that every one of the inferences made in SM's topic title and opening post had been the subject of at least some MSM discussion, and was therefore a legitimate subject for discussion on OLO, whether or not he approved of the direction in which the questions posed by SM may have appeared to be heading. GrahamY would also have been as aware as any of us of Kristina Keneally's concession speech claim following the NSW elections, with respect to voters, that "they did not leave us [the former ALP government], we left them".

But ugliness resides in the eye of the beholder, and, without SM having posted a single link by way of substantiation of the bases for the inferences he was seemingly making in opening the discussion, before one could say 'Jack Robinson' three out of four posters had risen to what SM has effectively subsequently confessed to was bait.

If, in posting links of the sort that should have been posted by SM, Ammonite thinks that I am not stating clearly what I mean, s/he needs to understand that I have had to tread carefully around possible contempt of SA law issues. Contrary to what s/he asserts, there may well be something to see here, folks, but not perhaps exactly what SM insinuates.

I've not read back over all the posts so it may have already been mentioned but don't forget two Qld Labor MP's being caught for child sexual abuse (including a former leader of the party).

On the other hand British Conservative MP's get plenty of mention from the left because of male MP's with a preference for dressing in women's clothes, bondage etc. The left has never been overly shy about using the chair sniffing incident for broader political purposes. The difference between the corruption in the former Qld Nat's which was proven and which is used to tar all members is notable.

It does seem that when someone who does not like Labor plays the game the way the left routinely plays it many are highly outraged in a way they don't seem to be when it's their own side playing the game that way.

Their does seem to be preference in most parties to overstate the failings of the otherside and excuse the same or similar from their own. The same allies to most group's.

R0bert

are you seriously implying that the ALP somehow attracts...
Rache,
You might be onto something here. Most of the ALP supporters I know are very self-centred & opportunistic in character. Of course there are decent people too but I'm referring to the majority.

FG,

Great analysis. Good to see an occasional poster that can engage his grey matter before reacting.

Given the broad media coverage of all the incidents to which I referred, I thought links would be redundant. (as would any link to show that the Japanese earthquake had occurred.)

In engineering/ business, there is a saying once is an incident, twice could be a coincidence, but three times is a trend. What is happening is definitely a trend.

There is most definitely smoke. I have offered my opinion as to the cause of the smoke, posters such as Belly, Lexi, Ammonite, would have us believe that there is no smoke and that all these incidents are just a long series of unfortunate coincidences.

I am forced to respond to this nonsense because the implication is clearly directed at only one particular Party when we all know full well that it's not the Partys' fault if some of its members don't always behave appropriately. Both Partys have members within their organisations whose actions at times leave a lot to be desired. Hence for the sake of balance here are just a few on behalf of the Liberal Party:

1) The Lindsay pamphlet scandal - an Australian electoral scandal that shocked quite a few voters - Google it for details.
2) Richard Dalla-Riva resigned from Ted Ballieu's Shadow Cabinet after he sexually harassed a teenager at a party function.
3) Federal Liberal Mp's have been caught rorting the public purse by
ordering nearly $300,000 of printer toner in the lead up to an election.
"Tonergate" according to the Courier Mail - the Lib MP's went on a 3 week blitz in late 2009 to beat a strict financial cap & stock up on office equipment - ruthlessly ordering taxpayer funded supplies ahead of the 2010 campaign.
4)Then there's various Lib Mp's who were force to repay tens of thosands in family travel perks and other entitlements which they had
misused.
5) And let's not forget the infamous Mr Buswell - the Liberal chair-sniffing MP from WA...
6) The "UTE-GATE" affair and the list goes on...

I could keep going but I think you get the point. Mud-slinging is a
nasty occupation even more so when it can be applicable to both sides.