HERE$ IS WHAT SOME_one needs to do here

The WashPo..just went "full Snowden".

*Newspaper publishes America's ‘Black budget’ summary

http://wapo.st/17mcAxu

quote from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/black-budget-summary-details-us-spy-networks-successes-failures-and-objectives/2013/08/29/7e57bb78-10ab-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html

“Our budgets are classified as they could provide insight for foreign intelligence services[[[read alp]..to discern our top national priorities, capabilities and sources and methods that allow us to obtain information to counter threats,” he said.

Among the notable revelations in the budget summary:

•Spending by the CIA has surged past that of every other spy agency, with $14.7 billion in requested funding for 2013. The figure vastly exceeds outside estimates and is nearly 50 percent above that of the National Security Agency, which conducts eavesdropping operations and has long been considered the behemoth of the community.

•The CIA and the NSA have begun aggressive new efforts to hack into foreign computer networks to steal information or sabotage enemy systems, embracing what the budget refers to as “offensive cyber-operations.”

•The NSA planned to investigate at least 4,000 possible insider threats in 2013, cases in which the agency suspected sensitive information may have been compromised by one of its own. The budget documents show that long before Snowden’s leaks, the U.S. intelligence community worried about “anomalous behavior” by personnel with access to highly classified material.

•U.S. intelligence officials take an active interest in foes as well as friends. Pakistan is described in detail as an “intractable target,” and counterintelligence operations “are strategically focused against [the] priority targets of China, Russia, Iran, Cuba and Israel.” The latter is a U.S. ally but has a history of espionage attempts against the United States.

Would be helpful to get some actual costings from the Coalition.

But aside from that....

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21584343-kevin-rudd-just-about-deserves-second-turn-lucky-no-more?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/lucky_no_more

"The choice between a man with a defective manifesto and one with a defective personality is not appealing—but Mr Rudd gets our vote...."

P,

So you chose the one with the defective manifesto and the personality defect?

As the coalition are releasing their policies, they are releasing their costings. If they release their final costings 24hrs before the election they will have exceeded anything that labor has done.

Notably Labor has yet to release their final costings or any of the analysis behind them.

....Labor has yet to release their final costings or any of the analysis behind them."

Treasury does that. http://electioncostings.gov.au/

Notably true is the LNP does not use Treasury but conjures up any figure that suits it under the imprimatur of three "prominent Australians"

The OTT squealing by the LNP today shows it's feeling the heat in its strategy of feeding the chooks all the way to the chopping block.

First we had the LNP's concocted confection of a "budget emergency" and now it's promising everything to everyone with a ditched commitment to surplus other than to say it will achieve it before Labor does. Now there's a promise that requires cuts, cuts and cuts!

All the LNP has done is wreak fear for three years, in cahoots with Murdoch, scaring the electorate with comparisons of Australia to Greece and Cyprus while enticing them from the front with undeliverable fiscal promises given foreseeable revenue restraints.

As a mark of respect to voters, may we please scrutinize the underlying assumptions costings and budgeting of the LNP before the election instead of being subjected to its pea'n'thimble tricks? Why won't it go to the Parliamentary Budget Office if it has all this worked out and nothing to hide? Duh, I wonder.

The LNP must reckon the election is in the bag but there is something in the air in these last days and perhaps the bookies have been overzealous in their early payouts, which may well just have itself been an inexpensive investment in influencing voters. Well, at least I am hoping so!

LF,

Have you even read the link you posted? All it has is the costings of a few minor labor promises with no analysis, no assumptions, and no bottom line.

Nice try but no cigar.

After the treasury officials essentially said that KRudd, Bowen and Wong were lying, none of these three stooges have any credibility.

SM,

"The Economist" says:

Mr Abbott = defective manifesto.

"The choice between a man with a defective manifesto and one with a defective personality is not appealing—but Mr Rudd gets our vote, largely because of Labor’s decent record. With deficits approaching, his numbers look more likely to add up than Mr Abbott’s....."

(Fairly straight forward:)