You have the right to remain silent.
Sandy - “In my 55 years of flying, including my professional career in General Aviation(GA), one occasionally comes across a bureaucratic piece of outstanding nonsense. Poor darlings, do you for one minute think that any sane person with even a cursory knowledge of the art of deviation and obscurantism would swallow this pathetic excuse for what might well go down in the annals of Australia’s GA as the greatest worse example of bureaucratic bungling and embuggerence in Australia’s history?”
Now it is a painful chore; to plough through the raft of correspondence in the 'Buckley Files' – there is a lot of mind numbing stuff to digest and consider. But, there are rewards to be winnowed from the chaff.
"..What I will tell you is that the team leader applied repeatedly from 2015 to 2018 to be removed from the supervision of Mr Buckley's case because he felt that his team was wilting under the demands and behaviours of Mr Buckley and he felt that his team was captured..." etc..
The 'he said – she said' of the Carmody v Buckley bout must be resolved; its a tough knot to untangle – but (in plain language) there is too much embroidery about the facts and far too much wriggle room for a jury to form an unbiased opinion. However; it can, with patience, be resolved. IMO, the Committee must place a Mr. John Costa and Crawford 'on the stand' under oath. In camera if need be. Both men have remained, as is their right, silent. A quick skim read of the Buckley – Crawford correspondence file contradicts almost all of the Carmody statement made at the last hearing. Reading through it all, one gets a sense that it is almost 'too informal'. Certainly not the usual run of the mill stuff between an operator and CASA; which is mostly kept very 'formal' and to the point. I digress.
The Crawford silence from the back row is significant as is the body language. One wonders, had the Committee called him to speak, if the right questions were asked how close toward actual perjury he would have dared sail, even with Aleck whispering in his ear.
There was a tipping point; it coincides with a number of as yet unexplained 'coincidences' which cast a shadow over some ministerial activities, such as doing advertorials for SOAR. Buckley stood well positioned to put a serious dent in the SOAR bubble. Sure, speculation and supposition – but it is a bucket that needs to be examined. In fact there are several buckets which the Committee must examine if there is indeed a political will to arrive at a point where we need have no more Senate inquiry into the pigs ear known as the CASA. The experiment has failed – Asking the right questions will see us arrive at a point beyond reasonable doubt.
Toot – toot. (MTF is a safe bet).
Sandy - “In my 55 years of flying, including my professional career in General Aviation(GA), one occasionally comes across a bureaucratic piece of outstanding nonsense. Poor darlings, do you for one minute think that any sane person with even a cursory knowledge of the art of deviation and obscurantism would swallow this pathetic excuse for what might well go down in the annals of Australia’s GA as the greatest worse example of bureaucratic bungling and embuggerence in Australia’s history?”
Now it is a painful chore; to plough through the raft of correspondence in the 'Buckley Files' – there is a lot of mind numbing stuff to digest and consider. But, there are rewards to be winnowed from the chaff.
"..What I will tell you is that the team leader applied repeatedly from 2015 to 2018 to be removed from the supervision of Mr Buckley's case because he felt that his team was wilting under the demands and behaviours of Mr Buckley and he felt that his team was captured..." etc..
The 'he said – she said' of the Carmody v Buckley bout must be resolved; its a tough knot to untangle – but (in plain language) there is too much embroidery about the facts and far too much wriggle room for a jury to form an unbiased opinion. However; it can, with patience, be resolved. IMO, the Committee must place a Mr. John Costa and Crawford 'on the stand' under oath. In camera if need be. Both men have remained, as is their right, silent. A quick skim read of the Buckley – Crawford correspondence file contradicts almost all of the Carmody statement made at the last hearing. Reading through it all, one gets a sense that it is almost 'too informal'. Certainly not the usual run of the mill stuff between an operator and CASA; which is mostly kept very 'formal' and to the point. I digress.
The Crawford silence from the back row is significant as is the body language. One wonders, had the Committee called him to speak, if the right questions were asked how close toward actual perjury he would have dared sail, even with Aleck whispering in his ear.
There was a tipping point; it coincides with a number of as yet unexplained 'coincidences' which cast a shadow over some ministerial activities, such as doing advertorials for SOAR. Buckley stood well positioned to put a serious dent in the SOAR bubble. Sure, speculation and supposition – but it is a bucket that needs to be examined. In fact there are several buckets which the Committee must examine if there is indeed a political will to arrive at a point where we need have no more Senate inquiry into the pigs ear known as the CASA. The experiment has failed – Asking the right questions will see us arrive at a point beyond reasonable doubt.
Toot – toot. (MTF is a safe bet).