An interesting excercise to do when reading these stories (a similar one graces the front page of the SMH this morning). Wherever you read ASIO/Keelty et. al “believes”, replace that with “believes, but cannot support with sufficient evidence”.
Also remember the current controversy about senior public servants covering the government’s ass about issues ranging from asylum seekers to torture in interrogations. The presumed assumption is that we are meant to believe that ASIO/Keelty are not political operatives in this mess – this could not be further from the truth, and has been shown on countless occasions. Remember Keelty having to
retract clarify his statements a while back that contradicted the government’s official line. Just read Andrew Wilkie’s damning book to get some idea of the politicisation of such agencies.
Of course – you’d think after THREE YEARS the US or ASIO (or someone!!!!) would have enough to at least lay charges if there was sufficient evidence that Mamdouh was linked to al Qaeda. This is trial by public opinion – it is the type of trial the government is so good at manufacturing to deflect attention from the REAL ISSUE – claims by Mamdouh that he was tortured in (unlawful) custody.
The real shame of all this is the fact that we cannot trust our government to tell us the truth about such significant matters.