Interesting observing the Kelly inquiry (at arms length)
that many of the 'Government' people have the agenda of
spin running through them like the stamp in a stick of rock.
Time and again the issue of 'language', in terms of its
'strength', phraseology, 'sexing up', 'tightened', 'tidying up'
and so on comes to the fore.
It's as if these people actually understand the language they use
as if it were some kind of reality or 'fact' when in fact it exists as a
set
of
symbols - a means of description - pointing at reality or fact; but it
is the symbol set they manipulate to suit their points of view, which
do not necessarily concord with reality (a bit like Walter Mitty
really...)
The difficulty here of of course lies in the intelligence material itself
having a vague and shifting character based upon fragmnents of hard
data and opinion derived therefrom; the facts themselves seem spurious,
(allowing political manipulation and nuance, as given above, to place
whatever emphasis on them that might suit the predelictions of the
manufacturers of dossiers). The Hutton enquiry might well clear some
smoke in establishing what 'facts' actually existed & how they got
(re)framed
by the dossiers' author(s) and sponsor(s).
[uk.p.m readers might benefit by searching
framing, reframing and NLP on the web; the techniques are well
established]
As for the spin put on the September dossier, one only has to look
at the nature of the information presented in the later, and entirely
discredited 'dodgy' ('dodged up' better) dossier.
|
