Notwithstanding the alleged secret video recording of the 'fraternization' of the 18-year-old female cadet being 'conduct most unbecoming', the article author and the public at large would do well to consider the enhanced standard of behaviour, with respect to that to be expected of others not subject to that level of military discipline, any Commandant of the ADFA is responsible for inculcating in those who would aspire to a career as commisssioned officers in the Defence Forces.

Under operational conditions, an enemy characteristically does not back off to order so that what may be claimed to be the 'offended dignity' of an officer exercising command can be salved at leisure. It is to deal with such conditions this cadet was being trained.

The self-evident fact is that the 18-year-old female cadet was as much a party to the proscribed fraternization at the outset as was at least one of those, on the face of it grubs, who were prepared to invade her privacy. It was with that breach of discipline that the Commandant had to commence dealing. The first part of the real scandal is that for commencing exactly at this point in dealing with the matter, the Commandant has been pilloried by his Minister bypassing, and in the process demeaning, the Defence Forces chiefs who would normally oversee such matters.

The second part of the real scandal is that advantage has seemingly been taken of the fact that the Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, is himself not subject to that higher standard of behaviour striven to be inculcated into ADFA graduates, in order to set him up to go off half-cocked in this matter. As I suspect the Minister has belatedly realized, these princesses of both sexes are in the process of being toughened up, and claims of 'insensitivity' on the part of the officer immediately responsible for the oversight of this process simply have no place in the public debate.

Is the 'former high-ranking military officer' declining to be named who considers the Commandant's position untenable a former DMP, I wonder?

Forrest Gump

If the facts of the case are as they have been reported, then the offence against the female cadet was far more serious (possibly criminal) than the offence she committed. Given this, and her likely emotional state on learning of the gross invasion of her privacy, it was entirely inappropriate for the commandant to focus his disciplinary attention on her. His demand that she apologise to her fellow cadets was demeaning and outrageous, and the fact he seemed more concerned with the media attention than the events that prompted it shows him to be self-protective and morally blind - not fit to hold a position of responsibility, especially for youngsters.

Yes, our military need to be tough, but sexual humiliation is never justified and should never be tolerated.

My understanding of a whistle blower is someone who detects a wrong doing, and or cover up by work colleagues or superiors and brings it to the attention of the authorities. Considering that this offence was brought to her attention by the authorities only a couple of days before she went to the media. I would not consider that any of the criteria of a whistle blower had been met.

Secondly, unless I am mistaken, "fraternising" or sexual contact with another cadet on the base is an offence, and in her brief employment with the defence force, she was already up on charges for being drunk, and AWOL.

And while I have the deepest sympathy for her humiliation, and believe that the men involved need to be disciplined to the fullest extent, she was certainly far from blameless in the affair, and feel that the minister's call to excuse her from punishment from that and other offences is completely inappropriate.

If she gets off scot free, it is only an inducement for any military person to run to the media. I am sure that with thousands of employees the military has lots of dirty laundry, and it is dealt with in a fair and procedurally correct manner nearly all the time.

Having done a short stint in the army I can attest that Forrest Gumpp is quite correct, military discipline is of another order and essentially independent of the civilian judiciary. It's not that military personnel are above the law, but that they're subject to the exactions of both military "and" civilian law. In many ways, however, military law does transcend civilian law, just as military service transcends civilian life; thus it's perfectly acceptable to kill military personnel en masse during wars but civilian casualties are deplored. Officer training, as FG suggests, is a higher echelon yet and politicians arguably have no business interfering.
So I also think Stephen Smith was out of line in imposing his politically correct mores onto what is traditionally a quasi-independent and amoral military machine.
I should add, however, that I hate the military, the institution not the personnel. I hate the way it conditions its members to sport the bravado and celebrate the mock-heroics at ceremonies and hide the nascent debauchery and butchery and rape and pillage, that flourishes opportunistically in every engagement, behind a respectable-looking uniform.
On the other hand, so long as we're having wars we should maintain this unconvincing semblance of respectability, this testosterone institution--far better than the impersonal kind of sterilised warfare that's currently being developed, if only because it has the potential to make us confront our (vicarious) actions viscerally. I say "potential" because generally our natural feelings of gut-revulsion are sublimated as uncritical tears and pathetic wallowing.
On a more mundane level, what happened to this female cadet goes on ad nauseam in civi-street; it's only news because it's the ADF. Just goes to show how conditioned we are to think the military are above all that, when the truth is they're primed and prepped for it.

Squeers

I appreciate your 'telling it like it is' post. Most men don't hate women to the extent demonstrated by these execrable cadets, but the ones who do - the armed forces remain the 'perfect storm' for them - "primed and prepped" as you say. In civi-life - we get situations like the Dianne Brimble case - where a complete lack of empathy resulted in a woman's death.

Shadow Minister is obviously having as much difficulty in telling right from wrong as did Commodore Bruce Kafer, head of the Defence Force Academy The wrongdoing was the broadcasting of the photos, without the female cadet’s consent. It is an appalling invasion of her privacy. If Shadow Minister denies this broadcasting of the photos was a wrong, he (for only a “he” could write that letter) only has to look up her rights under the Universal Declaration. It matters not at all, whether or not fraternisation was permitted on the Academy. It matters even less on whether she had been AWOL or on a charge of being drunk. Two wrongs, or even three on her side does not make the photo broadcasting right. Her first level of whistleblowing was to go to senior management in the Academy, according to the Sun-Herald on April 10. Getting no satisfaction she went to Channel 10. It was blowing the whistle on Bruce Kafer, and Commodore Kafer’s response was retaliation. One day, hopefully not too far from now, it will be illegal. One day, also hopefully not too far from now, the Defence Force will select for its senior managers, and most of all, those responsible for training this country’s senior military officers, people who have the ability to realise that they are have not correctly read the lie of the land , and have lead the entire army into trouble.

Secondly, unless I am mistaken, "fraternising" or sexual contact with another cadet on the base is an offence, and in her brief employment with the defence force, she was already up on charges for being drunk, and AWOL.

Shadow Minister with respect, do you realise that many servicemen on base, off duty, regularly enjoy their Friday or Saturday evening drinks, meet fellow servicewomen, conduct relationships and/or marry fellow servicewomen on the field or in administrative roles. Thousands.

This girl has not done anything wrong if media reports are accurate and off-duty from her training.

If the situation was reversed and a female ringleader slept with a fellow male cadet, videotaped the love?making and later showed it to her fellow female cadets, I would feel exactly the same and believe many fellow Australians would hold the same view.

This girl, and God bless her courage)has obviously been 'the one' chosen this powerful 2011 year, through her life journey, to non-intentionally (and I agree with you there SM) open up the can of worms exposing the truth and facts within certain parts of Defence that have required addressing for many years.

Administration at the top and at all senior levels who are policy making, need to update current legislation to include the elimination of ego type behaviour, cover-ups, adhere to public service codes, ethics and values that are written; it works both ways.

Great article Peter. Keep up the good work of defending whistleblowers wherever they are.

Your last post pretty much sums up my response to some of the above posts.

It is in the public interest to know and understand the state of the Defence Forces. In spite of all the rhetoric about noble causes, honour and character, there is not much of that to be seen within the ADF in the response to this girl's revelations.

Yes, I liked the article too. We need to protect whistleblowers like this poor cadet, not vilify her.

I wonder would we have so much carry on if it was a group of female cadets who had videotaped, and broadcasted, one of their female cadet friends having sex with a male cadet?
I would imagine it would be even worse!

Many misogynistic older men in the armed forces obviously still do not like having women in their ranks.
Maybe they saw this poor girl as a way to project all female armed forces staff as sluts?

They seemed to want to blame her for being an unwilling (unknowing) participant in a pornographic video.
They did not seem to have a problem with the man who wanted to star in a porn film with an unsuspecting woman, nor the sleazy men ('boys will be boys') who videotaped the sex and sent it on to be viewed by some other sick perverts!

They should all be charged with sexual assault as far as I am concerned

With Rhian and Ammonite, it's not the sex, it's the nastiness reflected in the texting prank.
Could you imagine having to rely on a sod like that in a combat situation.
You're in a trench and he's standing behind you, holding a bright neon sign with a downward pointing flashing green arrow to identify you for the enemy?!
I hate gutlessness, but suppose the age of the dingbats must be taken into account.
But I don't like the idea of defence as a home for morons and sociopaths, rather than rational human beings capable of a sense of proportion and reality, hence able to a good job soldiering. Watching teev the other night, unimpressed by footage of US troops in Iraq herding civilians into a closed space to cut them down for the fun of it from choppers, where's the "character" in that?

Peter Bowden is having great difficulty in reading.

My point was not that a serious offence had not taken place, but that running to the media was not an act of whistle blowing, as the incident was already known to the authorities and was in the beginning of an investigation.

Secondly that in her 3 weeks as a cadet she had committed 3 offences, 2 of which were unrelated to the incident, for which the minister of defence called for her not to be disciplined for.

While I agree with you that her transgressions don't make what was done to her correct (and I said so) by the same logic, what was done to her does not excuse her.

Peter before you go blasting away, make sure you have a target, and not figments of your imagination.

There is an aged old dictum which says: " the only females that enlist in the services today, are Bitches, butch's, dikes, whores and romantics looking for a husband to pay the Bills ".

How many delusional Parents in this age of Enlightenment, prosperity and opportunity can condone their siblings enlisting in the ADF, is beyond reasonable comprehension ? Especially, as the Skype Affair scuttles any credibility in the bonehead honcho's, who hold the lives of so many, in their " blokey ", testosterone charged, juvenile, misogynist, boozy-filled, homophobic, opaque Faulty-towers environment ? Indeed.

That poor Kate became the latest sex victim caught on camera, morphed into Oz's first Camilla-gate, in all it's squalid buffoonery.

America"s DADT ( don't ask, don't tell ) Act, hasn't imploded on us yet. Only because in our Services, transparency is verboten, and the fags, and dykes, are tolerated, provided they keep it discreet. So horrendously prevalent is it in the Marine Corps, Navy and even at West Point, the Joint Chief of Staff, are egregiously dismayed.

Defense Minister Smith undoubtedly stirred the possum with too much agro. It will be his undoing, as any time now, Gillard will shunt him off to another Planet-portfolio, where he can do NO harm. Another accident prone Peter Garrett.

Even as Women serve in the Military, in most developed Countries in the World, few are committed to battle fronts, exposed to the fury of RPG's, EID's etc trauma. In Vietnam, people like Little Patty, Lorraine Desmond, Denise Drysdale etc entertained and provided succor to oversexed, booze-ridden, sex starved aussie males.

In Bagram & Kandaha AFB, porno films are shown regularly, as morale boosters, and is widely replicated in all Defense establishments - it's part of Military folklore and ADF culture.

In Smith's view, women will in future serve in the Special Forces, on submarines, in boiler-rooms in 40 degrees heat, in grease, paint and excreta. They will carry out all the onerous jobs hitherto been absolved from ? They will have absolute freedom in all the mess's, and can look forward to attaining four star advancement in Rank.

Of course, pregnancy, physical fitness, tattooing, unplanned abortions, showering, and privacy will be up for grabs.

Trouble is, science & technology have outsmarted the Military - still engaged in class warfare, awarding tin-pot medals and accolades, self-promotion, and delusional third rate, borrowed equipment and armaments.

Cadet Officer Kate, should thank her lucky stars, she wasn't a spiked victim of GHB, and her fantasy video clip was not broadcast on My Face, Orkut or U Tube.

Wouldn't that be something !

Dalma,
steady on, you're bringing our brave young fighting men and women into disrepute. We're conditioned not to criticise the military, indeed to lionise its personnel without qualification. How else can we rationalise the evils rationalised during wars? During peacetime we only see them on ceremonial occasions and all respectable. I had two brothers in the navy, one on subs, and I can vouch for your account of the goings on, dalma. I well remember boats of over 500 hundred cases of VD among a ship's complement of 340 after a few stops around south east Asia--and my brother didn't contract it!
But sorry, this is sacrilege--mustn't criticise..

"I well remember 'boasts' of over 500 case.." that should have read.

“Illegal” seems to be just one aspect of disclosing practices of an organizations or person that labels someone a whistleblower.

So yes I think it was.

How she was treated after blowing the whistle appears to be classic treatment by persons or organizations being accused of illegal, immoral or illegitimate practices.

“I am sure that with thousands of employees the military has lots of dirty laundry, and it is dealt with in a fair and procedurally correct manner nearly all the time.”

What country are you in SM?

The brother who was on subs hated it (being 6'3 on subs is bad for the back) and got back on ships by complaining that life on subs was eroding his moral fibre. He told me himself that it was commonplace to find men masturbating in the mess over porno flicks. It went on on ships too of course, but at least you could get some fresh air on deck.
True story.

Mr Bowden this is some of what Mike Carlton has to say in his SMH article of 16.04.11:

"I have spent a week talking to my contacts in the ADF. Some facts might be useful.
Kate, the RAAF cadet, was no doe-eyed innocent. She had already been charged with being AWOL and drinking offences, and she knew sex between students was forbidden.
There is no longer a subculture of sexual bullying at the academy, nor a blokey conspiracy of silence. The gormless teenage oafs who tormented Kate had been there barely 10 weeks. Her ordeal was reported by a male cadet.
The academy commandant, Commodore Bruce Kafer, immediately called the Australian Federal Police. He did not order Kate to apologise to her fellow cadets for going public on the affair."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-truth-behind-sex-lies-and-skype-20110415-1dhpx.html#ixzz1JsYVlCns

Mr Bowden, if Mr Carlton is correct, I would say you are talking through your chivalrous academic hat particularly in regard to the comments you have made about Commodore Bruce Kafer.

Jewelry,

With more than 70 000 personnel how on the basis of a handful of bad examples can you claim that most of the 1000s of disciplinary cases are not followed in a procedurally fair way?

SM:”With more than 70 000 personnel how on the basis of a handful of bad examples can you claim that most of the 1000s of disciplinary cases are not followed in a procedurally fair way?”

Unlike other examples of whistle blowing on government departments etc the military is in a unique position to deal quietly with its people or send them off to some front line? Not the women though eh.

I also don't know what contracts they sign and like other departments what non-disclosure stuff there is after compensation or if compensation is paid or what kind of courts/inquiries this sort of thing can go through. Anyone know?

A thought… They are cult-like. I understand they have to be to a certain extent to do their job but it would mean speaking out against superiors would be extremely uncommon. They go in young and are sucked into a certain culture and if there is 70k of them then everyone you are likely to know has also been programmed a certain way.

Jewely, why should there be any compensation? What are you thinking of, Kate being compensated for when she shouldn't have been having sex? This is what Mike Carlton said about her in the article I referred to above:"Kate, the RAAF cadet, was no doe-eyed innocent. She had already been charged with being AWOL and drinking offences, and she knew sex between students was forbidden."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-truth-behind-sex-lies-and-skype-20110415-1dhpx.html#ixzz1K9mODgTy

Jewel,

As none of those involved had been with the ADF college for more than 10 weeks, it is a bit of a stretch to claim this as ADF culture. Having had the misfortune of being exposed once to schoolies week, I have seen far far worse.

As for non disclosure, while I am not familiar with the ADF policy, for the various companies I have worked, unauthorised press releases were a dismiss-able offence.

Hey Ros, I wasn’t really thinking about Kate. And eeww schoolies. Doesn’t matter when dealing with any offense what offenses the victim might also be guilty of does it?

I don’t know much about the military either but in general if you get ignored or feeling the punishments for complaining within a company/department and your politicians wont listen isn’t the media the last place that is left to go here?

A comment for Roscorp and his posting of 18 April. First thank you for the Mr Bowden…but Peter will do. You quote Mike Carlton in defense of the academy commandant, Commodore Bruce Kafer. Mike Carlton is a columnist for whom most of us have a great admiration. But this time he is wrong, simply wrong. Carlton’s statement "Kate, the RAAF cadet, was no doe-eyed innocent. She had already been charged with being AWOL and drinking offences, and she knew sex between students was forbidden" Is totally irrelevant. The issue is Kafer’s treatment of her, in that she blew the whistle on a wrongdoing and she was ignored. And asked to apologise. Otherwise why did she go to the media? If Kafer had acted positively she would have had no need to blow the whistle.

Kate’s own wrongs were immaterial. She could have been Lucretia Borgia, three times over, but that would still not justify any retribution. Carlton knows this, so why did he tell us that Kate was charged with being AWOL etc.”? Was it another “lurid exaggeration” by yet another commentator? Carlton’s additional statement that Kafer “did not order Kate to apologise to her fellow cadets for going public on the affair.” may be true, but according to the reporter to whom she blew the whistle, Kafer did suggest that she apologise. Any young cadet, male or female, would be throwing away their careers to ignore a “suggestion” from their commanding officer. Carlton’s statement therefore that “The hounding of Kafer has been cruelly unfair” is somewhat over-the-top. Any person who is training our future military leaders should be aware of the lay of the land, should think through and search out the traps into which he may expose himself, and act accordingly. Kafer did not.

Peter Bowden