The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Mission impossible: spying for liars > Comments

Mission impossible: spying for liars : Comments

By Warren Reed, published 22/3/2006

Patriotism suffers when political survival outbids the national interest.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
Warren,

A man of your experience should know that for many years ASIO was a backyard operation by comparison and now they are beginning to beef up and get some numbers and professionalism now.

Yes there will be traitors, there will be traitors in every organisation. You need the contacts, the exposure and the guts to do it, even if you are seranaded by other organisations to share information.

We are not up the creek by any means, and i think you are a little overcritical of Uncle Johnny. His commitment is to Australia first in intelligence, and his own agenda second. This bloke may tell lies but all leaders do, he tells lies often for the national interest or through it being forced. Deep down he is not a dictator or criminal, we all know that. Every leader tells lies, in fact, every person tells lies, we cant expect otherwise. You should know this better than anyone.

The current Government has a commitment to expanding and improving our inteligence, i suggest not to help feather his own nest. We punch above our weight now, and will further in the next 5 years with intelligence, and Howard knows the importance for Australia, not himself in doing this.

Warren dont be bitter, organisations change and are becoming more dynamic each day, your expereinces may by completely different if you entered in 2006.
Posted by Realist, Wednesday, 22 March 2006 10:20:20 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are many angles to this issue.

1st is the competence of our Government. Hardly anybody in the world believed the US and UK supposed intelligence that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. But Howard says he knew it was true. Why? Either he was incompetent in believing such dubious intelligence, or he lied - he didn't really believe it but the US's agenda was more important than Australia's.

2nd is the reaction of the Australian people. Most now agree that Howard was dishonest on this and several other issues. But most don't care. Australians will go along with a lie as long as the lie is consistent with what they WANT to believe. Contrast Australian attitudes to the much greater questioning of Blair and Bush in the US and UK.

3rd is the long term consequences of the decisions. The invasion of Iraq has been a debacle. Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the invasion. Now, aided by events such as Abu Graib, and the deaths of civilians, Al Qaeda can use it as its best recruitment advertisement. There were many in the intelligence community who predicted this - why did Howard choose to ignore them, and instead believe an obviously incompetent US leadership?

How can this possibly be viewed as putting Australia's interests ahead of his own partisan and / or ideological interests?
Posted by AMSADL, Wednesday, 22 March 2006 10:39:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder whether Australians really are more interested in their whitegoods than in security and intelligence, or whether we've lowered our expectations of anything to do with govt to the point where it's too painful to care.

Either way it must be difficult to deal with the risks of intelligence gathering knowing that the country you're serving couldn't give a toss. If the inevitable consequence is a breakdown of the system we have only ourselves to blame.

I can't blame Warren for his feelings
Posted by chainsmoker, Wednesday, 22 March 2006 10:49:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Realist

I agree that the major boost in funding for all Australia's intelligence agencies is timely and a positive thing.

While it would appear that Howard has long associated himself with security and intelligence matters for political gain, events overseas and domestically have vindicated the attention he paid – just luck (maybe)..

The ONA was used to pad Howard's speeches on Iraq in 2002-2003, however, ONA's alleged "errors" have provided a reason for much higher funding and staffing to cover real threats.

Warren Reed's article is a fragmentary critique covering several aspects of spying and it is captured by his Egypt experience (see http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-asio-chief-blew-cairo-spys-cover/2005/07/16/1121455937876.html). The appointment of O'Sullivan to head ASIO in July 2005 has boosted Warren's bitterness.

He forgets that a “good spy” has a long streak of cynicism and some opportunism to be successful. He needs to be professionally cynical about the organisations, people or countries he’s "watching" and this instinct should apply to his own agency (and country).

Successful spies feather their nests well. New graduates are well paid (particularly if they’re “disadvantaged” with Arts degrees) and the opportunities for travel and post career consultancies are increasing (in this al Qaeda infatuated world).

The appointment of outsiders to head int agencies is not inherently bad and it prevents "lifers" (typified as "cold warriors" or "dilettantes" in the past) from waging reigns of terror to settle old scores once they get to the top.

If a Director-General of ASIO has personal political clout - all the better.

Regarding Warren’s hypothetical about India – if you want to read about the latest real life controversy concerning the CIA vs Indian intelligence see the latest post on my site below.

Planta
aka Spooky Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/
Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 22 March 2006 3:27:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would have to agree with chainsmoker on this one...the writer of this piece sums the situation up well...
Posted by Meg1, Thursday, 23 March 2006 1:44:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think Warren is essentially right in his convictions.

AMSADL states:

"2nd is the reaction of the Australian people. Most now agree that Howard was dishonest on this and several other issues. But most don't care. Australians will go along with a lie as long as the lie is consistent with what they WANT to believe. Contrast Australian attitudes to the much greater questioning of Blair and Bush in the US and UK."

Agreed in part. I thint Australians do care but what do we do? We can sit on Internet Boards like this one and whinge. Can't march on Parliament House, can't protest. Can't afford a TV program like "Bob Santamaria's "Point of View". All we can do is wait untill the next election...
Posted by Narcissist, Friday, 24 March 2006 2:01:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy