We probably won't know the real reasons for some time if ever, but it's possible the raid was done for effect elsewhere. So that might have been the obvious tactic, a raid, very public and all that - but the greater strategy may have been to send a message to someone else, like an editor or someone suspected of something worse than this. Please don't just write off military and security people as idiots, they are not, and they may well be working way beyond your horizon.

mil-observer, your comment "As if the system's classified intelligence is so effective and competent anyway!", well it is competent, since this article is written in absence of knowledge of what the AFP was looking for. Also, the JSF may be the greatest air weapon ever, remember folks said very nasty things about the F-111 at its inception, and it has turned out to be a mighty weapon indeed. With the F/A-18, we din't sign up early and paid the price of not getting all the capability in the end, this time we're not making that mistake and investing earlier.

Easy who you call a traitor, in some countries, not as free as ours admitedly, writing such inflamatory stuff about decision makers may well be seen as "traitorous" - depends on your point of view I guess.

Silencing journalists and threatening them with home invasions and seizures is not acceptable under any but the most critical and narrow circumstances (eg. security codes etc...).

Would an adviser ever contradict government? I don't think so.

On this topic about the corrupt advice of former and current government advisers, it seems as though Peter Coates' last article was edited and changed (about Georgia).

In it he originally said (as a former adviser to government no less) that the Georgian invasion was "lawful". This word was removed from the article. I just checked it now.

So to get this straight a former government adviser called the Georgian invasion "lawful" (this former adviser is a representative of a western democracy too), which was essentially a military bombardment of a sleeping civilian population and the murder (iirc) of about 12 Russian military personnel ..... I wonder how many people remember the rubbish and lies spread by the media and politicians about the Russians on national television. Well this "lawful" comment was symptomatic of the deficiency and bias inherent in our political system and support structures. And the problem is endemic because it keeps happening.

Now if I am wrong P.Coates is free to contradict this but I have prior email evidence between me and Graham (and the deleted comment in which i quoted the passage) that indicates this was in the article.

The reason for the heavy handed raid on Philip's house was to deter future potential leakers.

It won't because I doubt they will find anything. Ministerial leaks good, other leaks bad.

So what that we found out Australia was spying on supposed allies and friends? Not earth shattering stuff, but embarrassing for the Government and Minister who I suspect knew of the raid before hand.

Does anyone else see a pattern here? Hicks, Habib, Haneef, the jailing of men in Melbourne for their thoughts (under draconian anti-terrorism laws that are so wide they can be used against anyone, and will I suspect be used against the Left soon enough), the raid on Philip's home etc

I spoke to Philip about inconsequential matters recently. Presumably my details are now with the AFP. What utter rubbish, but dangerous rubbish letting the Keelty's keystoners near anything.

Hi rpg

I agree - we don’t know the reasons for the leak to Mr Dorling. Yeah maybe the police search is for other hidden issues not related to Mr Dorling’s article.

Re “Please don't just write off military and security people as idiots, they are not, and they may well be working way beyond your horizon.” The military, security and intelligence are not innately insidious, its just that they are often used by politicians for low political reasons. The secrecy of these institutions makes them more useable.

Your trust in the JSF maybe well placed, but I doubt it. We can have a long debate about that. Checkout this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4837746.ece

--

Steel

I’m getting the impression that you think I’m a Believer in my government past. Even the Democrats – you’ve heard of the Public Interest Disclosures Bill 2007? (here’s the flavour of it http://www.democrats.org.au/speeches/index.htm?speech_id=2203) might not agree with your purist position on searches and leaks.

I think the government would agree that unintentionally I’ve caused them angst and heavy expense at times. They’ve sacked me (twice :) which is why I don’t work for them anymore. I left my posi of just one of maybe 50,000 government policy advisers 6 years ago.

Still I remember the words of one peak boss intimidating me on exit “We’re going to sack you for all the trouble you’ve caused…If you talk son you’ll never work again.”

But I bare few grudges.

We’ll I’ve kept quiet about Confidential, S, and TS stuff and I’m indeed not working (well not for the Government anyway).

Having recently been interviewed on ABC Radio Hobart and ABC Sydney about China, Mr Dorling and Japan's nuclear potential this restores my self-confidence, a bit.

--

Passy

Maybe you’re right. If you've actually spoken to Philip you may have a good handle on things.

Regards

Pete

Pete - the link to the article in times-online, is about funding issues and a shortfall in the UK Defence budget. Unless I missed it, it's not about the JSFs capability. For incidental intelligence on things military, I tend to got to sites like Jane's, http://www.janes.com/news/defence/systems/jdw/jdw080929_2_n.shtml My understanding is that the UK are playing hardball on JSF to ensure they get a full copy of the manual for "everything under the bonnet" so to speak. Sometimes the US restrict "good bits" under ITAR, even to the Brits. Some say this is just the Brits playing poker, of course we're not in for as much but are terribly interested in how their hand plays out.

I saw today, in a report from a Defence newsletter that Rand Corp denies the negative "JSF War Games reports" flying around publicly at the moment, expect to see some much louder denials in the next few days, if they go reported here that is.

I do agree that the inherent setup of agencies in the military does make them susceptable to ill use, dissappointing as that is. (I was totally repulsed by the Downer/Bolt incident relating to Wilkie, that was a low act. It was an emotional time for the previous government over Iraq, perhaps if they could do it again, they might do it differently, one hopes the players learned from it)