The FBI is watching YouTube

The FBI is watching you YouTube according to a 14 January 2009 threat assessment document posted on Wikileaks.
Apparently the bureau is searching for Al Qaeda videos.

For heavens sake don't tell Senator Conroy! ;-)

When is national security public information not public information?

When is public information not public information?
Why, when it's posted on the Attorney-General's website of course.
This site would make Sir Humphrey Appleby proud.
After declaring the National Security Public Information Guideline as being "not publicly available" it goes on to provide a helpful link to a pdf of this document.

"The Branch also has responsibility for reviewing and updating the National Counter-Terrorism Plan (www.nationalsecurity.gov.au), National Counter-Terrorism Handbook and oversees (with Public Affairs) the National Security Public Information Guidelines. The National Counter-Terrorism Handbook and National Security Public Information Guideline are not publicly available documents." (my bolding)

What is interesting in all this is just how determined the Prime Minister is to keep national security in his own bailiwick - four of the five committees dealing with national security and terrorism are chaired either by Kevin Rudd, the Secretary of the Dept. of Prime Minister and Cabinet or a senior official from that department.
It appears that our Kev just can't bear the thought of some other pollie taking credit for any work done on these matters.

National Security Public Information Guideline here.
National Counter-Terrorism Plan (with October 2008 amendments) here.

Just for fun here's a few updates on Australia's own terrorist watch list:
DFAT consolidated list of 540 individuals and terrorist groups here. Interestingly it notes that Osama Bin Laden is now an Afghan citizen and (although many convicted individuals are listed) the much maligned David Hicks is nowhere to be found.
ANS terrorist group list here.

Our own Mr. Potato opens his mouth too wide and doesn't like the response

Australian Attorney-General Robert McClelland was reported in The Australian last Tuesday (before the jury had completed its consideration of two other defendants in what has been billed as Australia's biggest terrorism trial):-

"ATTORNEY-GENERAL Robert McClelland has hailed the conviction of Muslim cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika and five of his followers on terror charges as the most successful terrorist prosecution in Australian history.

But Mr McClelland warned that more needed to be done to prevent the radicalisation of Muslim communities. He said the prosecutions provided a model for how law enforcement and security agencies should work together.

"It is my view that the successful prosecution in the Pendennis trials is the most successful terrorist prosecution that this country has seen," Mr McClelland said yesterday.

He praised the work of the Australian Federal Police, ASIO and Victoria Police, saying the trial had been "lengthy and complicated".

Mr McClelland said more than 50 witnesses and more than 3000 documents had been tendered during the trial.

But he warned that, despite the prosecutions, Australia still faced terror attacks from overseas organisations and home-grown cells.

He said it would be naive to discount the risk of a terrorist attack in Australia. "The area where we think there needs to be more work is in the area of counter-radicalisation," Mr McClelland said.

"The Government is actually undertaking a considerable amount of work in that area to understand the factors that have led to young Australians being radicalised."

Now Sebago Rob is faced with an irate Justice Bernard Bongiorno who didn't appreciate his comments and: "told the court it would have been better for the justice system had his comments never been made."

Bongiorno showed admirable restraint in his response.
Any juror who read Tuesday's newspaper might just have been swayed into thinking that handing out two more convictions would be saving teh Aussie way of life as we know it.

September 11 2008

Cartoon from Salon.com

For a mix of archival footage and whacky theories (from those wonderful folks who gave us rendition and torture to replace the Geneva Convention) click September 11 News

Guantanamo Bay 2008

The U.S. detention camps at Guantanamo Bay have been operating now since 2002.

There are still over 250 people being held in these camps without formal arrest or charge.

The Rudd Government may ignore the moral and human rights implications of supporting the government which operates these camps and our courts may remain silent because the issue has not been before them.

However, the British High Court of Justice (Queens Bench Division) spoke out in a limited fashion in an open judgment on 21 August 2008, about certain circumstances making an arguable case that rendition, unlawful detention, cruel and degrading treatment had occurred to a former British resident currently held at Guantanamo.
Along with attempts to deny the ability to conduct a fully informed defence.

Judgment summary here.

Full judgment here.

The Nature Notes cartoon came from The Times online

Grab your flack jacket - Australia's under attack!

When out surfing the Net last night I came across the Global Terrorism Database.
Opening the tab GD2 I received something of a shock. It seems that Australia has had 63 terrorist attacks up to 1997, many involving fatalities.

Does anyone remember an attack on 19 August 1996 which targeted government and saw 60 people injured?
Or four days earlier the indigenous community of Halls Creek conducting a terrorist attack on multiple fronts?
A terrorist assault on business on 28 February 1997 which saw 19 hurt?

Here are the website's details:
Copyright © 2007 National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism START: A Center of Excellence of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security

University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA 301.405.6600

mailto:infostart@start.umd.edu?subject=GTD

http://www.start.umd.edu/

Last Updated: May 14, 2007

The methodology is here.

Call 000 if your laughter threatens to become terminal.

Updated GD2 webpage for Australia showing 9 more terrorist attacks between 1998 and 2003.

The member for the Planet of the Apes interjects....

I opened the Clarence Valley Review the other day to find one of those dob-in-a-terrorist-or-the-neighbour-you-don't-like adverts taking up a good half of page 17 in the last issue.
This money wasting exercise featured a tag cloud in the shape of Australia which highlighted such gems as I know this person who has downloaded a lot of documents from suspicious websites and I can't shake the feeling something's wrong.
Well, I thought, what a yawn - the internet filters installed on Federal Parliament PCs seem to feel that half the political blogs written by Australians are suspicious and the President of the Senate and the Black Rod appear to think that all internet activity by elected senators is inherently dangerous.
But then I read the adverts' main blurb; So if you see or hear something that just doesn't feel right, please call the National Security Hotline and keep the information flowing.
Now there's a thought! It's hard not to see and hear things that aren't quite right in Canberra these days, so perhaps I should let my fingers do the walking and inform on...........
Luke Hartsuyker, Nationals MP for Cowper, for this inane remark demonstrating a waste of space; The member for the Planet of the Apes interjects.[House of Reps 29 May 2008]
Tony Abbott, Liberal MP for Warringah, for these bon mots; Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Shortland is wasting our time raving on about people going surfing. If she has a question to ask the minister, she should ask it. and Mr Deputy Speaker, I am not making any personal aspersions against the member for Maribyrnong. [House of Reps 5 June] and Mr Speaker, I said that she was a liar and I withdraw that. [26 March 2007]
Wilson Tuckey, Liberal MP for O'Connor, for insulting peanuts; Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I want to refer you to standing orders 88, 89, 90 and 91 relating to disorderly conduct. If you want disorderly conduct in this place, let that peanut carry on with matters that have nothing to do with the question. [House of Reps 18 June]
Malcolm Turnbull, Liberal MP for Wentworth, for the crime of over-explanation; Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. [House of Reps 19 June] and Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation [19 June] and again Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation [17 March] and yet again Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. [12 March]
Julie Bishop, Liberal MP for Curtin, for copying Malcolm Turnbull's homework: Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation [House of Reps 19 June] and Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. [18 June]
Brendan Nelson, Liberal MP for Bradfield, for his daffy ways and disrespectfully using the term "silly idiot"; Mr Speaker, just to assist you: if I have said anything at all which is in any way offensive to the Deputy Prime Minister, I withdraw. [House of Reps 18 June]

* A big thankyou to the four blokes and a sheila at OpenAustralia who have just made hunting political snipe that much easier! And quite seriously, have made Hansard searches a little less daunting when looking for your local member's contribution to debate.

US08: Will the real Barack Obama please stand up?

Yesterday Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was quoted on his approach to the misnamed US War on Terror and Osama Bin Laden.

"What would be important would be for us to do it in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he's engaged in and not to make him into a martyr, and to assure that the United States government is abiding by basic conventions that would strengthen our hand in the broader battle against terrorism," Obama said.
Obama was questioned about bin Laden after he met with a new team of national security advisers. The meeting came after rival John McCain's campaign said Obama had a pre-9/11 mind-set for promoting criminal trials for terrorists.
"I refuse to be lectured on national security by people who are responsible for the most disastrous set of foreign policy decisions in the recent history of the United States," Obama said in opening remarks that in part referred to the Iraq war. He was standing before 17 American flags and a sign that said "Judgment to Lead." He was surrounded by national security experts who had formerly served in Congress and the Clinton administration and will be advising his campaign — an effort to bring foreign policy experience to a candidate who has served just three years in Congress. [my emphasis]

This aforementioned quote is supposedly Obama now.
The excerpt below was Obama quoted in the New York Post less than a year ago.

Presidential candidate Barack Obama warned yesterday that he would use American forces to invade U.S. ally Pakistan if its leaders weren't doing enough to catch terrorists on their soil.
"Let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans," Obama said.
"They are plotting to strike again . . . If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President [Pervez] Musharraf won't act, we will."
The stunning call to arms against a U.S. friend comes less than two weeks after Obama publicly agreed to meet -- without any preconditions - with the dictators of dangerous rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea.
Fleshed out in yesterday's speech, Obama's foreign policy is shaping up to be a "talk to your enemies, invade your friends" approach to American relations abroad.
Analysts say U.S. military action could risk destabilizing Pakistan, breeding more militancy and undermining Musharraf. [my emphasis]

When the real Barack Obama finally reveals himself will he actually represent any difference from George Bush and John McCain, in matters of foreign policy and international affairs?

Is it a nerd? Is it a pain? No, it's SuperRudd!

SuperRudd has unleashed his rather mindless razor gang on everything that moves, except those silly dob-in-a-terrorist TV ads which seem to be running each day this week and obviously costing unnecessary dollars because Australia's domestic terrorism threat level is still where it was in 2002 - at an arbitrary "medium" level.
The Nerd of Steel is also understood to have enlisted the help of the Attorney-General to see how much more money can be wasted on this redundant campaign to promote the National Security Hotline.
If ASIO's 2006-07 Year in Review figures are to be believed, this national hotline is so popular that half of the country must have its freecall number tattooed on their foreheads or still have Howard's fridge magnet in plain view.
Time to get back in the phone box, Kev. You're expecting an irate call concerning the cost of government advertising in a year where pensioners and working families are tightening their belts.

An ongoing difficulty for a less than rational world

Jonathon Mahler in Week in Review examines "Why This Court Keeps Rebuking This President".

“The most important thing we do is not doing,” Justice Louis D. Brandeis once said of the Supreme Court’s abiding humility, its overwhelming preference to allow the people, through their elected representatives, to govern themselves.---
And never is the court more reluctant to act than when faced with a challenge to the president during wartime.---
So it is extraordinary that during the Bush administration’s seven years, nearly all of them a time of war that began on Sept. 11, 2001, the court has been prompted to push back four times. Last week’s decision in Boumediene v. Bush, in which the court ruled that prisoners at Guantánamo Bay have a right to challenge their detentions in the federal courts, marks only the most recent rebuke."

This presents a somewhat reassuring view of America and seems to support the pious hope of justice prevailing.
However, for the international community which has watched George Dubbya circumvent the US Courts time and time again, the difference in response from both presidential candidates leaves an uncomfortable notion that the fate of human rights in America is still very much up in the air.

"Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama have both long advocated closing the Guantánamo detention center but have disagreed on the rights of prisoners there.
Mr. McCain said here Thursday morning that he had not had time to read the decision but that “it obviously concerns me,” adding, “These are unlawful combatants; they’re not American citizens.”
Mr. McCain said he thought “we should pay attention” to the dissent by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., which argued that the steps established by the administration and Congress in creating review tribunals run by the military were more than sufficiently generous as a way for detainees to challenge their status.
Still, the senator said, “it is a decision the Supreme Court has made, and now we need to move forward.”
Mr. Obama issued a statement calling the decision “a rejection of the Bush administration’s attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantánamo” that he said was “yet another failed policy supported by John McCain.”
“This is an important step,” he said of the ruling, “toward re-establishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus. Our courts have employed habeas corpus with rigor and fairness for more than two centuries, and we must continue to do so as we defend the freedom that violent extremists seek to destroy.”

British academic freedom definitely in WTF territory, as allegedly 'illegal' al Qaeda documents found absolutely everywhere

On Saturday 24 May The Guardian reported that a UK uni student was held for six days, then released without charge, because he had downloaded information from a US Government site concerning the training practices of al Qaeda.

The post-graduate student was held under the Terrorism Act 2006 and could have been held for up to 28 days.
He was reported to authorities by a staff member at Nottingham University.
The student, his supervisors and tutor say that he was researching for legitimate study purposes in order to complete his masters degree and appears to have downloaded the edited version.

From the newspaper's description this downloaded information is very similar to information which has been freely available for years from a number of sites, including the US Dept.of Justice.

In fact a 28 page excerpt from the so-called al Qaeda training manual were released in 2001 for PR purposes and can still be found on the world wide web here.

In 2003 the blog Smoking Gun published around 160 gif images of the manual pages here.

The Federation of American Scientists has a 140 page version complete with cover gif here.

As this manual is almost always found on the Internet in alleged translation, the blogosphere is still unsure of its provenance and it may be that it is part of a government propaganda exercise.

An allegedly third edition of this document around 5,000 pages long is supposedly found at Yahoo Geocities here.

This is what Global Security says about the document.

The legend that ricin can be made from a recipe on the Internet using only household chemicals will probably never die. A big reason for this is its regular vetting by authority figures and government agencies.
The best example of this can be seen in how the "al Qaeda training manual" is regarded. Discovered in a search of an al Qaeda member's home in England and entered into the public record in the January 2001 trial of the embassy bombings in Africa, the manual includes a page devoted to explaining how to purify ricin from castor beans. With minor changes, it is the discredited formula that was common in "anarchy files" uploaded to private bulletin boards and the web over the past decade. In other words, it's the same useless lye and acetone procedure that has long been in residence on the Temple of the Screaming Electron web site. (See National Security Notes 02/20/2004.)
The al Qaeda training manual was translated in its entirety and made into an Adobe Acrobat file prior to September 11. With some searching copies can still be found on the Internet.
However, on September 11, America was seized by fear. The manual's section on poisoning and ricin concoction was expurgated by government authorities and subsequently republished on the Department of Justice's web site. The surgical removal of this section granted it gravity, effectively validating what was actually a procedure of no worth.
The validation was echoed in other places, notably the popular Smoking Gun web site, which displayed a fragment of the item.
"The manual ... instructs [al Qaeda] members on how to produce poisons from readily available materials," read an article in the National Journal on December 3, 2001. "For example, dimethyl sulfoxide, which is used as a topical analgesic by veterinarians, can be mixed with herbal poisons such as ricin, which is obtained from castor beans."
Even simple common sense broke down when considering the al Qaeda training manual and its supposed recipe for ricin. The expurgated portion also contains a passage which suggests that the consumption of three cigarettes could be used in assassinations. While this might be inspirational to those searching for a reason to give up smoking, normally it would raise doubts in even the most disinterested reader on the knowledgeability of the author of the section of the manual in question.
But the war on terror is not a normal time and often clear thinking and sophisticated analysis goes right out the window when evaluating potentials for mayhem.

Literally thousands of people world-wide have viewed one or all of these 'training' documents.
In fact this particular 10 minute search appears to indicate that a credit card will get me a complete copy of the manual.

Given that all this information is out there and freely available in hyperspace, why was this student detained under British anti-terrorism laws and why is the person who printed out the document for him to be deported?
One has to suspect that ethnicity and religion played a big part in the minds of Nottingham police.

In response to the wrongful detentions, academics from the University of Nottingham will be doing a public reading of the research material that led to arrests under the Terrorism Act on campus, outside the Hallward library, University Park Campus, at 2:00pm, on May 28. The reading will be followed by a silent protest where students and academics will symbolically gag themselves to object to the attack on academic freedom.

This establishment stupidity is a salutary lesson for us all. Reading material on the Internet, downloading and emailing it, is dangerous for your health and safety in our topsy-turvey world.
The Australian Federal Police also tend to lose their commonsense whenever the word 'terrorist' is mentioned.
I wouldn't be going anywhere near His Holiness when he visits in case either Sydney or Commonwealth police decide to look at me sideways.
After all I clicked the links to that manual - ooh aaah.

The Beeston Quakers on the subject of arbitrary arrest and censorship here.

Only in America......

Well there it is - an advert with the words Swiss, gold and terror.
I guess that it would only be in America that the history of gold, particularly Swiss gold, could be completely forgotten by advertising agencies.
For heaven's sake - towards the end of the Nazi era Swiss banks were allegedly accounting dental-grade gold from Germany, according to Adam LeBor's Hitler's Secret Bankers.
This internet image is not the smartest way to puff up an 'investment' firm which apparently specialises in US gold and silver coins.
Image came from www.worldnetdaily.com with this blurb.

Fruit from a poisoned tree may be the death of the Rudd Government

With the latest news on America's treatment of Guantanamo detainees, prisoner abuse and politcal interference, it is time that the Rudd Government addressed the fact that much of the advice it receives on both domestic and international anti-terrorism measures is fruit from a poisoned tree.

The Prime Minister's failure to either rise above the politics of fear or rid the public service of the principal supporters of such fear will result in retention of legislation which breaches international law and erases the common law rights of Australian citizens. 

Federal Labor would do well to remember that, like a person who divorced their spouse, Australian voters having got rid of one government may fairly quickly rid themselves of another when next at the polling booth.

Mr. Rudd, we've broken the political marriage taboo - lift your game or pack your bag.

No-one's willing to tolerate an ersatz Howard Government, except diehard Liberal Party followers and those in the anti-terrorism 'industry'.

 

News.com.au yesterday.

 

AUSTRALIAN man David Hicks should never have been charged with terror offences, according to Guantanamo Bay's former chief prosecutor.

Colonel Moe Davis, who oversaw the prosecution of Hicks, quit the war court last year.

He testified overnight that evidence for the war crimes tribunals was obtained through prisoner abuse, and political appointees and higher-ranking officers pushed prosecutors to file charges before trial rules were even written.

Col Davis was giving evidence at a pre-trial hearing for Osama bin Laden's driver, Yemeni prisoner Salim Hamdan, in a courtroom at the remote Guantanamo naval base in Cuba.

Since the US began sending foreign captives to Guantanamo in 2002, only one case has been resolved - that of Hicks.

 

Tony Kevin writing in New Matilda has it right.

 

But are sections of the Australian foreign policy and national security bureaucracies still living, by force of habit, in a world mainly defined by fear? How much of the worldview so well analysed in Lawrence's lectures still lingers in Canberra? And do Labor Ministers have any idea how to re-jig their departmental executives' way of thinking towards the new direction Rudd is taking as Prime Minister?

It's a little like turning the Titanic around. If there is not a great deal of deliberate hard steering from the bridge, the ship will stay comfortably on its old course.

Take, for example, a recent speech by the Minister for Immigration, Senator Chris Evans. In an otherwise humanitarian speech, sensitive to the human rights of persons caught up in migration and refugee determination issues, he said this on border security:

"The Government is committed to strong border security, tough anti-people smuggling measures and the orderly processing of migration to our country... This Government will continue to look at ways to prevent, deter and enforce compliance to preserve the integrity of Australia's migration program, while treating individuals humanely."

Did Evans really understand what he was saying, or did he just uncritically accept a departmental draft? Does he understand that under Howard, terms like "strong border security" and "tough anti-people-smuggling measures" were policy cover under which the AFP and Immigration mounted questionable covert people smuggling disruption operations in Indonesia? Under which Defence intercepted boats and was in no hurry to rescue people at risk of drowning on crippled, sinking vessels?

Are these the nongs who want to set off rabbit hunts at the office?

Yesterday I woke to find that the Rudd Government had lost its tiny mind and finally lurched so far right that it was convincingly lost in a strange black ops forest.

Yep, it had called up the terrorist bogey man to insist that it was fit and proper to let an employer snoop unannounced into every email passing through an office computer or a company laptop being used by a worker while out in the big bad world.

 

So who or what has been whispering in the shell-like ears of our fearless Cabinet members?

After US Homeland Security and FBI, the first Aussie culprit appears to be The Research Network for a Secure Australia, a "multi-disciplinary collaboration established to strengthen Australia's research capacity for protecting critical infrastructure from natural or human caused disasters including terrorist acts" and provide security "commercialisation opportunities", funded by the Australian Government (at least until next year) and administered by Melbourne University.

 

Looking at the Network's management and advisory line up, I am flabbergasted that all these academics and professionals could apparently come up with to 'protect' Australia from cyber threats was a plan to spy on ordinary people.

 

The management committee contacts are:

A/Prof. Priyan Mendis
Reader, Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering
The University of Melbourne,
Prof. Ed Dawson

Director- Information Security Institute
Queensland University of Technology
Prof. Joseph Lai
Associate Dean (Research)
UNSW @ ADFA
Australian Defence Force Academy

 

Its advisory committee is made up of the following:

Chair:
Mr. Mike Rothery (Director, Critical Infrastructure Branch, Attorney-General's Dept.).

Members:
Dr. Richard Davis (Head, NSST Unit);
Dr. Lynn Booth (DSTO);
Mr. Bruce Howard (Engineers Australia, Security Commissioner);
Prof. Ed Dawson (QUT);
Prof. Peter Anderson (PICT, Macquarie University);
Mr. Jason Brown (General Manager, Thales);
Craig Sharkie (CSL Ltd);
Tony Sleigh (NSW Lands);
Mr. Warwick Watkins (Director-General NSW Lands);
A/Prof Priyan Mendis (Convenor of RNSA);
Prof. Joseph Lai (ADFA);
Ms. Jennie Clothier (DSTO);
Mr. Terry Vincent (Australian Bomb Data Centre).

Advisory Board Secretary:
Mr. Athol Yates (Australian Homeland Security Research Centre)

 

The Australian Homeland Security Research Centre  which gives the advisory board its secretary also has an expertise roll call that makes for interesting reading. An employment background  combination of business, military, embassy and spooks all seemingly looking to sell us something to fight that bogeyman.

 

Of course the bogeyman is just as likely to be an infrastructure company like Telstra who very recently repaired an internet exchange box storm-damage fault with an equally faulty computer card and launched its own 2-day denial of service cyber attack on Yamba customers by bringing down its broadband service.

And in the process actually realising the observation that being struck by lightening is more probable than a terrorist attack!

U.S. Big Brother is watching Australia but doesn't like what it sees

The very peaceful and law-abiding Port Phillip Bay anti-channel dredging protest group Blue Wedges Coalition has turned up on the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence's international threat list, according to Richard Baker of The Age.

 

"Blue Wedges is included in an Office of Naval Intelligence's worldwide threat to shipping document, which details active violence against shipping, credible threats to vessels, or situations that have the potential to develop into direct threats.------

Blue Wedges joins Greenpeace as the only groups included in the threat list under the section headed: Environmental and Economic Non-State Activist Groups.

"Protesters plan to surround the dredger (Queen of the Netherlands) as it arrives in Port Phillip Bay, Australia, on 02 Aug (sic) to begin a controversial trial dredging project for the Port of Melbourne Corporation," the Office of Naval Intelligence warned.

"The Greenpeace ship (Rainbow Warrior) is due in port the same week but Greenpeace denies they are planning to block dredging operations. The Blue Wedges Coalition, which is leading the opposition, is consulting lawyers over possible action in the Supreme Court to block the trial dredging."

The Age article last Monday week:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/investigations/blue-wedges-tagged-with-sea-pirates/2008/01/27/1201368944836.html

 

It would seem that the Bush Administration finds democracy Australian-style just a little too heady for its neo-con taste.

 

Greenpeace also appears to be a sensitive topic generally with U.S. Intelligence.

When North Coast Voices began to mention Greenpeace and the protest against Japanese whaling in Antarctic waters, it received a rather interesting site visit from the Naval Ocean Systems Center (Joint Intelligence Center Pacific/RDON) out of Hawaii at ISP 198.201.23.#, confirmed by WHO.IS as a U.S. Dept of Defense ISP address.

Aloha, boys and girls.

 

Crikey gives Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty a serve

Greg Barns writing in www.crikey.com.au yesterday gives Mick Keelty a well-deserved serve.

"Are there two Mick Keeltys? Last night a man calling himself Mick Keelty and claiming to be the Australian Federal Police Commissioner told a Sydney audience that he wants a black-out of all media coverage of terrorism investigations and cases. This Mr Keelty claims that police records of interviews are being leaked to the media to help the person under investigation get public sympathy. And this Mr Keelty thinks there should be a secret society of editors that he and his fellow security agency heads can brief, on an off-the-record basis, so that matters are set straight.

 

Now, let's turn to the other person who calls himself Mick Keelty and who also claims to be the nation's top cop. This is the Mick Keelty who revels in media publicity about terrorism cases, whose organisation leaks to the media and who runs a police force which wrongly accused a Gold Coast Indian doctor of terrorism offences (besmirched his name in the media in the meantime).

 

Could the real Mick Keelty please stand up? Is it the man calling for media black-outs and secret briefings, or is it the man who uses the media relentlessly to chase his quarry? The evidence suggests it's the latter."

 

"Aunty ABC" took a more measured approach which canvasses similar views.

 

"After taking sustained criticism for the Australian Federal Police's handling of the Mohamed Haneef saga, AFP Commissioner Mick Keelty has gone on the front foot to defend his organisation's handling of terrorism cases.

In a speech to the Sydney Institute last night, Mr Keelty took a swipe at media coverage of such cases, saying it is often uninformed and gives an incorrect perception that the AFP is failing in its duties.

But lawyers and journalists involved in the Mohamed Haneef case say Mr Keelty is simply shooting the messenger in what they say is a crude attempt to regain credibility for the AFP.

When Mr Keelty addressed the Sydney Institute last night, he had a few things he wanted to get off his chest.

"For most people, their sole source of knowledge regarding the AFP's counter terrorism investigations is in the mass media," he said.

"As such, it would be perfectly understandable if they mistakenly thought or held the belief that the AFP has failed the community.'-------

The Australian newspaper's Hedley Thomas won Australian journalism's highest award, the Gold Walkley, for his coverage of the Mohamed Haneef affair. He describes Mr Keelty's reasoning in the speech as strange.

"On the one hand he was saying that defendants and suspects deserve a much better go in the court of public opinion, as he described it, and that the media should treat them more kindly," he said.

"But the facts are that in the Mohamed Haneef case and others, it's been the police, the security agencies and the politicians using police information, that have smeared the character of the suspects before they have even been charged."

Dr Haneef's barrister, Stephen Keim, is equally perplexed with Mr Keelty's views about media coverage of AFP operations."

ABC News report yesterday:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/30/2149867.htm

Server in the Sky? Oh (big) brother!

"THE FBI wants Australia to take part in an international database to be used to hunt down major criminals and terrorists.

A working group called the International Information Consortium has been formed by allies in the war against terror — the US, Australia, UK, Canada and New Zealand — to look into setting up the database.

The program, known as Server in the Sky, would involve the exchange of information about wanted criminals, including their biometric measurements (irises or palm prints) and fingerprints.---

Under the Server in the Sky program, the FBI wants to establish three categories of suspects — internationally recognised terrorists and felons; major felons and suspected terrorists; and those who are the subject of terrorist investigations or criminals with international links.

A pilot project for the program is expected to run later this year."

The Age article yesterday:
 http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/fbi-invites-australia-to-join-crime-database/2008/01/19/1200620280804.html

 

Given that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, US Central Intelligence Agency, ASIO and the Australian Federal Police appear to be as paranoid now as they were during the Viet Nam War, one wonders just who would end up in the Australian section of such a data base.

Federal Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus should be very wary of accepting any American guidelines if the Rudd Government decides to go with this dubious invitation.

Especially as the FBI appears to see its own information gathering as a way of allowing employers to spy on employees.

 

The British reaction to Server in the Sky.

"The plan will make groups anxious to safeguard personal privacy question how much access to UK databases is granted to foreign law enforcement agencies. There will also be concern over security, particularly after embarrassing data losses within the UK, and accuracy: in one case, an arrest for a terror offence by US investigators used what turned out to be misidentified fingerprint matches.----------Although each participating country would manage and secure its own data, the sharing of personal data between countries is becoming an increasingly controversial area of police practice. There is political concern at Westminster about the public transparency of such cooperation."

The Guardian last week:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/humanrights/story/0,,2241005,00.html

 

Media report on FBI aims and objectives.

"CLARKSBURG, W. Va. -- The FBI is embarking on a $1 billion effort to build the world's largest computer database of peoples' physical characteristics, a project that would give the government unprecedented abilities to identify individuals in the United States and abroad.

Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are already flowing into FBI systems in a climate-controlled, secure basement here. Next month, the FBI intends to award a 10-year contract that would significantly expand the amount and kinds of biometric information it receives. And in the coming years, law enforcement authorities around the world will be able to rely on iris patterns, face-shape data, scars and perhaps even the unique ways people walk and talk, to solve crimes and identify criminals and terrorists. The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law.-----------

The FBI's biometric database, which includes criminal history records, communicates with the Terrorist Screening Center's database of suspects and the National Crime Information Center database, which is the FBI's master criminal database of felons, fugitives and terrorism suspects."

The Washington Post December 2007 article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122102544_pf.html

Hell hath no fury like a federal police force scorned

Dr. Mohamed Haneef may have been cleared of terrorism charges and had the revocation of his work visa declared invalid by Australian courts, but he would be mad to return to Australia.

It will take more than a change in federal government to restore balance and perspective to the Australian Federal Police after a decade under far-right political masters.

It appears that the AFP is still itching to find something, anything, against this Muslim doctor.

 

"The Australian Federal Police says an investigation into former Gold Coast doctors Mohamed Haneef and Asif Ali is ongoing.

The comment comes after the Federal Government ruled out an appeal against a court decision to reinstate Dr Haneef's working visa."

ABC News yesterday:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/17/2140675.htm?section=australia

Who does Robert McClelland think he's fooling when it comes to David Hicks?

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland has refused to confirm or deny that he has signed the initial papers authorising the imposition of an interim control order on David Hicks.

He tells us all that the Attorney-General only performs "an administrative function" in relation to any control order.

News.com.au today:
 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22918115-29277,00.html

 

That's a heap of hot, steaming manure he is shovelling our way. Applications for interim control orders require the consent of the Attorney-General. In 104.3 of the C'wealth Anti-terrorism Act (No 2) 2005 as amended, there is a clear indication that the Attorney-General has choice in signing off on any interim application by the Australian Federal Police. This clause begins "If the Attorney-General consents". This phrase is repeated throughout the Act in relation to control orders.

See:

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/Act1.nsf/0/4ED7D914ED94BAC9CA2572960010BEF8/$file/1442005.pdf

 

To put it crudely - the new Attorney-General appears to be running scared and whipped when it comes to a very right-wing Australian Federal Police.

 

David Hicks broke no Australian law existing at the time of his original capture and detention. His sentence by a US military tribunal showed that this court clearly saw him as being a minimal threat.

 

Enough is enough Mr. McClelland. Australia deserves better than to have Federal Labor continue to impose John Howard's distorted view of our society and values.