Classified Cabinet Docs Leak Down Under Via An Actual Cabinet Sale… Just As Aussies Try To Outlaw Leaking
from the what-a-world dept
Back in December, we reported on an effort underway in Australia to criminalize both whistleblowers and journalists who publish classified documents with up to 20 years in prison. 20 years, by the way, is also the amount of time that Cabinet documents are supposed to be kept classified in Australia. But just recently Australia’s ABC news suddenly started breaking a bunch of news that appeared to come from access to Cabinet documents that were still supposed to be classified. This included stories around ending welfare benefits for anyone under 30 years old as well as delaying background checks on refugees. Some explosive stuff.
On Wednsday, ABC finally revealed where all this stuff came from. It wasn’t an Australian Ed Snowden. It was… government incompetence. Apparently, someone bought an old filing cabinet from a store that sells second-hand government office furniture. The cabinet had no key, so he drilled the lock and… found a ton of Cabinet documents in an actual cabinet.
So… if that law were to go through in Australia… would that mean the government employee who didn’t check the filing cabinet would get 20 years in jail? Or the store that sold out? Or the guy that drilled it? Or do all of them get 20 years? Why don’t we just support whistleblowers and the press for reporting on important news that the public should know about?
Filed Under: australia, cabinet, classified information, leaks, reporting, security, whistleblowing
Comments on “Classified Cabinet Docs Leak Down Under Via An Actual Cabinet Sale… Just As Aussies Try To Outlaw Leaking”
Honesty
Are there any uncorrupt, transparent honest politicians in the world?
Re: Honesty
Yes, yes there are. The Ministry Of Magic is…… no wait um… damn. Not even fictional ones are uncorrupt or honest.
Re: Re: Honesty
Wait, the dementors seem to have their act together. The do what they are meant to do and no one has any disillusions as to what that might be. But I really don’t think they stand for elections, so that might ruin their standing as politicians, no matter how much they resemble some of those.
Re: Re: Re: Honesty
No, not even the dementors; they breach protocol and due process tons of times (see; Gryffindor-Hufflepuff Quidditch match, kissing of Barty Crouch Jr., attempted kissing of Dudley and Harry), not to mention the whole suck-out-happy-memories thing is a violation of human rights.
Re: Re: Re:2 Honesty
A: Those are failures to follow orders (one might say an excess of exuberance), not dishonesty or corruption.
B: They aren’t human.
Re: Re: Re:3 Honesty
an excess of exuberance
the new and improved "afraid for my life"
Re: Honesty
No.
Humans are fallible, that’s the way it is. No one is perfect.
A well run system of checks and balances might work if it is allowed to function.
AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
As usual, you take considering a possibility
as if were already ordering the grinders to start
producing Google’s Soylent Rainbow. By your notion,
NO study or consideration could ever be given to
new ideas, as some part of population will always
benefit or suffer.
And of course you go off on usual fantasy that
prosecutors won’t at all apply common sense.
Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
Holy… What are you smoking and where can I get some?
Re: Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
Well kool-aid comes in powder form. Maybe he snorts it.
Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
“And of course you go off on usual fantasy that
prosecutors won’t at all apply common sense.”
Except there is court doctrine defining vindictive prosecution. Why would that even be needed if all prosecutors applied common sense.
Re: Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
The words “prosecutors” and “common sense” are not usually found in the same sentence.
Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
I would insult you, but your post is more than insulting for the both of us.
Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
Carry that Snowden hate for MyNameHere, blue boy. I’m sure he’d fellate you once he inevitably returns.
Or do all of them get 20 years?
Yesss! And their little dogs, too!
Classification and overclassification of materials not provably dangerous to national defense should be criminalized.
Re: Re:
Or at least made a fire-able offense. No severance pay or pension.
Re: Re:
20 years sounds right to me.
I wish someone would drill out the fucking cabinet in Australia, incompetent, self-serving corrupt loonies the lot of em.
Does Australia have a similar concept to "no ex post facto laws"?
I remember from Geography Australia used to be a penal colony.
I read an article like this and I think, “used to be?”
Proposed law would make the problem worse in this case
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/02/cabinet_of_secr.html makes the great point that if the law were already in place, the documents probably would have gone to a non-Aussie media outlet, who likely would have been much less interested in talking to the government about what gets published and when.