David Rosenberg worked for the United States National Security Agency at Pine Gap for 18 years.

On 8 July 2011 I had a lengthy conversation with him on his book "Inside Pine Gap: The spy who came in from the desert".

Here's a snippet.   Let me know if you want the whole thing put up.

This has now been changed online by Fairfax.   You'll have to follow a few steps to see the way it was first published.

Go to google.

Search for "after tony abbott is sprung snooping"

You'll see this.

The original story looked like this.

The subeditor had followed the line in the story to produce a headline that fits the copy.

They've now changed the headline to this, suggesting the point of the story is that President Yudhoyono (like Shane Warne and Liz Hurley) has a larger number of Twitter followers than Tony Abbott.

But the copy of the story is there in its original deceptive form.  

It's always awkward, isn't it, to get caught snooping? Whether it's rifling through your spouse's pocketbook when you think they're in the loo, or mounting a highly sophisticated 3G phone surveillance operation on the head of state of your professed ally and then boasting about it to your superiors in a PowerPoint presentation, well, you're going to feel a mite sheepish when surprised in the act.

And when you're caught, you can go one of two ways: prostrate yourself before the object of your snooping; or - and we'll call this the ''Abbott model'' - offer an apology, couched firmly in the passive tense, for ''any hurt or embarrassment caused'', without naming yourself as the direct cause of these emotions. And then imply that they should have expected you to do it anyway so you're not really sure what the big fuss is about.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/shurley-not-yudhoyono-musters-superior-forces-for-twitter-stoush-20131119-2xteo.html#ixzz2l9uZzsWX

Tony Abbott has a contemporary problem with President Yudhoyono not because he himself was caught snooping, rather because he took responsibility for responding to actions of the Australian Government under Mr Rudd's "snooping" direction.

Any suggestiong that Mr Abbott has been caught snooping is just bullshit.  The SMH will need to do more than change a headline to atone for that.

The substantive proceedings against the defendant Thomson start in 6 days time.   From 26 November the manoeuverings stop and the final positions for each side are locked in.

Managers are employed to add shareowner value.   Managers are an expense, they cost shareowners money.   If they make decisions that make the company more valuable, shareowners love them.   When they don't shareowners should know.

Fairfax has shareowners who will be listening to this historic program, the last time Jason Morrison will broadcast on 2UE*.   You have a chance to talk directly to Jason on 131332 and to let the people who pay his salary, the shareowners, know how you feel.

131332 is the telephone number for your last chance to call Jason Morrison at 2UE today between 3PM and 6PM Eastern Summer Time.

Jason would love to hear from you as would the owners of a significant proportion of Fairfax's voting rights.  

(*not a guarantee)

One of the ways we're different from, say, Somalia is the Rule of Law.

There was a time when we took the Crimes Act seriously and even Editors in Chief of news media outlets would tremble before it.   When the high and mighty take it on themselves to decide what is in the public interest, they would do well to make sure the public agree.

CRIMES ACT 1914 - SECT 79

Official secrets

             (1)  For the purposes of this section, a sketch, plan, photograph, model, cipher, note, document, or article is a prescribed sketch, plan, photograph, model, cipher, note, document or article in relation to a person, and information is prescribed information in relation to a person, if the person has it in his or her possession or control and:

                     (a)  it has been made or obtained in contravention of this Part or in contravention of section 91.1 of the Criminal Code ;

That's Mr Snowden, currently residing with friends of our enemies.

(3)  If a person communicates a prescribed sketch, plan, photograph, model, cipher, note, document or article, or prescribed information, to a person, other than:

                     (a)  a person to whom he or she is authorized to communicate it; or

                     (b)  a person to whom it is, in the interest of the Commonwealth or a part of the Queen's dominions, his or her duty to communicate it;

or permits a person, other than a person referred to in paragraph (a) or (b), to have access to it, he or she shall be guilty of an offence.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years.   Add 5 years if it's done with the intention to harm our security.

Mr Snowden's digital possession was transmitted to the custody of  Ms Catherine Viner from The Guardian.   Sadlly, she is no such thing.

(Catherine Viner from The Guardian newspaper who received the documents from Snowden)

(6)  If a person receives any sketch, plan, photograph, model, cipher, note, document, article or information, knowing, or having reasonable ground to believe, at the time when he or she receives it, that it is communicated to him or her in contravention of subsection (3), he or she shall be guilty of an offence unless he or she proves that the communication was contrary to his or her desire.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 2 years.

Ms Viner passed them on to the ABC.  From what Mark "public interest" Scott tells us, there was a bit of a chat between him and Ms Viner as they coordinated their efforts to achieve the maximum "public interest".

Besides employing makeup artists capable of creating the Les Paterson look, the ABC takes three quarters of a million dollars every year to pay for an Editor in Chief to make certain the ABC does not public the things it should not publish and does publish those things it should.   In the former forbidden category would be our official secrets in the latter would be court proceedings against a sitting prime minister released by the court for publication.

Amongst our friends from the Left, keen on free and open trade in people between Indonesia and Australia, there has been a push to downplay old-fashioned crimes so they're not viewed as crimes at all.   That's really up to all of us to decide, not just the progressives whose reward is to feel good while others clean up the mess. 

There is so much law to chose from and so many lawyers to render learned opinions.   ranging from the bush lawyer keenly out of the blocks  like me to the gravitas laden Geoffrey Robertson QC who will be biding his time before the PR company decides the moment of maximum exposure has arrived.

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00366/Html/Text#_Toc369269041

Division 91—Offences relating to espionage and similar activities

91.1  Espionage and similar activities

             (1)  A person commits an offence if:

                     (a)  the person communicates, or makes available:

                              (i)  information concerning the Commonwealth’s security or defence; or

                             (ii)  information concerning the security or defence of another country, being information that the person acquired (whether directly or indirectly) from the Commonwealth; and

                     (b)  the person does so intending to prejudice the Commonwealth’s security or defence; and

                     (c)  the person’s act results in, or is likely to result in, the information being communicated or made available to another country or a foreign organisation, or to a person acting on behalf of such a country or organisation.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 25 years.

             (2)  A person commits an offence if:

                     (a)  the person communicates, or makes available:

                              (i)  information concerning the Commonwealth’s security or defence; or

                             (ii)  information concerning the security or defence of another country, being information that the person acquired (whether directly or indirectly) from the Commonwealth; and

                     (b)  the person does so:

                              (i)  without lawful authority; and

                             (ii)  intending to give an advantage to another country’s security or defence; and

                     (c)  the person’s act results in, or is likely to result in, the information being communicated or made available to another country or a foreign organisation, or to a person acting on behalf of such a country or organisation.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 25 years.

             (3)  A person commits an offence if:

                     (a)  the person makes, obtains or copies a record (in any form) of:

                              (i)  information concerning the Commonwealth’s security or defence; or

                             (ii)  information concerning the security or defence of another country, being information that the person acquired (whether directly or indirectly) from the Commonwealth; and

                     (b)  the person does so:

                              (i)  intending that the record will, or may, be delivered to another country or a foreign organisation, or to a person acting on behalf of such a country or organisation; and

                             (ii)  intending to prejudice the Commonwealth’s security or defence.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 25 years.

             (4)  A person commits an offence if:

                     (a)  the person makes, obtains or copies a record (in any form) of:

                              (i)  information concerning the Commonwealth’s security or defence; or

                             (ii)  information concerning the security or defence of another country, being information that the person acquired (whether directly or indirectly) from the Commonwealth; and

                     (b)  the person does so:

                              (i)  without lawful authority; and

                             (ii)  intending that the record will, or may, be delivered to another country or a foreign organisation, or to a person acting on behalf of such a country or organisation; and

                            (iii)  intending to give an advantage to another country’s security or defence.

Penalty:  Imprisonment for 25 years.

             (5)  For the purposes of subparagraphs (3)(b)(i) and (4)(b)(ii), the person concerned does not need to have a particular country, foreign organisation or person in mind at the time when the person makes, obtains or copies the record.

Tim Lee was GM of Fair Work Australia from 27 July 2009 until 7 September 2011 a period during which no analysis was made of the credit card statements that held the core evidence to support the allegations against Craig Thomson.

The powers and responsibilities for ongoing matters held by his predecessor the Industrial Registrar pass to Lee.

The Industrial Registar ordered the commencement of a coercive investigation into the Thomson/HSU matter on 30 June, 2009.   Lee denies knowing that any such order existed.

The important thing that is known is that no investigation commenced at all until March 27 2010.

Part of the Industrial Registrar's operational plan and budget for the investigation included the engagement of an external accountant.   His  whose work was highly regarded by the other externsal professional adviser on the team, the Australian Government Solicitor's Craig Rawson.

Under GM Lee the external accountant's contract was not renewed and the professional accountancy skills lost to the team were not replaced.

Kathy Jackson lodged 4 boxes of credit card and mobile phone records with the IR on 18 June 2009 and that property was transmitted with the IR's assets and operations to FWA on 1 July 2009.

No financial analysis of the credit card statement material took place during the whole of Lee's time as General Manager.   The timing of any activity relating to analysis of the credit card statements matches perfectly the tenure of Mr Lee.   The documents arrived just before he did in answer to Doug Williams call for the evidence.   Williams had engaged specialist financial analytical skills via contract for the purpose of managing that and other evidentiary analysis.   Lee did not maintain that contract.   No analysis of the Credit Card statements took place until September 2011.   Tim Lee left his job as GM on 7 September 2011 and that's when the analysis commenced.

The primary allegations against Thomson were about the misuse of union credit cards.   Lee must take responsibility for the fact of no analysis on the credit card statements taking place during the whole of his two and a bit years in the job.   It's impossible to complete an investigation into allegations of financial fraud without adding up how money is involved.

Mr Lee's movements into that job and his sudden resignation from it and appointment to a lessser paid judicial role that took him out of the reach of an inquisitive Senate Estimates Hearing call for much greater scrutiny.

Please allow me to tell you only that there is work happening with  a milestone today.

I am very happy with the progress of the Victoria Police investigation of my complaint about Ms Gillard.   I have reason to be confident that justice is seriously on its way.

The then Prime Minister seems to have endorsed the Defence Signals Directorate by tweeting their motto, now being workshopped by the AWU.

Thanks to the staff of the Defence Signals Directorate for helping to keep Aus safe. Their motto - Reveal their secrets, Protect our own. JG

— Julia Gillard (@JuliaGillard) January 24, 2013

Ms Gillard's visit to endorse the pivotal work the DSD used to do before Tony Abbott ruined it was heartily endorsed by the ABC in only January this year.

Its mission statement is brief and to the point: "Reveal their secrets - protect our own."

Its website declares that it operates "in the slim area between the difficult and the impossible".

And it acts as Australia's listening post - intercepting foreign communications, providing high-level intelligence to military forces and protecting Australia from cyber espionage.

Hidden within a largely non-descript building behind tight security in Canberra's defence headquarters, the work of the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) goes largely unnoticed by the public.

And for only the second time since the DSD relocated from Melbourne more than two decades ago, it has hosted an Australian prime minister.

Julia Gillard wanted to visit the top-secret agency on the back of yesterday's announcement that the Government would be establishing a new cyber security centre by the end of the year.

"The work that you do here is a pivotal part of our national security efforts, it's a pivotal part of keeping our nation safe, and thank you very much for doing it," Ms Gillard told the hundreds of DSD staff who had lined the internal balconies across several levels of the building's atrium.

Her speech was broadcast via a secure video-link to staff at other DSD locations around Australia - including Geraldton in Western Australia's mid-west, Darwin, and Canberra - as well as to liaison staff in the United States.

Earlier Ms Gillard had visited "the pit" - an area of the building's basement where staff work on rows of computers within the DSD's cyber security operations centre.

Asked how the new centre would be different from the existing one, a spokeswoman for Ms Gillard said the current arrangements focused on government networks while the new centre would have "a significantly broader scope and mandate".

However in 2010, then defence minister John Faulkner said the DSD's cyber security operations centre would focus on safeguarding government and private sector infrastructure from cyber threats.

The Government is still deciding where in Canberra the centre will be located and says it will be paid for out of existing funding.

'Hide!!'

Understandably, the DSD goes to great lengths to protect the work it undertakes. Its building is surrounded by a fence several metres high, rigged with motion sensors.

Mobile phones are generally not allowed within the building because of the potential of them being unknowingly used as a listening device by foreign intelligence agencies and phone signals are jammed.

Journalists have rarely been allowed inside the building. For today's visit, reporters and photographers were closely monitored by staff escorts and warned not to wander off.

Having passed through a security check, representatives of the media were issued with visitor passes which explained what to do in the event of a lockdown.

It advised that windows, blinds and doors should be closed and lights turned off, computers locked and documents put away.

It also warned of the need to remain silent and directed the pass holder to "Hide!!", adding that a lockdown could be in place for some time.

In welcoming the Prime Minister, the DSD's acting director, Mike Burgess, said the organisation's work was necessarily conducted in secret.

"That helps us protect our capabilities, that helps us generate intelligence that meets national intelligence needs," he said.

"It also helps us protect our men and women deployed in Afghanistan at the moment and elsewhere on military operations.

"And as you know, it also helps us protect Australia against the cyber threat."

Mr Burgess then quipped: "In that regard of our work being necessarily conducted in secret, I should also acknowledge and welcome the media to Defence Signals Directorate."

Ms Gillard quickly responded: "Your secrets are safe with them."

Maybe the former PM might be so good as to retweet the message of comfort to President Yudhoyono herself.  "Your secrets are safe with them."