16 Comments

Though ASIO's head is yet to confirm it was the Chinese Intelligence services I see Channel 9 has said it was, probably with as much evidence as 'the vibe' and your 'who else could afford it' not exactly sure how much value for money ASIO offers. I am curious as to the pearl clutching over Chinese funding politicians when its seems okay for Mining interests in Australia or foreign media owners to buy them.

Expand full comment

The pollies complaining that the perp hasn't been outed (and not so secretly hoping it's someone from "across the aisle") shows that they cannot play chess (TBH, they would probably fail to play Snap).

Burgess is playing the long game here (familiar to both the Chinese and Russians). We have stopped you. We have put potential customers on notice. And if you proceed, there will be a very messy, very public outing next time (well that's what I like think).

Expand full comment
author

It scans.

Expand full comment

What's the story about targets?- from memory they're motivated to divulge secrets by one of three things: a cause, greed, or fear (of exposure of some peccadillo or threat to a loved one). It's been so long since this type of thing in Australia, so this story coming out is a way of making any potential target think twice about allowing themselves to be recruited, given the cost of exposure.

It's been a while since the Petrov affair, after all, and lessons have to be refreshed.

Expand full comment

Deep voice: "i pity the spy that just gives up"

Expand full comment

I'm just puzzled as to why this person has not been prosecuted. One would have thought that would be a far greater warning/deterrent than not-naming and shaming.

Given the avid pursuit of Witness K, Bernard Collaery and several others the cynical might speculate that there are different standards for politicians.

Expand full comment

Apparently because the laws under which the person could be prosecuted were introduced after the events took place, and the laws are not retrospective. Burgess did an interview with the Guardian Australia politics podcast and got asked this directly

Expand full comment

Yes, I didn't find this explanation satisfactory. There were other laws in place at the time - not specific to politicians - that could have been used.

Expand full comment
author

Yeah. It's a bit suss, given the Collaery case.

Expand full comment

Agreed. The one rule for the pollies and a different rule for the plebs is alive and well. And if the whole point of the announcement was to scare the pants off potential targets, naming and charging someone with treason would be a far more effective deterrent...

Expand full comment

I'm just surprised that everyone has blithely assumed that any of our politicians posess secrets worth buying.

Expand full comment

But I am pretty sure we all know who it is, no? Or am I barking up the wrong tree? I was surprised to hear Turnbull's son fess up that he thought he might have been the ex-PMs relative that was targetted.

Expand full comment

Burgess said that it wasn't Alex Turnbull, because apparently the approach to the PM's family member was aborted and never took place, so whatever approach he experienced is a different case.

Expand full comment

Hi JB no idea what this story is about, sorry it's not been covered in UK press (not surprising, they only care about celebs) but am I reading correctly that Chinese Intelligence have compromised Australian politicians?

can I ask a book related question while you are hear?

Looking on Amazon today I saw a release date for a hardcover of Forever Dead this Tuesday, is that right? If so any ideas on Kindle and Audible release dates, Amazon only list Hardcover.

Thanks!

Expand full comment
author

Hey Donald. I'm afraid that date is Fake News! The manuscript is still sitting with an editor in New York, awaiting her ferocious notes.

Expand full comment

the beast of Bezos lied? I am shocked! oh well need to wait for my fix of McLennan by listening to the old ones again.

Expand full comment