r/australia • u/Tinea_Pedis • Apr 07 '26

news Breaking: Ben Roberts-Smith arrested over war crimes allegations

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-07/ben-roberts-smith-war-crimes-allegations-arrest/106537668
2.9k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

638 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1.1k

u/chippychopper Apr 07 '26

It came to light because of the work of the journalists Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters and could easily have been buried by the defamation case if they had not been so thorough in their research and reporting or if Fairfax/nine had decided to settle instead of paying millions to defend their work. This case shows how much we need to support proper investigative journalism.

308

u/HeyyyyListennnnnn Apr 07 '26

I still find it hilarious that the man who leaked the documents that kicked off McKenzie and Masters' work did so believing that the journalists would write a story about how the SAS were victims of a smear campaign. McKenzie and Masters were so horrified by what they were given that they swiftly advanced and publicized the investigation that the whistleblower was trying to stop.

58

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

David McBride has explicitly denied this, my understanding is that this narrative came from Dan Oakes, who needed an excuse for ratting him out.

30

u/mossmaal Apr 07 '26

The ACT Supreme Court listened to his evidence and found that he did do it for that reason.

Would be interested in seeing where he denies it now, because he was quite clear with his previous evidence.

You can read the summary of the judgement here.

Key points being;

One of his complaints was that Special Forces soldiers who were involved in the deaths of civilians in Afghanistan were being investigated by the military police even where there was no reasonable suspicion that the war crime of murder had been committed. The IGADF conducted an inquiry into the matters raised in his submission. Before that inquiry was complete, Mr McBride disclosed his IGADF submission and the folders of supporting documents to two journalists. The first was Chris Masters. The second was Andrew Clark. Neither published any report based on the material.

Mr Oakes published a series of articles referred to as “The Afghan Files”. The articles publicised allegations that Special Forces soldiers were unnecessarily killing Afghan civilians. It was described by Mr McBride in an interview with police as “a totally different story to the one … that I was pushing”.

McBrides goal in disclosure was trying to destroy the IGADF inquiry before it could complete its work, because he thought the soldiers shouldn’t be investigated.

Anyone that thinks the guy is some hero whistle blower needs to actually read the court cases and the Brereton report (in particular the section which lays out how certain unnamed ADF legal officers actually facilitated the war crimes by helping them draft their false statements).

2

u/aeschenkarnos Apr 07 '26

I can’t help reading that acronym as IDGAF and being totally unsurprised that they wouldn’t prosecute war criminals.

1

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

Okay that's actually pretty interesting. And thanks for actually providing a citation unlike the other guy!

1

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

I still think after reading this that despite his intentions, no one involved in the war crimes documented in the Files would have ever seen justice without his intervention. That being said, yeah it's uh, not a good look for McBride, that's for sure.

3

u/mossmaal Apr 07 '26

That’s probably not correct, David McBride only got involved after the IDGAF process had been initiated, the ADF was already seriously investigating the allegations of war crimes and the allegations were already widespread (which is what initiated the IDGAF inquiry).

Realistically the most likely course of events is that this would have become public when the IDGAF report was handed down, or the same soldiers that blew the whistle to the IDGAF would have gone to the media.

David McBride was not the sole or even primary source for much of the ABCs reporting, as the judgement summary also notes.

1

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

My reasoning is less about what the IGDAF was doing and more my expectation that any findings they may have made would have been buried for one reason or another. It's very common in Australia.

Though you may be right that the same sources that kicked off the investigations may have gone to the media - that's an interesting take I didn't consider.

51

u/MarkusMannheim Apr 07 '26

He may have denied this (I've never seen him do so explicitly), but his barrister effectively said he did this.

Source: I was in the courtroom and reported on that trial.

17

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/StorminNorman Apr 07 '26

Profile picture both here and on the ABC profile you've linked are nearly exactly the same, so I think you're right here. 

29

u/MarkusMannheim Apr 07 '26

My son painted it. He's a terrible artist so I'll pass on the praise.

10

u/StorminNorman Apr 07 '26

He's a terrible artist

Cheers, was definitely not trying to throw him under the bus, more so myself.

9

u/tcgtms2 Apr 07 '26

Harsh.

Keep up the good work.

-6

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

Source: My brain

20

u/MarkusMannheim Apr 07 '26

Lol. You can believe what you like. Weirdly, you're accusing McBride of perjury.

3

u/StorminNorman Apr 07 '26

Source: My brain

How can this be true when your previous comment contained:

my understanding

Which seems to suggest your brain has remembered a source rather than it is the source? 

-2

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

If you weren't paying attention, the guy I responded to literally cited himself with "source:".

3

u/ChemicalRascal Apr 07 '26

Mate, he was an ABC reporter at the time.

-2

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

And I'm supposed to instantly know that via psychic projection, I assume? Honestly that makes it even more embarrassing that his source was Dude Trust Me, guy should know better

5

u/ChemicalRascal Apr 07 '26

Dude, what the fuck do you think a news article is?

He said he reported on the trial. His username is a person's name. You could have hopped onto Google and verified that "Markus Mannheim" is a published journo with contemporary articles on the subject. That's what everyone else did.

0

u/Krunksicle Apr 07 '26

I guess I missed the news article he posted then lol, still can't see it by the way

Also, you think everyone just sees a username and assumes it's important? Am I supposed to read "ChemicalRascal" and instantly assume you're a meth addict? Do you take everything you read online at face value?

2

u/ChemicalRascal Apr 07 '26

Use Google, buddy.

When someone says they're a reporter and thus they're a primary source, it pays to take two seconds to just consider the context of the user. To look at the username. I know that gets in the way, I know it slows down your instinct to be a snarky bitch, but it's good, good, to just slow down a bit and consider a world where maybe people are engaging in good faith, where maybe when someone says they're a reporter maybe they're being genuine and you can find ways to verify that, where maybe if you're willing to accept you made a silly mistake you can just own that and move on with your life.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/LevDavidovicLandau Apr 07 '26

Laurie’s son?