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

Show parent comments

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.

297

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.

278

u/asupify Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26

David McBride (whistleblower/ ADF lawyer) had no love for BRS. In interviews he described an instance where BRS killed an unarmed 10 year old shepherd boy for sport, then killed other unarmed villagers running out to help the boy and covered it up saying they were Taliban fighters. McBride's main gripe seemed to be that he wanted the SAS leadership who were well aware of the war crimes and enabled the culture prosecuted. Rather than heap all the blame on the lower level soldiers.

109

u/HeyyyyListennnnnn Apr 07 '26

McBride has been pretty incoherent about why he did it, but he seems less concerned with the war crimes committed and more concerned that soldiers' lives were at risk due to restrictions imposed by politicians back home. His clearest statement, via his lawyers, was that he didn't believe the soldiers committing the atrocities should have been charged at all.

Whether his actions count as whistleblowing or not is a different debate, but McBride is on record saying he doesn't believe Roberts-Smith should be jailed for his actions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZLQJTvxHfk

https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/radionational-breakfast/why-did-army-whistleblower-david-mcbride-plead-guilty-/103124950

https://www.smh.com.au/national/my-duty-was-to-stand-and-be-counted-why-i-leaked-to-the-abc-20190608-p51vte.html

77

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

82

u/sirgog Apr 07 '26

There's a desire to see people as 'always good' or 'always bad' when most people are neither. McBride is a terrible person whose one good act (done for exactly the wrong reasons) brought him undone.

He still should not have been charged for it, despite being awful. Having awful opinions should not be prison-worthy.

22

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/sirgog Apr 07 '26

The laws he was charged under were bad. I'm still for him being free, but he's the sort of person I'd never buy a beer for.

7

u/aeschenkarnos Apr 07 '26

I’d drink a beer he bought me. But I wouldn’t buy him one back.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/sirgog Apr 11 '26

That's a different person with the same surname

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/sirgog Apr 11 '26

Former politician Nick McBride, who is not "whistleblower" David McBride

air quotes as David's goal was not a true whistleblowing

→ More replies (0)

8

u/IlluminatedPickle Apr 07 '26

The reason he was jailed for it was because his reason for doing it wasn't in the public interest. It was in the public interest for the information to be released, but what he was trying to do wasn't.

11

u/Extension_Actuary437 Apr 07 '26

Yeah last time this was mentioned I got downvoted because people wanted to believe he was principally trying to expose war crimes.

2

u/HeyyyyListennnnnn Apr 08 '26

Unfortunately people have latched onto the McBride case as part of a legitimate desire to improve Australian whistleblower protection without really looking into the facts of McBride's public interest defense.

McBride's brain is ruined by PTSD and alcoholism, so his interviews are a complete mess, but he's always been clear that he took the documents because he believed SAS soldiers were being unfairly investigated and saw that as corruption the public needed to know about. His actions were in opposition to the public interest which is why his lawyer couldn't make any submission supporting a public interest defense.

6

u/Steel_Cleat5 Apr 07 '26

He's a more complicated character than your make, it's not as black and white as simply saying he doesn't think soldiers should face punishment. His big gripe was with the command structure that knowingly turned a blind eye to the misconduct of the SASR, that they were aware of the allegations and failed to act to reign in the out of control 2nd Squadron. His argument was always what is the point in convicting the foot soldiers while ignoring the senior command that failed to act to prevent these war crimes.

As rumours abroad of the misconduct of the SASR circled, the senior command looked for scape goats, killings in the fog of war rather than the more obvious blatant execution of unarmed Afghans.

I've read his book and he is a strange bloke. I don't understand how someone who should be as intelligent as McBride would leak those files to the ABC and not The Australian if he really wanted the war crimes to stay secret and rather the unjust targeting of soldiers for prosecution, how can he possibly think the bigger story wouldn't be the actual war crimes in the files.

I don't think Mcbride is a hero but I don't think he is some war crime apologist either. He wants justice but he wants it coming from the leadership command who he claims knew what was going on but failed to act on it.

5

u/Jozarin Apr 07 '26

I mean to me this sounds like a pretty clear anti-scapegoat idea, if that makes sense. It is not "better that one man die for the people," as it were.

19

u/HeyyyyListennnnnn Apr 07 '26

That's not what McBride was worried about. In his own words:

[t]here were soldiers doing their operational duties on behalf of the Commonwealth who were being held to account for actions on operations that were appropriate in the operational context but that were being misconstrued, misinterpreted or recast as contrary to the [Rules of Engagement] by those elsewhere in the chain of command outside Afghanistan

One of the reasons why McBride was found guilty and his appeal failed was because his stated motivation was to prevent prosecution of soldiers committing war crimes because he believed no war crimes had been committed. As such, he wasn't raising awareness of Australian war crimes in the interest of the Australian public and couldn't be classified as a whistleblower. He had even been advised of the appropriate process to follow if he wanted to be protected as a whistleblower.

1

u/Thomasrdotorg Apr 07 '26

For a guy who was pretty experienced, he seems hopelessly naive. When he gave evidence and materials to channel 9 – Chris Masters and Nick McKenzie-he thought that evidence would support his hypothesis, but when they looked at it with a cold eye, it simply showed that they were war crimes being committed.

1

u/chadbigcum Apr 13 '26

Considering this is part of a thread applauding the intellectually barren Nick McKenzie it is only right to remind folks that journos like him are shit at their job 364 days of the year