The Terrorist Plot That Wasn't And Then Was

When I said I would withdraw my cynicism if the indecent fervour with which the Federal Government rushed through its amendments to anti-terror laws proved justified, I meant it. Nobody wants to see images like this, or hear that a bloke was arrested just up the street, allegedly with a garage full of explosives.

However, I don't know how many of you caught Kerry O'Brien's interview with John Howard on the 7.30 Report last night (no doubt it had Santo Santoro and his coven of 28 soothsayers all aflutter). It made for an intriguing juxtaposition to today's events:

KERRY O'BRIEN: Is it also true that that's not the last time - not the first time you've received that advice. Is it true that other agencies including the Australian Federal Police have asked for the change you introduced with great urgency last week, as long as 18 months ago?

JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, I'm not going to talk about when I've received other advice about particular situations.

KERRY O'BRIEN: Don't you think the public has a right to know that, Mr Howard?

JOHN HOWARD: This is difficult. I think the public has a right to know from me why I wanted the law changed but I don't think the public wants me to say anything that will in any way compromise or might be capable of compromising operational matters dealing with issues such as terrorism. You see, my critics want it both ways.

KERRY O'BRIEN: That's not what I'm asking you Mr Howard. I'm asking you whether the AFP or other agencies sought from the Government as long as 18 months ago the very changes that you have now introduced with urgency and drama in the Parliament last week?

JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, the combination of last week and the circumstances of last week had not previously occurred.

KERRY O'BRIEN: But that's not what I was asking Mr Howard. I was asking whether the AFP or other agencies had asked you to make this amendment prior to last week, and if they have why didn't the Government act on it earlier?

JOHN HOWARD: I don't personally recall and I'm not saying it may not have been put to somebody else in the Government, but I don't personally recall - and I say that deliberately, because I don't have an infallible memory, I don't pretend I do. I don't personally recall that particular amendment being previously pressed on me personally with a sense of urgency.

Meanwhile in the Daily Telegraph and several other outlets:

The raids were the culmination of a 16-month operation and the suspects in Melbourne and Sydney were alleged to be working together, police said.

The allegation that there was no terrorist threat? Withdrawn pending democratic investigation of suspects. The allegation that the rushing through of the legislation was not timed to distract from other, less favourable issues? I'm still reserving my judgement on that one. I'm certainly not saying it was stashed away for 18 months to wait for exactly the right moment, but I'm just still not convinced.