this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2026
66 points (98.5% liked)
Australia
4899 readers
79 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Theres an implicit claim here that I don't think has any basis in reality. Source for Harold Holt conspiracy theory?
^Note: I'm not trying to denigrate whatever you're thinking in regards Holt, if he was murdered, etc, then it would very much have been a conspiracy. Conspiracy theory has a bad reputation as a stand in for only being outlandish and crazy claims in discourse, annoyingly.^
Other poster is right, I conflated Holt with Whitlam.
There's an ollld conspiracy theory that Holt was a Chinese spy and spirited away when he was close to being nabbed by ASIO iirc, zero hard evidence to this day, just novelists and crackpots.
https://www.nfsa.gov.au/collection/curated/asset/98238-allegations-and-conspiracy-theories
Felt inspired to listen to the Do Go On podcast on Harold Holt - spotify today. Those three really go on. Its okay if you wanted to learn marginally more about the man, and be mildly amused one day when you're bored for an hour and a half. :)
Honestly I think they just conflated Holt with Whitlam.
Yeah true, surely they must've.
He was disappeared by the CIA for not toeing the line with American interests. I don't think it was China at all, for once.
We've also had evidence come out that the Whitlam situation was more CIA dicking around
It's long past time we tell the Yanks to fuck off.
Holt was killed by his own toxic masculinity.
He went swimming on an extremely dangerous closed beach while his mistress, her son and his girlfriend stood on the shore.
Nothing more than that.
A source for Holt?
I've read fairly far into the Whitlam dismissal. The CIA involvement has no more evidence, yet, than to suggest Whitlam wasn't the US' first choice. With the 'note' that was passed on. And that they were keeping tabs on a developing situation. If i remember correctly, they were aware of the Palace communications and of Kerr's previous links. Its mostly circumstantial, with multiple possible reasons for these things to occur, so not enough evidence of CIA involvement for nefarious purposes.
What I dislike is people always blame the CIA that has little evidence, when the behaviour of two members of the High court, Kerr, Fraser, the Liberal Senate leader of the day and many others who couldn't accept a progressive government for a few years was so egregious and in some cases treasonous.
Whether outside influence from the Palace or the CIA occured the key players were all Australian, and that side of politics have never been held to account, except arguably Fraser and Kerr, forbtheir actions that damaged Australia to this day. They couldn't win the political argument, so they overturned the rules and guidelines to win again. Truly disgusting.
A CIA leaker has said that Kerr was referred to as "our man Kerr" within the CIA. And Kerr had known ties to an organisation that was secretly backed by the CIA. And it was not long before the Dismissal that the US appointed a new Ambassador to Australia, a man known as "the coupmaster" for his role in the acknowledged US-backed coups elsewhere, including Indonesia. None of these is anywhere near a smoking gun (especially since the leaker ended up defecting to the Soviets, IIRC, and may have had ulterior motives).
You're right that the evidence is "circumstantial", though in a legal sense that isn't nearly as damning as the screenwriters of CSI and other legal/cop dramas would have you believe. Circumstantial evidence can be quite powerful in making a legal case. And I think it's a bit of an understatement to say that there is "no more evidence...than to suggest Whitlam wasn't the US' first choice." Not a smoking gun. Certainly not a sure thing. But quite a bit less of a crazy conspiracy theory than anything to do with Holt is.
Also speaking of Holt, shout out to James "Haha Nice" on YouTube (he's also on TikTok) who's currently doing an in-depth series of videos on the whole Holt government and just how wild it was.
Look you can denigrate other cop shows, but CSI Miami is a straight up fly on the wall documentary. Those cats do it, By. The. Book. /s
Yeah, maybe they were less comfortable than I presented it as, but at the same time the key question of Pine Gap had been put to rest by Whitlam by the time of the dismissal. Maybe the Vietnam draw down played a role, seems petty though.
I think I need to see a clear intervention before I could call it anywhere near a CIA coup just because of the behaviour of the other actors. Like those Palace letters, Kerr was gunning for it for over a year, he was so obsequious to the crown, it was quite skin crawling. He contacted the High Court justices they didn't say boo to the PM, Kerr wouldn't talk to Whitlam, Fraser had the perfect opportunity to discuss the seriousness of the situation on the plane ride. The whole thing sits poorly with me, self interest stacked on top of self interest, all the way down. I'll admit Whitlam seems like he could be overbearing to deal with at times, maybe that played a bigger part.
The thing i'd forgotten about was the coupmaster part, cheers.
Well may he say trace every lead, but when the trail leads to Langley... 😎
...the case goes cold. 🕶️
Genuinely chuckling at this, even read it in Goughs voice lol
YEEEAAAAAAAAH