Why did you leave out the quote immediately after that? It's relevant.
> the Australian agency "has been able to continue to cover the talks, providing highly useful intelligence for interested US customers"
Whey would they say that the (continued!) intelligence provided by the Australian agency was "highly useful" if their counsel ruled they couldn't use it?
> the Australian agency "has been able to continue to cover the talks, providing highly useful intelligence for interested US customers"
Whey would they say that the (continued!) intelligence provided by the Australian agency was "highly useful" if their counsel ruled they couldn't use it?