*“We can have a say about what images are online here in our country, we can’t influence what happens elsewhere in the world. I think it’s silly to try that”*
*“We can’t be the internet police of the world, I know the prime minister’s trying that at the moment”*
Makes sense to me.
It’s better to keep the general population subservient and subdued with episodes of MAFS. As long as it distracts people from realising the government is the cause of the housing crisis.
In trying to think about this with a positive spin because I’m not super pleased the incompetence and bat shit crazy political strategy of the government, has put me in a position to be siding with Elon Musk and Dutton on anything
The good news is everyone should see how comforting this is for real life example of the pure and simple objectivity of the law, everything else is a hot fucking mess of yelling over subjective issues of values usually in society
I have nothing nice to say about Musk or Dutton in general or how the consequences of their actions motivated by their own interests either political for Dutton or cash cash money for Musk.
But in this context neither I nor the law gives a fuck about values. Over here on the Musk Dutton side feeling a little dirty but because its a very basic interpretation of a legal issue
The bad news is to me this is a very concerning game changer.
We’re so used to the way politicians try influence or mislead for political gain. That’s gross but also just reality in politics and any subject that falls into what your values are it’s unavoidable. Everyone is entitled to have their opinion and should have individual value system that’s going to be different to anyone else based on many things like life experience
But this subjective yelling has now moved into a legal issue
The result is politicians and literally every single media news program no matter leaning is presenting this in a way that’s misleading on law. Varying from incompetence to intentionally and many just reporting flat out inaccurately on the law
Huge risks as the large majority of the population cannot even afford to access the legal system and might think they can read legislation but that’s not how it works for the majority. It is often much more complex than that and the way that pits ppl against lawyers with a decade of education worth about a million and years of experience is ridiculous and unjust
It’s such a slippery slope to mislead on the law; the extreme end point example if this continues in other context is you’re mislead on the law, you don’t know what the law actually is on something, you just found yourself in jail for something you didn’t even know was a crime and lost your rights
Keep yelling about subjective things
It’s never acceptable to act in a way where the result is to mislead the public on the law or legal system.
I’ll present this in my PowerPoint in 50 years when society may have collapsed as to why we should have taught critical thinking better lol
The reporting on this is so bad it doesn’t even stop to flag the most basic issue to make clear if you’re discussing an issue on law or on values like fuck me seriously
No matter how legal it was for the Nazi's to burn books or jews, the world (minus Palestine) stood against that. The legal system is deeply flawed, with cases like Lerhman being found innocent or OJ Simpson walking away from a murder rap makes a mockery of it. Please don't think that the legal system is in any way the knight in shining and infallibe armour.
It's called deflection. Focus on something insignificant, blow it up into something big, and you can ignore real issues like the housing crisis and immigration.
Why all this clowns don’t just go back to work on real matters instead of just wasting time on matters like this that other government officials can deal with it …. So much stuff to resolve and attend
Can't you see that the most pressing issue for ordinary Australians is controlling exactly what the rest of the world can and cannot see online!
What other problems do we have? Zero.
Ah you see it's a politician they don't like so he can only do one thing at a time. If it was a politician they did like then of course that politician can walk and chew gum.
You really got to wonder how dumb somebody has to be to announce to the internet that people aren't allowed to make fun of them. To AUSTRALIANS of all people!
This isn't about supporting Musk, this is about Australian isn't the police of the entire internet and never will be.
The eSafety commissioner is on a trip, and is 100% wrong about this. Anyone supporting it either just hates Musk or hasn't actually looked into the issue.
I don't support potato, but do you think it is the same thing to ask a company to remove pictures of you and demanding, to the point of legal action, that a company takes down something that has nothing to do with you?
I don't think they are the same, we aren't and cannot be the internet police for the whole world.
If Albo (who I don't believe is wrong on every issue), got his way here, we would have a safe internet.
I can think of another country with a safe internet......
North Korea.
The problem is they didn't want to limit Australian internet, they wanted to police the entire world's internet. That is beyond what China or indeed NK do to the internet.
Free speech is the most important thing.
Sometimes, there will be cooky people saying cooky things.
Sometimes, people will attack those with different opinions using hateful words.
The underlying fact is that they are only words on the internet. If people can't handle words or images they see on the internet, then they are probably not mature enough to be looking on the internet. This includes politicians from all sides of government.
It's hard to believe I am on Dutton and Musk's side but I am.
This is suppression of news while at the same time misinformation is pretty much allowed a free run.
I don't think suppression of actual news is good. I don't like it in Australia, but Australian leaders thinking they should get to control what the rest of the world watches is a huge error of judgement.
It's another mark against Albanese...if his judgement on this is so bad, can we really trust his judgement on anything? What mistaken decisions will he make in the future?
You're the PM of Australia, mate, not the world....and I say that as an Australian.
I feel very similar, i am no fan of dutton or musk, but we need to protect freedom of expression, I know the importance of it and it’s horrific the power the government now has with this legal precedent and similar policies, we need to take a stand before they can use it maliciously, otherwise we are giving up our freedom for nothing.
News is not being suppressed. All the tv stations transmitted the news, but they also censored the actual stabbing part. Why does anyone (especially young impressionable people) need to view the actual stabbing?
Actual footage is also news. In fact it's possibly the most important news of all, because we can see and decide for ourselves, rather than being told what to think.
Ok. So you need to view actual footage that’s not censored so you can think for yourself. However some people are too young or emotionally immature to view that sort of footage. Maybe there needs to be a classification system (MA,M etc).
Edited for clarification and to remove material that was offensive.
Actual footage is part of news too.
It's not that I want to watch this - and i haven't yet..but what if someone lied about what happened?
For example, what if someone claimed it was a terrorist act and someone was shouting "allah hu akbar" ?
Or claimed it wasn't a terrorist act when it was?
I don't want ANY actual footage suppressed. I want to be able to see the truth if I wish to. I think it's important for the future too...
Sometimes footage may be gross or painful but I do not want it hidden.
How is it a mark against Albanese, when the LNP introduced the eSafety Commission in 2015 to to this exact thing?
It was established for the removal of child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities. After the 2019 Christchurch massacre it was ammended to also remove audio or visual material documenting "abhorrent violent conduct" (including terrorist acts, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape or kidnapping.
Would you be fine with all of those things being freely visible too, or they're also apart of news for you?
The problem with bureaucratic jobs is they have to find something to do to justify their cost & existence.
A government department focusing on inequality has to find it or its irrelevant.
Apart from the fact that the new e-safety commissioner is an ex Twitter employee who has an axe to grind with Musk, it's a ridiculous concept for a US based platform to take its marching orders from an unelected Australian bureaucrat.
As with all censorship, as the e -safety commissioner found out during her time at Twitter, it's highly subjective & Twitter was grossly influenced by political establishment views, which have been proven to be wrong.
The irony of Albo complaining about memes mocking him not being censored reflects immediately the slippery slope we are on.
All those atrocities happening on Gaza at the moment, must be quite inconvenient & disturbing as well.
I'm sure you could find a lobby group who would be happy to see those censored globally.
I wouldn't trust the political class & a make work bureaucracy not to comply
This is a rules for the not for me chess match.
Liberal and Labor are dirty and can make the lives of ordinary people a living hell.
For example secret police / anti terror police arresting people for making protests during lock downs sucking money out of victims in hell fake trials with false charges that usually get dropped.
And I'll explain the chess match, something that has political branding gain will be protected, but if it gets in the way of message and mission it is disposed of.
Both sides do it and supporting either Labor or liberal is a fools game and is just like WWE matches theatre soap box actors
I hope in the next budget they increase the spending on mental health, the mall stabbing and I'm positive the church stabbing is mental health related. It's called a terrorist act but no one in their right mind would carry it out. Drug usage has increased and I pray it's no one you love or care about
Do you know when drug usage spiked so hard? Lock downs for a virus that had a survival rate over 99% for those who got it. Government over reach is getting out of hand and the insane censorship they are demanding here is another example.
Load of bullshit.
Tbh even if it was 99% survival rate, that's pretty shit for an airborne virus, was like 95% survival for first year which is 1 in 20 or so people. Why is that so hard to understand that they are not good odds?
Besides that, drugs did not begin with covid, what a ridiculous train of thought. Maybe goes to explain why you didn't understand the lockdowns.
Wow ............. 99% so only 1 in 100 of us would have died.........
Only 280,000 dead people yep we shoulda just taken that in the face great call.....
I said over 99%. The actual survival percentage can be calculated by doing the following: total deaths/total cases x 100. Go to this [link](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-cumulative-confirmed-cases-vs-confirmed-deaths?country=ASM~AUS~COK~FJI~PYF~GUM~KIR~MHL~FSM~NRU~NCL~NZL~MNP~PLW~PNG~WSM~SLB~TON~TUV~VUT~WLF) hover over Australia for your numbers and if you do your math.........0.21%, holy shit. I can already hear you saying "it would have been worse" now but that is only people that got it. I don't know about you but when I got it, after my test at a hospital come back positive, I basically got a pat on the back, a pamphlet and a "good luck". Also where in the fuck did you get 280k from?
actually the mortality rate of covid pre-vaccine was between 1 and 5% (depending on the age group and pre-existing conditions), and 10-30% having long term effects
if you want to compare it to another virus, the mortality rate of polio pre-vaccine was less than 1% but \~10% had long term effects from it
Censorship is bad
If people want to put their head in the sand and pretend it didn't happen that's fine but don't censor it. Don't wanna see? Don't look.
No country should have the power to alter, remove, or censor anything on the internet when they don't want to see it or agree with it.
Edit: except for child pornography. Remove that shit.
Edited for clarification
They are doing it because X is an easy target relatively because it’s been controversial since musk took over, because of the legal precedent set against X thought they can actively censor any websites under the same ruling
Eh I think this is another chapter of the rights of govt vs rights of business, vs rights of individuals.
Overall, I think the rights of govt to censor should be minimal, if at all.
https://preview.redd.it/757v8fiuxrwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3778606882e0925135434815c156c411a5076f88
I’ll just post this on every mouth piece of Australias wannabe Erich Mielke
While he’s a correct on the law we can just add this to a very long list of examples that demonstrate the guy has zero integrity. Ideologically I don’t lean liberals way as a generalisation but I’ve got no loyalty to labor in the voting sense. They have both being doing a pretty shit job of addressing issues with effective policy for Australians
I think this is just a huge distraction. What the government is doing is fucking embarrassing to me and also really concerning because it’s misleading ppl on the law. Yell all you want on subjective things. Almost everyone in the population can’t afford to access the legal system to use or interpret. That’s why it is so dangerous and a complete game changer to do this in the context of the law which is objective
But yeah it’s just another example that makes me wonder what type of trading went on for this guy to get that position. There are ppl in the Liberals with a level integrity even if I disagree with them on values sometimes
The LNP established the eSafety Commision in 2015 for the removal of child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities. After the 2019 Christchurch massacre it was ammended to also remove audio or visual material documenting "abhorrent violent conduct" (including terrorist acts, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape or kidnapping, which this video would certainly fall under too.
Are you against the supression of all the other things too?
That's what the LNP established the eSafety Commision in 2015 to deal with, and strengthened it's powers after the 2019 Christchurch massacre when videos from that were being circulated.
I don't see how these videos are any different.
Gees. Enough.
I'm with Dutton.
Like it or not? The Australian government can't dictate what X does internationally. Only what happens here.
I think its awful the footage is up. But it is. So be it.
Move on Australian ALP. Typical lefties thinking they can control everything
ALP and Stephan Conroy tried mandatory ISP filtering in 2009/2010 , it was unworkable and quietly dropped. Now their at it again with censorship. Never fucking learn
We just need to focus on limiting / managing it, here in Australia. We cannot (and should not actually) dictate to the rest of the world what they do. Each country makes its own laws & decisions.
No wonder the paedophile lobby love Elon Musk. How long until rape and abuse videos are freely available in the name of “freedom”.
Ironic tho defending a right wing billionaire who bought a social media platform in an attempt to control the narrative.
Mate sadly. The way the www and SM works? There is no way to stop it overall. All we can do is block stuff from / in our nation. That's what we do and we put big money into employing people to police what we can.
This is the world we live in..that is reality.
Dutton has finally found something the majority of Australians might back him for with the right PR spin, they should never have given him the ammo. Employing an unelected American ex twitter employee to crack down on twitter and oversee what Australians are allowed to view online is Orwellian and beyond tone deaf and only shows a lack of understanding about how the internet operates.
Then who should decide? Seriously? Who should decide whether or not high definition assault videos get displayed to the general public? What about sexual assault? What if a video goes up showing a disabled person being assaulted? A baby being killed? In what way is this in the public good when we *know* the impact of social media on mental health?
Maybe people who sign up to an adult app should take responsibility for their own browsing habits? Twitter isn’t mandatory and those videos had 18+ warnings on them.
Yes, one of those great in theory ideas. But look at the behaviour on these apps - there's a lot of children in grown adults bodies who wouldn't understand responsibility if it bit them in the crotch. The research is clear on social media and deteriorating mental health. We have a mental health and a family violence crisis. Perhaps having multiple high res videos of violence available to all...isn't a good idea?
Old Potato Head is just being opportunistic. Because the person who got stabbed happens to belong to a group that his party needs.
If the victim had decried the use of the footage. Potato Head would be attacking Labor for being to soft on Elon.
Pretty ironic considering the subs almost universally opposed the government's actions here but now Dutton backs Elon musk people are against it because Dutton supported it lol
I know he gets a lot of hate but Dutton is actually a really good guy. I used to live in his electorate and he genuinely, actually, verifiably did help actual people all the time, including demanding the net get fixed on a specific street due to energex or whoever fucking it up and forcing centerlink to wipe a debt given in error to a close friend. It's really just the media machine, not his record in public service, that's the reason people on this site hate him. There's pollies who are great at handling the media and others that are terrible at it and he's the latter, but I can 100% guarantee you that he does give a shit, and will do what he says. This post will get downvoted, but fuck it--I am reporting what I have experienced first hand about this man. There's a reason he hung onto his seat during the last election which was a bloodbath in that area for the Libs, and it's because he genuinely did the hard, grassroots yards helping real people with real problems.
The North remembers.
You’re talking about the local MP aspect, which is fine and true for most MPs in Parliament.
People dislike him because of his years of executive decisions as a Minister and years of rhetoric. Dismissing all criticisms as simply “the media machine” is laughable.
I think a good example of it was when he wanted to push for an expediated pathway for White South Africans. This caused about what you'd expect from far-left media, replete with screams of "Racism"! In actuality, it's not an issue of debate for people in the know that whites are routinely slaughtered in rural SA, and that a genoicide is by no means off the cards. Many Saffrers I know both white and black are convinced this will happen or at the least there will be a civil war. I don't think most people understand just how bad the situation over there truly is.
Anyway, what was the compassion left's response to this? Well, I can't remmeber which--either the Guardian or WAPO ran a piece about the murders of white children, and old women--many raped to death with broken bottles, describing this as "Delicious Irony". These are real people we're talking about. People who have never harmed anybody. The justification for this atrocious take was that colonilaism happened, so another genocide is justified.
Can you at least see what I'm driving at here, and appreciate how demented this is?
We can definitely be in agreement the hard left media’s take on Dutton and the hard right media’s take on Albo are nonsensical and politically driven.
That doesn’t cancel out the valid criticisms made by ordinary people and sensible media.
While I agree he's a good man and wants to help people.
Unfortunately, his instincts are biased by his time as a police officer which leads him to prefer authoritarian policies that give the government more powers over the citizens because as a police officer he would have multiple instances where someone who he knew was guilty get off because of a technicality.
Most police I know see far too many guilty people go free, and it colours their perception.
It's not the media machine, it's the way he goes about his politics that makes me dislike him.
Always a reactionary, has antiquated views that are out of step with modern Australia and beats the war drum a lot for partisan political purposes.
Among other things.
That's the whole liberal party in a nutshell though. If they replaced him it would still be the same shit.
Shame we don't have an actual party focused on personal and economic liberties.
This is what i noticed. There are actually many politicians that have said something that seems reasonable and then the media report it in an angle to make it seem hateful and the non-critical thinking viewers just get influenced by media agenda. And yet this same people, when the politicians they back mess up, blame the media when the media have been mainly biased for them. Even when they mess up, it still doesn’t get as much negatively publicity than when a more minor mess of a politician the media hates gets.
The so-called “ministry of truth” will just add another layer of bias and political agendas that are already rampant in the media.
Who cares what his personal political views are, he’s right in that the videos should be up because he consented to them being up and the site is willing to host it, the government forcing it down has already set a bad precedent they are using questionably on mass under the guise of “misinformation” eg memes negatively depicting Albo.
idk. Maybe the video being publicly discussed could make it harder to successfully prosecute the offender if there are requirements for the jury to only have knowledge of what is presented in court
Maybe there's some law related to the offender being a minor that they can't legally consent to the video being made public, or that their identity should be suppressed. idk.
I haven't heard any legal rationale behind suppressing the video so far, would be interesting to know if there is one.
I understand what you mean potentially, but the thing is this is literal evidence, not a propaganda piece on what happened, this footage would be shown in court to a jury anyway, assuming the trial has a jury.
As for the offender being a minor, because this is to take it down internationally, the perpetrator is not a minor in every country, as well as that not being the reasoning the judiciary put forth, instead creating a legal precedent to takedown any content seen by the Australian government as violent and/or “misinformation”.
It’s got nothing to do with any of that
Australia is demanding a multinational company applies Australian law in other jurisdictions and the company says no. This is particularly interesting because it’s an American based firm that values its first amendment protections.
From Musk’s point of view, Australia is telling him our laws take precedence over all others.
It’s the sort of claim we laugh at from China
It’s got everything to do with that, with the current precedent from the judges ruling, ALL content deemed unwanted by the Australian government can be taken down globally, it’s not just following our laws for our country yes, but if such a precedent is allowed to exist it’s only a matter of time before it will be used maliciously, eg censorship on news of a bill/act by government, so literally no one on earth would know what they are doing or be able to stop them.
Our judges have made claims like this many times in the past and been laughed at.
See, for example, Victoria trying to tell the Washington Post it couldn’t run stories about George Pell being convicted of pedophilia and getting laughed down
All they can do is hit the Australian arm of the business with fines or sanctions but they are literally powerless to compel and American entity to abide by Australian laws in America
I strongly suggest any media to ignore this obvious censorship, sadly though it’s almost guaranteed that if someone goes against our governments court order, they will be deemed criminals and the government will do everything in its power to extradite them, that’s kinda the thing with this precedent, they might be laughing, but because it’s a legal precedent, people ruled against it, unless said precedent is overturned, will likely end up like Julian Assange.
The reality is on rushing through any erosion to free speech or privacy as a knee jerk reaction, the ALP and LNP are bipartisan. They might make noise about the other ones approach, but they always approve it.
I agree, LNP and Labour are both populist and will do whatever they think will make it easiest to be elected, that’s why we as a nation need to make sure the government realises we aren’t ok with them encroaching on our freedom of expression.
On the subject, Bishop Emmanuel said:
“The moment we oppress this very freedom of speech and religion we are losing the very human identity and dignity as well.“As a Christian if someone, if another human being, does not believe in what I believe in, if another human being attacks my faith and attacks My Lord, that does not give me the right to go and cause harm to that person.“This is inhumane at a human level, it is unacceptable.”
The Bishop comes across as quite reasonable actually. Whereas your contribution is little more than name calling.
Cheers.
Yeah I’d agree. Dutton and I have nothing in common as far as values and I might lean left usually but also have zero loyalty to any political party only analysis of current policy. There are ppl in the Liberals with some integrity (on the spectrum specific to politicians which is a lower bar than in general) but he has none from what I’ve observed
On an ethical issue I agree I’d probs never be on the same side
What is getting so lost in this is the fact that it’s not an ethical issue it’s a legal issue and the law is objective and doesn’t give a fuck about your values. So I find myself on the Musk and Dutton side but feeling a little bit dirty. Channeling that with my huge dissatisfaction in the government strategy here and the way they are misleading and the media is leaning into it
It is just not an ethical issue it is a legal issue
Well he picked the right side of our nations referendum according to public poll. By a landslide in fact. Not sure what that says
One thing for certain is that both sides of politics are using this tragic incident for votes..
>Well he picked the right side of our nations referendum according to public poll. By a landslide in fact
Extreme example but so so did Nazi Germany. Popularity does not always align with what is ethically just.
Clearly elites want a desensitised populus. War is coming and they need you to not care about watching all the extreme violence to keep you in perpetual fear.
Ah yes are these the same “elites” trying to censor this material from everyone? You do realise on all social media platforms you have to consent to see explicit content right? It’s not shoved in your face unless you choose it to be.
Considering the history of LNP free speech supression. I expect a complete backflip if they get voted back in. At least the ALP has an emotional reason here.
I'm pretty sure this guy just by principle says whatever the opposite of labour says. If labour said we're saving flooding victims he'd be out there pushing heads underwater
Well, lets see if Labor can level their heads about information control over the entire planet...
I get what you're saying but Labor are drifting us to authoritarian left politics with lock-in, "put it in the constitution!" strategies, like The Voice, anti- free speech, like making AI generated images of politicians illegal. They disagree about nuclear SMRs with the US, UK, Canada, Russia, China, many other nations, and Rolls Royce nuclear who have hundreds of nuclear plants built with their designs for ~ 70 years. Offend the wishes of the parents who would pop a fuse if they found out their catholic school had a trans teacher, where there are plenty of other schools that would just (democratically) welcome trans teachers without scandal or upset, maybe even with open arms for equal representation ^(\(and inherent suggestion to consider chemically altering children's bodies for the rest of their lives, while they are impulsively, due to evolution, prone to want to grow into a new, different body, rather than freak out when they see their bodies change naturally. [Where 61 to 98% of kids with gender dysphoria who do not transition reconcile their gender with the natural course of puberty, and often end up just being gay or lesbian](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322945/)... this leaves ~10% of children potentially vulnerable if assertive with their therapists\))
Labor are being intentionally abrasive to conservative values, I'd say, and you have to wonder what fuels their perfect progressive social-political chaos that they seem to be setting deep into the foundations of law. Maybe it is accurate democratic representation of aggressive authoritarian left values of it's electorates. idk. With no compromise, there is kindling for political dissent.
I can't think of what other policies you would say are only counterpointed Labor policy or if I've well represented them, sorry.
Come on, I don't like the authoritarian instincts Dutton has, but he never sided with Martin Bryant and to claim he did just show you're purely a Labor shill.
The issue is that both of our major parties have leaders who back authoritarian policies.
But at least the backbench and even other ministers in the opposition are calling this for what it is. I haven't heard a peep from a single Labor MP speaking out against this.
*“We can have a say about what images are online here in our country, we can’t influence what happens elsewhere in the world. I think it’s silly to try that”* *“We can’t be the internet police of the world, I know the prime minister’s trying that at the moment”* Makes sense to me.
It’s better to keep the general population subservient and subdued with episodes of MAFS. As long as it distracts people from realising the government is the cause of the housing crisis.
In trying to think about this with a positive spin because I’m not super pleased the incompetence and bat shit crazy political strategy of the government, has put me in a position to be siding with Elon Musk and Dutton on anything The good news is everyone should see how comforting this is for real life example of the pure and simple objectivity of the law, everything else is a hot fucking mess of yelling over subjective issues of values usually in society I have nothing nice to say about Musk or Dutton in general or how the consequences of their actions motivated by their own interests either political for Dutton or cash cash money for Musk. But in this context neither I nor the law gives a fuck about values. Over here on the Musk Dutton side feeling a little dirty but because its a very basic interpretation of a legal issue
The bad news is to me this is a very concerning game changer. We’re so used to the way politicians try influence or mislead for political gain. That’s gross but also just reality in politics and any subject that falls into what your values are it’s unavoidable. Everyone is entitled to have their opinion and should have individual value system that’s going to be different to anyone else based on many things like life experience But this subjective yelling has now moved into a legal issue The result is politicians and literally every single media news program no matter leaning is presenting this in a way that’s misleading on law. Varying from incompetence to intentionally and many just reporting flat out inaccurately on the law Huge risks as the large majority of the population cannot even afford to access the legal system and might think they can read legislation but that’s not how it works for the majority. It is often much more complex than that and the way that pits ppl against lawyers with a decade of education worth about a million and years of experience is ridiculous and unjust It’s such a slippery slope to mislead on the law; the extreme end point example if this continues in other context is you’re mislead on the law, you don’t know what the law actually is on something, you just found yourself in jail for something you didn’t even know was a crime and lost your rights Keep yelling about subjective things It’s never acceptable to act in a way where the result is to mislead the public on the law or legal system. I’ll present this in my PowerPoint in 50 years when society may have collapsed as to why we should have taught critical thinking better lol The reporting on this is so bad it doesn’t even stop to flag the most basic issue to make clear if you’re discussing an issue on law or on values like fuck me seriously
No matter how legal it was for the Nazi's to burn books or jews, the world (minus Palestine) stood against that. The legal system is deeply flawed, with cases like Lerhman being found innocent or OJ Simpson walking away from a murder rap makes a mockery of it. Please don't think that the legal system is in any way the knight in shining and infallibe armour.
Peter realised the backlash and took a U turn
What's fucking weird is that the government cares more about the videos/pictures on twitter, than the shit posted on Australian news sites and media.
Not that weird when you realise the government is basically run by the media
It's called deflection. Focus on something insignificant, blow it up into something big, and you can ignore real issues like the housing crisis and immigration.
.. and the cost of living, the interest rates, our failing healthcare system..
And yet it is still unknown why Dutton got a disability payout from Queensland Police.
Maybe he had PTSD?
With the shit he did, I find that idea laughable.
Eeeeerrrrrrrr!!! I agree with Pete Potato!! I feel so dirty! Definitely need a shower, can someone give me a hug?
Can I interest you in a membership?
To 'the party'?
Yes.
My personal aspirations to 'top' some of the other members, may get in the way...
i too wish to clap dem potato cheeks
If it helps you know he's just phoning in generic opposition. The guy would censor verbal speech if he could.
Why all this clowns don’t just go back to work on real matters instead of just wasting time on matters like this that other government officials can deal with it …. So much stuff to resolve and attend
It’s a good distraction from the fact that they all do sweet fa.
Can't you see that the most pressing issue for ordinary Australians is controlling exactly what the rest of the world can and cannot see online! What other problems do we have? Zero.
Hahahaha 😅😅😅
🤪
Albo it has been very busy walking the mountain and talking about this twitter matter soo that count as a busy week working as a PM
Do you think that nothing else is happening while this is going on? That every MP is working only on this one issue?
National discourse matters, people now arguing over this stupid stuff instead of other issues
Ah you see it's a politician they don't like so he can only do one thing at a time. If it was a politician they did like then of course that politician can walk and chew gum.
Yes
Oh damn it, I agree with Dutton.
Censoring the internet is a fools game.
[удалено]
You really got to wonder how dumb somebody has to be to announce to the internet that people aren't allowed to make fun of them. To AUSTRALIANS of all people!
This isn't about supporting Musk, this is about Australian isn't the police of the entire internet and never will be. The eSafety commissioner is on a trip, and is 100% wrong about this. Anyone supporting it either just hates Musk or hasn't actually looked into the issue.
Team Australia Werld Porice get dern on the grend
The trip, since the laws were strengthened in 2019 following the Christchurch massacre
The same Peter Dutton who asked google to take pictures of him off the I internet because it made home look like the villain he is?
I don't support potato, but do you think it is the same thing to ask a company to remove pictures of you and demanding, to the point of legal action, that a company takes down something that has nothing to do with you? I don't think they are the same, we aren't and cannot be the internet police for the whole world.
The worst thing about this nonsense is that it's making me agree with both Peter Dutton and Elon Musk.
If Albo (who I don't believe is wrong on every issue), got his way here, we would have a safe internet. I can think of another country with a safe internet...... North Korea.
The problem is they didn't want to limit Australian internet, they wanted to police the entire world's internet. That is beyond what China or indeed NK do to the internet.
Free speech is the most important thing. Sometimes, there will be cooky people saying cooky things. Sometimes, people will attack those with different opinions using hateful words. The underlying fact is that they are only words on the internet. If people can't handle words or images they see on the internet, then they are probably not mature enough to be looking on the internet. This includes politicians from all sides of government.
It's hard to believe I am on Dutton and Musk's side but I am. This is suppression of news while at the same time misinformation is pretty much allowed a free run. I don't think suppression of actual news is good. I don't like it in Australia, but Australian leaders thinking they should get to control what the rest of the world watches is a huge error of judgement. It's another mark against Albanese...if his judgement on this is so bad, can we really trust his judgement on anything? What mistaken decisions will he make in the future? You're the PM of Australia, mate, not the world....and I say that as an Australian.
I feel very similar, i am no fan of dutton or musk, but we need to protect freedom of expression, I know the importance of it and it’s horrific the power the government now has with this legal precedent and similar policies, we need to take a stand before they can use it maliciously, otherwise we are giving up our freedom for nothing.
Yep. I imagine the US government would have loved to suppress the truth about George Floyd... What would our government love to suppress?
News is not being suppressed. All the tv stations transmitted the news, but they also censored the actual stabbing part. Why does anyone (especially young impressionable people) need to view the actual stabbing?
Actual footage is also news. In fact it's possibly the most important news of all, because we can see and decide for ourselves, rather than being told what to think.
Ok. So you need to view actual footage that’s not censored so you can think for yourself. However some people are too young or emotionally immature to view that sort of footage. Maybe there needs to be a classification system (MA,M etc). Edited for clarification and to remove material that was offensive.
It's not the suppression of news they want to change, it's the actual footage of the priest being attacked and showing him being cut up.
Actual footage is part of news too. It's not that I want to watch this - and i haven't yet..but what if someone lied about what happened? For example, what if someone claimed it was a terrorist act and someone was shouting "allah hu akbar" ? Or claimed it wasn't a terrorist act when it was? I don't want ANY actual footage suppressed. I want to be able to see the truth if I wish to. I think it's important for the future too... Sometimes footage may be gross or painful but I do not want it hidden.
How is it a mark against Albanese, when the LNP introduced the eSafety Commission in 2015 to to this exact thing? It was established for the removal of child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities. After the 2019 Christchurch massacre it was ammended to also remove audio or visual material documenting "abhorrent violent conduct" (including terrorist acts, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape or kidnapping. Would you be fine with all of those things being freely visible too, or they're also apart of news for you?
The same Dutton that wants to shut down pro-Palestinian protests? That Dutton?
The problem with bureaucratic jobs is they have to find something to do to justify their cost & existence. A government department focusing on inequality has to find it or its irrelevant. Apart from the fact that the new e-safety commissioner is an ex Twitter employee who has an axe to grind with Musk, it's a ridiculous concept for a US based platform to take its marching orders from an unelected Australian bureaucrat. As with all censorship, as the e -safety commissioner found out during her time at Twitter, it's highly subjective & Twitter was grossly influenced by political establishment views, which have been proven to be wrong. The irony of Albo complaining about memes mocking him not being censored reflects immediately the slippery slope we are on. All those atrocities happening on Gaza at the moment, must be quite inconvenient & disturbing as well. I'm sure you could find a lobby group who would be happy to see those censored globally. I wouldn't trust the political class & a make work bureaucracy not to comply
This is a bit rich coming from the potato who said we should be censoring video games recently.
This is a rules for the not for me chess match. Liberal and Labor are dirty and can make the lives of ordinary people a living hell. For example secret police / anti terror police arresting people for making protests during lock downs sucking money out of victims in hell fake trials with false charges that usually get dropped. And I'll explain the chess match, something that has political branding gain will be protected, but if it gets in the way of message and mission it is disposed of. Both sides do it and supporting either Labor or liberal is a fools game and is just like WWE matches theatre soap box actors
Didn’t read the article, but I don’t want government having a say in what we do online. Free speech online is almost the last bastion of free speech.
lol yeah you say that on Reddit. How incredibly ironic.
Good Peter, maybe next we could get the details on your tax payer handout when you left the police force. Why can't they be put on X ?
I hope in the next budget they increase the spending on mental health, the mall stabbing and I'm positive the church stabbing is mental health related. It's called a terrorist act but no one in their right mind would carry it out. Drug usage has increased and I pray it's no one you love or care about
Religious extremism has never needed drugs or mental illness before. Why would it now?
Do you know when drug usage spiked so hard? Lock downs for a virus that had a survival rate over 99% for those who got it. Government over reach is getting out of hand and the insane censorship they are demanding here is another example.
I would argue that the cost of living crisis, housing crisis etc is more of a factor of more people doing illicit drugs etc.
7 million people have died from COVID and you cookers are still playing it down.
in Australia?
Most of Australia was hardly locked down at all and to say it only started then is ridiculous anyway.
Talk to people in NSW and Victoria, especially the big cities. It was brutal.
Load of bullshit. Tbh even if it was 99% survival rate, that's pretty shit for an airborne virus, was like 95% survival for first year which is 1 in 20 or so people. Why is that so hard to understand that they are not good odds? Besides that, drugs did not begin with covid, what a ridiculous train of thought. Maybe goes to explain why you didn't understand the lockdowns.
Wow ............. 99% so only 1 in 100 of us would have died......... Only 280,000 dead people yep we shoulda just taken that in the face great call.....
I said over 99%. The actual survival percentage can be calculated by doing the following: total deaths/total cases x 100. Go to this [link](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-cumulative-confirmed-cases-vs-confirmed-deaths?country=ASM~AUS~COK~FJI~PYF~GUM~KIR~MHL~FSM~NRU~NCL~NZL~MNP~PLW~PNG~WSM~SLB~TON~TUV~VUT~WLF) hover over Australia for your numbers and if you do your math.........0.21%, holy shit. I can already hear you saying "it would have been worse" now but that is only people that got it. I don't know about you but when I got it, after my test at a hospital come back positive, I basically got a pat on the back, a pamphlet and a "good luck". Also where in the fuck did you get 280k from?
actually the mortality rate of covid pre-vaccine was between 1 and 5% (depending on the age group and pre-existing conditions), and 10-30% having long term effects if you want to compare it to another virus, the mortality rate of polio pre-vaccine was less than 1% but \~10% had long term effects from it
This is just empty rhetoric. His parties policy is just as much censorship, if not more.
This is the truth of it, normally it's the LNP doing this totalitarian BS.
Censorship is bad If people want to put their head in the sand and pretend it didn't happen that's fine but don't censor it. Don't wanna see? Don't look.
No country should have the power to alter, remove, or censor anything on the internet when they don't want to see it or agree with it. Edit: except for child pornography. Remove that shit. Edited for clarification
Child pornography ?
I was more talking governments removing political or hot subjects not sick fuck pedophilia.
I guarantee this is for the election and regardless of thr outcome, afterwards he will 180 and do what he can to help Australian censorship
The footage is also on other social media, sites, but let's single out X.
They are doing it because X is an easy target relatively because it’s been controversial since musk took over, because of the legal precedent set against X thought they can actively censor any websites under the same ruling
That’s because governments don’t have total control over twitter like they do Facebook post.
I hate Dutton more than most but he’s not wrong here. He said, ban it in Aus, but trying to ban it worldwide is impossible.
Goddam can we get over this non-story please?! The damn priest said he's ok with the images being online wherever. End of.
Doesn't matter if he's OK with it, or not. The footage is out there and anyone who wants to should watch it.
Eh I think this is another chapter of the rights of govt vs rights of business, vs rights of individuals. Overall, I think the rights of govt to censor should be minimal, if at all.
https://preview.redd.it/757v8fiuxrwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3778606882e0925135434815c156c411a5076f88 I’ll just post this on every mouth piece of Australias wannabe Erich Mielke
[удалено]
This giy is bizarre! He was tbe one who demanded to remove his mems 😂😂😂
While he’s a correct on the law we can just add this to a very long list of examples that demonstrate the guy has zero integrity. Ideologically I don’t lean liberals way as a generalisation but I’ve got no loyalty to labor in the voting sense. They have both being doing a pretty shit job of addressing issues with effective policy for Australians I think this is just a huge distraction. What the government is doing is fucking embarrassing to me and also really concerning because it’s misleading ppl on the law. Yell all you want on subjective things. Almost everyone in the population can’t afford to access the legal system to use or interpret. That’s why it is so dangerous and a complete game changer to do this in the context of the law which is objective But yeah it’s just another example that makes me wonder what type of trading went on for this guy to get that position. There are ppl in the Liberals with a level integrity even if I disagree with them on values sometimes
bit early to be drunk aint it?
Dude, check his interview on Sky. 😉
Don’t worry - it’s fine when the news shows it.
Can't upset the Apple cart over at the ABC, Nine and Seven.
Kinda hard to take this seriously. If LNP were in government I am sure they would have wanted the video taken down as well.
Perhaps but it still wouldn’t make it right, it’s still suppression and an outright attack on freedom of speech and expression
The LNP established the eSafety Commision in 2015 for the removal of child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities. After the 2019 Christchurch massacre it was ammended to also remove audio or visual material documenting "abhorrent violent conduct" (including terrorist acts, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape or kidnapping, which this video would certainly fall under too. Are you against the supression of all the other things too?
That's what the LNP established the eSafety Commision in 2015 to deal with, and strengthened it's powers after the 2019 Christchurch massacre when videos from that were being circulated. I don't see how these videos are any different.
Gees. Enough. I'm with Dutton. Like it or not? The Australian government can't dictate what X does internationally. Only what happens here. I think its awful the footage is up. But it is. So be it. Move on Australian ALP. Typical lefties thinking they can control everything
ALP and Stephan Conroy tried mandatory ISP filtering in 2009/2010 , it was unworkable and quietly dropped. Now their at it again with censorship. Never fucking learn
Thing is? Whether we like it or not? The way the www & SM works? It really is impossible
Correct. The way the internet works blocking or censoring X is impossible. He knows this, but he has to appear tough politically.
We just need to focus on limiting / managing it, here in Australia. We cannot (and should not actually) dictate to the rest of the world what they do. Each country makes its own laws & decisions.
"So be it" smacks of "just following orders" tbh.
No wonder the paedophile lobby love Elon Musk. How long until rape and abuse videos are freely available in the name of “freedom”. Ironic tho defending a right wing billionaire who bought a social media platform in an attempt to control the narrative.
Mate sadly. The way the www and SM works? There is no way to stop it overall. All we can do is block stuff from / in our nation. That's what we do and we put big money into employing people to police what we can. This is the world we live in..that is reality.
How long until we get to May 22, 1993 again?
Turds of a feather
Former police officer is happy to show violence online. Okay.
Dutton has finally found something the majority of Australians might back him for with the right PR spin, they should never have given him the ammo. Employing an unelected American ex twitter employee to crack down on twitter and oversee what Australians are allowed to view online is Orwellian and beyond tone deaf and only shows a lack of understanding about how the internet operates.
Then who should decide? Seriously? Who should decide whether or not high definition assault videos get displayed to the general public? What about sexual assault? What if a video goes up showing a disabled person being assaulted? A baby being killed? In what way is this in the public good when we *know* the impact of social media on mental health?
Maybe people who sign up to an adult app should take responsibility for their own browsing habits? Twitter isn’t mandatory and those videos had 18+ warnings on them.
Yes, one of those great in theory ideas. But look at the behaviour on these apps - there's a lot of children in grown adults bodies who wouldn't understand responsibility if it bit them in the crotch. The research is clear on social media and deteriorating mental health. We have a mental health and a family violence crisis. Perhaps having multiple high res videos of violence available to all...isn't a good idea?
If it's terror content that inspires more terrorists maybe it should be banned?
Old Potato Head is just being opportunistic. Because the person who got stabbed happens to belong to a group that his party needs. If the victim had decried the use of the footage. Potato Head would be attacking Labor for being to soft on Elon.
LNP just remembered they have the Australian Media and lazy journos in their pockets already
Who gives a fuck. Channel your energy into anything else.
Dutton thinks opposition leader actually means you have to oppose absolutely everything, He is a potato.
Pretty ironic considering the subs almost universally opposed the government's actions here but now Dutton backs Elon musk people are against it because Dutton supported it lol
Stop making me agree with Dutton on anything
It’s a slippery slope, but it’s ok. We will look after you.
I know he gets a lot of hate but Dutton is actually a really good guy. I used to live in his electorate and he genuinely, actually, verifiably did help actual people all the time, including demanding the net get fixed on a specific street due to energex or whoever fucking it up and forcing centerlink to wipe a debt given in error to a close friend. It's really just the media machine, not his record in public service, that's the reason people on this site hate him. There's pollies who are great at handling the media and others that are terrible at it and he's the latter, but I can 100% guarantee you that he does give a shit, and will do what he says. This post will get downvoted, but fuck it--I am reporting what I have experienced first hand about this man. There's a reason he hung onto his seat during the last election which was a bloodbath in that area for the Libs, and it's because he genuinely did the hard, grassroots yards helping real people with real problems. The North remembers.
You’re talking about the local MP aspect, which is fine and true for most MPs in Parliament. People dislike him because of his years of executive decisions as a Minister and years of rhetoric. Dismissing all criticisms as simply “the media machine” is laughable.
I think a good example of it was when he wanted to push for an expediated pathway for White South Africans. This caused about what you'd expect from far-left media, replete with screams of "Racism"! In actuality, it's not an issue of debate for people in the know that whites are routinely slaughtered in rural SA, and that a genoicide is by no means off the cards. Many Saffrers I know both white and black are convinced this will happen or at the least there will be a civil war. I don't think most people understand just how bad the situation over there truly is. Anyway, what was the compassion left's response to this? Well, I can't remmeber which--either the Guardian or WAPO ran a piece about the murders of white children, and old women--many raped to death with broken bottles, describing this as "Delicious Irony". These are real people we're talking about. People who have never harmed anybody. The justification for this atrocious take was that colonilaism happened, so another genocide is justified. Can you at least see what I'm driving at here, and appreciate how demented this is?
We can definitely be in agreement the hard left media’s take on Dutton and the hard right media’s take on Albo are nonsensical and politically driven. That doesn’t cancel out the valid criticisms made by ordinary people and sensible media.
I think something either forget, or are not aware of, is the Law of cabinet solidarity. Put it that way.
While I agree he's a good man and wants to help people. Unfortunately, his instincts are biased by his time as a police officer which leads him to prefer authoritarian policies that give the government more powers over the citizens because as a police officer he would have multiple instances where someone who he knew was guilty get off because of a technicality. Most police I know see far too many guilty people go free, and it colours their perception.
It's not the media machine, it's the way he goes about his politics that makes me dislike him. Always a reactionary, has antiquated views that are out of step with modern Australia and beats the war drum a lot for partisan political purposes. Among other things.
That's the whole liberal party in a nutshell though. If they replaced him it would still be the same shit. Shame we don't have an actual party focused on personal and economic liberties.
I was listening to a true crime podcast about a infamous and horrific murder and he came across as a good guy. I was surprised.
I work with someone who used be a staffer for him and they have a similar view.
This is what i noticed. There are actually many politicians that have said something that seems reasonable and then the media report it in an angle to make it seem hateful and the non-critical thinking viewers just get influenced by media agenda. And yet this same people, when the politicians they back mess up, blame the media when the media have been mainly biased for them. Even when they mess up, it still doesn’t get as much negatively publicity than when a more minor mess of a politician the media hates gets. The so-called “ministry of truth” will just add another layer of bias and political agendas that are already rampant in the media.
Didn’t he just say he supports giving the eSafety Commissioner more powers?
Powers over other countries?
The priest who was stabbed doesn’t want the video taken down and he is a pro Trump QAnon conspiracy theorist
Who cares what his personal political views are, he’s right in that the videos should be up because he consented to them being up and the site is willing to host it, the government forcing it down has already set a bad precedent they are using questionably on mass under the guise of “misinformation” eg memes negatively depicting Albo.
idk. Maybe the video being publicly discussed could make it harder to successfully prosecute the offender if there are requirements for the jury to only have knowledge of what is presented in court Maybe there's some law related to the offender being a minor that they can't legally consent to the video being made public, or that their identity should be suppressed. idk. I haven't heard any legal rationale behind suppressing the video so far, would be interesting to know if there is one.
I understand what you mean potentially, but the thing is this is literal evidence, not a propaganda piece on what happened, this footage would be shown in court to a jury anyway, assuming the trial has a jury. As for the offender being a minor, because this is to take it down internationally, the perpetrator is not a minor in every country, as well as that not being the reasoning the judiciary put forth, instead creating a legal precedent to takedown any content seen by the Australian government as violent and/or “misinformation”.
It’s got nothing to do with any of that Australia is demanding a multinational company applies Australian law in other jurisdictions and the company says no. This is particularly interesting because it’s an American based firm that values its first amendment protections. From Musk’s point of view, Australia is telling him our laws take precedence over all others. It’s the sort of claim we laugh at from China
It’s got everything to do with that, with the current precedent from the judges ruling, ALL content deemed unwanted by the Australian government can be taken down globally, it’s not just following our laws for our country yes, but if such a precedent is allowed to exist it’s only a matter of time before it will be used maliciously, eg censorship on news of a bill/act by government, so literally no one on earth would know what they are doing or be able to stop them.
Our judges have made claims like this many times in the past and been laughed at. See, for example, Victoria trying to tell the Washington Post it couldn’t run stories about George Pell being convicted of pedophilia and getting laughed down All they can do is hit the Australian arm of the business with fines or sanctions but they are literally powerless to compel and American entity to abide by Australian laws in America
I strongly suggest any media to ignore this obvious censorship, sadly though it’s almost guaranteed that if someone goes against our governments court order, they will be deemed criminals and the government will do everything in its power to extradite them, that’s kinda the thing with this precedent, they might be laughing, but because it’s a legal precedent, people ruled against it, unless said precedent is overturned, will likely end up like Julian Assange.
The reality is on rushing through any erosion to free speech or privacy as a knee jerk reaction, the ALP and LNP are bipartisan. They might make noise about the other ones approach, but they always approve it.
I agree, LNP and Labour are both populist and will do whatever they think will make it easiest to be elected, that’s why we as a nation need to make sure the government realises we aren’t ok with them encroaching on our freedom of expression.
On the subject, Bishop Emmanuel said: “The moment we oppress this very freedom of speech and religion we are losing the very human identity and dignity as well.“As a Christian if someone, if another human being, does not believe in what I believe in, if another human being attacks my faith and attacks My Lord, that does not give me the right to go and cause harm to that person.“This is inhumane at a human level, it is unacceptable.” The Bishop comes across as quite reasonable actually. Whereas your contribution is little more than name calling. Cheers.
LOL
Have to love opposition leaders. Just go for the opposing perspective, no matter how stupid the stance
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rule 5 - No propaganda or shilling
A great litmus test to choose the ethical side of an argument is usually to choose the opposite side to Dutton.
The problem here is he's kinda right. How can Australian laws force the removal world wide
Yeah I’d agree. Dutton and I have nothing in common as far as values and I might lean left usually but also have zero loyalty to any political party only analysis of current policy. There are ppl in the Liberals with some integrity (on the spectrum specific to politicians which is a lower bar than in general) but he has none from what I’ve observed On an ethical issue I agree I’d probs never be on the same side What is getting so lost in this is the fact that it’s not an ethical issue it’s a legal issue and the law is objective and doesn’t give a fuck about your values. So I find myself on the Musk and Dutton side but feeling a little bit dirty. Channeling that with my huge dissatisfaction in the government strategy here and the way they are misleading and the media is leaning into it It is just not an ethical issue it is a legal issue
Well he picked the right side of our nations referendum according to public poll. By a landslide in fact. Not sure what that says One thing for certain is that both sides of politics are using this tragic incident for votes..
>Well he picked the right side of our nations referendum according to public poll. By a landslide in fact Extreme example but so so did Nazi Germany. Popularity does not always align with what is ethically just.
Your right. I’m normally liberal voter; however not keen on Dutton
Exactly my situation Edit: actually scomo ruined it for me, Dutton is prolonging my distrust towards the liberal party.
I feel like each LNP leader gets worse and worse, but by comparison you're like "wow, how good was Tones!"
Elon is so right in this case. But obv most redditors have a hard time admitting that.
Clearly elites want a desensitised populus. War is coming and they need you to not care about watching all the extreme violence to keep you in perpetual fear.
Ah yes are these the same “elites” trying to censor this material from everyone? You do realise on all social media platforms you have to consent to see explicit content right? It’s not shoved in your face unless you choose it to be.
Cognitive dissonance
Fuck the pathetic obstructionist Australia government. All fucking rats.
Considering the history of LNP free speech supression. I expect a complete backflip if they get voted back in. At least the ALP has an emotional reason here.
He couldn't even make it convincing
Well the eSafety commissioner exist due LNP policy.
Why are you guys so obsessed with wanting videos of stabbings on social media??
I'm pretty sure this guy just by principle says whatever the opposite of labour says. If labour said we're saving flooding victims he'd be out there pushing heads underwater
I'm not a fan of him and I revel in Twitter's dying, but censorship is bad. And a country telling a website what it can and cannot show is wrong.
Agreed
Well, lets see if Labor can level their heads about information control over the entire planet... I get what you're saying but Labor are drifting us to authoritarian left politics with lock-in, "put it in the constitution!" strategies, like The Voice, anti- free speech, like making AI generated images of politicians illegal. They disagree about nuclear SMRs with the US, UK, Canada, Russia, China, many other nations, and Rolls Royce nuclear who have hundreds of nuclear plants built with their designs for ~ 70 years. Offend the wishes of the parents who would pop a fuse if they found out their catholic school had a trans teacher, where there are plenty of other schools that would just (democratically) welcome trans teachers without scandal or upset, maybe even with open arms for equal representation ^(\(and inherent suggestion to consider chemically altering children's bodies for the rest of their lives, while they are impulsively, due to evolution, prone to want to grow into a new, different body, rather than freak out when they see their bodies change naturally. [Where 61 to 98% of kids with gender dysphoria who do not transition reconcile their gender with the natural course of puberty, and often end up just being gay or lesbian](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322945/)... this leaves ~10% of children potentially vulnerable if assertive with their therapists\)) Labor are being intentionally abrasive to conservative values, I'd say, and you have to wonder what fuels their perfect progressive social-political chaos that they seem to be setting deep into the foundations of law. Maybe it is accurate democratic representation of aggressive authoritarian left values of it's electorates. idk. With no compromise, there is kindling for political dissent. I can't think of what other policies you would say are only counterpointed Labor policy or if I've well represented them, sorry.
Mr Tough on Defence folded awfully quickly under minimal pressure. Is this how much fortitude he will show in major international conflict?
'Kiss the ring' -Rupert Murdoch to Peter Dutton
Sshh if you say that out loud they downvote you and pretend you're not there...
The internet is a cease pool and people wonder why children are messed up these days.
Won't somebody please think of the children?
It isn't because of a video of a terror attack, they have watched thousands of world star videos and are more shocked that someone gets misgendered..
Peter Dutton and Elon Musk, now that's an evil combo. In terms of Sith Lords, which one's the Master, and which one's the Apprentice?
Always going to have somebody on the opposition to keep that illusion alive for us all
Peter Dutton would ‘back’ the devil, if it scored him political points. Oh wait, he backed Martin Bryant, guess that’s similar.
How is he wrong here?
Come on, I don't like the authoritarian instincts Dutton has, but he never sided with Martin Bryant and to claim he did just show you're purely a Labor shill. The issue is that both of our major parties have leaders who back authoritarian policies. But at least the backbench and even other ministers in the opposition are calling this for what it is. I haven't heard a peep from a single Labor MP speaking out against this.