QUACKTASTIC posted:

But think of the short-term savings!

Cultural Imperial posted:

loving lol

up next, roving gangs of cannibals

Doctor Spaceman posted:

https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/727633893629693952

Redcordial posted:

I don't understand why reporters don't just tell him to shut the gently caress up, but then again I do because good luck getting another job am I right.

Negligent posted:

All you really need to know about bill shorten is that when the Beaconsfield mine collapse happened he was thousands of miles away, but as soon as it became apparent the whole thing would be a media circus, bill dropped everything to put himself in front of the cameras. He is an unprincipled amoral opportunist of the first order and I'm glad he will never be prime minister of Australia.

Negligent posted:

All you really need to know about bill shorten is that when the Beaconsfield mine collapse happened he was thousands of miles away, but as soon as it became apparent the whole thing would be a media circus, bill dropped everything to put himself in front of the cameras. He is an unprincipled amoral opportunist of the first order and I'm glad he will never be prime minister of Australia.

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

https://twitter.com/braddybb/status/727636373637734400

Jumpingmanjim posted:

#lnpspill #pray4springborg

quote:

New South Wales police are on the verge of securing “extreme” new powers including to impose curfews on citizens, restrict who they spend time with or limit their communications, if they suspect involvement in “serious crime-related activity”.

The new “serious crime prevention orders” (SCPO) are similar to the control orders used on suspected terrorists, but broadened to a range of other offences including theft, tax evasion, money laundering or homicide.

Those acquitted of serious offences can still be issued a SCPO, as will people deemed to have engaged in conduct “likely to facilitate” a serious crime, defined as one punishable by at least five years’ prison.

The orders allow police to limit a person’s movement, associations, employment and internet access for an unlimited amount of time.

bill introducing SCPOs was being debated in the NSW parliament on Wednesday and is expected to pass before the end of the week.

Another bill, allowing police to stop a person from attending a public event if their presence is deemed “a serious risk to public safety”, is also being considered.

The Labor opposition is trying to amend the SCPO bill so an order can only be granted by the supreme court, with full rights of appeal. It is also seeking to prevent those acquitted of a serious offences from being subject to SCPOs based on substantially the same crime.

In a scathing April submission the NSW Bar Association criticised the government’s limited consultation with legal groups and its attempt to rush the bill through parliament.

“No evidence has been cited as to the ineffectiveness of the administration of criminal justice by a process of trial for ‘reducing serious and organised crime’ in New South Wales,” the submission said.

“The bill effectively sets up a rival to the criminal trial system and interferes unacceptably in the fundamental human rights and freedoms of citizens of NSW.

“The potential for interference in the liberties of citizens of New South Wales and their day to day lives is extreme,” it said.

Troy Grant police minister, has said the measures would provide police with a more effective way to reducing serious and organised crime by targeting business dealings and restricting suspects’ behaviour.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties on Wednesday said the orders were “extraordinary, unwarranted and dangerous”.

Also under consideration this week are new continuing detention orders, permitting police to monitor convicted murderers in prison or monitor them closely after their release. Such orders already exist in the case of convicted rapists deemed to pose a high risk of reoffending.

The state attorney general, Gabrielle Upton, said the new orders would “encourage prisoners to rehabilitate as part of their sentence”.

Anidav posted:

Happening?

quote:

Federal prosecutors in Brazil have filed a 155 billion real ($58.2 billion) civil lawsuit against iron miner Samarco, and its owners Vale SA and BHP Billiton, for a collapsed tailings dam that killed 19 people and polluted a major river.

Anidav posted:

Anidav posted: