Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Regular Wario
Mar 27, 2010

Slippery Tilde

Recoome posted:

Wow, amazing that the person who leaked the Lehrmann case review was actually the former Justice who authored it.

What the actual gently caress.

i havent been following this story and am also an idiot, this is bad?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Robodog
Oct 22, 2004

...how does that work?
parts of the case review utterly failed to turn up who exactly disclosed text messages to the press, and then the case review itself is leaked to the press, by the guy in charge of doing the case review

its like a 2/10 really not a great look

Eediot Jedi
Dec 25, 2007

This is where I begin to speculate what being a
man of my word costs me

Also they gave a copy to the media before they gave a copy to the person the report was supposed to go to. It's not even like the usual leak scenario where the report was handed in months ago, parked forever, then someone gets fed up and leaks it to make something happen.

DRINK ME
Jul 31, 2006
i cant fix avs like this because idk the bbcode - HTML IS BS MAN
If journalists are cozying up to you buying you drinks it’s not because they’re your friend

quote:

Sofronoff explained to the chief minister that he believed it was “possible to identify journalists who are ethical” and that he judged neither of the pair would “take the serious step of betraying his trust by behaving unprofessionally”.


Sofronoff also revealed that he “sometimes told journalists what appeared” to him “to be the issues that would arise on the following day’s hearings”, Barr said.

Is this case special because it’s so public and that caused so many gently caress-ups, or do they regularly have this many gently caress-ups and we don’t see them because most cases aren’t so public?

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
who the gently caress is funding Lehrmann? and can they stop please

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
It's gunna suck when he has his own Sky News show and Daily Telegraph column. The Miranda Devine of rape.

birdstrike
Oct 30, 2008

i;m gay

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

who the gently caress is funding Lehrmann? and can they stop please

https://twitter.com/serkanthewriter/status/1669292747956817920?s=46&t=-SJ0iV1ryOF9h29u1nKy4g

Recoome
Nov 9, 2013

Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

DRINK ME posted:

If journalists are cozying up to you buying you drinks it’s not because they’re your friend

Is this case special because it’s so public and that caused so many gently caress-ups, or do they regularly have this many gently caress-ups and we don’t see them because most cases aren’t so public?

So what we have is a clear case of prejudice because the guy doing the review knows what’ll happen the next day and shapes the media narrative.

Extremely cool and normal.

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002


Are you still reading true crime weekly and all the other tinfoil news websites?

birdstrike
Oct 30, 2008

i;m gay

hambeet posted:

Are you still reading true crime weekly and all the other tinfoil news websites?

you know it. tcnw, kangaroo court, fin review, the klaxon. all the muck that’s fit to rake

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe

Guardian Australia posted:

Support for the voice was strongest among women, with 47% in favour compared with 40% opposed, and among people aged 18 to 34, with 62% in favour compared with 26% opposed.

Opposition to the voice was strongest among men, 55% of whom said no; among people aged over 55, 65% of whom said no; and among supporters of the Coalition, minor parties and independents.

The most common reason cited for opposing the voice was “It won’t make a real difference to the lives of ordinary Indigenous Australians” (cited by 58% of no voters), followed by “It will give Indigenous Australians rights and privileges that other Australians don’t have” (42%).

I love that the two major reasons for voting no are entirely contradictory, good job Albo, it's the worst of both worlds!

God I loving hate this racist rear end god drat country.

Eediot Jedi
Dec 25, 2007

This is where I begin to speculate what being a
man of my word costs me

hambeet posted:

Are you still reading true crime weekly and all the other tinfoil news websites?

The dude posted a twitter 𝕏 embed, how much more evidence do you need of brain rot?

lih
May 15, 2013

Just a friendly reminder of what it looks like.

We'll do punctuation later.

hooman posted:

I love that the two major reasons for voting no are entirely contradictory, good job Albo, it's the worst of both worlds!

God I loving hate this racist rear end god drat country.

the question in the poll was just a binary choice of the two options, asked to all who said they would vote no. a weird question reported badly

Regular Wario
Mar 27, 2010

Slippery Tilde

hooman posted:

I love that the two major reasons for voting no are entirely contradictory, good job Albo, it's the worst of both worlds!

God I loving hate this racist rear end god drat country.

This would be solved if they just explained that if Yes wins then the aboriginal death squads will kill the old racist whiteys in the street like the dogs they are

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017

Exploration is ill-advised.
I feel like the funniest result now is if Yes wins despite both parties clearly neither wanting nor expecting it to, Brexit style.

freebooter
Jul 7, 2009

hooman posted:

I love that the two major reasons for voting no are entirely contradictory, good job Albo, it's the worst of both worlds!

quote:

“It won’t make a real difference to the lives of ordinary Indigenous Australians” (cited by 58% of no voters),

Yeah but guarantee you a massive, massive amount of this 58% are actually doing it for racist reasons and don't want to sound that way.

Though it is also funny that "I don't understand what it would be and I'm suspicious of change" isn't represented despite being a perfectly valid reason and, in fact, the reason our constitutional referendum process is designed the way it is.

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.

Ghost Leviathan posted:

I feel like the funniest result now is if Yes wins despite both parties clearly neither wanting nor expecting it to, Brexit style.

Labor really want it to get up, they're just doing a bad job. They think a four week super push will do it. I think a year of poison might win.

E: like they actually expected some kumbayah come to Jesus style thing to happen. Johnny Australia says nah me mortgage.

Recoome
Nov 9, 2013

Matter of fact, I'm salty now.
Tryin 2 figure out which state or territory is more gutless this week, ACT for whatever the gently caress the Sofronoff thing is or WA for whatever the gently caress the legislation backflip thing is

EvilElmo
May 10, 2009

JBP posted:

Labor really want it to get up, they're just doing a bad job. They think a four week super push will do it. I think a year of poison might win.

E: like they actually expected some kumbayah come to Jesus style thing to happen. Johnny Australia says nah me mortgage.

At the beginning of the campaign the Greens were telling their supporters they will probably vote no and should vote no because the voice is poo poo. We had awkward silence from the Greens leadership. It took months until they finally had a position on it, split and in the process lost their Aboriginal affairs spokesperson to the crossbench.

Jezza of OZPOS
Mar 21, 2018

GET LOSE❌🗺️, YOUS CAN'T COMPARE😤 WITH ME 💪POWERS🇦🇺

EvilElmo posted:

At the beginning of the campaign the Greens were telling their supporters they will probably vote no and should vote no because the voice is poo poo. We had awkward silence from the Greens leadership. It took months until they finally had a position on it, split and in the process lost their Aboriginal affairs spokesperson to the crossbench.

its kind of incredible how ballsy it is to just omit the part that the split was because the aboriginal affairs spokesperson was the only sitting greens member opposed to it and produce this like some kind of wedge against the greens

ShoeFly
Dec 28, 2006

Waiter, there's a fly in my shoe!

Jezza of OZPOS posted:

its kind of incredible how ballsy it is to just omit the part that the split was because the aboriginal affairs spokesperson was the only sitting greens member opposed to it and produce this like some kind of wedge against the greens

No it’s the Greens’ fault that the government hasn’t been able to communicate anything

EvilElmo
May 10, 2009

ShoeFly posted:

No it’s the Greens’ fault that the government hasn’t been able to communicate anything

Greens haven't been saying much. Last media release I can find was on page 9 of their media releases back on 19 June. It is easy to say "drat Labor getting their message wrong and ruining the campaign!" When the Greens aren't campaigning.

https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/voice-campaign-begins-sovereignty-motion-passes-senate

NPR Journalizard
Feb 14, 2008

EvilElmo posted:

Greens haven't been saying much. Last media release I can find was on page 9 of their media releases back on 19 June. It is easy to say "drat Labor getting their message wrong and ruining the campaign!" When the Greens aren't campaigning.

https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/voice-campaign-begins-sovereignty-motion-passes-senate

https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/yes-pamphlets-endorsed-australian-greens-party-room

here you go tiger, found one for you.

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.
No votes for the greens political party in populations outside of the urban effete nepobaby millionaires in waiting.


Lol I give this pamphlet a hearty endorsement

JBP fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Aug 8, 2023

freebooter
Jul 7, 2009

EvilElmo posted:

It is easy to say "drat Labor getting their message wrong and ruining the campaign!" When the Greens aren't campaigning.

Yeah I'm sure if the Greens could only convince the 15% of their opposed voters out of a 10% share of the national voter base then this thing would be in the bag

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe
Phew, I'm glad it's the greens fault this is going to fail.

Otherwise I might have to consider the ineffectiveness of the ALP or the sheer evilness of the LNP.

Also it just loving rules how hard the LNP is going against this, for what essentially amounts to nothing. It's no different to boycotting the apology, it's a oval office move by loving cunts. How dare aboriginal people have an option to be formally ignored, they should be informally ignored instead!

Bald Stalin
Jul 11, 2004
Probation
Can't post for 5 hours!

hooman posted:

How dare aboriginal people have an option to be formally ignored, they should be informally ignored instead!

Remember when aboriginal people were formally ignored from 1990 to 2005? Apparently ATSIC would have worked better and wouldn't have been ignored if it was written into the Constitution because... you know... the vibe of the thing?

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe

Bald Stalin posted:

Remember when aboriginal people were formally ignored from 1990 to 2005? Apparently ATSIC would have worked better and wouldn't have been ignored if it was written into the Constitution because... you know... the vibe of the thing?

I agree it does nothing, did you actually read my post? It formally granting no powers is not a reason we shouldn't give them constitutional recognition at all!

The apology also did nothing material, didn't mean it wasn't worth doing.

Rock Puncher
Jul 26, 2014
the two major reasons for voting are not contradictory at all:

Main reason (it doesn't go far enough!!):
racists

Secondary reason (check your privilege):
envious

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe

Guardian AU posted:

Tax office whistleblower Richard Boyle is today appealing against a decision to deny him whistleblower protections.

Boyle is facing trial and potential imprisonment on 24 charges, including allegedly disclosing protected information and recording protected information. The charges are related to his collection of information about unethical debt recovery practices at the Australian Taxation Office. Boyle blew the whistle on the practices, first internally, and then to an independent watchdog and the ABC.

The South Australian district court denied him whistleblower protections earlier this year, but Boyle has appealed, hoping to use the Public Interest Disclosure Act to stop his prosecution.

It is the first real test of the PID Act’s ability to protect individuals in such circumstances.

The appeal is being heard in the SA court of appeal on Wednesday. Prior to the hearing, the Human Rights Law Centre senior lawyer Kieran Pender said the case was a “critical moment”.

The strength of whistleblower protections for all Australians who speak up about wrongdoing are being put to the test in the Court of Appeal today. This is a landmark test case.

The Human Rights Law Centre has successfully applied to intervene and assist the court on points of law relevant to the case.

:confuoot:

Regular Wario
Mar 27, 2010

Slippery Tilde
https://twitter.com/auhansard_said/status/1689062470655385601?t=91daiUOUQg8WbzLqxCQ2LQ&s=19

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008

makes you think

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008

quote:

The National Indigenous Australians Agency has written to Coalition senator and no campaign leader Jacinta Nampijinpa Price to flatly deny her claims that it told her the Uluru statement from the heart was a 26-page document, again confirming it is a one-page document.

this is the quality of the political discourse around the voice

Robodog
Oct 22, 2004

...how does that work?
yeah it's a pretty typical (plz forgive the terms i fucken hate them too) 'fake news' and 'post truth' strat of, added on to the likely majority apathy on the issue of the voice to begin with, just slinging so much poo poo around that the average punter doesnt know what the gently caress anymore and aggressively doesn't care to try and find out

which you add the racist vote on top of and you get a p. strong chance of the no side getting up

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
see also the brittany higgins affair if you wanna see how bad the discource has become.

starkebn
May 18, 2004

"Oooh, got a little too serious. You okay there, little buddy?"

nice whistleblower protections when they can just say "no you"

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
Has anyone anywhere ever successfully used whistleblower protections?

Animal Friend
Sep 7, 2011

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

Has anyone anywhere ever successfully used whistleblower protections?

AFL umpires when Collingwood play

Bald Stalin
Jul 11, 2004
Probation
Can't post for 5 hours!

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

Has anyone anywhere ever successfully used whistleblower protections?

Whistleblowing negatively affects the state and capital, so it makes sense that they fight tooth and nail to stop it and scare the gently caress out of whistleblowers. It's why Assange is being turbo hosed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
was ned kelly a socialist?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply