Page 22 of 29

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 12:10 pm
by Mickey_Raider
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... irekeeper/

As I indicated earlier, this reporting reiterates and estimates that the JK program wasted approximately 10-20 billion on companies with soaring profits.

I do apologise. Earlier I extrapolated the data we did have and applied it across the whole program and came to a figure of 17 billion.

It could be 20 billion.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 12:19 pm
by Mickey_Raider
Also the scandals rumble on.

We know from Frydenberg that Lamings conduct is unacceptable and he will be standing aside at the next federal election.

But we also infer that his conduct is not unacceptable enough to force an immediate by election in Bowman, as this could send the government into minority.

It just never ends with this mob.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 12:20 pm
by The Nickman
Yeah, I can honestly see all of this stuff costing the Libs the next federal election.

And Frankly... I'm completely happy with that. If this is what it needs for culture change from the top down, then this is what Australia needs.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 12:25 pm
by Mickey_Raider
The Nickman wrote: March 29, 2021, 12:20 pm Yeah, I can honestly see all of this stuff costing the Libs the next federal election.

And Frankly... I'm completely happy with that. If this is what it needs for culture change from the top down, then this is what Australia needs.
It is still going to be very close.

Like all elections, a seat by seat brawl.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 8:19 pm
by -TW-
Would've thought you would have to be a decent human being to be elected to Parliament

Laming has disproved that theory

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk


Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 8:31 pm
by Botman
thats interesting, i would have never thought that. In fact my general thoughts are all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. If they had an ounce of ability, they wouldnt be in politics... but it maybe im too cynical

being a good and decent person seems like a trait that excludes you from politics. There is a great harry potter quote about power that seems pretty relevant.

The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 9:02 pm
by gangrenous
Botman has the identified the horcrux of the issue. They’re all Weasley.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 9:15 pm
by T_R
The Nickman wrote: March 29, 2021, 12:20 pm Yeah, I can honestly see all of this stuff costing the Libs the next federal election.

And Frankly... I'm completely happy with that. If this is what it needs for culture change from the top down, then this is what Australia needs.
It has certainly discounted an October election, anyway.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 29, 2021, 9:41 pm
by FuiFui BradBrad
Botman wrote:thats interesting, i would have never thought that. In fact my general thoughts are all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. If they had an ounce of ability, they wouldnt be in politics... but it maybe im too cynical

being a good and decent person seems like a trait that excludes you from politics. There is a great harry potter quote about power that seems pretty relevant.
I’m waiting for KW to start moving up the ladder and sorting this mess out

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 30, 2021, 8:05 am
by Botman
Fuifui Bradbrad wrote: March 29, 2021, 9:41 pm
Botman wrote:thats interesting, i would have never thought that. In fact my general thoughts are all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. If they had an ounce of ability, they wouldnt be in politics... but it maybe im too cynical

being a good and decent person seems like a trait that excludes you from politics. There is a great harry potter quote about power that seems pretty relevant.
I’m waiting for KW to start moving up the ladder and sorting this mess out
I say it again, all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. :D

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 30, 2021, 10:15 am
by The Nickman
Botman wrote: March 30, 2021, 8:05 am
Fuifui Bradbrad wrote: March 29, 2021, 9:41 pm
Botman wrote:thats interesting, i would have never thought that. In fact my general thoughts are all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. If they had an ounce of ability, they wouldnt be in politics... but it maybe im too cynical

being a good and decent person seems like a trait that excludes you from politics. There is a great harry potter quote about power that seems pretty relevant.
I’m waiting for KW to start moving up the ladder and sorting this mess out
I say it again, all these guys are **** incompetent or crooks. :D
Lucky for KW he's both!

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 30, 2021, 11:41 am
by Northern Raider
I know a number of people who have gone into politics. They start with honourable intentions and end up corrupted by the processes. First casualty is their own moral code when they find out what is required to survive the party room and to keep their own seat.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: March 30, 2021, 12:03 pm
by Botman
Northern Raider wrote: March 30, 2021, 11:41 am I know a number of people who have gone into politics. They start with honourable intentions and end up corrupted by the processes. First casualty is their own moral code when they find out what is required to survive the party room and to keep their own seat.
All jokes aside, it does genuinely seem this way
I dont know that anyone goes into the game with bad intentions but the nature of the job and what it takes to rise to the top of a party etc... i mean by the time they've gotten to that level, they're so used to the disloyalty and looking after their own personal interests and then interests of the party, very few are able to maintain that connection to why they got in the game to begin with

I've had a good old chuckle at the uproar about Morrison not sacking this dirtbag Andrew Laming... and i can sit here and completely agree the guy isnt **** fit to hold public office. But has any sitting party ever voluntarily sacked one of it's own members when it would plunge the sitting Govt into a minority?
Im not a political historian so if there is precedence I'm not aware of, I'm happy to be told this assumption is wrong, but i'd be surprised if that's every happened, on either side of the aisle.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 6, 2021, 8:09 pm
by Mickey_Raider
https://theconversation.com/please-no-m ... ebt-158056

Another fantastic article, this time from the professor of economics at the University of Adelaide.

TL;DR: "The government does not need to increase taxes in order to increase spending, and it doesn’t even need to borrow. Its Reserve Bank issues currency for it all of the time, every day."

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 8:39 am
by the bone
Derek Chauvin found guilty on all charges. Justice is served.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 9:13 am
by -PJ-
Yep.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 10:53 am
by rayden83
I thought the verdict was a bit wacky. Even the medical examiner who did the autopsy ruled that asphyxiation was not a cause of death, rather a perfect storm of heart disease, adrenaline, 3x lethal dose of fentanyl and sub-dual restraint. In other words Floyd’s heart was so weak the act of arresting and restraining him caused him to die.

No doubt the verdict will have wide ranging ramifications for policing in the US. Police Departments and officers will be reluctant to arrest and restrain people on the basis that if the suspect OD’s or dies of natural reasons in the course of making an arrest that they could be judged a murderer.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 11:13 am
by Botman
I dont know where you've gotten the idea that the medical examiner did not believe Floyd's death was a homicide cause primarily by Chauvin's actions.
I'd like to see a link to that, since i havent been able to find it.


"The medical examiner who ruled George Floyd's death a homicide testified Friday that Floyd's heart disease and drug use contributed to his death, but police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck were the primary causes."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/me ... s-n1263670

Subsequently, there were two autopsies conducted, each concluded the death was a result of homicide. One report, as per above said the cause of death was "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression" whilst the other simply put it down to asphyxia.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th ... they-seem/

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 11:14 am
by The Nickman
Botman wrote: April 21, 2021, 11:13 am I dont know where you've gotten the idea that the medical examiner did not believe Floyd's death was a homicide cause primarily by Chauvin's actions.
I'd like to see a link to that, since i havent been able to find it.
Oh, I'm sure he read that on Facebook somewhere.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 1:45 pm
by rayden83
Botman wrote: April 21, 2021, 11:13 am I dont know where you've gotten the idea that the medical examiner did not believe Floyd's death was a homicide cause primarily by Chauvin's actions.
I'd like to see a link to that, since i havent been able to find it.


"The medical examiner who ruled George Floyd's death a homicide testified Friday that Floyd's heart disease and drug use contributed to his death, but police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck were the primary causes."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/me ... s-n1263670

Subsequently, there were two autopsies conducted, each concluded the death was a result of homicide. One report, as per above said the cause of death was "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression" whilst the other simply put it down to asphyxia.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th ... they-seem/
Homicide isnt the same as murder. For it to be murder, it needs to be proven that the officers acted unlawfully in the way they restrained Floyd, and that those actions significantly contributed to his death. The actions of pinning a suspect to ground who resists arrest, and using chokeholds to subdue a suspect aren’t unlawful. The question then arises at which point the officers actions became unlawful? Was it when Floyd stopped resisting or stopped breathing? These arent easy questions to answer as police training permits police to continued restraint of suspects even after they’ve stopped responding. Why? An unresponsive suspect can still be dangerous.

Even if you prove the officers acted unlawfully, for it to be murder you have to prove that the actions of police significantly contributed to his death. If the suspect has 3x the lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system, advanced heart disease, is complaining that they cant breathe (while standing) and is full of adrenaline, then it’s hard not to argue that they were also major factors in his death. What is more likely to kill, lethal dose of drugs, advanced heart disease, or being restrained by police? The restraint did not cause Floyd to choke or suffocate, it did not cut off his oxygen supply, so I’m skeptical of the finding, beyond reasonable doubt , that the action of a legally applied physical restraint that did not cause injury was the primary cause of his death.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 1:48 pm
by -TW-
Homicide is murder you idiot.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk


Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:12 pm
by rayden83
-TW- wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:48 pm Homicide is murder you idiot.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
No it isnt dopey :lol:

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:28 pm
by Northern Raider
rayden83 wrote: April 21, 2021, 2:12 pm
-TW- wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:48 pm Homicide is murder you idiot.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
No it isnt dopey :lol:
Yep, Rayden is correct. Homicide is the act of killing someone. Murder is a legal classification of the act. All murders are homicides yet all homicides are not murders.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:43 pm
by Botman
That is a lot of words to say not much, and of things actually said, a lot if false.
rayden83 wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:45 pm Homicide isnt the same as murder.
Firstly, I'm aware what homicide and murder are. I don't what that has to do with what the medical examiner did or did not testify to.
You said the medical examiner said the cause of death was " rather a perfect storm of heart disease, adrenaline, 3x lethal dose of fentanyl and sub-dual restraint."

This is not true. The medical examiners report and testimony was that whilst other factors contributed, the primary cause of death was "police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck"... it was his view that the officers actions were the primary cause of death. That's not up for debate, that is the testimony of the medical examiner. There was also a secondary autopsy conducted which found the cause of death as asphyxia. The two different conclusions are more word play than anything else. The man died because he couldnt breathe. He couldnt breathe because an officer was kneeling on his neck for nearly 9 minutes.

rayden83 wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:45 pm For it to be murder, it needs to be proven that the officers acted unlawfully in the way they restrained Floyd, and that those actions significantly contributed to his death. The actions of pinning a suspect to ground who resists arrest, and using chokeholds to subdue a suspect aren’t unlawful. The question then arises at which point the officers actions became unlawful? Was it when Floyd stopped resisting or stopped breathing? These arent easy questions to answer as police training permits police to continued restraint of suspects even after they’ve stopped responding. Why? An unresponsive suspect can still be dangerous.
Yes, it does need to be proven in a court of law that the officer acted unlawfully and when that unlawful behaviour starts. That's how courts work. Defence will claim their actions were lawful, the prosecution will argue they aren't. And a judge/jury make their rulings on that. A jury took 10 hours to come in with a verdict... So whilst you may disagree, this jury have declared the man's actions unlawful, and so it is, as per law. Lets remember this jury came back in 10 hours... this was not a hard deliberation for them. The prosecution made their case. Pending appeal, the courts have found his actions unlawful.
rayden83 wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:45 pm Even if you prove the officers acted unlawfully, for it to be murder you have to prove that the actions of police significantly contributed to his death.
Once you get your head around the fact that when the medical examiner testifies that the primary cause of death was "police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck" then you'll quickly understand that is exactly what the evidence is saying. The actions of the officer significantly contributed to his death. This is supported by the coroner's finding, and a 2nd independent autopsy

rayden83 wrote: April 21, 2021, 1:45 pm If the suspect has 3x the lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system, advanced heart disease, is complaining that they cant breathe (while standing) and is full of adrenaline, then it’s hard not to argue that they were also major factors in his death. What is more likely to kill, lethal dose of drugs, advanced heart disease, or being restrained by police? The restraint did not cause Floyd to choke or suffocate, it did not cut off his oxygen supply, so I’m skeptical of the finding, beyond reasonable doubt , that the action of a legally applied physical restraint that did not cause injury was the primary cause of his death.
Perhaps you should have been his lawyer then, since it's such an easy argument to make. His defence did argue on those grounds. They were not able to convince the jury of this. Why? probably because all the evidence suggested that those were contributing factors and not the primary cause. Again, that's how these things work. Defence argues X, prosecution argues Y... Jury and judge decide. 10 hours, guilty on all counts. I dont think you need to a law student to figure out who made their case better to this jury.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:47 pm
by The Nickman
Ooooof, four balls to pick out of rayden's net there.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:47 pm
by -TW-
Murder, manslaughter, act of war and self defence are all homicides.

"Murder isn't the same as homicide" is false, albeit on a technicality of intent.



Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk


Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 2:49 pm
by -TW-
The Nickman wrote:Ooooof, four balls to pick out of rayden's net there.
What's it up to now? 20?

American Samoa's 31-0 will be in danger soon

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk


Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 3:41 pm
by Botman
For anyone who wants to actually get an idea of what he was found guilty of and how, the following is a good article

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-21/ ... /100083494


Most important as this relates to the charges:

He was charged with:
Unintentional second-degree murder
Third-degree murder
Second-degree manslaughter

"To convict Chauvin on the second-degree murder charge, the jury needed to be convinced he unintentionally killed Mr Floyd while committing or trying to commit another crime — assault in the third degree.
To convict him of third-degree murder, the jury had to believe he acted in an "eminently dangerous" way, with reckless disregard towards human life when he killed Mr Floyd.
The second-degree manslaughter charge required the jury to find he was culpably negligent in causing Mr Floyd's death."

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 4:22 pm
by Northern Raider
Thanks, that explains it better. I was confused why he was found guilty of 3 different yet similar offences for the one crime. A case of laying all 3 charges in case one or more failed to gain a conviction. Being found guilty of all 3 relatively moot as he'll be sentenced based on the most serious offence.

P.S. we should really have a general news thread. This isn't really politics and we see a lot of news stories end up here by default.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 5:58 pm
by rayden83
Botman wrote: April 21, 2021, 2:43 pm Firstly, I'm aware what homicide and murder are. I don't what that has to do with what the medical examiner did or did not testify to.
You said the medical examiner said the cause of death was " rather a perfect storm of heart disease, adrenaline, 3x lethal dose of fentanyl and sub-dual restraint."

This is not true. The medical examiners report and testimony was that whilst other factors contributed, the primary cause of death was "police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck"... it was his view that the officers actions were the primary cause of death. That's not up for debate, that is the testimony of the medical examiner. There was also a secondary autopsy conducted which found the cause of death as asphyxia. The two different conclusions are more word play than anything else. The man died because he couldnt breathe. He couldnt breathe because an officer was kneeling on his neck for nearly 9 minutes.
That is flat out false. The official autopsy from Hannapin county found "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression" and found "rteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease, fentanyl intoxication, and recent methamphetamine use as other significant conditions contributing to death." Heart attack was the cause of death, not asphyxia. It is arguable that the officer person holding Floyd's feet was as culpable in the homicide as Chauvin.

The second "autopsy" was done by a celebrity pathologist, the same fella who did one on Epstein and concluded he was murdered. He wasn't even called as a witness. He's a joke. Also you seemed to ignore the fact that kneeling on someones neck for 10 minutes does not cause them to suffocate, and in any case the examiner thought that Chauvin's knee positioned on his back not his neck.
Yes, it does need to be proven in a court of law that the officer acted unlawfully and when that unlawful behaviour starts. That's how courts work. Defence will claim their actions were lawful, the prosecution will argue they aren't. And a judge/jury make their rulings on that. A jury took 10 hours to come in with a verdict... So whilst you may disagree, this jury have declared the man's actions unlawful, and so it is, as per law. Lets remember this jury came back in 10 hours... this was not a hard deliberation for them. The prosecution made their case. Pending appeal, the courts have found his actions unlawful.
A quick jury deliberation doesn't mean an accurate one. Also you have to consider the climate in which the verdict was made, under the spectre of riots and politically sanctioned violence, que Maxine Waters, and that the fact that the jurors may eventually have their identities revealed. What would you do if you were a juror? There was significant pressure on the jury, politically, socially and culturally to find the cop guilty. There is significant chance this will be deemed a mistrial.
Once you get your head around the fact that when the medical examiner testifies that the primary cause of death was "police officers' restraint of his body and compression of his neck" then you'll quickly understand that is exactly what the evidence is saying. The actions of the officer significantly contributed to his death. This is supported by the coroner's finding, and a 2nd independent autopsy
You have to read the full report and not just cherry pick a single sentence. All the evidence has to be weighed and compared against other evidence. It's clear that the actions of the police contributed to Floyd's death, but as per the autopsy report "rteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease, fentanyl intoxication, and recent methamphetamine use as other significant conditions contributing to death." It's simply the medical examiners opinion that the actions of police officers restraining a man on his side and applying force to his feet, side and back constituted an act of force so great that is caused a man to die, more so than things which are commonly deadly such as advanced heart disease and 3x lethal fentanyl dose. I wasn't disagreeing with the medical examiner, just expressing skepticism at the finding and how it was leveraged by the prosecution to argue Chauvin guilty "beyond reasonable doubt".

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 6:04 pm
by rayden83
-TW- wrote: April 21, 2021, 2:49 pm
The Nickman wrote:Ooooof, four balls to pick out of rayden's net there.
What's it up to now? 20?

American Samoa's 31-0 will be in danger soon

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
No I think you have that one covered after your "homicide is murder!" tantrum. :lol:

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 6:05 pm
by Botman
Contributed to the death and being the primary cause are where you’re falling over yourself

No one is denying there was other contributing factors to the death. The medical examiners report and his testimony was that the primary causes of the death was the constraint on the body and pressure on the neck by Chauvin

There is very rarely a death where there are not other contributing factors.
Contributing factors do not give the police a free pass to act unlawfully

The judge and jury in this case have weighed the evidence and arguments presented to them and very quickly determined this officer guilty of unlawful behaviour

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 6:30 pm
by -TW-
rayden83 wrote:
-TW- wrote: April 21, 2021, 2:49 pm
The Nickman wrote:Ooooof, four balls to pick out of rayden's net there.
What's it up to now? 20?

American Samoa's 31-0 will be in danger soon

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
No I think you have that one covered after your "homicide is murder!" tantrum. Image
Tantrum? What the ****

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk



Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 6:51 pm
by Botman
Look I’m not a lawyer so I can’t speak to the specifics of the law
But from reading and listening to pods on this case, my understanding is the case turns on simply whether the actions of the officer were judged to be a reasonable and acceptable use of force by a police officer in these circumstances or not.

The defence argued this is part of standard training and he was just doing as he was trained, so it’s reasonable. Ugly as a lot of police work can be but reasonable.

The prosecution argue there was excessive force, it was unreasonable and officer showed a disregard of human life in his actions. His actions were unlawful and resulted in the death of Mr Floyd

I personally don’t understand how any reasonable person could look at the footage and conclude anything but this was an arrogant man in power who had no regard for the life of the man he was kneeling on.

I wouldn’t want to live in a country that allows police to treat people like that. And I’m pleased he was convicted. I hope it sticks on appeal.

Re: The Politics Thread 2021

Posted: April 21, 2021, 7:32 pm
by gangrenous
rayden83 wrote: Also you seemed to ignore the fact that kneeling on someones neck for 10 minutes does not cause them to suffocate
Umm.. that sounds exactly like something that would cause someone to suffocate

rayden83 wrote: Why? An unresponsive suspect can still be dangerous.
Not when the suspect has no pulse. My understanding is he remained beyond that point.