albo's screwed

[bigrich]

just saw this report on sky , if true the title of the topic says it all. gun owners have been screwed over cause albo cut funding and shut down part of the AFP counter terrorism branch . no wonder he doesn't want a royal commission....

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/al ... ocialshare

[Wm.Traynor]

That makes Albo look BAD

[alexjones]

That makes Albo look BAD

Everything makes him look bad.

[Zappa]

Im waiting for a credible new source to report this until then, I take this with a pinch of salt. But it is probable, his razor gang would have cut funding from a pubic service, like all previous governments have done prior.

I still feel that the major issue was the lack of communication, due to their bureaucratic and political structure, between NSWPol, ASIO and Home affairs to a lesser extent.

Latest is, He's on side with the RC so reports suggest he'll announce it soon in parliament sitting.

[womble]

Apology is an admission of culpability

[cadet]

Sky is not an independent, credible news source.

[bigrich]

Sky is not an independent, credible news source.

Still better than 9msm, the guardian or Sydney morning herald. Extremely leftist, but I still look at their articles to see what cr@p they’re spinning. I’ll take sky any day over them.

[CJRBOLTGUN1]

Ha, looks like he's going to give us a royal commission but will pick who leads it, this whole system is corrupt to the core, and he'll no doubt walk away smiling the prick

[alexjones]

Howard the scumbag never gave a royal commission for Port Arthur. Records were sealed for 25 years then at year 23 when they digitised all the records they added on another 75 years for the maximum of 100 years.

Lack of transparency is what fulls distrust and so called conspiracy theories.

[Wapiti]

He announced it with the opening statement - "Its clear to me that a Royal Commission is required dribble dribble wheeze wheeze"
When what he really was thinking was,
"It's clear everybody thinks I'm a completely useless, cowardly lying fu*kwit and everybody knows it and absolutely hates my guts. They've seen right through the clustrf**k that is everything I've ever touched and said, and my attempt to blame all the stupid lower-than-me scum voters thatll NEVER be a hero PM like me and that have firearms instead of being a man hasn't worked at all"

Watch him dodge and set agendas that blame everybody but himself and Minns.
The dog couldn't even admit he fell off the stage in full view of 50 cameras.

[bigrich]

He announced it with the opening statement - "Its clear to me that a Royal Commission is required dribble dribble wheeze wheeze"
When what he really was thinking was,
"It's clear everybody thinks I'm a completely useless, cowardly lying fu*kwit and everybody knows it and absolutely hates my guts. They've seen right through the clustrf**k that is everything I've ever touched and said, and my attempt to blame all the stupid lower-than-me scum voters thatll NEVER be a hero PM like me and that have firearms instead of being a man hasn't worked at all"

Watch him dodge and set agendas that blame everybody but himself and Minns.
The dog couldn't even admit he fell off the stage in full view of 50 cameras.

did he fall , or was he pushed i reckon the labour party as a whole would be starting do divide into factions , with some thinking they'd be better off throwing toxic albo under the bus . hopefully he won't get his way with who runs the royal commission. still , the facts are the facts , and when they come out i'm hoping the political left in this country implode .

greens have been awful quiet haven't they , their support of the free gaza protesters and the radical elements within that rabble are going to come home to roost with the greens i reckon . again, i'm hoping

[bigrich]

Howard the scumbag never gave a royal commission for Port Arthur. Records were sealed for 25 years then at year 23 when they digitised all the records they added on another 75 years for the maximum of 100 years.

Lack of transparency is what fulls distrust and so called conspiracy theories.

that's the thing i point out to people, why would you seal the port arthur records for 100 years if nothing suss went on ? it's my way of opening the door to all the weird facts about port arthur and making people think....

[deye243]

Sky is not an independent, credible news source.

Well at least it's not far left like Channel 7 Channel 9 Channel 10 and the ABC and while you're at it you name one credible independent news source

[Wapiti]

Sky is not an independent, credible news source.

Compared to who?

The Albo/Queens fellatio gAyBC?
Channel 7 & 9 leftist dribble? Paid off university activists?
Facebook, all conspiracy and whatever algorithm suits your search and view history?

No wonder we're screwed.

Yep, we pay for Foxtel, to get Sky primarily and all the movies, Netflix and sports.
The viewership numbers are only a small percentage of viewership of the free-to-air networks, but you get what you pay for. They are on only one who airs stuff supporting our work.
And it's playing in Canberra, parliament house. The gAyBC ain't.
It's always the people who want news for free, lies, who step up and dribble that old claim - Sky isn't credible.

And you wonder why you're all continually f*cked over. Enjoy your bias.

[alexjones]

Howard the scumbag never gave a royal commission for Port Arthur. Records were sealed for 25 years then at year 23 when they digitised all the records they added on another 75 years for the maximum of 100 years.

Lack of transparency is what fulls distrust and so called conspiracy theories.

that's the thing i point out to people, why would you seal the port arthur records for 100 years if nothing suss went on ? it's my way of opening the door to all the weird facts about port arthur and making people think....

An example is the fire escape door to the gift shop broke about 6 weeks before so the managers just welded it shut and never fixed it.

6 bodies were stacked up like firewood trying to escape through that door.

A royal commission would of charged those managers with some kind of neglect or not providing a safe work site etc.


That is just one example of the many that occurred at Port Arthur.

[alexjones]

That bloke that decided to weld the door shut to that gift shop probably feels like “insert profanity” as he should do. If he is even alive anymore?

At work I do some supervising and I always think of this scenario when the crew tell me about stuff that needs fixing.

Granted the odds are low but still if you are a supervisor and the crew tell you about something it should be noted and fixed. I do not want to be responsible or negligent in causing anyones death.

[womble]

In fairness, sky doesn’t claim to be a legitimate source of news. It’s registered as entertainment.

Some people like to be enraged. Life hurt them and they are bitter for it.

If you want an unbiased account of events that allows you to make your own conclusions, then just follow the money.
Is it commercially funded. Is it not for profit. Is it publicly funded. Is it a trust.
We’re actually very lucky in this country to have credible sources of information accessible to us,
The media magnates don’t have total control yet. Not for lack of trying. Literally millions of bots calling for public media to be scrapped.
Training you to parrot along. See above the gayBC.

A social media algorithm was triggered by a key word that particular person posted. And then it goes to work on him to reinforce his particular bias or ignorance. Makes him feel he is fighting a righteous cause. Makes him feel important.
Effectively uses him to help sow discontent around publicly funded media.
And he will do this for free. It costs them nothing.
The end goal is total control of news and information by the big corporations, so the government can make you believe what it wants you to believe.

The act passed by NSW government. Entirely designed to cripple any public media that dares to criticize the billionaires. Your masters.

Look what happened to Dan Andrews when he forced a certain billionaire to pay tax.
Bot farms don’t come cheap. But cheaper than paying their taxes.

Or of course you could just look it up yourself. Currently there is no royal commission being conducted.
https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/

[womble]

Howard the scumbag never gave a royal commission for Port Arthur. Records were sealed for 25 years then at year 23 when they digitised all the records they added on another 75 years for the maximum of 100 years.

Lack of transparency is what fulls distrust and so called conspiracy theories.

that's the thing i point out to people, why would you seal the port arthur records for 100 years if nothing suss went on ? it's my way of opening the door to all the weird facts about port arthur and making people think....

An example is the fire escape door to the gift shop broke about 6 weeks before so the managers just welded it shut and never fixed it.

6 bodies were stacked up like firewood trying to escape through that door.

A royal commission would of charged those managers with some kind of neglect or not providing a safe work site etc.


That is just one example of the many that occurred at Port Arthur.

Gift shop was government owned. Government is liable. Survivors and relatives of deserve compensation with interest.

[bigrich]

Howard the scumbag never gave a royal commission for Port Arthur. Records were sealed for 25 years then at year 23 when they digitised all the records they added on another 75 years for the maximum of 100 years.

Lack of transparency is what fulls distrust and so called conspiracy theories.

that's the thing i point out to people, why would you seal the port arthur records for 100 years if nothing suss went on ? it's my way of opening the door to all the weird facts about port arthur and making people think....

An example is the fire escape door to the gift shop broke about 6 weeks before so the managers just welded it shut and never fixed it.

6 bodies were stacked up like firewood trying to escape through that door.

A royal commission would of charged those managers with some kind of neglect or not providing a safe work site etc.


That is just one example of the many that occurred at Port Arthur.

Gift shop was government owned. Government is liable. Survivors and relatives of deserve compensation with interest.

your up early womble yeah, there's a LOT of f@cked up stuff with PA . if mobile phones had've been around back then it woulda been a lot harder to cover up . the current situation with bondi hasn't been able to be covered up cause of all the phone vids getting around . i think albo cutting funding for anti terrorism is pretty damning , but i reckon there's more to come out . i reckon albo's sh!tting himself , wong and burke seem to be in hiding

[womble]

There’s a few genuinely f*cked up things in a mountain of nonsense conspiracy theories.

You can’t fire from various windows when you’re on a landline.

There’s three people seated in the Volvo when it heads up the road to the tollbooth. Long blond hair driving, two in the rear.

There’s two shooters captured on video. One has white pants. The other has black pants. I don’t think he found time to change his pants.

There’s people interviewed in hospital beds on camera with shotgun wounds.

And just the sheer amount of evidence that was destroyed. Hours of video recordings from all the American tourists with their new fancy video recorders. And over 3 hours of communication on the landline with the hostage negotiator. Martin liked to chat and they kept him talking.

[alexjones]

Weirdest thing about Port Arthur is the soap powder decoy. The only two cops in the area were 30 minutes away at the exact time of the shooting because somebody reported they found a bag of heroin. It turned out to be soap powder.

[alexjones]

I'm up to date with the wasp files. Good series.

[womble]

Weirdest thing about Port Arthur is the soap powder decoy. The only two cops in the area were 30 minutes away at the exact time of the shooting because somebody reported they found a bag of heroin. It turned out to be soap powder.

Yes and that.

[cadet]

The numbers of you who bristled when I asserted that Sky is not an independent, credible news source... "but but gayBC!" etc kinda illustrates my point. I didn't say anything about any other sources (most of which are also, on their own, deficient in some way), but you are clearly parochially wedded to Sky, and reject others.

If you are not getting your news from a range of local and international, public and private, satire and serious, mainstream and alternative sources, if you are not consciously trying to step out of an echo chamber and bamboozle an algorithm, if you are not trying consciously to avoid biting at rage bait, if you are not willing to fairly and in good faith consider and engage with other intelligent, educated, connected, credible perspectives, if you have not bothered to understand who owns and controls your news sources, and what biases and agendas they have and what they want you to believe and why, then you probably could choose to do some work on that.

That all takes a level of intellectual engagement, comprehension, inferential reading and pattern recognition. Many can't muster it. Mass media is a weapon, and you and I are not the ones wielding it - but we can at least call out target indications and find cover...

I've tried to be pretty diplomatic above, but I'll flat out say that if you think the likes of Murdoch, Stokes, Rinehart, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg et al (as well as names you and I have never even heard...) are altruists, then you are lost. If you don't know how and why they try to influence what you believe, you are lost.

[Bugman]

The numbers of you who bristled when I asserted that Sky is not an independent, credible news source... "but but gayBC!" etc kinda illustrates my point. I didn't say anything about any other sources (most of which are also, on their own, deficient in some way), but you are clearly parochially wedded to Sky, and reject others.

If you are not getting your news from a range of local and international, public and private, satire and serious, mainstream and alternative sources, if you are not consciously trying to step out of an echo chamber and bamboozle an algorithm, if you are not trying consciously to avoid biting at rage bait, if you are not willing to fairly and in good faith consider and engage with other intelligent, educated, connected, credible perspectives, if you have not bothered to understand who owns and controls your news sources, and what biases and agendas they have and what they want you to believe and why, then you probably could choose to do some work on that.

That all takes a level of intellectual engagement, comprehension, inferential reading and pattern recognition. Many can't muster it. Mass media is a weapon, and you and I are not the ones wielding it - but we can at least call out target indications and find cover...

I've tried to be pretty diplomatic above, but I'll flat out say that if you think the likes of Murdoch, Stokes, Rinehart, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg et al (as well as names you and I have never even heard...) are altruists, then you are lost. If you don't know how and why they try to influence what you believe, you are lost.

Yep bit like buying a newspaper. You know the saying, "good news never made a paper sell".

[mchughcb]

There's no truth in the news and no news in the truth.

Old Soviet saying.

[bigrich]

The numbers of you who bristled when I asserted that Sky is not an independent, credible news source... "but but gayBC!" etc kinda illustrates my point. I didn't say anything about any other sources (most of which are also, on their own, deficient in some way), but you are clearly parochially wedded to Sky, and reject others.

If you are not getting your news from a range of local and international, public and private, satire and serious, mainstream and alternative sources, if you are not consciously trying to step out of an echo chamber and bamboozle an algorithm, if you are not trying consciously to avoid biting at rage bait, if you are not willing to fairly and in good faith consider and engage with other intelligent, educated, connected, credible perspectives, if you have not bothered to understand who owns and controls your news sources, and what biases and agendas they have and what they want you to believe and why, then you probably could choose to do some work on that.

That all takes a level of intellectual engagement, comprehension, inferential reading and pattern recognition. Many can't muster it. Mass media is a weapon, and you and I are not the ones wielding it - but we can at least call out target indications and find cover...

I've tried to be pretty diplomatic above, but I'll flat out say that if you think the likes of Murdoch, Stokes, Rinehart, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg et al (as well as names you and I have never even heard...) are altruists, then you are lost. If you don't know how and why they try to influence what you believe, you are lost.

quite well spoken/posted , and your polite diplomacy is appreciated, at least by me at the end of the day everybody has their own agenda and opinion, such is the human condition . i read stories by "the guardian" and others i view as leftist, to get the opposing view. "know thy enemy...."

i'm sceptical of any info put out these days , but to me, sky has a balance of factual, conservative views that i agree with . i'm 57 and have a lot of life experience , and i'm assuming ,also from a different era to yourself which had older more conservative morals and views. with "views" being the key word. sky gets to the facts, and also reports what other MSM won't . point in case, albo cutting funding to AFP counter terrorism . haven't seen that reported from any other source . and the gay-BC is notoriously leftist , they just are
cheers

[womble]

The numbers of you who bristled when I asserted that Sky is not an independent, credible news source... "but but gayBC!" etc kinda illustrates my point. I didn't say anything about any other sources (most of which are also, on their own, deficient in some way), but you are clearly parochially wedded to Sky, and reject others.

If you are not getting your news from a range of local and international, public and private, satire and serious, mainstream and alternative sources, if you are not consciously trying to step out of an echo chamber and bamboozle an algorithm, if you are not trying consciously to avoid biting at rage bait, if you are not willing to fairly and in good faith consider and engage with other intelligent, educated, connected, credible perspectives, if you have not bothered to understand who owns and controls your news sources, and what biases and agendas they have and what they want you to believe and why, then you probably could choose to do some work on that.

That all takes a level of intellectual engagement, comprehension, inferential reading and pattern recognition. Many can't muster it. Mass media is a weapon, and you and I are not the ones wielding it - but we can at least call out target indications and find cover...

I've tried to be pretty diplomatic above, but I'll flat out say that if you think the likes of Murdoch, Stokes, Rinehart, Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg et al (as well as names you and I have never even heard...) are altruists, then you are lost. If you don't know how and why they try to influence what you believe, you are lost.

quite well spoken/posted , and your polite diplomacy is appreciated, at least by me at the end of the day everybody has their own agenda and opinion, such is the human condition . i read stories by "the guardian" and others i view as leftist, to get the opposing view. "know thy enemy...."

i'm sceptical of any info put out these days , but to me, sky has a balance of factual, conservative views that i agree with . i'm 57 and have a lot of life experience , and i'm assuming ,also from a different era to yourself which had older more conservative morals and views. with "views" being the key word. sky gets to the facts, and also reports what other MSM won't . point in case, albo cutting funding to AFP counter terrorism . haven't seen that reported from any other source . and the gay-BC is notoriously leftist , they just are
cheers

You need to do better than “They just are”
Because they can be held to account for political bias. That’s not what our taxes pay them to do.
Could you give us an example.
The ABC should sit center left, because it’s from the people for the people. We own it. The majority of the population don’t have significant wealth and it should reflect that.
It has taken criticism lately for being too right leaning.

The Guardian is intended to be a leftist view to target that demographic of the market. And it still does this in a for profit enterprise.
But in a unique way so as it can’t be influenced by global corporations.
It’s owned by a trust fund which reinvests all profits back into its enterprise. It doesn’t pay out to shareholders or a proprietor.
And that’s how it can put forward a leftist view point.
But it’s more center left because it’s after a middle aged audience.

There are two other leftist ventures being Crikey and The Conversation which target younger audiences.

Albo cutting funding to the AFP counter terrorism was exposed by the ABC.
If you look closely at your Sky article they use a screenshot of the video where the ABC takes Albo to task.
And that’s what we expect our taxes to pay for. We must have free press.
Because without that we can’t keep the bastards honest.

[bigrich]

"keep the barstard's honest" , who said that , auntie pauline

[womble]

Don Chipp.

Someone you’ve never heard of