The Greens stance on it is as admirable as it’s always been. That the rest of the world can’t hold the same standard isn’t on them.

Putting a policy in a vacuum is the worst possible way govern, and I hope this forever demonstrates why the Greens should never be allowed near the levers of power. Their brand of pacifism is identical to Trump’s: willfully ignorant of the downstream effects and motivated by anything but the material conditions of the victims.

supporting a President who backs Ukraines enemy

This is transparently guilt by association and nothing more. Our sovereign decision to support Ukraine has nothing to do with appeasing America. By your own logic we should be doing the opposite if it was relevant.

I mean if you want to argue that it should be an even standard across the board I might agree with you, like I would hold Iran in infinitely lower esteem for hanging political dissidents, to say nothing of them doing it publically.

But something rubs me the wrong way about America, the shining city on the hill, even dipping its toes in this kind of barbaric spectacle.

Whether it’s because I hold them to a higher standard, or because I view it as a betrayal of what liberal democracy means.

How myopic. I didn’t realise America’s sole focus since it’s inception has been terror and barbarism. I guess PEPFAR, USAID, the civil rights act, the Marshall Plan, fighting smallpox and polio, and international disaster relief were just cosmic whoopsies that materialised from the ether.

America is evil, got it 👍

What should we do about it?

It’s obviously a democracy, so idk why you would deny that. Idk what a “warmongering duopoly” is.

Iraq and Saudi Arabia don’t do public executions these days, and none of them besides the US live stream them. Apparently they’re the first country to ever do it.

The real problem is the reasons some of these countries condemn people to death, regardless of the barbarism they engage in while carrying it out.

The US’s actions are only notable because they are held to a higher standard, rightly so.

So we shouldn’t be a US client state? What should we be?

It’s funny to me you’re listing things we’re already aware of thanks to the US being a transparent western democracy. Things that are the subject of heated discussion within the country as well.

Sounds like a tautology, like the reform can only happen when the economic conditions necessitate it, like no shit.

Also even the article explains that Joe Hockey’s tenure saw stupid deficits, so he can shut the fuck up for the rest of time.

Nobody likes to trash populism more than me, but blaming it for increasing spending when you used it to cut taxes is insane.

Conversations about national deficits are always like this, no one wants to talk about taxes so they ratchet down while we juggle spending a million different ways. We need a government brave enough to tell voters to get fucked and raise the tax rate to cover what they want to spend and not be apologetic about it.

F35’s are cool, so fuck these guys.

What a boring read. The only question is “why?” and despite a subheading asking just that, it isn’t answered.

It’s hinted several times that the sanctions might be overly broad, but it isn’t discussed in any kind of detail. Considering the sanctions won’t be finalised for months, Australia must have some other reason they don’t want to negotiate with these countries.

Maybe they walked into the room, saw too many white guys wearing kafias, and thought it best to gtfo.

However, the Coalition points to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures that show tobacco consumption increased by roughly 30 per cent between 2022 and 2025.

This is ofc a lie, as any words that spill from the dysgenic swill holes these freaks speak from often are. The ABS is speaking of nicotine consumption, including vapes, etc, not what the reader probably thinks when they hear “tobacco”. I hope this Jake Revell guy is quoting them directly and not peddling this himself.

While sales of illegal cigarettes and nicotine products have declined dramatically, wastewater analysis shows that overall nicotine consumption is surging.

Pretty sure this is a spelling mistake and they meant legal cigarettes, because it makes no sense. It’s also misleading, if my understanding is correct the waste water tests showed total cigarette use is down, but by cross referencing the sales of legal cigarettes with this data it showed illegal use was up. Also I think this is conflating cigarettes and other nicotine products when it says “surging”… but it says nicotine products have declined… Which isn’t true? Idk this sentence is a mess.

Fair, and I’d go one step further by saying the “neo-Nazi” market share is something Facebook doesn’t want to miss out on.

That said they’d probably ban these guys if enough people complained about it. Or maybe not seeing as Mark Zuckerberg has decided to kiss Trump’s ring…

What is?

Based. King.

The argument is the DEAO is basically a warrant anyway, it needs to be signed off on by the same authorised officers (magistrates, registrars, etc).

All a warrant does is grant the legal authority to go looking for the device. If a cop sees you filming a murder on your phone and arrests you they can already seize your device without a warrant. So a warrant wouldn’t grant any more authority than the cop already has at that time.

The article is deliberately a lot of things imo, none of them good. It’s not written by a lawyer btw, important to note that.

The point about the warrant is the only thing that matters here, and I’d argue it’s meaningless when we are talking about lawful seizure.

A warrant provides you with the legal authority to search for the device, inside a private residence for example. When a cop witnesses a crime and sees that a device is relevant to that crime they can seize it without a warrant. In that case the idea of getting a warrant is superfluous and only a thing because the DEAO law explicitly says so.

They will still need to apply for the DEAO from the same kind of judicial officer that would sign their warrants to get into it.

God damn, why is a legal firm paying journalists to write slop like this on their website? Half of it is a political rant with no relevance.

The only relevant point is this: should police require an additional warrant before applying for a DEAO?

Arguably no, not if they already have the device. The warrant is only really needed to gain access to the device and grant legal authority to search for it. If you have both of those already through lawful seizure after witnessing a crime take place the warrant doesn’t provide you any additional powers.

A DEAO still needs to be signed off on by an authorised officer of the judiciary, and the cop applying for it can be charged with perjury if they lie on the application. The evidence is also very likely to be thrown out.

The point is NSW warrants aren’t a meaningful check on power, and this loser Paul Gregoire is just jerking off by framing it as such.

Probably some slopulist led revolution to institute communism, followed by a million or so deaths, societal collapse, and a century of no true Scotsman fallacies defending it. I don’t listen to commie critiques because they are all illiterate and ahistoric hacks, and I don’t take anything they say as quaint or humorous because they are amoral campists who hide behind masks.

Children are represented by their parents who advocate for them.

Old people need to advocate for themselves.

A poll test is anti-democratic as hell, and a step towards authoritarianism.