Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Edmus]

Anyone got thoughts on Shorten's claims that he totally didn't do that crime no one had heard of until now?
It feels weird to me, but maybe that's because it's a politician being somewhat honest.

[Reudh]

Anyone got thoughts on Shorten's claims that he totally didn't do that crime no one had heard of until now?
It feels weird to me, but maybe that's because it's a politician being somewhat honest.

What the police said was that even if it were true, there would be little to no chance of conviction - Shorten said he was elsewhere, and there'd be no physical evidence after thirty years.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I kinda like this 'ball of untouchable grease' Palmer fella. He seems like a pretty pragmatic guy and doesn't afraid of anything. This is entirely from reporting in this topic, though. I know nothing about Aussie politicians besides they hate the reef.

[Edmus]

So far Palmer has been surprisingly supportive of things I like, I was prepared to hate him but now... Ehh.
He's apparently against the university deregulation legislature which is making me glad.

[Jimmy]

Yeah, he's pretty obviously focusing his political points on high public approval. As for the man himself I don't trust him as far as I could throw him (interesting mental image there) but for the fact he's prepared to support the side of the common folk, even if it is only for approval and not because he genuinely cares, he's become one of my favourite politicians. I wait with bated breath to see the next shitstorm he stirs up.

Oh, and sadly he had to say he's vewy vewy sowwy to the Chinese. Interestingly, however, the condemnation of his comments from the official channels doesn't seem to be shared with the common people inside China. There are reports that users on Chinese social media Weibo welcomed Clive's comments. The second highest liked comment was translated as saying: “Thank you to this Australian member of parliament for taking a principled stand on behalf of the Chinese people."

[Reelya]

One upside to Palmer is that politicians who already made a bucket-load of money generally tell it like they see it, because they are in no way beholden to "donations" as career party-politicians are.

Party politicians need to watch what they say not only for their own sake, but also because it can hit their party "donations" (parties are completely private organizations and have plenty of ways to funnel the "donations" into the pockets of the people who run them, including hiring their family members as "consultants" and the like). The reason I keep put "donations" in quotes, is because in any other industry, that would be referred to a "bribe money".

So, Palmer as a guy with his own money to fund his campaign can generally step on toes and say what he thinks without fear, which comes across as refreshing compared to politicians who need to watch what they say for fear of offending many groups who support them.

That's the upside to Palmer. The downside of course is that he's a rich plutocrat and will use his political power to benefit his own corporation, rather than a politician using their power to benefit a corporation and then raking in the "donations" as a reward. Palmer is a politician and his own benefactor/patron rolled into one, so he clearly doesn't need to worry about offending himself and losing donations.

[Geneoce]

Honestly I prefer Palmer, a rich guy who does what he wants, to the 2 L's and the watermelons, who do what their sponsors tell them too.

He has straight forward inane madness mixed with some good policy while the regulars have whatever the donators pressure them to have veiled under "promises". He doesnt need to trick the population at large because he can just follow what the people want to get in power, rather than getting the media to convience people that they want something to ensure corporate backers get one of their flavour of the 3 year cycle party in position.

Most fun occurance would be another few Palmer-likes popping out of a grain-corp, manufacturing or a shipping company with different views to him. Be a bit more interesting than Party 1, Party A or Party Distraction.

[sneakey pete]

As a note to that donations thing, there seems to be a big shitstorm going on about that in state politics in NSW. Lots of brown paper bags and the like. (I do wonder: where does one get brown paper bags for bribe donation money?)

[Reelya]

This sort of thing, rather than the old brown paper bags they use for sandwiches.



But, generally there are much cleverer ways to funnel money around than literally passing over a wad of cash.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/tony-abbott-blames-confusion-over-developer-donation-ban-for-libs-icac-woes-20140818-105d3h.html

Tony Abbott interestingly blames Labor's ban on donations for causing his party-members to be caught for corruption. He says there was some "confusion": In their "confusion" about the new laws they accepted these wads of cash in brown envelopes. But how can that be true, because even before the ban on property-developer "donations" it was never legal to take undeclared money for your campaign.

So his argument is that it's the law's fault that his colleagues are getting done for breaking the law. I guess murderers and rapists can blame the law too, for themselves getting in trouble. Clearly, they're only criminals because of those silly laws banning what they did.

[Geneoce]

Huh. One of the vile creatures who covered for the "asian" gang who rounded up 1400 british child sex slaves in Rotherham because she didnt want to be called a Racist moved to Australia and got a cushy job in victorian department of education. Gotta love Melbourne.

Well played Dr. Sharp. Wonder how long she will last as a senior in early childhood development now that this is circulating in the news, and what other heinous crimes has she got stashed away in her cupboard?

[Reelya]

You're conflating several aspects of the story together there. She's made a statement about the 3 years she did that job. There's no evidence that she "covered" for anyone. Nor is she one of the people who was accused of not doing anything because she "didn't want to appear racist".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2736136/We-won-t-blame-1-400-young-girls-abused-rapists-loose-officials-charge-Rotherham-abuse-scandal-continue-pass-buck.html

Sonia Sharp worked for the local council. How much funding or power do you really think a local council has?

Heads are going to roll, sure. But a local council, anywhere, just isn't capable of stopping widespread crime. That's what the police are there for, and they are the ones who ultimately failed here.

And she was there for 2 or 3 years, when the problem was already widespread. There's no logical way she could have personally tackled a crime gang with 1400 victims in two years, when the police couldn't even handle it in 15 years. So blaming Ms Sharp is kind of like saying whoever go the job should take the blame, which is just nonsense. Not everything can be fixed. If you got the job it would have been just a big a balls-up as Sonia Sharp witnessed. And would that be your fault for your inability to magically solve this problem?

[Geneoce]

I'm pointing her out because she is a Respected Scholar who has advised numerous people and insititues on the treatment of early childhood conditions and is currently working in a government department in my home city. She knew about the incidents and said nothing, in my terms thats pretty much covering. As for the fear of racism:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734694/It-hard-appalling-nature-abuse-child-victims-suffered-1-400-children-sexually-exploited-just-one-town-16-year-period-report-reveals.html

Yes she worked for the local council. Yes she was only doing it for 3 years. Why are we hearing about this now? Wouldnt her professional integrity cause her to speak out? If you were in her position and you were apart of the team that "couldnt say you didnt know about it" would you stand idle?

If I got the job you better believe you would have been hearing about this much earlier. All she needed was the facts on what was happening and a bit of evidence. But then she would have lost her job and been ostracised for speaking out. Guess job security was worth more than these childrens safety?

Nah, not on mate. She shouldnt be allowed 100 meters near a school, let alone working in a senior position.

[Reelya]

This just sounds like a retarded witch-hunt you're on now.

Generally, police and other public servants are legally not allowed to overstep their chain of command and just blab stuff to the media at random. They can go to jail for that stuff. Councils have official PR departments, and employees are bound by non-disclosure agreements.

You don't really see random council workers or police officers just "popping up" on the news to disagree with official policy now do you? That's because of the legal stuff they sign when they get the job.

Plus, whatever details she possessed would also have been related to ongoing police investigations. Leaking that stuff is a definite jail term.

[Geneoce]

Being a concerned parent who wants to see an individual who could have done something about a child sex scandle numbering over 1000 victims removed from her office dealing with young children until her innocence is proven is not a "retarded witch-hunt" Reelya. Much better safe than sorry in this circumstance.

[Reelya]

What "innocence is proven" and "sex scandal". There's no evidence she had any connection to the thugs who were doing this. Nor was she a law enforcement agent who could have "covered" for criminals.

And pulling out the "concern parent" bullshit: "I'm a parent so my insane ranting is valid goddammit"

By an logic, what is she going to do here that is going to cause harm? The only way for that to happen would be to import the entire population and the problem from that city in England. Plenty of people exactly like her work in similar jobs in cities which DO NOT have insanely large sex-trafficking gangs. Her only failing is that she was unlucky enough to get posted there. Purely luck of the draw and nothing she did, personally, created this problem. Whoever was hired for that job would be in the same situation.

It's like saying any policeman who worked in a city with a high crime rate, not matter how briefly they worked there, is immediately suspect, and should never be allowed to work in the force ever again. That makes just as much sense as blaming this person for happening to have a job in that city for a couple of years.

Why don't we just say all people from Rotherham are evil until proven otherwise? That makes just as much sense as attacking this woman. She didn't come from the town, and I'll bet you that plenty of the locals knew shit was going on, and did or said nothing.