Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Labor requesting an investigation is very different to the AFP conducting raids.
I don’t care. The AFP has been used as weapon by the Coalition for well over a decade, ever since that incompetent oaf Mick Keelty arrested Mohammad Haneef on nonsense charges in the lead up to the 2007 federal election.Oh c'mon - what do you think an investigation comprises in this context? Inspector Clouseau sitting at his desk and thumbing through paperwork? Look at the language Dreyfus used; "gravity of such a security breach", "appear to be extremely sensitive" - Labor thought this breach should be treated with the utmost seriousness and investigated as thoroughly as possible. Problem is, Dreyfus drafted this back when he thought he was dishing dirt on Dutton.
But one thing we can all be certain about.... Had Labor won the recent election and this raid had taken place, those same posters (plus some others who have remained curiously silent on the issue) would be in this thread screaming how voting for the ALP is essentially voting for a socialist dictatorship.
right...Now: did Labor ask for raids or just an investigation?
You can investigate a leak without raiding news org offices.
Or didn’t like the methods.right...
so dreyfus wanted an investigation, got it but didnt like the fact it was done by the afp. nice example of dreyfus/labor wanting to have theor cake and eat it as well.
The searching through evidence to determine whether there had been a breach and/or offence. Also am pretty positive the claims it was a raid have been completely debunked. It was an agreed meeting to carry out the warrant.Or didn’t like the methods.
This is weak from the government but people are equating “investigation” with “AFP raid”.
What else might be involved in an investigation other than AFP raids on our national broadcaster?
The fact they got a warrant at all is the problem.The searching through evidence to determine whether there had been a breach and/or offence. Also am pretty positive the claims it was a raid have been completely debunked. It was an agreed meeting to carry out the warrant.
Who should have carried out the investigation? The AFP seems like the most appropriate body to do this.
how is it?The fact they got a warrant at all is the problem.
It is important to remember that these stories did not risk national security. They invited criticism, not danger. The raids on the ABC and the home of a News Corp reporter were about government embarrassment.
Oh c'mon - what do you think an investigation comprises in this context? Inspector Clouseau sitting at his desk and thumbing through paperwork? Look at the language Dreyfus used; "gravity of such a security breach", "appear to be extremely sensitive" - Labor thought this breach should be treated with the utmost seriousness and investigated as thoroughly as possible. Problem is, Dreyfus drafted this back when he thought he was dishing dirt on Dutton.
So you are posting as a point of evidence against the justification of the investigation an opinion piece .
During the press conference the AFP spokeperson was asked about that and his response was:You are the best I have seen on here at taking wild guesses without any evidence at all to back yourself up.
Fact is you have zero idea what the ALP meant when it stated that they wanted an investigation. You cannot make any assertion at all they they would have sent the AFP in to investigate Annika Smethurst's underwear drawer.
You are the best I have seen on here at taking wild guesses without any evidence at all to back yourself up.
Fact is you have zero idea what the ALP meant when it stated that they wanted an investigation. You cannot make any assertion at all they they would have sent the AFP in to investigate Annika Smethurst's underwear drawer.
Exactly - and you have zero idea too. So, let's just look at Dreyfus's words. And then let's consider who is the appropriate investigating body in this instance.
Both bits of objective info lead to an investigation by the AFP over information of the most highly confidential nature.
Oops i forgot opinions have no business being on the internetSo you are posting as a point of evidence against the justification of the investigation an opinion piece .
Oops i forgot opinions have no business being on the internet
In the case of GoldenSky, his/her posting history is littered with anti-ALP propaganda. This thread is a perfect example. This AFP investigation happened on Dutton's watch...yet here we ago again with the finger pointing directed at the mob who aren't even in government.
And it happens in every thread GoldenSky shows up in.
Not the journalists job to really care or protect the military. It’s all about the provision of news to fund advertising.For the love of god. C O N F I D E N T I A L defence force documents. Where did they get these? How?
Well standard Australian logic is one of ours is worth hundreds of “them”; after all the opponents are just statisticsKilling innocent children is a poor lapse in judgement apparently. That will make defending child murderers a whole lot easier for lawyers.
Innocent civilians have been murdered, but you're right, Australian solders are the true victims in all of this.
Lean to the right? To the right of che Guevara maybe...Can't handle contrary opinions? You might be a bit of a snowflake. From what I've seen, the SRP board tends to lean towards the right for the most part. There's plenty of other places you can go which are essentially far-right hive-minds if you really are that desperate to have your world view confirmed by a majority.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06...airs-boss-over-post-raids-phone-call/11199230
With Dutton denying all knowledge of just about everything he does prior to today, it's amazing such a thin-skinned crybaby is the man in charge of the nation's security apparatus.