pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Other than the removal of due process, what powers does this new law offer these agencies that they don't already have if they just follow a system?
There's plenty of process in the new laws. It's just that the process is broken. For a general non-technical description of the new powers, you can do much worse than the article Johnny posted the previous page.Other than the removal of due process, what powers does this new law offer these agencies that they don't already have if they just follow a system?
I read the article, it was long and yesterday. All that stuck in my mind was the ability to seize/detain/search etc.There's plenty of process in the new laws. It's just that the process is broken. For a general non-technical description of the new powers, you can do much worse than the article Johnny posted the previous page.
...just like the way they all told Australia to fuck off over the gst.The points about this idiot law being unenforceable are strong.
Yes, that's exactly what I said, it's uncanny. I am a big believer in extrapolating from the smallest sample size possible. Or, you know, I was using an example.So you're basing your position on legislators all over on one person who was deliberatly making a political point to a misinformed base?
Shorten doesn't want to get wedged on national security in the lead up to the next election, and Scott Morrison is desperate to look tuff. Meanwhile, the damage is already done. Amendments can be effective if the basic law is good, which can't be said in this case. There's not enough air freshener in the world to make this stinker palatable.Just spoke with a tech lawyer, related to the national security community who echoed many of the complaints here: rushed, lack of oversight and not accounting well enough for unintended consequences. This person suggests that the process has been politicised between ALP/LNP, which then creates an oppotunity to get a law through that has been wanted for a long time, so the mentatily of "just get it in and amend it later" is likely driving some decisions that wouldn't otherwise be made.
An example of what, hyperbole??!Yes, that's exactly what I said, it's uncanny. I am a big believer in extrapolating from the smallest sample size possible. Or, you know, I was using an example.
Jeeeeez. You know, Archimedes talked about a lever long enough to move the world, but even he would be impressed at how much work you did to ignore all my previous posts on the failures of legislative process to present a single complementary anecdote as the sole basis of my argument.An example of what, hyperbole??!
You were trying to make a case for legislators not engaging properly or adequately on tech matters, no?
Libs wedged Labor right up the.....This person suggests that the process has been politicised between ALP/LNP, which then creates an oppotunity to get a law through that has been wanted for a long time, so the mentatily of "just get it in and amend it later" is likely driving some decisions that wouldn't otherwise be made.
Christ, you’re a child sometimes.Nothing screams winner quite like personal attacks, after all.
No doubt. Don't mind me, just practicing writing my next daily telegraph headline.Christ, you’re a child sometimes.