Leensander General manner. Welcome to the late Debains.
Good evening and welcome to the program. I'm Caleb Bond with Listorer and kel richards Well. Could by claims contravene human rights? One group of people in Sydney think so, and they're taking it all the way to the Human Rights Commission. More strength to their arm, I say, when we get into the papers, Alan Joyce's sixteen million dollar payout from Quantus could be in a bit of trouble.
And does social media need cigarette style warnings. We'll talk about that a little bit later, but first in Victoria today a new bill hit the Parliament to increase the age of criminal responsibility. Currently it's ten years old and they want to make at twelve. And you might ask the question, well why is this. If you go through the numbers the increases in youth crime in Victoria, it
becomes very clear, very quickly. Crime for those fourteen to seventeen year olds went up thirty percent last year, ten to thirteen went up twenty two and a half percent, but staggeringly for ten and eleven year olds it went up by sixty five percent. So the Victorian government thought, goodness, gracious, me. We've got all this crime happening with ten and eleven
year olds. What can we do about it? I know will make it impossible for ten and eleven year olds to commit crimes, and therefore we'll have a one hundred percent reduction in the youth crime rate. What a marvelous brainway, who would have thought of that one? Here's the Attorney General, Jacqueline Simes crowing about this today and how great it's going to be for Victorian kids.
If we want this to work.
We're proud of this legislation. We want to make sure it gets through the Parliament. We're giving an ample opportunity for people to have their say in relation to that. But it will take potentially some time ver and I bringing our toothbrushes when it's going to be in committee, because there'll be lots of questions that we'll have to deal.
Premier Decina Allen also said that it would reduce youth crime and yes, I guess that is correct. When you can't charge children with crimes, they're not technically committing crimes, are they, His opposition leader John Pursuito, hitting back, we'll.
Certainly look at the proposal from ten to twelve. But our position has always been clear on twelve to fourteen that it is too problematic and we're not going to see the ethic of responsibility and the ethic of accountability watered down to the point where the government's approach to dealing with violent crime is to pretend it's not happening.
It's expected this will come into law early next year, early twenty twenty five, and one of the other effects of it is that they will change the presumption of whether you're capable of committing a crime between the ages of ten and fourteen years. So the presumption now, Liz, will be that if you are ten to eleven, twelve, thirteen or fourteen, it is presumed that you don't have the capability to commit a crime, so the court will have to prove that you understand what you are doing
is a crime. They increase the age of criminal responsibility to twelve, so eventually you won't have to face any charges whatsoever, and their ultimate dat is to get it all the way up to fourteen, so anyone under the age of fourteen will literally not be able to commit a crime.
Staggering, staggering, So we're raising the age of criminality at a time when serious offenders are getting younger and younger, we're not addressing those underlying issues, and then the natural outcome is that the community is more worried than ever because they know they're at the mercy of these juveniles who won't be punished properly. So why would these kids then not continue to do what they're doing or indeed
become first offenders. What really got me about this was the I think this is Latin, so I'm going to butcher it, but the Dolly incapats principle will be written into legislation, and that is that the presumption that a child aged ten to fourteen is incapable of criminal intent.
Now we know that that is nonsense.
And every time this comes up, I just remember that terrible, very famous case of nineteen ninety three where we had two ten year olds in the UK.
Murder a two year old.
They abducted him, they tortured him, and they murdered him.
His name was James Bulger.
And these two ten year olds, it was shown in court, they knew exactly what they were doing.
They knew that it was wrong. They did it anyway.
There is just no basis for an argument that kids engaging in serious criminal activity were, Oh, we weren't aware that this was criminal activity, or we weren't.
Aware that we should do it. We know that the Act did this.
Last year they bumped up the age of criminal responsibility to twelve, and in the next two years they intend to.
Make that fourteen.
It seems kell Act is often the first domino to fall when it comes to terrible ideas.
Like the first domino to get it wrong. Let me thrown a little fact to it. I did a big research thing in all the psychology sites that I could find in psychiatry sites, and there's a very wide agreement that children know right from wrong from the age of seven. So everything you're saying is absolutely right. There are four points that they announced, CA we bring those up on the screen. There are four points that they said are going to be the part of the keys to this legislation.
Electronic monitoring was one of them, raising the age electronic monitoring, legislating warnings and cautions.
Parole boards will alert victims of.
Things that are changing, and they're also lowering the age which people can be charged with enticing kids commit crime. But look at the third one. There legislated cautions. That's the problem. That's what went wrong in Queensland. Because Anastasia Palichet said they shouldn't be in the criminal system, do not consider putting them in jail, and don't lock them up, just give them a caution. They legislated for that, and the kids very quickly worked out what was going on.
So that's right.
They committed a crime, they happily went to court, they got a caution, they didn't.
Have any conviction recorded, and they went out and committed another crime.
So so you do sound I've got to say for a young man, like a middle aged cynic, sometimes.
You're right, ag.
Agent.
So it is happening.
It's happening for the statistical reasons you talked about. But more crime will happen on the streets, is the whole point. Jasenda Allen said today, and I think I can quote the ipsum of Erber. She said, kids should not be in the criminal justice system. Yes they should. It's the only way to get them off the street. Stop them stealing cars. The cars will still be stolen, they just won't be counted exactly.
So you youth crime plummets because we just don't record it. Oh, it doesn't exist as far as we're concerned, and they took today. You know, the police will still have the ability to round the kids up and take them to the cop shop if we can't get hold of their parents. But once they get them to the cop shop, they can't do anything with them. They just call up social services and ask them to come and take the kid away.
And the only force they can use to grab a ten or eleven year old under these laws is to just grab their arm and hope they come with them. So the police will be powerless to do anything about a ten or eleven year old, essentially the group where crime went up by sixty five percent. Now I understand that that means there are probably problems at home, and there are problems at school, and they are serious and
they need to be dealt with. But you can't tell me that simply raising the age of criminal responsibility actually helps these kids.
No, it's about fudging the numbers. And there was signs saying we really want this to work. Yeah, you know, it hasn't worked anywhere else, but because we really want it to work, I'm sure at will. No one can give us any factual evidence that this is in any way effective. All it does is fudge the numbers and teach these kids like you say, Hell, I.
Go to court, I got a slap on the wrist.
I've got a caution.
Can can we wonder why the rates of recidivism are so high?
But we have a model.
We have a model because this is almost exactly what Queensland tried. So it's almost as though they sat there in the cabinet room said, is there a system for dealing with the kids in the in law that will not work and be absolutely terrible?
Oh?
Yes, Queensland made a mess of it. We will follow their patterns. What a good idea that is.
Victoria is very good at just taking things and making them worse, aren't they know? The comonwealth game.
They're very consistent on.
And on it goes. Speaking of which, if you are a child at school, you probably shouldn't be watching it this hour, Go to bed, little Johnny. But if your parents you start and watch the Late Bake, you can
probably get a little bit. And if you were at school, because we learned today that again in Victoria, the rules that have been put in place, they're now compulsory for the teaching of children in early education in Victoria spell out exactly what they need to be told about diversity, equity, inclusion, etc. And they've got to be taught about Aboriginal Torres Strait
Islander people. Now, can you believe it? In the document that sets all of this out DEI, Diversity, equity and inclusion is mentioned one hundred and forty nine times, one hundred and forty nine times, Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander and reconciliation matters are mentioned ninety six times. How many times do you reckon? The document mentions the words mother, father or parent? Zero, big fat zero? Would you believe it?
The IPA did some work into this document and uncopitab Listen, Thank god they've done it, because if it weren't for them, we wouldn't know about. It's doctor Belladiabrera over at the IPA. So these centers should be where children playing sand pits, draw with crayons and have afternoon naps, not be inducted into the cults of social justice, identity, politics and sustainability
by activist educators. Parents should be very concerned that the Australian government supports young children that being support sorry, young children being exposed to very adult themes such as gender, sexuality, race, culture, and the environment, years before it's appropriate. The education system is shifted away from the acquisition of knowledge towards activism and social justice. Results have continued to slide compared to other nations. And I think we've known for some time
that this is coming. But Kel, we're talking about early learners. Were talking a three four year old. No, they don't talk once about mum or dad. We got to talk about the environment and diversity in.
It and drag coeens and whatever else they bring.
Listen, I speak with the authority of a grandpa who's got a little four year old, little six year old toddlers and they're now in big school.
That's exciting.
But they've just come through this preschool area and end of the preschool area. They have nursery rhymes and fairy tales, and they build things with the big lego blocks, that's what it's all about. And they play hide and seek with Grandpa. They're little kids. They've got to be treated like little kids. Now, the people who drew this up, it's very clear what's happening here. They know that what they're teaching is highly disputed. They know there's a lot
of the community that would not approve. A lot of parents would not approve. They don't care. It shows absolute contempt for parents. It's very arrogant thing to do, and you've got to say why do they do it? And someone explained to me once here's how it works.
Kill.
People on the political right think the left or wrong. People on the political left think the right are evil. So if you're conservative, they think you're evil and you have to be subverted. So they have to take your children and grandchildren away from you because you are so evil, they've got to stop your influence.
That's the kind of.
Arrogance that is behind what's going on here. It's not only educationally stupid. To teach these things to two and three and four year olds educationally absolutely idiotic.
It's indefensible.
I'd call them halfwits, but that would be massively overestimating them. They're more like quarterwits something like that, possibly one eighth. So it's a stupid thing to do educationally, but they are doing it deliberately and consciously because they really despise everyone who doesn't agree with them.
Correct, and the raisure of parents, the very mention of mother and father from this curriculum just underlines everything I've always said about this.
Parents.
The state wants your job, and it's not asking for permission. The state itself cannot have children. It takes yours. It was Lenin who said, give us a child for a years and he will be a Bolshevik forever.
It was Hitler who.
Said, he alone, who owns the youth, gains the future. And it was Marx who said, as soon as a child does not need the care of his mother anymore, he should be educated in state institutions only.
This is how Marxist worked. Slowly, slowly.
You think you're sending your kid off for some education. That's what we all send our kids to pre Kindy, to learn motor skills, to learn how to associate with other kids and get along nicely. No, no, the state has a very different plan for your child's education.
And we've seen this going on four years.
You may remember this incident back in twenty twenty two where a dad had gone to pick up his two year old, sorry five year old from Kindi and found the place plasted with all sorts of lgbtiq. I remember him specifically talking about the pen sexual stuff. What is a five year old got to do learning about pen sexual for crying out loud, and he took great issue with this, told the kindie that he was very unimpressed.
They called the cops on this guy for simply trying to protect his five year old from this rabid kind of indoctrination.
My mama always said she always.
Referred to state schools as cesspools, even when I was too young to even know what a cesspool was, and her saying was always you've got a brainwashing before somebody else does, because kids are sponges, and so whoever teaches them first teaches them best.
But I only know what they're told. They only know what they're told at that age. You tell them the wrong thing.
That's what they know.
They say that really can definitely, at the age of three, the only thing that should matter in their life his toilet training. Nothing else should be important for them. You know the huge triumph when they call out from the bathroom. You have to go and see the pooh they did, because it's a shavement. It is it exactly is that's what matters for little lives. This is destroying little lives,
and it's destroying little lives. For really evil reasons. Jordan Peterson published online an image that he found in a preschool about having drag queens come and read to them and all the different things that were happening there Dune his Pride month.
You can't read it. The printer is feeling small.
But it's about you know about drag queens and are there any drag kings? And in what way are people in drag different from you little children. I mean, there are a whole lot of adults who couldn't care less, who don't want to know. But if adults want to find out about drag queens and that communey, that's fine, they're adults. But to foist something as marginal in society and as unusual in society as that on tiny little kids who will only be confused by it, that's wrong exactly.
And it's happening all over the Western world. Run. It's in Australia, it's in the US, it's in the UK.
And of course, which is why I am so suspicious of the Albanesy government and the labor state governments all pushing universal daycare.
So number one, mum, hand your.
Kids over to us, that we the state will raise them, you get back to work, earning us more glorious tax dollars. We don't care about anything else. And these kids go into daycare younger and younger. Nowadays, the state knows exactly what it's doing, being like, oh, look, how generous we are, universal daycare for all. No, No, I think it's a far more sinister thing that's at play here.
I think you're right.
If it were not the case, instead of subsidizing the childcare centers, they'd say, here's the subsidy, We'll pay it to the parents and either mom can stay at home if he wants to, or dad could start at home all they could send them off to a child center, give them the money, they look after their kids. They make the decisions. The fact that no government will do that makes me suspected what you're saying is a absolutely right.
Correct and I've advocated for that for a long time, and just on the fact that it's happening around world. Have listened to Nigel Fards talking about exactly this in the UK.
I am just so sick to death of our youngsters being told that we are a uniquely bad country because we pursue slavery, as were the only country in.
History it was bad, right, that it was bad, yes, and every.
Other European country, and it's still happening in many parts of the world today. But why not teach them as well that we spent forty years with the Royal Naval Squadron driving slavery off the high seas, and that the British government spent more money stopping slavery than it ever owned from it. Make sure kids get a sense of balance.
Yes, but of course we told them the truth lives. You know, they wouldn't be good little socialist work of these.
Indeed, and that is the point of the state school system to be good little cogs in the will.
To Pizer now, because it looks.
Like judgment day is drawing at nigh, with the State of Kansas taking them to court saying that their marketing was misleading. He is the Kansas Governor explaining some of the reasons why he's taking this drastic action.
Pfiser marketed its vaccine as safe for pregnant women. However, in February of twenty twenty one, Pfizer possessed reports for four hundred and fifty eight pregnant women who received Pfizer's COVID nineteen vaccine during pregnancy. More than half of the pregnant women reported an adverse event, and more than ten percent reported a miscarriage, many within days of the vaccination.
Pfizer also possessed information from its own October twenty twenty study on pre agency in rats indicating that it's COVID nineteen vaccine was likely linked to infertility, loss of litters and still born offspring.
So this is serious.
What is alleging is Phis New Phis, a New all along in their own trials that this was going to be problematic for pregnant women. He goes on to talk about pericarditis, myocarditis, different heart issues linked to the Phiza vaccine.
This is going to be a very very interesting court case.
I know that I cannot wait for the discovery period and what will come out in that period.
Piso has not wanted to give up details.
You may remember, I think it was the Supreme Court in the end who told them, no, no, you have to hand over your findings and your research what went into making this vaccine, and they gave it up very unwillingly. But this is what the turn General I called him, the governor is the Attorney General is one of five states bringing these kinds of actions. Now it's really gaining traction in the US as more and more side effects have become just pretty darn off.
Yet Texas, Texas is one of them as well. And in both cases, Texas and this case has of course claimed that there's nothing to see here, don't worrys, no merit whatsoever. But but you know, there is mounting evidence that we've talked about quite a bit on this program. The recent study by a bunch of Dutch scientists twister there investigating whether or not there could be a link between excess mortality in vaccines and saying that that is worthy of investigation.
Excess mortality that again we've seen has gone Western world. This study did not get enough media except the one place of deaven countries in their data.
Sweden, the country which did not go mad over over COVID vaccines and all the mad COVID rules, has a lower excess mortality rate than the rest of us. We all got it wrong because there was this mad rush to push these out and force them on and let's broaden it, that's not just fireza Astraseneka withdrew their COVID vaccine.
And now flay.
We took it off the shelf last year and then our astrosenica woke up and took it off the shelf worldwide earlier this year.
In America, there is still a class action fifty one people claiming ill effects from it, twelve of them saying a relative died because of it.
So what was happening with this sort of mad, mad rush, this mad panic and.
We must get this out there and get this into everyone's arms is really really strange when we look back at it now, there is not a apart from Sweden, which I mentioned, there's not a government in the world that got this right. There's no health authority in the world that was careful enough to protect people. It's their job. It's their job, that's what they're supposed to do.
Yeah, And in fact, last week in America, the Ninth Circuit Court action ruled that because this was an mRNA vaccine, it's not a vaccine.
So very very interesting.
This thing just seems to be unraveling at a rate of knots now. And I for one, am just so happy to get a big bowl of popcorn and hope.
Justice because most people took this under Duriss.
Most people took this under Duriss.
Indeed, that was the point of the mandate, and in fact, transmission is something else. The Attorney General went into in this brilliant speech he gave saying, well, FIZES actually admitted they didn't even test for transmission. That wasn't the purpose
of the vaccine to begin with. And yet and that's why he's getting them on this misleading marketing case because he's like, you guys led us to believe that this did something that it doesn't do, and unfortunately appears to do that which you said it never would.
And that's how we were black mild.
You don't want to pass this on to grandma, do you, because over eighty grandma will die, And you think, oh, okay, if it's going to stop transmission, i'd better have it. But a lot of people, but my wife and I got a couple of shots. But then we started reading the very early information coming out about this, and we thought, ah ah, there's something about this that's strange.
The m R in the r.
mRNA, thank you, they're here to help.
The here to help.
But it was a brand new type of vaccina, a brand new type of process it's actually.
Involving the human genome.
I think this has got years to run because if it's if it's doing what it claims to do, which is having an effect on the human genome.
Affects my turn up years from now. We've got no I don't know what, no idea, how bad this is going to get?
No idea and this could have years and years to run. Can I just give a nod to Rebecca Wisser, one of my colleagues. She currently edits Quadron. She's written a lot of articles over the last two or three years for the Spectator magazine blowing the wish a on this, but mainstream media nothing.
And it's good to see that it is starting to come to the fore now. Good to see a government like Kansas actually going and asking the questions that the rest of us want answered. One of the other things that the Attorney General of Kansas went into was the alleged suppression of information that was being given to people, particularly through social media.
After making these misleading statements, Pfizer also engaged in some censorship attempts. Emails revealed that Pfiser officials coordinated with social media platforms to censor any speech critical of Pfizer's COVID nineteen vaccine safety and effectiveness.
As Liz said, grab the popcorn. And of course, the federal government and the TGA still advised that your best defense against COVID is the vaccine. Well, let's go to my favorite topic of the night, which is human rights abuses committed by bike lanes. I've been waiting for someone, someone who've been talking about the.
Greatest human rights in.
Getting on a soap box.
But you understand, he spent a long time traveling down major roads, tried to go fixed it with bikes in front of.
Him, going thirty five, that's right and.
Under.
And the whole time I was sitting there thinking, Gee, I wish one of these vaccines would kill me so I didn't have to sit here. I'm not suggesting they do, but please take me out so I don't have to deal with bloody cyclist. So in Paddington in Sydney, a bunch of residents have worked out that there's this new bikelane that's going to go up Oxford Street and because there's a footpath and then there'll be a bike lane and then the road and there are bus stops along
the road. They'll have to cross the bike lane in order to get to the bus stop, and they are quite concerned that they're going to be collected by speeding cycle in the process. And you can see there this as an example of one of these bikeways. It's got the pedestrian crossing on it, but you know, when someone's speeding along on their bike, it's quite easy for someone to be collected. They have decided this is a human rights issue and they have gone off to the Australian
Human Rights Commission. One of the blokes involved in this case, Sorry, Michael Waterhouse cake, I'm thinking about my birthday tomorrow. Is it was my fault as in walking across the thing and nearly getting collected. But I realized this could happen to anybody of a certain age. The more I looked into it, the more I thought this is bizarre. I'm really concerned about it. The whole cycling thing is good on one level. Unfortunately, there are a number of cyclists
who will cause problems. The demographic of Paddington is getting older. There are a lot of people around who I think will be affected and fair enough, and I should note as well that one of the people involved in this case to the Human Rights Commission is Catherine Griner, the ex wife of former New South Wales pre Nick Grann. I reckon they should rip every single one of these bloody bike lanes out. They are a human rights issue. Not only are they and I saw they take up
precious space on the road. And I don't know if you've seen the bike lanes in Melbourne. They're much like the ones in Sydney, but they take out an entire lane of traffic through the CBD. There's never anyone on them. You try to park your car in the Melbourne CBD, someone wants to do a reverse parallel park. It holds up all the traffic because there's literally only one lane because they took one out for the bloody bike Get rid.
Of the lot of them.
Calm down, calm down.
Don't tell me to calm down.
Ken It's all right, don't come down. That's perfectly I've got that.
Part of the problem is that cyclists understand they're superior to the rest of us. Therefore they don't have to treat us with respect and decency. We were pulling out of a in the CBD in Sydney, pulling out of
a car park. To come out of this underground car park, obviously you have to cross the bike lane in order to get onto the road onto the right and so but we pulled up there and we were watching the traffic coming and a bicycle came down them so he could proceeded to bump the side of our car with his front wheel as hard as he could because we didn't belong there, it belonged to him.
I've worked at that.
The problem is we are mere Homo sapiens. They have evolved to the next level. They are home. They are homocyclists, which is which is the next level of human evolution there, and they're better than us because they're saving the planet. We are discussing Homo sapiens down here somewhere because we're not saving the planet. They're riding bikes, so they're saving the planet. That makes them morally superior. They can do
whatever they like. I've actually worked that's their theory. There is a problem with the theory because they're trying to save the planet by reducing carbon dioxide. The problem is every time they breathe out, they breathe carbon dioxide there, so they've got alone to ride their bikes without breathing, and then they'll be complete.
And then they potentially have to knock over some trees to put in the bike lane, so it's not soaking up all that that carbon dioxide. I mean, I couldn't particularly care whether they were homo cyclists or heterocyclist lives, to be perfectly honest, But I reckon these people have a point.
They have a point.
It's all good and well to say that the cyclists need their little bit of the world to get about what they're doing. But there are far more pedestrians on the street than there are cyclists, and surely the pedestrians, by that logic, should have right of way over the cyclists in all cases.
Why can't we just have zebra crossings?
Then?
Because they do.
Some issue is that the bike lanes have created what's now called island bus stops.
Did you cover off on this bit? I just glazed over in the end.
He gets on his soapbox and I'm like, wow, I can feel a lot of hot air on my left cheek, but I can't.
So they're worries that people who are trying to get to the.
Bus or disembarking the bus are going to be cleaned up by these cyclists who don't care and don't stop for anyone. I personally have never had a bad experience with a cyclist, so I can't share your vitriol.
Oh no, no, no no, I can talk to you about this an enormous length. Let me tell you the part of the problem is cycles are silent and you don't hear them coming up behind you.
And when we were.
Vienna and a local said to us, watch out for the cyclists. They won't be watching out for you and you can't hear them coming. Cyclists around the world are superior to the rest of us, and they're allowed to hit anyone who's not.
On a bike.
It's true. And you say you've never had a bad experience with a cyclist, I haven't.
My father Guys Inlycra, I've always been kind.
They may well be kind, But my father is a cyclist and he dons the licra every now and again. And I think that alone is the biggest problem with cyclists. All these middle aged men getting around in their like with their their tummies out, and then they go along to the cafe and sip a coffee after going through a ride.
You sounding jealous.
Well, I'm not jealous of fat old men getting around in buddy like.
Old ones at all. It's not even this is true.
You'll have to step on a set of scales before you can buy.
Alf This is bordering on like bell.
Okay, no, no, no, let me tell you that it gets worse. They're also stupid.
They are riding a pushbike on the Pacific Highway.
I see them all the time. It is unsafe. It is unsafe.
They're surrounded by vehicles which weigh tons and are made out of steel. They're on a little bike and they think like rule will protect them. I mean that is that is fairly brain.
No, you can't mow them down. It's the same with pedestrians who like saunter across. You're like, this isn't a zebra crossing zebra crossing cat.
I don't say zebra. Show me your American pat sport. If we're gonna say zebra.
The wrong man to say zebra with.
If we go down that road, we'll get into root and route again. But I know that one of noisi is SI.
Quickly to Tennessee now, where they have legislated the death penalty for convicted child rapists and I'm jealous.
I am so jealous. Why do we not have this here Australia.
Bring back corporal punishment, bring back capital punishment when it comes to people who have been convicted of molesting, of raping, of harming children.
I am all for it.
Here's Majority House Leader William Lamberth giving his thoughts on the matter.
They should forfeit their own life.
They should face the death penalily.
Their lives are altered forever, they carry those scars for the rest of their life.
He's not wrong, he's not wrong, and we know thru studies these aren't the kinds of people who you're like, oh, just re educate them. At the same time, we have movements now who are trying to legitimize maps minor attracted person. Oh yes, changing them pedophiles.
That is what they are.
The fact is that these people never change, They are never cured, They never acknowledge that what they did was wrong. So you've got to you've got to lock them away to make society safer. You can't let them out again.
And the death taxpayer dime for the rest of their lives.
No thanks to the death penalty is one of three options death penalty, life, imprisonment, life without the option of parole. I actually would go for the last one because I'm not a death penalty support. I belong to the life squad, not the death squad. Right, the problem, there's a good reasons, because human justice is fallible. If you lock up the wrong person, you release them, but if you execute the wrong person, you can't resurrect them.
Are human cases where it is is beyond all reasonable doubt that these people did the crime.
Because the death penalty changes that. Lindy Chamberlin who was found guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt. So because human just well, it's if it would have carried the death penalty in Tennessee. My point is that because human justice is fallible, let's lock them up, let's not kill them. That's that's the better way to go. But you're right, it's the most horrible, horrendous crime.
Is there not an arguments? An argument? And I have been sympathetic to the idea that the justice system is fallible and therefore there are issues with the death penalty. But have we not reached a point now with technology, particularly DNA technology, where it is possible for a crime to be proven beyond any doubt, not just beyond reasonable doubt. And in those cases, why should be available? That's that's
what I think. Like if if it is fundamentally provable, like not a matter of he said, she said, and a jury has to decide which side is more persuasive if it is there, if there is physical evidence, particularly something like DNA with one hundred percent match between two people, why should someone like that not be up for the.
Because there's still came on. I've got to answer his question. Let me answer his question because I've got an answer. It's human beings are still involved. If it was done by the Pathology Department of the Queensland Police Service during the DNA crisis, which has been reported by Headley Thomas, the results.
Would have been just as dubious.
So because there's human beings involved, you can't be absolutely certain. You don't kill people. You lock them up forever. I know it costs some money, but it's still the right thing to do.
I think putting them to death is to just overflowing.
They tell me that that wouldn't affect people with these kind of evil proclivities if they knew that their.
Life hang in the balance.
If they were to act on those You cannot tell me that that wouldn't.
I don't believe it will.
No, I don't, but because because I think these people think what they're doing is right, I think it's worse than that.
So well, they're evil enough to and right now you're adding to my argument for the death penalty. Thank you call.
All right, Well, if you are watching tonight and you'd like to put yourself up for the death penalty, go over to Tennessee and we'll see how things end up for you. After the break, we'll get into the papers. And I have to give you a little tip. I know some of you at home like a tip when I've had a bit tonight, A piece of heaven Race seven royal asket made of mine owns coming.
Out, don't do it.
I have really ever lost his tips gamble responsibly? I am, But.
Who always says, what is it? Chase your lost?
No? No, no, on television, Lea's gamble responsible. I wouldn't want you to miss out, now, don't. I have an exciting opportunity for you. It's the opportunity to ask us anything. You better believe it. You can ask us those questions you have always wanted to know not my credit card details. Now you'll also have the chance to ask any question of your favorite sky sky News host Sorry Anything, as part of a video series on the Sky News Australia app.
So seeing your questions through Ask Me Anything that's asked Me Anything at sky News dot com dot au. Ask Me Anything is available exclusively for supporters of Sky News Australia with a five dollars monthly subscription.
So I'll give you a bonus. Have you got a question about a word or saying? I will answer it for that.
We'll come back after the breakdown. Go away. Let's get stuck into the papers. Kel You've got the Townsville Bulletin.
I have indeed, because there is a big Army base in Townsville. They often have military stories on the front page. And did you know the Army did gap years? I had no idea, but it's true and I think it's a wonderful idea. The story says that a stint in camouflage could be the new Kontiki for the Australian Defense Forces, boosting hundreds of school levers for its gap year program.
It started off with five hundred and ninety three back in twenty eighteen, eight hundred and eighty one last year, and already this year one hundred and seventy six have signed up. I had no idea the Army provided gap years for kids, and I think it's a great idea, wonderful way to spend the gap year.
It's genius. It says.
Gap year recruits get the same employment benefits as other ADF personnel, including access to subsidized accommodation and meals, and full medical and dental covery.
They might even get to travel, They might have intro.
At a time when obviously our recruiting in the IDF is But what I.
Can't get over is that their target is eight hundred and eighty one this year. That seems to me a really low target. But why are they not going into every single school in the country and selling this. I suppose because they're worried that people will actually take it up and then they'll have to spend some money.
On it would cost.
But we know we've got problems in terms of recruiting people. We're talking about allowing foreigners into the army, you know, permanent residents who are not citizens, who come from Allied nations, because we don't have enough Australian citizens who want to sign up. Why wouldn't we go Okay, let's fix the problem at the route instead of putting a band aid over it later. Let's go into every school in the country and encourage these kids to go off and good for.
Them, Good for them what they're doing at the end of high school they're still like umming and ring and not sure.
How better than to spend a year acquiring.
These kind of wonderful experience the state's budget, wonderful experience for them, good for the army. Good or I just remembering that famous army recruiting post to join the army, see the world, meet interesting people and kill them.
Wow, that was that? Kn't of been an actual hell?
Surely I thought you were against dead.
Not anymore.
The run page of The Australia now the Dutton Department of Nuclear The big splash reads Peter Dutton will announce that nuclear reactors will be Commonwealth owned and operated under similar schemes to those overseeing snowy Hydro. You don't want to mention that, mate, And the NBN is Jim Chalmer's attempts at renewables reset by placing new community benefit principles at the center of Labour's future Made in Australia Act. It's all very secret, squirrel. Nobody knows quite where these things.
Know and we know we know, we know the go to go where the old coal fire power stations are. We've had Albanis are saying, come on, show us the details.
We know the details.
They're going to where the grid already runs to. So you don't have to spend billions and squillions building at twenty eight thousand kilometers.
Of a new grid. You just use the grid that's there.
Up here for thinking incredible calm and we could find out the sort ofitty gritty details of all of this stuff as soon as tomorrow, which would be excellent because that has been their only argument essentially. Oh, no one really knows what's going to happen here. Oh where you're possibly going to put it. Oh, it's going to cost so much money. Oh it's terrible. Well, I mean, tell me how that's any different to renewable energy.
Right, Oh, indeed, out of road to nowhere.
But we're going to have an offshore wind farm zone down and off the coast of Victoria in South Australia. But South Australia's not included anymore. Oh but that bit of Victoria's not included anymore. That's been shrinking. We talked last night about the one they want to put up off the coast of the Illawarra here in New South Wales, which is opposed strongly by the local community. There's no more surety in their renewable projects than there is in nuclear.
The only travel is, of course, the nuclear energy is still banned in this country. But and he's banned for a reason, because they're scared it'll work.
And Albany is you can't say anything about this because if he says to people, do you want a nuclear power plant, well the answer is we don't.
We don't particularly want your.
Huge transmission towers or your wee from no none of those, thank you very much.
Yes, And unlike what they've done with green energy, with most people being like, thanks for ruining our pristine rural areas, et cetera, et cetera, our coastline, Dutton has done his homework and this article talks about how they've gotten basically the community's blessings in advance, so Labour.
Can't be very smart on that front.
Last but not least on the front page of The Australian.
Joyce's sixteen million dollar payout is.
Up in the air. Love what you did there? Turnip phrase.
Former Quantus boss Alan Joyce faces a fight to claim a sixteen million dollar windfall payment, with the airline hiring a high profile consulting chief to question senior leaders on whether a series of bungles on mister Joyce's watch will void the payment of lucrative bonuses.
Well, well, well, I have a question.
I have a question for the viewer on this one.
Why is it knowing Alan Joyce might miss out on sixteen million dollars makes you feel so good?
It's because his service was so bad, I think, why does he deserve sixteen No? No, And previously they talked about it being like eight million dollars or there, but now it's suddenly sixty Well.
Says his long term bonuses are almost fourteen million, plus a short term bonus of just over two millions, So I'm thinking, even if they go to the mattresses on this, he'll.
Probably just miss out on that bonus.
The short term bonus we should miss out on all of its size. I'm concerned, but no, wonder Quantis is bringing in consultants to try and clean up this mess because the amount of money they have to pay out to the blow who destroyed the reputation of that airline is extortionated. And I don't know if any of you have flown Quantus recently, but it's really not that different
to any other airline at the moment. The only good thing I can say that they've done on Quantas is that they've brought the free booze forward from four pm to mid That is the only good thing has done of late. I did take advantage of it recently, but then when I compared the cost of the ticket to get on the plane to the cost of getting on a Virgin flight or a rex flat, I don't know that I really came out with your head flap much further further in Flat, Actually, you're not allowed to use
the hip flask apparently, like that stops you. But if they don't see you, it's not a problem.
Let's go to the people put it in his coffee.
Well, a former radio colleague who you might have worked with, Tony Pilkington, like to put a little whisky in his coffee and drink it on air. Let's go to the Korean reveal. Oh sorry, that's the wrong story. I was about to tell you the one we just read on the front of the oars. Let's go to this one. Glady was a fraudster. Premier Stephen Marles handpicked Director General Mike Kayser, says committing fraud saved him from what would have been a bloody, boring career as a labor minister.
Kayser opened up about the eighteen dating him nineteen eighty six incidents when his signature on a false enrollment form would force his resignation from PALA fifteen years later. Gosh, just just move slows a bullet by the sounds of it, lucky bagger.
And we missed out on a potentially honest politician.
Very quickly. The herald'sun Before we get to the pot hell.
Yes, the Herald Son, there was a really grim story, actually quite a frightening one where parents had to rush their child who wasn't breathing to start with, in their own cart of the hospital because they were told that the newest ambulance was fifty kilometers away. This is to do with the collapse of the health system in Victoria. Which is getting to be very bad COLB and.
It is killing people. I mean the coverage we did at the Herald Sun when I was there. It is killing people, the fact that they can't answer the phones and they can't get the ambulances to them. After the break. Does social media need cigarette style warnings? Would have stopped using Facebook? We'll talk about that after the frame. Now, if there's one thing I've really come to love over the last few years, it's health bureaucrats. I can't get
enough of them. How about the US Surgeon General Vivic Murphy, who now says, if you go on social media, perhaps you should be subjected to warnings much like the ones you would get on cigarette packets. He reckons it will discourage people from using social media, or at the very least will warn them about the mental health impacts of doing so.
I got to tell you, kell I reckon.
If I went on to Facebook or Instagram or whatever and I saw a cigarette style warning, that'd be enough to make me light out.
Probably.
And we all know when we're online, dialogue boxes pop up and we know exactly what we do. This is a little cross on the top right hand corner, and we click that and it goes away and we don't know what it's said, So it's not going to achieve anything, is it. I mean, it's a serious problem. Screen time does destroy young brains, but we need a proper response to it.
Not this here here, to the States.
Now where you would have seen this, because it went absolutely viral, Biden doing his latest freeze and being let off stage by Obama, who looks like he was taking care of Grandpa that day and was assigned the role of carer well. The following day, Biden's press secretary took to the podium to assure everyone that no, no, that video.
That has been seen by millions of.
People around the world of Biden freezing yet again, seeming to not know where he is, it's fake.
It tells you everything that we need to know about how desperate, how desperate Republicans are here. And instead of talking about the president's performance in office, and what I mean by that is his legislative wins, what he's been able to do for the American people across the country, we're seeing these deep fakes, these manipulated videos. Lady.
There aren't enough deep fakes in the world to cover up all of Biden's mishaps. Here he is clearly freezing on stage and wait, wait, wait till Obama gives him his cue and says, come on, Grams, let's it's time for the retirement village.
Has called it's time to leave now.
This is the video that she is alleging is completely fake, despite the fact that there was hundreds of people there and witnessed it.
The expression for.
Us deep fake means digitally altered. That was not digitally altered. Whatever else it was, it wasn't. So it's not a deep fake.
Let me show you a real deep fake. This one's good.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you will look right here. Okay, so you did not see Biden wandering around aimlessly, freezing up himself, sniffing dignitaries, falling asleep, drinking drug cocktails, and frisking serving girls. What you actually saw were cheap fakes.
It's like a deep fake.
But it's just the real video that we don't want people to see.
These are real, We don't know anyway.
That's it for us tonight.
Thank you so much for your company to read a panety shows something ex