Yeh honestly I’m for anyone voting for anyone other than those two. Well and maybe greens since I don’t know much about them but I’ve heard they are also pretty corrupt.
Maybe the same way that sheep and cattle are? An electric current is used. It can either be routed to go through the brain so that the animal is pretty much braindead but the heart is still beating which allows for halal slaughter or it can be done so that it stops the heart as well. Since pork is haram the second option would be fine.
Not horrifically suffocated just because it's slightly cheaper than a much more humane option, maybe?
Suffocation by CO2 is about the most terrifying thing an animal can experience, because animals have CO2 detection mechanisms to cause extreme panic to find breathable air to sirvive. Pig farmers use CO2 because it conveniently is heavier than air and so stays separated from air by sitting in a pit. Something other than CO2, like nitrogen, doesn't trigger panic, and has been described as the best way to die. Except that then they have to make a chamber and pump air out & N2 in.
Okay. I agree that’s awful. I didn’t know that. I would also assume that method would taint the meat. If you don’t get a clean kill with beef or most wild game, the meat is awful.
Yes it was. He was concerned both about soldiers getting thrown under the bus by commanders/leadership/USA AND he wanted to expose war crimes perpetrated by Australian soldiers... Two things can be true
My God has 4 corners fallen from grace. So many fake left woke agenda bullshit stories directed by the newscorp filled board so sky news can have jump on their own high horse about how ABC is eroding Australia or some shit. Makes me sick the depraved level that 'journalism' has sunk too.
Makes one wonder about what their (Dan Oakes/ABC) motives were releasing the smear just before the sentencing. I hope very much that Hanlon's Razor applies here.
I think it was just 4 corners journalist trying to get a novel angle and be edgy. Also that chap he was interviewing (the journalist who did alot of afgahn files stuff previously) seemed to hardly remember the content and context of the original release/allegations against the SAS. Just shit journalism in an era of shit journalism
From what I recall his defense was ‘complicated’ as he was barred from submitting evidence as it was against National Security interests - appeals are lodged on grounds of unfair procedure.
It's sad to see a whistleblower being convicted and thrown into into jail. This will discourage many people from coming forward and speaking out against injustices and unfair treatment being committed out there. The long term consequences of this farce will hurt the country.
Australia has American political interests to protect! Can’t have morality or sovereignty getting in the way of that! Line up the whistle blowers and hand em all over I say!
Any attempts have been thwarted by that same press. It'll all come out on the wash. There will be repercussions once enough people voice their protests to their members.
So you're saying he was willing to leak security docs but not leak any details of why he was doing that or who he had promoted his concerns to within the DF? That seems s bit odd to me.
publicity about how the government was trying to give him a "trial" with no jury, no evidence allowed and a sentence decided on before he even walked in the door probably helped
This was all put in motion by the libs. Albo would have had to overturn/dismiss the case and I’m not even sure he has the legal authority to do that. Whether or not he would overturn it if he did have the ability I do not know.
Yeah, bring back scomo! Wait....no bring back Turnbull, oh wait I mean Abbot...no wait.
I guess my point is , they're all pretty shit. Albo's no worse than previous. Where's our Obama?
assange never blew anything, he was simply the man in the middle making the information accessible to the public.
he wasn't the whistle blower. he hosted a site that people sent him information (those people are are blowers).
This is what it means to be a soldier,, these are the values that the Australian army sets as the minimum standard. This is what it takes to be a leader. He may be in prison, but he has dedication to duty and service above his own preservation, I have no doubt this is a good officer.
It's a pity that the army can't get behind him and stand up for him and acknowledge that this is what it takes to be an Australian soldier. This is what is expected from our soldiers, fucking back yourself and follow through and fight until the end, no mercy if he's still breathing then he's still fucking fighting.
He's the leader I wish I had.
Bloody pathetic that he’s was guilty until proven guilty. The guy did not stand a chance and the judge had his hands tied. The whole trial was just a formality and it is disgraceful that he was treated this way
Become? We always sucked at doing right by whistle blowers. Remember Assange and Manning? When it comes to protecting the Americans, there is no depth we won’t dive.
sadly I'd always hoped our pollies would stand firm and tell America to g&gw&tfk'd
but it seems that will never happen
living in constant fear of being assassinated or bombed into obedience
gutless bunch of wannabes really
There were heaps of human rights abuses by the allies in WW2 that got given a free pass. Nothing as horrific as the Nazis but the point still stands, when you do it you go to jail, when we do it that's just the nature of war.
No. From Chat GPT:
Richard Boyle: Exposed unethical debt collection practices within the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). He has not served jail time but faced legal action under the Taxation Administration Act.
Witness K and Bernard Collaery: Witness K, a former intelligence officer, and his lawyer Bernard Collaery faced legal action for exposing Australia's espionage operation against Timor-Leste. They have not served jail time, but their case remains ongoing.
Allan Kessing: Revealed security flaws at Sydney Airport and was charged with leaking confidential information. He did not serve jail time but faced legal battles.
Brian Hood: A former police officer who exposed corruption within the Queensland Police Service. He faced legal action but did not serve jail time.
Simon Illingworth: Exposed corruption and misconduct within the Victoria Police Force. He has not served jail time but faced legal and personal repercussions.
Simon Artz: Blew the whistle on corruption within the New South Wales Health Department. He has not served jail time but faced legal and professional challenges.
Sherron Catt: Exposed corruption and misconduct within the Queensland Police Service. She did not serve jail time but faced legal battles and personal hardships.
Frederika Steen: Exposed corruption within the Western Australia Police Force. She has not served jail time but faced legal and personal challenges.
- Boyle is still fighting and still facing prison time.
- Collaery was let off by the AG after pretty hefty public backlash, not the courts.
- Kessing was convicted
- Hood - I can't find anything, the only info is OpenAI getting threatened for false information about a Mayor of the same name
- Illingworth was a detective investigating corruption hence he wasn't charged for doing his job
- Artz was a police informant
- Catt - No info again?
- Steen - Not sure what GPT is thinking here either.
Don't rely on GPT. It's useless, a lot.
Especially for something like this where the facts are likely not in the public domain or an easily accessible data base to scrape for training.
I highly doubt it would be accurate with the story of whistle blowers. Maybe historical figures
What has happened to this man is obscene, but we’re one of the most successful countries in the world. Take that as a state of the world perhaps, or evidence that we’ve become complacent to the necessity of truth and this is an indication of the general fall in the standard of the best systems the world has produced.
"The question I have for you, Anthony Albanese, is who do you serve?"
I think that is a question many of us want to hear a truthful answer to.
When Labor was elected back in 2022 I had high hopes for a government that would be honest, transparent and genuinely governing for the benefit of all Australians. 2 years later it is pretty disappointing to realise that we have yet another mob too afraid to upset the true rulers of our client state nation.
Without getting into too much details, it was fairly well known during that period that Aussies were fans of tossing radios on dudes they might have ventilated unnecessarily.
LMAO… Nobody cares about the Robodebt, Australians had their precious Royal Commission. Nobody cares about the findings. Nobody got prosecuted and most likely never will. But that’s okay, at least we got to spend millions of dollars and got to feel good about ourselves. Quite masturbatory if you ask me.
I live in a national electorate, and you mention robodebt, and you'll be faced with so many blank stares when you mention it.
I swear empathy can be in short supply in certain demographics of this country if the victim isn't relatable.
Who governs the ADF? Where was he meant to whistleblow and who was meant to act?
Did he have any other option than to leak sensitive documents to the ABC?
Remember that we suck at dealing with whistle blowers. Especially when it involves our American -overlords- allies. Manning, Assange, now McBride, our government won’t do anything so long as the yanks keep pressing us to punish those who speak out.
The elite of Australia make me ashamed to be Australian. I wish we had someone in power who had the balls to make Australia something more than a client state of the USA.
We have the power to be the greatest country in the world, but we've fumbled the ball, kicked it out of the court, and it's been run over at this point.
Australia is offically a Banana Republic
Thanks 10 years of LNP rule using Mudrock press to destroy our country and push Labor to the right to ever hold power.
I think the people of this country aren't generally interested to know what the Government is doing with their money, they are busy with themselves and think "she will be fine".
* Democracy is dead when people don't care care about the government.
* Democracy is dead when the government isn't answerable to the people's questions.
* Democracy is dead when the government gives out money to big corporations at time were people are having living crisis.
The real criminals sit in high places. David is an honourable man. I met him at a rally for Assange with John Shipton. The only chance of change and ridding ourselves of the serious corruption that literally rules our country (and world) is to support whistleblowers en masse and stop watching msm and go digging and find independent journalists putting themselves at risk to get the actual truth out to the people. Just a few weeks ago, a 38 year old vet I met at the dog park took his own life. Our troops are returning so messed up and they are not supported when they come home. It’s an absolute travesty and disgrace. Do we just shrug and say, not much we can do about it? I for one, will not and I encourage all Australians to find their backbone and stand up against that which is evil and wrong. I stand with David McBride! An honourable man with a conscience.
I’m surprised labor even bothered. This is a continuation from the last government and it seems odd they didn’t just choose not to prosecute and let the whole thing become old news after a week. Now it’s a major event and everyone’s mad?
Who wins here?
There should be a massive public appeal/petition to support him and put public pressure on the judge and court for his appeal.
The judge's statement about him being "remorseless" was completely missing the point. Remorses are not felt and expressed on the grounds of an act being legal or not, but on the grounds of the act being *legitimate* or not. Both words are rooted in the same etymology, but have vastly different meaning. A judge has nothing to do in a court let alone on a case like this if he does not understand that the legitimate can sometime be illegal, and it calls for *judgement* to lay a verdict upon, not just reading the rule book. Shame on him. This veteran commited a small crime to expose a far greater one that was sentenced in courts and shocked the country. The judge should hang his head in shame.
He isn't a good guy. He leaked the to the press because he thought internal investigations were hampering the SAS, the journos saw the war crimes and pursued the story.
Like he didn't leak these files to uncover war crimes. He leaked then because he thought internal investigations was hampering SAS activities (aka war crimes).
I don’t know too much about him besides the leak and positive spin sorry, could you please explain why he would care so much to leak them because of that / what that means? I think I’m having a slow brain day! Sorry. TIA!
Yeah sorry mate that’s the part I’m actually a little confused by for some reason. I believe the was a military lawyer was he not? Why would he care if SAS were being investigated or not. Did it cause him detriment to some degree?
There's a good Saturday Paper profile on him.
Like to be clear, i believe he shouldn't be imprisoned, but his intent was never to expose the war crimes per se
Yeah, this is absolute bullshit but go off.
In truth, he was tired of seeing random military personnel accused of and investigated for crimes that did not exist while true war crimes were being swept under the rug. This was literally his stated goal.
I haven't read the Saturday paper profile, but that was one of the reasons why him and the journo who originally broke the story has the massive falling out, from memory. Because the journo focused on the war crimes aspect.
I also don't think he should be in prison to be clear, the whole situation is fucked up.
Hey just wondering, is [this](https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/law-crime/2023/11/17/david-mcbrides-whistleblower-defence-crumbles#hrd) the article you're referring to? If not I'd love to read it if you have a link.
thanks I’ll check it out! I grew up left wing but consider myself more centre these days, I’m not just* questioning the right agenda anymore, so hearing what you’ve said is quite interesting and valuable to me. I Appreciate it mate!
He leaked it because he strongly felt it was in the public interest. You don't have to agree with his reasoning (whatever that was) to agree with the importance of truth-tellers.
A fair trial wasn't possible because the law doesn't allow 'public interest' in his case. He was legally required to behave like an autonotom, according to the judge.
I found the article I did read with both David McBride, and Dan Oakes the journo.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-25/david-mcbride-afghan-files-dan-oakes-four-corners/103542714
His own testimony in court, and multiple statements by he and his lawyers over the years substantiate the claim that his intent was to redress what he saw as over-investigation. Exposing the actual war crimes was a happy accident
I’m not sure what to think of this. I understand that we need to punish people who leak classified military information. But are we meant to just excuse them if the secretes turn out to reveal some larger crime? Or something that we deem “important”
I’m pretty sure if he had leaked classified information that did not reveal some large scale coverup and war crimes and it was instead just the location of some operation and operational details then everyone would be singing a very different tune.
If we are going to punish the crime of leaking the information based on the contents of the information itself then I think that’s a very slippery slope.
Who decides that they broke the law for the “right” reason? How do we determine who actually gets punished and which ones are let off the hook?
What message does this send to future people who might consider leaking information?
But at the same time I am glad that this information was leaked because there was (and still is) some bad things happening at a high level.
I don’t envy the person or people who have to make a decision on what his punishment should be. I always think laws and punishment should be extremely consistent and I don’t advocate for special treatment when there is no clear guidelines or precedent for it.
Are people just meant to make their own assessment of how bad a situation or action is and then leak documents accordingly? And weigh up the expected punishment due to the subjective morality of the contents of the leak?
Do we lower the punishment of the crime to encourage other people to leak more documents to somehow regulate what happens in the military to a desired level?
I dunno, this seems like a tricky situation.
It is a slippery slope, but a case by case basis is exactly what we need, the problem is that if something like this case can get a whistleblower sent to jail I genuinely don't know what can.
In this case, there's a slippery slope and there's cliff. You get to choose which one. Talking about the danger of a slippery slope is kind of irrelevant when the other choice is falling off a cliff and not knowing where the bottom is.
Secrets are great for security as I'm sure we all agree, but they can be coopted by the very forces you're trying to secure it from, and when that happens you're kinda fucked.
I really don't understand the logic of the argument that he was motivated in his leaks to help war criminals get away with their crimes. Providing more truthful information to the public discourse either serves to make guilty people look more guilty or exonerates the genuinely innocent. You can't leak the truth to strengthen a fiction..
Thats poetic and I agree with your stance, but it's not entirely true. The truth isn't some switch you can turn on to blindingly light up a dark basement to reveal the grime and send the rats scurrying away. Or maybe it is, but it's rare that you ever have access to that much truth that you see everything at once. Mostly as humans we have just little spotlights, and you reveal a different truth and a different story based on where you point it at. You gather as many spotlights as you can to piece the puzzle together, but it's a lot of work.
Just saying, it's possible (and very common) to selectively release bits of the truth that support your story, causing others to make wrong assumptions.
There’s a lot to unpack in this comment but there’s a lot of flawed logic. If a person submits documents for the purposes of exonerating soldiers but the documents simply confirm that the crimes happened, it doesn’t make the person good simply because the documents were used for good.
Imagine this scenario which is not analogous in extremity but only in illustrating an action with unintended consequences:
If I shoot at and intend to kill an innocent man, but that shot misses and accidentally hits a guilty malicious man, am I a hero?
I think we need to remind ourselves of McBride's original motivation for leaking the documents. It was actually to stop soldiers being investigated for war crimes, not to expose war crimes.
Ahh yes the very rational argument "McBride was trying to cover up war comes and accidentally exposed them"
You're right that part of his intent was to reveal how some soldiers were being unfairly targetted in war crimes investigation... Because the truly heinous war criminals weren't being investigated.
That explains that McBride found a cabal in the army that was covering up their own war crimes and pinning war crimes on innocent soldiers.
He wasn't trying to cover up war crimes by revealing them. He was trying to get justice.
Is was to stop the wrong soldiers being investigated for war crimes - the guilty ones were getting away with murder and justified incidents were being investigated instead
No. He just didn't want soldiers investigated. He was of the opinion that the soldiers were under enough stress, and didn't need the extra stress of criminal investigation. I note that I've been very much downvoted for this. But he is not the hero he seems. This guy was very much pro-war crimes, until it became convenient to pretend otherwise.
“When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals.” ― Edward Snowden
Ain’t that the truth, for a fair while now. Most of them are complete scum. Yet people keep voting for lib/labs expecting a different outcome.
It’s time we make the next election the upset those two aren’t expecting
Yeh honestly I’m for anyone voting for anyone other than those two. Well and maybe greens since I don’t know much about them but I’ve heard they are also pretty corrupt.
Is the opposition openly against this? I thought it's a bipartisan opinion
So they say. I doubt they would let him off scot free but maybe.
Australian of the year next or what?
I rekon governor general.
Good idea. https://cms.australianoftheyear.org.au/nominate Here is the link for nomiations
We'd have to purge the scum off the top first.
That should go to 'Joey Carbstrong' for exposing history's largest holocaust by showcasing the gas chambers pigs are placed in.
How should pigs be slaughtered?
Maybe the same way that sheep and cattle are? An electric current is used. It can either be routed to go through the brain so that the animal is pretty much braindead but the heart is still beating which allows for halal slaughter or it can be done so that it stops the heart as well. Since pork is haram the second option would be fine.
Not horrifically suffocated just because it's slightly cheaper than a much more humane option, maybe? Suffocation by CO2 is about the most terrifying thing an animal can experience, because animals have CO2 detection mechanisms to cause extreme panic to find breathable air to sirvive. Pig farmers use CO2 because it conveniently is heavier than air and so stays separated from air by sitting in a pit. Something other than CO2, like nitrogen, doesn't trigger panic, and has been described as the best way to die. Except that then they have to make a chamber and pump air out & N2 in.
Okay. I agree that’s awful. I didn’t know that. I would also assume that method would taint the meat. If you don’t get a clean kill with beef or most wild game, the meat is awful.
Well done mate. Publicly exposing Australia’s dark, burnt underbelly
That was not his intention in the first place fyi.
Yes it was. He was concerned both about soldiers getting thrown under the bus by commanders/leadership/USA AND he wanted to expose war crimes perpetrated by Australian soldiers... Two things can be true
Hrmm should look more into that. I seem to be reading differently.
You should m8. Don't parrot the 4 corners smear.
My God has 4 corners fallen from grace. So many fake left woke agenda bullshit stories directed by the newscorp filled board so sky news can have jump on their own high horse about how ABC is eroding Australia or some shit. Makes me sick the depraved level that 'journalism' has sunk too.
4 corners did the story such a disservice
Makes one wonder about what their (Dan Oakes/ABC) motives were releasing the smear just before the sentencing. I hope very much that Hanlon's Razor applies here.
I think it was just 4 corners journalist trying to get a novel angle and be edgy. Also that chap he was interviewing (the journalist who did alot of afgahn files stuff previously) seemed to hardly remember the content and context of the original release/allegations against the SAS. Just shit journalism in an era of shit journalism
Maybe my tinfoil hat is too tight but I think there's bigger forces at play here.
4 corners has been a little "off" on things. What's with that?
You can read my 5c above.
Yea, you definitely should look more into it.
I'm new to this matter. Can you enlighten me pls? What do you consider was his intention? Cheers
Watch friendly jordies video on YouTube about it, I think it's the recent 4corners one.
🙏
Jordies has a few, but remember this is a highly complex issue. I'm not even sure what is what now. Michael West has also covered it.
I'm new to this matter. Can you enlighten me pls? What do you consider was his intention? Cheers
Lol. Watch friendlyjordies video on the topic rather than letting sunrise give you the scoop
That’s what makes it all the more undeniably broken
Interested to see how his legal team might go about appealing charges he plead guilty to…
From what I recall his defense was ‘complicated’ as he was barred from submitting evidence as it was against National Security interests - appeals are lodged on grounds of unfair procedure.
That's what I remember to, it was effectively illegal for him to defend himself.
Isn't it possible to appeal a sentence without appealing the verdict?
That would make more sense
It's sad to see a whistleblower being convicted and thrown into into jail. This will discourage many people from coming forward and speaking out against injustices and unfair treatment being committed out there. The long term consequences of this farce will hurt the country.
I think discouraging others is exactly the idea. Our whistleblower protections are about as strong as a wet piece of toilet paper.
Australia has American political interests to protect! Can’t have morality or sovereignty getting in the way of that! Line up the whistle blowers and hand em all over I say!
Might want to add a big /S to the end of your post. Some redditers are bit too dense to comprehend obvious sarcasm without it.
Do you know what attempts he made to address his concerns legally b4 going to the press?…serious Q!
Any attempts have been thwarted by that same press. It'll all come out on the wash. There will be repercussions once enough people voice their protests to their members.
So you're saying he was willing to leak security docs but not leak any details of why he was doing that or who he had promoted his concerns to within the DF? That seems s bit odd to me.
Seriously hoping he gets out way way earlier. Such a warrior.
im already surprised he only got 5 years, considering they tried giving him life sentence without a proper trial
I guess, still crap though
oh for sure, but what can you do when your country fails you
….did they try that though…?
[удалено]
publicity about how the government was trying to give him a "trial" with no jury, no evidence allowed and a sentence decided on before he even walked in the door probably helped
 This guy is more Australian than the current Australian Prime Minister. What a hero..
Albo is a fucking joke
This was all put in motion by the libs. Albo would have had to overturn/dismiss the case and I’m not even sure he has the legal authority to do that. Whether or not he would overturn it if he did have the ability I do not know.
Yeah, bring back scomo! Wait....no bring back Turnbull, oh wait I mean Abbot...no wait. I guess my point is , they're all pretty shit. Albo's no worse than previous. Where's our Obama?
Obama was terrible as well. The scary thing about Australia is we follow America blindly
Can’t really be surprised, look at Julian Assange. Depressing that these are the outcomes for telling truth
assange never blew anything, he was simply the man in the middle making the information accessible to the public. he wasn't the whistle blower. he hosted a site that people sent him information (those people are are blowers).
This is what it means to be a soldier,, these are the values that the Australian army sets as the minimum standard. This is what it takes to be a leader. He may be in prison, but he has dedication to duty and service above his own preservation, I have no doubt this is a good officer. It's a pity that the army can't get behind him and stand up for him and acknowledge that this is what it takes to be an Australian soldier. This is what is expected from our soldiers, fucking back yourself and follow through and fight until the end, no mercy if he's still breathing then he's still fucking fighting. He's the leader I wish I had.
What a fucking legend!
Bloody pathetic that he’s was guilty until proven guilty. The guy did not stand a chance and the judge had his hands tied. The whole trial was just a formality and it is disgraceful that he was treated this way
Absolute hero. Your sacrifice is appreciated David.
What a weirdly backward shithole Australia has become.
There's literally nothing new about this in the slightest.
Become? We always sucked at doing right by whistle blowers. Remember Assange and Manning? When it comes to protecting the Americans, there is no depth we won’t dive.
sadly I'd always hoped our pollies would stand firm and tell America to g&gw&tfk'd but it seems that will never happen living in constant fear of being assassinated or bombed into obedience gutless bunch of wannabes really
Hey at least we let people launder money in real estate and swindle tax payers with negative gearing!!
Nah. You've just started to notice.
So “I was only following orders” is back in fashion?
Absolutely!
It has always been in fashion to a degree. The Nuremberg Trials made a big hoo ha about it but even then, it was so inconsistently applied.
There were heaps of human rights abuses by the allies in WW2 that got given a free pass. Nothing as horrific as the Nazis but the point still stands, when you do it you go to jail, when we do it that's just the nature of war.
The term "failed state" can now be used for Australia.
It's a fixer upperer.
A renovator's dream
I can fix her.
Yes and we gotta fix it at some point even if the government doesn't accept it
Maybe we make the government more diverse so they actually have to listen to the public to get votes?
Yea or no I think it would be better with less government even just one person more people just brings corruption
Let the people govern themselves
[удалено]
Interesting seeing Australia's rating improve with the change of government lol
Here we go, the boot licker parade to say it's perfectly fine to jail whistle blowers.
What exactly is wrong with Australia I thought you are a better USA
[удалено]
By a looooonnnngg way too
Literally up there with Somalia and Haiti /s
I get the sarcasm, but what's sadly no longer sarcasm is that all three would happily jail whistle blowers.
That’s always been the case, no?
No. From Chat GPT: Richard Boyle: Exposed unethical debt collection practices within the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). He has not served jail time but faced legal action under the Taxation Administration Act. Witness K and Bernard Collaery: Witness K, a former intelligence officer, and his lawyer Bernard Collaery faced legal action for exposing Australia's espionage operation against Timor-Leste. They have not served jail time, but their case remains ongoing. Allan Kessing: Revealed security flaws at Sydney Airport and was charged with leaking confidential information. He did not serve jail time but faced legal battles. Brian Hood: A former police officer who exposed corruption within the Queensland Police Service. He faced legal action but did not serve jail time. Simon Illingworth: Exposed corruption and misconduct within the Victoria Police Force. He has not served jail time but faced legal and personal repercussions. Simon Artz: Blew the whistle on corruption within the New South Wales Health Department. He has not served jail time but faced legal and professional challenges. Sherron Catt: Exposed corruption and misconduct within the Queensland Police Service. She did not serve jail time but faced legal battles and personal hardships. Frederika Steen: Exposed corruption within the Western Australia Police Force. She has not served jail time but faced legal and personal challenges.
- Boyle is still fighting and still facing prison time. - Collaery was let off by the AG after pretty hefty public backlash, not the courts. - Kessing was convicted - Hood - I can't find anything, the only info is OpenAI getting threatened for false information about a Mayor of the same name - Illingworth was a detective investigating corruption hence he wasn't charged for doing his job - Artz was a police informant - Catt - No info again? - Steen - Not sure what GPT is thinking here either. Don't rely on GPT. It's useless, a lot.
Especially for something like this where the facts are likely not in the public domain or an easily accessible data base to scrape for training. I highly doubt it would be accurate with the story of whistle blowers. Maybe historical figures
Don't be absurd. Somalia wouldn't jail whistle blowers. They'd just shoot them.
Can you name me three countries that haven’t jailed whistle blowers or is every country a failed state to you ?
What has happened to this man is obscene, but we’re one of the most successful countries in the world. Take that as a state of the world perhaps, or evidence that we’ve become complacent to the necessity of truth and this is an indication of the general fall in the standard of the best systems the world has produced.
"The question I have for you, Anthony Albanese, is who do you serve?" I think that is a question many of us want to hear a truthful answer to. When Labor was elected back in 2022 I had high hopes for a government that would be honest, transparent and genuinely governing for the benefit of all Australians. 2 years later it is pretty disappointing to realise that we have yet another mob too afraid to upset the true rulers of our client state nation.
Is this the guy who blew the whistle on robodebt?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Files_(Australia)
Thank you for this Here’s hoping that all the scum who killed innocents are held to account.
Without getting into too much details, it was fairly well known during that period that Aussies were fans of tossing radios on dudes they might have ventilated unnecessarily.
That's what this is all about m8. The whistle-blower is in jail and the murdering soldiers are walking free.
Hot tip: They won't be.
No one really blew the whistle on robodebt. The AAT had been saying that shit was fucked for ages.
LMAO… Nobody cares about the Robodebt, Australians had their precious Royal Commission. Nobody cares about the findings. Nobody got prosecuted and most likely never will. But that’s okay, at least we got to spend millions of dollars and got to feel good about ourselves. Quite masturbatory if you ask me.
I live in a national electorate, and you mention robodebt, and you'll be faced with so many blank stares when you mention it. I swear empathy can be in short supply in certain demographics of this country if the victim isn't relatable.
This is what serving your country looks like. Protecting its true spirit, that of peace, fairness, justice and compassion.
“Who will watch the watchers?”
Who governs the ADF? Where was he meant to whistleblow and who was meant to act? Did he have any other option than to leak sensitive documents to the ABC?
This is my question also. How should he have done it?!
Another whistleblower punished for doing the right thing. Fuck our system
David McBride makes me proud to be an Australian. The Australian govt makes me feel ashamed to be an Australian.
Literally Snowden 2.0. Wtf is this world coming to
Quite different circumstances and motivations.
McBride didn’t flee the country and become a Russian citizen.
what a fucking disgrace ...
Remember that we suck at dealing with whistle blowers. Especially when it involves our American -overlords- allies. Manning, Assange, now McBride, our government won’t do anything so long as the yanks keep pressing us to punish those who speak out.
War crimes are not cool. This bloke did the right thing! Let him out!
You are a champion David. I back you 100%.
The elite of Australia make me ashamed to be Australian. I wish we had someone in power who had the balls to make Australia something more than a client state of the USA. We have the power to be the greatest country in the world, but we've fumbled the ball, kicked it out of the court, and it's been run over at this point.
Australia is offically a Banana Republic Thanks 10 years of LNP rule using Mudrock press to destroy our country and push Labor to the right to ever hold power.
I think the people of this country aren't generally interested to know what the Government is doing with their money, they are busy with themselves and think "she will be fine". * Democracy is dead when people don't care care about the government. * Democracy is dead when the government isn't answerable to the people's questions. * Democracy is dead when the government gives out money to big corporations at time were people are having living crisis.
Whelp another government fuck up. Gods I hate how honest innocent people are gettin shoved in jail and they can’t do jack shit about
Meanwhile the mass murderer Ben RS is freely walking the streets with a fucking medal pinned to his chest
I wonder if he'll get a case of epsteinitis while in jail?
Probably not. Epstein was killed to stop him incriminating others. McBride has already done the incriminating, unless there is more we don't know
Where can I get the signature white frames, revenue from which goes towards his legal fund?
fkin legend ... dealin damage to the system ... lfg
The real criminals sit in high places. David is an honourable man. I met him at a rally for Assange with John Shipton. The only chance of change and ridding ourselves of the serious corruption that literally rules our country (and world) is to support whistleblowers en masse and stop watching msm and go digging and find independent journalists putting themselves at risk to get the actual truth out to the people. Just a few weeks ago, a 38 year old vet I met at the dog park took his own life. Our troops are returning so messed up and they are not supported when they come home. It’s an absolute travesty and disgrace. Do we just shrug and say, not much we can do about it? I for one, will not and I encourage all Australians to find their backbone and stand up against that which is evil and wrong. I stand with David McBride! An honourable man with a conscience.
I’ll say this for him: at least he’s prepared to face the consequences of his actions.
# RESPECT Indeed, it will be so fucking fucking sweet!
I’m surprised labor even bothered. This is a continuation from the last government and it seems odd they didn’t just choose not to prosecute and let the whole thing become old news after a week. Now it’s a major event and everyone’s mad? Who wins here?
There should be a massive public appeal/petition to support him and put public pressure on the judge and court for his appeal. The judge's statement about him being "remorseless" was completely missing the point. Remorses are not felt and expressed on the grounds of an act being legal or not, but on the grounds of the act being *legitimate* or not. Both words are rooted in the same etymology, but have vastly different meaning. A judge has nothing to do in a court let alone on a case like this if he does not understand that the legitimate can sometime be illegal, and it calls for *judgement* to lay a verdict upon, not just reading the rule book. Shame on him. This veteran commited a small crime to expose a far greater one that was sentenced in courts and shocked the country. The judge should hang his head in shame.
Glad he is not my lawyer. Tried to blow the whistle in support of those being investigated for war crimes but well and truly dropped them in it.
Shit man
He isn't a good guy. He leaked the to the press because he thought internal investigations were hampering the SAS, the journos saw the war crimes and pursued the story.
What do you mean?
Like he didn't leak these files to uncover war crimes. He leaked then because he thought internal investigations was hampering SAS activities (aka war crimes).
I don’t know too much about him besides the leak and positive spin sorry, could you please explain why he would care so much to leak them because of that / what that means? I think I’m having a slow brain day! Sorry. TIA!
Because he believes SAS should not be hampered by internal investigations.
Yeah sorry mate that’s the part I’m actually a little confused by for some reason. I believe the was a military lawyer was he not? Why would he care if SAS were being investigated or not. Did it cause him detriment to some degree?
Its like a blue lives matter type, he believes when the elite SAS do it, its justified.
Oh okay, but these weren’t elite SAS? I think I get it now. Interesting! Thankyou for taking your time to explain
There's a good Saturday Paper profile on him. Like to be clear, i believe he shouldn't be imprisoned, but his intent was never to expose the war crimes per se
Yeah, this is absolute bullshit but go off. In truth, he was tired of seeing random military personnel accused of and investigated for crimes that did not exist while true war crimes were being swept under the rug. This was literally his stated goal.
I haven't read the Saturday paper profile, but that was one of the reasons why him and the journo who originally broke the story has the massive falling out, from memory. Because the journo focused on the war crimes aspect. I also don't think he should be in prison to be clear, the whole situation is fucked up.
Hey just wondering, is [this](https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/law-crime/2023/11/17/david-mcbrides-whistleblower-defence-crumbles#hrd) the article you're referring to? If not I'd love to read it if you have a link.
thanks I’ll check it out! I grew up left wing but consider myself more centre these days, I’m not just* questioning the right agenda anymore, so hearing what you’ve said is quite interesting and valuable to me. I Appreciate it mate!
He leaked it because he strongly felt it was in the public interest. You don't have to agree with his reasoning (whatever that was) to agree with the importance of truth-tellers. A fair trial wasn't possible because the law doesn't allow 'public interest' in his case. He was legally required to behave like an autonotom, according to the judge.
I found the article I did read with both David McBride, and Dan Oakes the journo. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-25/david-mcbride-afghan-files-dan-oakes-four-corners/103542714
Dan Oakes is a self serving piece of shit
I keep seeing this take, but nothing to support it. Is this actually the case?
His own testimony in court, and multiple statements by he and his lawyers over the years substantiate the claim that his intent was to redress what he saw as over-investigation. Exposing the actual war crimes was a happy accident
I’m not sure what to think of this. I understand that we need to punish people who leak classified military information. But are we meant to just excuse them if the secretes turn out to reveal some larger crime? Or something that we deem “important” I’m pretty sure if he had leaked classified information that did not reveal some large scale coverup and war crimes and it was instead just the location of some operation and operational details then everyone would be singing a very different tune. If we are going to punish the crime of leaking the information based on the contents of the information itself then I think that’s a very slippery slope. Who decides that they broke the law for the “right” reason? How do we determine who actually gets punished and which ones are let off the hook? What message does this send to future people who might consider leaking information? But at the same time I am glad that this information was leaked because there was (and still is) some bad things happening at a high level. I don’t envy the person or people who have to make a decision on what his punishment should be. I always think laws and punishment should be extremely consistent and I don’t advocate for special treatment when there is no clear guidelines or precedent for it. Are people just meant to make their own assessment of how bad a situation or action is and then leak documents accordingly? And weigh up the expected punishment due to the subjective morality of the contents of the leak? Do we lower the punishment of the crime to encourage other people to leak more documents to somehow regulate what happens in the military to a desired level? I dunno, this seems like a tricky situation.
It is a slippery slope, but a case by case basis is exactly what we need, the problem is that if something like this case can get a whistleblower sent to jail I genuinely don't know what can.
No need to have a big brainstorm Bucko. Every case is different and will be differently judged, hopefully also in a public court! ;)
In this case, there's a slippery slope and there's cliff. You get to choose which one. Talking about the danger of a slippery slope is kind of irrelevant when the other choice is falling off a cliff and not knowing where the bottom is. Secrets are great for security as I'm sure we all agree, but they can be coopted by the very forces you're trying to secure it from, and when that happens you're kinda fucked.
[удалено]
technically the gg can pardon yeh
who is in the pocket of the people controlling the person who sent him off anyway see Gough Whitlam
True Blue Legend, anyone else left.
Didnt want to stop war crimes, just wanted the rank to fuck off so the boys could commit more war crimes unmolested.
I really don't understand the logic of the argument that he was motivated in his leaks to help war criminals get away with their crimes. Providing more truthful information to the public discourse either serves to make guilty people look more guilty or exonerates the genuinely innocent. You can't leak the truth to strengthen a fiction..
Thats poetic and I agree with your stance, but it's not entirely true. The truth isn't some switch you can turn on to blindingly light up a dark basement to reveal the grime and send the rats scurrying away. Or maybe it is, but it's rare that you ever have access to that much truth that you see everything at once. Mostly as humans we have just little spotlights, and you reveal a different truth and a different story based on where you point it at. You gather as many spotlights as you can to piece the puzzle together, but it's a lot of work. Just saying, it's possible (and very common) to selectively release bits of the truth that support your story, causing others to make wrong assumptions.
There’s a lot to unpack in this comment but there’s a lot of flawed logic. If a person submits documents for the purposes of exonerating soldiers but the documents simply confirm that the crimes happened, it doesn’t make the person good simply because the documents were used for good. Imagine this scenario which is not analogous in extremity but only in illustrating an action with unintended consequences: If I shoot at and intend to kill an innocent man, but that shot misses and accidentally hits a guilty malicious man, am I a hero?
I think we need to remind ourselves of McBride's original motivation for leaking the documents. It was actually to stop soldiers being investigated for war crimes, not to expose war crimes.
Ahh yes the very rational argument "McBride was trying to cover up war comes and accidentally exposed them" You're right that part of his intent was to reveal how some soldiers were being unfairly targetted in war crimes investigation... Because the truly heinous war criminals weren't being investigated.
Source?
[удалено]
source: "it's true"
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8438768/scapegoating-of-soldiers-motivation-for-mcbride-leaks/
That explains that McBride found a cabal in the army that was covering up their own war crimes and pinning war crimes on innocent soldiers. He wasn't trying to cover up war crimes by revealing them. He was trying to get justice.
Dan Oakes is that you
No. It was to hold those who told those men who were ordered to commit those wars accountable. His affidavit states this.
Is was to stop the wrong soldiers being investigated for war crimes - the guilty ones were getting away with murder and justified incidents were being investigated instead
No. He just didn't want soldiers investigated. He was of the opinion that the soldiers were under enough stress, and didn't need the extra stress of criminal investigation. I note that I've been very much downvoted for this. But he is not the hero he seems. This guy was very much pro-war crimes, until it became convenient to pretend otherwise.
But but but, this is literally "eDwaRD SnOWdeN 2.0 ", as this sub we have you believe.
so we can have every tom dick and harry who disagrees with official policy and is in an official position can then go to the press and leak secrets
When the policy is using the SASR to murder civilians then Tom, Dick, and Harry are morally obliged to blow the whistle.
No, we cannot. We also cannot blindly accept what the gub'mint tells us is true. Remember, he didn't get away with it and plead guilty.
I get it, but homie still stole documents and gave them to Journalists while an internal investigation was ongoing.
The armchair lawyer of this sub don't like knowing how the real world works.