Speaker 1: Lately, General man, welcome the late debase. Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 2: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Storer and cayleb Bond coming up.
Speaker 2: But I don't know how far you'd go to get
Speaker 2: rid of a spider from your car. But in a
Speaker 2: story that could only take place in North Queensland, one
Speaker 2: guy goes the whole way. We'll show you what happens
Speaker 2: a little later. Plus when we look at the papers,
Speaker 2: the Australian newspaper tomorrow has a big expose on the
Speaker 2: ndis you guessed it, more funding problems and Quantus makes
Speaker 2: some decisions about how they will approach political and social
Speaker 2: issues going forward. I know you're intrigued.
Speaker 1: We all are. We'll talk about that a little later.
Speaker 2: But first, there's a few nervous politicians in Queensland after
Speaker 2: it was revealed private conversations at the offices of the
Speaker 2: United Workers Union have been recorded for at least the
Speaker 2: past twelve months now. This is important because it was
Speaker 2: the United Workers Union that was responsible for getting rid
Speaker 2: of Station Pealage and inserting Stephen Miles as the Queensland
Speaker 2: premiere at the end of last year. Oh to have
Speaker 2: been a fly on the wall when those discussions were
Speaker 2: taking place, Well there was no fly, but there were
Speaker 2: CCTV cameras and they weren't only watching. Turns out they
Speaker 2: were listening. Now, all of this came to light when
Speaker 2: a union worker was accused of using drugs on site
Speaker 2: and sacked. He's taken the union to court alleging unfair dismissal,
Speaker 2: and as part of that claim, he's seeking all CCTV
Speaker 2: footage featuring himself to be released. Now the union have
Speaker 2: fought that claim, saying we can't do that because we've
Speaker 2: only just realized that the contractor who installed the CCTV
Speaker 2: cameras accidentally switched on the audio recording feature as well,
Speaker 2: and so if we release all of that, the video
Speaker 2: and the audio, we'd be in breach of privacy laws. Well, amazingly,
Speaker 2: the Fair Work Commission has said no, no, whatever footage
Speaker 2: exists of that worker, it should all be released, including
Speaker 2: the audio. Now there's a few things to this story.
Speaker 2: There's a privacy issue. There's obviously do we believe the
Speaker 2: union that this was all just a big mistake by
Speaker 2: the contractor. But the most intriguing part Calebin Liz, is
Speaker 2: that most of the CCTV footage relating to the period
Speaker 2: of time where this worker was alleged to have used
Speaker 2: drugs on site is around the same time that many
Speaker 2: union officials and current Labor Cabinet ministers were having little
Speaker 2: meetings at the union offices about what they would do
Speaker 2: regarding Anastasia Palage and whether Stephen Miles would be an
Speaker 2: appropriate replacement. Now, I should mention the LNP have referred
Speaker 2: this matter to the police because of breaches of the
Speaker 2: Privacy Act. But it's an intriguing story, and as I said,
Speaker 2: there would be some nervous people right now waiting to
Speaker 2: see what is going to be made public.
Speaker 3: You would think, so, I mean, for goodness sake, if
Speaker 3: the security cameras out in our newsroom and in other
Speaker 3: certain parts of this building have the audio enabled, I
Speaker 3: am sunk, is all.
Speaker 1: I can say. And it really makes you think.
Speaker 3: You would ordinarily think, Okay, you walk into a shop
Speaker 3: or an office or wherever there's a security camera there.
Speaker 3: You're kind of under the understanding that it's filming you
Speaker 3: while you're there, but you wouldn't immediately think that it
Speaker 3: has the audio enabled. Now terribly convenient for the union
Speaker 3: that they've only just realized that they were recording all
Speaker 3: this audio for about a year. But not only would
Speaker 3: you be nervous, I suppose about the fact that it
Speaker 3: might have recorded you when you're in there, particularly if
Speaker 3: you went in for a high level political meeting, but
Speaker 3: anyone who walked into that office and unknowingly had their
Speaker 3: video not video but audio recorded, their voice recorded should
Speaker 3: be apoplectic because you should be told that in most places,
Speaker 3: if you walk in and there is a camera there,
Speaker 3: warned in some way that there is a camera there.
Speaker 3: Of course, no warning was given that audio was being recorded.
Speaker 3: Not only is that a great breach of privacy, it's
Speaker 3: almost treacherous. And if they didn't know until this point,
Speaker 3: they have just discovered the greatest treasure trove of content
Speaker 3: that they could possibly have ever hoped for. I mean, look,
Speaker 3: you know it's I don't know whether it would be
Speaker 3: illegal now to go back through all of that recording
Speaker 3: and use it in some way.
Speaker 4: Well what illegal to record exactly?
Speaker 5: Which is why it's so hilarious that when the court
Speaker 5: requested this because of this fellow's fair workcase and the
Speaker 5: union saying no, we couldn't possibly release this because we've
Speaker 5: just realized that not only were we filming, but there's audio,
Speaker 5: and we don't want to break the Privacy Act. You've
Speaker 5: already broken the Privacy Act by recording people unbeknownst to
Speaker 5: them for months and months around the clock too.
Speaker 4: This was twenty four hour valent.
Speaker 5: So this bloke who simply needed the footage from the
Speaker 5: second and the fifth of October when he's alleged to
Speaker 5: have been caught out taking drugs on the premises, has
Speaker 5: blown this whole case wide open. And this is disastrous
Speaker 5: timing for Miles right, because this creates a reminder for
Speaker 5: everyone who he's tied to how he became premiere, this
Speaker 5: back room, factional, union driven deal that was done that
Speaker 5: saw him in power. It also reminds everyone that out
Speaker 5: of his nineteen strong cabinet, twelve of them are in
Speaker 5: Gary Bullock's pocket.
Speaker 4: Twelve of them belong to this same union, and this.
Speaker 5: Union is so dodgy they want everyone to believe, Oh.
Speaker 4: We haven't been recording totally on most us.
Speaker 5: It was a CZTV guy and he just gave us
Speaker 5: an extra feature that we never us for and we
Speaker 5: made it very I mean, what CCTV footage do you
Speaker 5: know of that does include audio. Everyone says, CCTV, we
Speaker 5: all think of the mute footage, right, That's what the
Speaker 5: cops use. That's what everyone uses. That's what you just mentioned.
Speaker 5: When you walk into a shop and you see it
Speaker 5: up there, there's no sound being recorded, it's.
Speaker 4: Just the images.
Speaker 5: And you mean to tell me they just got some
Speaker 5: weird CCTV contractor.
Speaker 4: Who was like, I'm just gonna do audio as well.
Speaker 5: Can you imagineable like you're asking, you're asking us to
Speaker 5: believe a bit too much.
Speaker 3: All the people watching at home tonight who are going
Speaker 3: to work in an office or wherever tomorrow will now
Speaker 3: be thinking, hang on, has the boss been recording me
Speaker 3: in the lunch.
Speaker 4: Room what I've been saying?
Speaker 3: Oh my god. I slagged off another colleague and said,
Speaker 3: you're like, you have reasonable belief that you're having quote
Speaker 3: unquote private conversation in certain parts of your workplace. And
Speaker 3: this opens up the possibility that perhaps you haven't been
Speaker 3: because if it can be done at the uwu's offices,
Speaker 3: how many other officers workplaces, supermarkets, shops, whatever across the
Speaker 3: country could this have been done at And if someone
Speaker 3: realized if you were an employer, obviously this has all
Speaker 3: been blown out because it's gone to fair work. But
Speaker 3: if you were an employer who realized that this ability
Speaker 3: had been enabled by a contractor, let's just buy that
Speaker 3: idea for a minute, that this was enabled by a contractor,
Speaker 3: and you later realized when you went to check the
Speaker 3: CCTV footage for some reason or another that the audio
Speaker 3: was enabled, would you, as an employer change that. Would
Speaker 3: you go and tell your staff that they had been recorded,
Speaker 3: or would you secretly go, hmm, this could be useful
Speaker 3: one day, and you couldn't blame them for doing it,
Speaker 3: because of course it's an upper handful.
Speaker 2: This explains you know, we've always wanted why.
Speaker 1: Do unions have so much power?
Speaker 2: Now we know because they invite government ministers in from
Speaker 2: it for a meeting. Where should we have at the
Speaker 2: local coffee shop? No, no, let's have it in our offices.
Speaker 2: They're comfortable, you'll feel right home, and you know, consequently
Speaker 2: you've got leverage. But the other funny part about this,
Speaker 2: if it's true that this was a mistake by the contractor,
Speaker 2: that they've only just realized, that would imply, would it not,
Speaker 2: that they've not ever looked at CCTV footage for the
Speaker 2: past twelve months. Well, because if they'd looked at it,
Speaker 2: they would have realized, Right, that's the argument. We've just
Speaker 2: gone looking for this footage and now we've realized have
Speaker 2: they not looked at any footage for over a year
Speaker 2: and realized?
Speaker 1: So it's a little hard to buy.
Speaker 2: This excuse that it was the contract of what done it?
Speaker 3: Isn't it just And while we're on the topic of privacy,
Speaker 3: et cetera, let's go to abadarby And I'm going to
Speaker 3: open this with a joke which is somewhat unrelated to
Speaker 3: the topic. But you know what they're well, you know,
Speaker 3: you know what the difference is between Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
Speaker 1: Go on, have a guess, Dubai.
Speaker 5: This is going to have something to do with the
Speaker 5: fact that that's how you pronounce no, no, no, no.
Speaker 1: There's a good Flintstones joke.
Speaker 2: It's punchline, Jake, I can't remember the punch.
Speaker 3: Yeah, people in st okay, okay, I'll start get you
Speaker 3: did not watch that last minute of television has been
Speaker 3: raised from your memory? What's the difference?
Speaker 4: What's just a curd? Is going to be funny of it?
Speaker 1: Clearly really well, what's.
Speaker 3: The difference between Dubai and Abu Dhrby.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 3: People in Dubai don't watch The Flintstones but people in
Speaker 3: Abu Dharby do. Anyway, there you go.
Speaker 1: That was a long set up job.
Speaker 5: In anti climax and it is my diary exactly.
Speaker 3: How look, look, it's it's probably the highlight of your day.
Speaker 3: Do you view at home? But it is somewhat related.
Speaker 3: Is somewhat related because of course in The Flintstones, which
Speaker 3: is about the nineteen fifties, is all this futuristic stuff
Speaker 3: going on, and that is exactly what's going on in
Speaker 3: Abu Dharby. Now where they've said that in the Internet
Speaker 3: National Airport they're going to enable facial recognition. Now you
Speaker 3: might think of facial recognition, Oh okay, you know, they're just
Speaker 3: going to be able to see that you've been in
Speaker 3: the airport and they can monitor that you've been in
Speaker 3: the airport. No, this thing is going to allow you
Speaker 3: to move through the airport without producing any papers. So
Speaker 3: the camera essentially looks at your face identifies who you are.
Speaker 3: I mean, you don't have to pull out your passport,
Speaker 3: you don't have to pull out a visa because it
Speaker 3: will all be held electronically and they can tell it
Speaker 3: the minute you walk into the airport. It essentially means
Speaker 3: you don't have to go through all the rigmarole that
Speaker 3: you would normally go through going through an international airport.
Speaker 3: You just walk in the joint, go through the security
Speaker 3: clearance and that's it. You are totally done. And of
Speaker 3: course that sucks people in because they think, well, how
Speaker 3: good is this? It makes the whole process so much
Speaker 3: more streamlined. I don't have to worry about leaving my
Speaker 3: passport at home and all this sort of stuff. But
Speaker 3: just think about it for a minute. If they can
Speaker 3: literally track every piece of information they need about you
Speaker 3: to go through an international airport, and going through an
Speaker 3: international airport is not an easy task usually, what else
Speaker 3: could they be monitoring when they've got this facial recognition
Speaker 3: And we've talked about this before, a story about I
Speaker 3: think it was the Tube in England where they've been
Speaker 3: using facial recognition technology that can monitor your moods so
Speaker 3: they can determine what sort of advertising should potentially be
Speaker 3: shown to you. Like, they're literally collecting absolutely everything about you,
Speaker 3: to the point that a camera can look at you
Speaker 3: and know whether you should be in that airport or not,
Speaker 3: whether you've got a visa or not, every single piece
Speaker 3: of that airport that you've moved through before you even
Speaker 3: know what you've done.
Speaker 5: And it was insane, really concerning about this. Get this,
Speaker 5: This is a direct quote from Chief Information Officer Andrew Murphy.
Speaker 4: He says it's designed with no pre enrollment required.
Speaker 5: Passengers are automatically regnized and authenticated as they moved through
Speaker 5: the airport, significantly speeding up the entire process. So he's
Speaker 5: the airport's chief information officer and he's really tooting his
Speaker 5: horn about that. But notice no pre enrollment is required.
Speaker 5: So my first question is, hang on a minute. So
Speaker 5: I fly into Abu Dhabi, I'm an Australian citizen. How
Speaker 5: is it you have all my information? How is it
Speaker 5: that your system can recognize my face, doesn't need my passport?
Speaker 5: And this is why whenever one of these stories come up,
Speaker 5: I always argue, do you genuinely think they haven't already
Speaker 5: amassed all this kind of face ID technology?
Speaker 4: Or but we don't know that they're using it here
Speaker 4: in Australia.
Speaker 5: Yeah, well, but we do know the good guys Bunnings
Speaker 5: and Kamar got busted roughly eighteen months ago using this
Speaker 5: on the millions of Ozzies who walked through their doors
Speaker 5: and nobody had a clue.
Speaker 4: They didn't have to disclose it.
Speaker 5: And again I asked the question, what were you doing
Speaker 5: with that info?
Speaker 4: They always treat us like idiots and.
Speaker 5: Say, oh, we're just doing it to keep people safe, right,
Speaker 5: so just stop a handful of shoplifters per week. Everybody
Speaker 5: else has to give up their rights and just live
Speaker 5: in a surveillance state.
Speaker 4: I don't think so.
Speaker 5: So when you've got a major airport like Abu Dhabi
Speaker 5: just announcing this and saying how grand it is and
Speaker 5: now people can get through security and don't have to
Speaker 5: show any papers and everyone's loving it.
Speaker 4: Hang on a minute, who was asked about this?
Speaker 5: Because the massive breach of privacy that we're talking about
Speaker 5: the amount of information that thing has to have on
Speaker 5: you and can recognize as soon as it looks at
Speaker 5: your base.
Speaker 4: And we're talking about an international.
Speaker 5: Airport here, So again, where are you getting that kind
Speaker 5: of information regarding people from all.
Speaker 4: Over the world?
Speaker 2: Just before we missed the idea completely, And I agree
Speaker 2: it's not good.
Speaker 1: He's lining it up.
Speaker 3: He's lining it up.
Speaker 4: Could not what you're doing?
Speaker 2: Could we not take thirty seconds just to ponder how
Speaker 2: magnificent it would be? They say it would be fifteen
Speaker 2: minutes from getting dropped off at the curb outside the
Speaker 2: airport to being at the gate of your plane that's
Speaker 2: going through customs, through immigration, getting your boarding pass.
Speaker 1: You don't need it. It's all one.
Speaker 4: Of those of them. I will trade in my bo
Speaker 4: it's a valent state. In the name of convenience.
Speaker 1: I'm going to it.
Speaker 4: Well, let's go to a cashless society.
Speaker 5: Then, in the name of convenience, sign up for your
Speaker 5: digital IDMAC. In the name is so combinion, you should
Speaker 5: get one.
Speaker 2: I'm going to agree with you guys that this is
Speaker 2: a bad thing, But just for a moment, let's consider
Speaker 2: if it wasn't so nefarious, how great would this technology be. No,
Speaker 2: it's have you ever stood in a catch like forever?
Speaker 4: I have?
Speaker 1: And then you get it there and you line up
Speaker 1: and trying to get cam immigration.
Speaker 4: I do not care.
Speaker 2: Like I said, I agree with you, but just for
Speaker 2: a second, it was a great thought. It reminds me
Speaker 2: of the Minority Report. Do you remember that scene where
Speaker 2: is it Tom Cruise and he's walking through a shopping
Speaker 2: center and everything is facial recognition, even the billboards, and
Speaker 2: they recognize him coming towards the billboard and immediately the
Speaker 2: advertisement on the billboard changes. We've already got that with
Speaker 2: you know, Instagram. He knows you and knows your algorithms
Speaker 2: and changes the advertising.
Speaker 1: This would see. This technology is so close.
Speaker 2: To what we've seen on science fiction movies in fairly
Speaker 2: recent times India, it's quite amazing. There's other things as well,
Speaker 2: like your idea could be stolen, you could be mistaken
Speaker 2: because it's not perfect technology, right, So next thing you know,
Speaker 2: you're being jumped by securitys. I'm not Caleb Bond, I
Speaker 2: promise I'm not.
Speaker 3: You be really worried if they thought you were Caleb.
Speaker 1: That good looking.
Speaker 2: But the other problem, of course, well is even if
Speaker 2: all of those things were not problematic, it's the normalization
Speaker 2: of this technology. It's getting people used to it, first
Speaker 2: in the airport and then in every other area.
Speaker 4: Just the normalization.
Speaker 5: It's the implementation of something nobody asks for. We are
Speaker 5: talking about a full blown surveillance state, and.
Speaker 4: The power of that is a power that.
Speaker 5: No government should have, but clearly a lot of them
Speaker 5: have acquired it, whether it's two hour knowledge or not.
Speaker 5: No government should have that kind of power. No government
Speaker 5: should have that much information on you. And in case
Speaker 5: you're sitting at home and you're kind of one of
Speaker 5: those case rah people, you know, I'm not a criminal.
Speaker 5: So if you want to track me, track me, I've
Speaker 5: got nothing to lose. You can take my privacy, you
Speaker 5: can take my freedom. I've got nothing to hide. Here's
Speaker 5: a little clip by Andrew Snowden, one of the massively
Speaker 5: original whistleblowers at the NSA, one of the most secretive
Speaker 5: government organizations in the world. Here he is trying to
Speaker 5: help everyday people like you and me understand why you
Speaker 5: should care.
Speaker 6: Why should people care about surveillance, Because even if you're
Speaker 6: not doing anything wrong, you're being watched and recorded, and
Speaker 6: the storage capability of these systems increases every year consistently
Speaker 6: by orders of magnitude, to where it's getting to the
Speaker 6: point you don't have to have done anything wrong. You
Speaker 6: simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody, even
Speaker 6: by a wrong call, and then they can use this
Speaker 6: system to go back in time and scrutinize every decision
Speaker 6: you've ever made, every friend you've ever discussed something with,
Speaker 6: and attack you on that basis to sort of derive
Speaker 6: suspicion from an innocent life and paint anyone in the
Speaker 6: context of a wrongdoer.
Speaker 5: Whise words from Edward Snowden there people need to realize,
Speaker 5: especially when we're talking about digital ID, this new age
Speaker 5: of digital ID. What he just said is exactly what
Speaker 5: we're already seeing happen in the likes of the UK,
Speaker 5: who arrested over three thousand people just last year because
Speaker 5: of things they'd interacted.
Speaker 4: With on Facebook.
Speaker 5: So what he's talking about there is they are putting
Speaker 5: together a genormous dossier on you, conversations that you've had,
Speaker 5: posts that you've interacted with.
Speaker 4: Maybe you haven't even interacted with things, but.
Speaker 5: You have watched this video on YouTube, You've watched this
Speaker 5: clip on Rumble, you googled this two years ago.
Speaker 4: They are building what it is to be you, and.
Speaker 5: That kind of power that gives someone complete power to
Speaker 5: be able to anticipate your decision making process, what you like,
Speaker 5: what you hate, and to manipulate you because they figured
Speaker 5: out how you tick on any given subject.
Speaker 4: It's just freaky, freaky technology.
Speaker 5: I wish it didn't exist, but I fear that there's
Speaker 5: absolutely no putting the genie back into the bottle at
Speaker 5: this point.
Speaker 3: And going back to the point that you were making before, James,
Speaker 3: you know, think for thirty seconds about how wonderful the
Speaker 3: convenience of it would be. That's how they suck people in,
Speaker 3: because it's, like you know it is. It is terribly convenient,
Speaker 3: and the idea of it sounds so wonderful because who
Speaker 3: doesn't want to make their life easier, But it's giving
Speaker 3: up that or accepting the easiness, requires you to give
Speaker 3: up so much more that is so much more powerful
Speaker 3: and valuable to you in the long run than the
Speaker 3: thirty or forty five minutes that you managed to buy
Speaker 3: back by using the technology.
Speaker 2: That thirty seconds that I sat here just thinking about
Speaker 2: how glorious. Had I not had you two sitting beside me,
Speaker 2: I reckon, I would have gone.
Speaker 3: We're keeping you on the state.
Speaker 1: Thank God for both of you.
Speaker 2: The US International Air Transport Association surveyed passengers and found
Speaker 2: you will not be surprised. Seventy five percent of passengers
Speaker 2: said they loved the idea thought it was really good.
Speaker 4: You never know how big those poles are.
Speaker 5: I'm like, they could just have interviewed or ah, surveyed
Speaker 5: one hundred people and then been like seventy five percent
Speaker 5: of passengers. These guys always seem to turn up the
Speaker 5: research that they want, right look one to roll out
Speaker 5: this surveillance system.
Speaker 4: Meanwhile, there's been a massive backlash in the.
Speaker 5: US when the TSA announced that they were going to
Speaker 5: roll out similar in four hundred airports across the United
Speaker 5: States of America, because people actually care about their privacy
Speaker 5: when you're talking about the United States of America and
Speaker 5: they've got the guns to back it up.
Speaker 3: Well, I've just run a survey. It's a world first,
Speaker 3: exclusive late debate, exclusive survey. I've surveyed the people in
Speaker 3: this room, and I think we've come back with a
Speaker 3: one hundred percent denouncement of this technology. One hundred percent
Speaker 3: of people say this technology is bad.
Speaker 1: How about the survey was legitimate.
Speaker 2: They surveyed all the employees of the facial recognition technic
Speaker 2: and seventy five percent so they could.
Speaker 1: Let's go to Paris for a second. You remember the.
Speaker 2: Opening ceremony caused huge controversy and upset for Christians around
Speaker 2: the world with it mocking the Last Supper, portraying Jesus
Speaker 2: as an overweight lesbian and the Disciples as transgendered and
Speaker 2: as drag queens. Well, a group of Christians decided to
Speaker 2: protest this. They got a bus. They put an image
Speaker 2: of what happened at the opening ceremony on the bus
Speaker 2: and wrote the word stop attacking Christians, and they began
Speaker 2: to drive that around Paris. Well, they were arrested and
Speaker 2: thrown in jail. Here's some vision of the bus. Let's
Speaker 2: have a look at that, and you'll see the police
Speaker 2: escorting them. So for driving that bus around, they were
Speaker 2: arrested for an unauthorized protest. The group responsible, as I said,
Speaker 2: six Christians. They put out the following tweet. Six of
Speaker 2: our team members were forced to spend the night in
Speaker 2: jail for simply denouncing the mockery of Christians by having
Speaker 2: the message stop attacks on Christians written on a bus.
Speaker 1: This is not illegal in any way. As a lawyer states,
Speaker 1: it appears.
Speaker 2: Impossible to constitute the crime of failing to communicate a
Speaker 2: protest because there's no protest in the presence of one
Speaker 2: unique vehicle. The prosecutor pushed the law to its limits
Speaker 2: to stop the bus and limit their free speech. Moreover,
Speaker 2: the procedure was highly irregular. Here's some of the Christians
Speaker 2: in the back of the police van talking about what's
Speaker 2: happened to them.
Speaker 3: So as you can see, I've just been taken into
Speaker 3: a police van when there right now take the whole
Speaker 3: cities of local underground. It's going to be taken to
Speaker 3: the police office, to the police station where they want
Speaker 3: to play on a report.
Speaker 4: They found some kind of recent way, had a harper.
Speaker 5: Start on a here.
Speaker 4: We did everything, we've been remas we asked if there
Speaker 4: was a new commission.
Speaker 3: It seems like it's obviously above and I see it
Speaker 3: seem they it's an ideological attack.
Speaker 1: That's absolutely ridiculous. Clearly it's not a protest.
Speaker 2: It's a singular vehicle with a message that the French
Speaker 2: government didn't like because it shamed them and embarrassed them.
Speaker 4: I mean, this is hair raising.
Speaker 5: There was no protest, there was no riot. You've got
Speaker 5: a bus driving around. They had been driving around since
Speaker 5: nine am that morning. They were arrested at gunpoint. We're
Speaker 5: told the bus was stopped, surrounded by police and stopped
Speaker 5: at seven pm, so from nine am just peaceably driving around.
Speaker 5: Obviously this was reported by someone to someone who took
Speaker 5: great exception to it. They were making no noise, there
Speaker 5: was no kind of upheaval, no kind of upset whatsoever.
Speaker 5: Peaceably driving around. The sign says it all. So that
Speaker 5: was the extent of the protest. And these guys spent
Speaker 5: a night in jail. They spent a night in jail
Speaker 5: for very respectfully, very quietly making their.
Speaker 4: This was very distasteful, This was blasphemous.
Speaker 5: This was disrespectful to our faith, as they should and
Speaker 5: have every right to do, apparently unless you're in France.
Speaker 5: So they're now going to press charges against this, and
Speaker 5: that is going to be a very serious and I
Speaker 5: hope a groundbreaking court case because they're like, you arrested
Speaker 5: us for doing nothing wrong, literally by your own laws.
Speaker 4: We have broken no laws whatsoever. There was zero disturbance
Speaker 4: of the piece.
Speaker 5: So it's going to be really interesting following this to
Speaker 5: see what the state comes up with to justify surrounding
Speaker 5: their vehicle at gunpoint and making these guys, six of
Speaker 5: them plus the bus driver, spend a night in jail.
Speaker 2: Maybe if it was an electric bus.
Speaker 3: Just indulge me for a moment. I'm going to mount
Speaker 3: an argument in favor of this, because I hate bumper stickers,
Speaker 3: particularly political bumper stickers. And if they could apply this
Speaker 3: rule in Australia so that anyone driving around with like
Speaker 3: a Greens bumper sticker or something on the back of
Speaker 3: the deck, save the whales, you know, put up the
Speaker 3: wind turbines. That is exactly the same premise here. That's
Speaker 3: some sort of protest and we're going to reach everyone
Speaker 3: driving around with one of those bumper stickers. I wouldn't
Speaker 3: mind that so much. When I lived in South Melbourne,
Speaker 3: I used to drive past this car all the time
Speaker 3: and it had an f Sky newsed bumper sticker on
Speaker 3: the back of it, and I wouldn't have mind it
Speaker 3: if I got locked up. Now I am joking, because
Speaker 3: this is a flagrant attack on free speech. Like if
Speaker 3: you cannot that was a simply peaceful message written on
Speaker 3: the side of a bus. If you can't drive around
Speaker 3: doing that, how can you openly run any kind of
Speaker 3: political campaign? And we then to suggest that someone on
Speaker 3: the side of a road with an a frame sign
Speaker 3: saying you know, I don't know. Once upon a time
Speaker 3: it would have been free Julian assane or something that
Speaker 3: that was some sort of unauthorized protest because there was
Speaker 3: one person waving a flag. And it says so much
Speaker 3: that what we saw at the Olympic opening ceremony was
Speaker 3: allowed to go ahead. That was an expression of free
Speaker 3: speech that was totally condoned and attack on religion that
Speaker 3: there was no problem with that. But someone drives around
Speaker 3: with a bus that simply says stop attacking Christians, and
Speaker 3: that is somehow an unauthorized protest that needs to be stopped.
Speaker 3: I think says it all, doesn't it.
Speaker 2: If you attack Christians, that's perfectly fine. They broadcast it
Speaker 2: to an international audience. But if you drive around the
Speaker 2: streets of parisaying please don't attack Christians, well that constitutes
Speaker 2: an offense.
Speaker 4: Now you're in trouble.
Speaker 1: How dare you?
Speaker 4: How dare you ask not to how dare you ask
Speaker 4: to be treated with some respect? Ridiculous?
Speaker 5: Before we go to a break, there's this great story
Speaker 5: about NASA.
Speaker 4: So remember when we.
Speaker 5: Were talking about how Boeing's not been doing too well lately.
Speaker 4: The DOJ took them to court.
Speaker 5: There was a small matter of those two planes that crash,
Speaker 5: killing everyone on board.
Speaker 4: They're still being held to account.
Speaker 5: For that and pleading guilty to a few things, but
Speaker 5: got off lightly with a sweetheart deal. And we joked
Speaker 5: at the time, were the people who were flying into
Speaker 5: space on Boeing vehicles? Were they worried maybe they weren't
Speaker 5: going to make it home safely. Well, it turns out
Speaker 5: they are stuck up in space and drink how to
Speaker 5: get home, and Elon Musk's Space X is going maybe.
Speaker 4: We better rescue these guys, although to their credit, they
Speaker 4: are keeping in very good spirits while they're stuck up there.
Speaker 4: Check out of.
Speaker 5: Them having their own little Olympics since they're missing out
Speaker 5: on it while they're out in space. Hilariously, Steve Stitch,
Speaker 5: program manager for NASA's Commercial Cruise, trying to trying to
Speaker 5: find out what the best way forward is and what
Speaker 5: the heck happened on this Boeing machinery they've.
Speaker 4: Used to get up there.
Speaker 5: He says, I think the NASA community in general would
Speaker 5: like to understand a little.
Speaker 4: Bit more of the root cause and the physics.
Speaker 5: I think especially the people who arrived on board that
Speaker 5: particularly Boeing vehicle and now are wondering how.
Speaker 4: To get home.
Speaker 5: This was supposed to be an eight week long journey, sorry,
Speaker 5: no long journey, and now is blowing out to potentially
Speaker 5: eight months long because they're just like, well, I guess
Speaker 5: we're in it for the long haul until somebody can
Speaker 5: get us home.
Speaker 2: This all goes back to when NASA decommissioned the space shuttles,
Speaker 2: and then to get into space they either had to
Speaker 2: get the ride with the Russians or they had to
Speaker 2: get some private company to do it. So they gave
Speaker 2: multi billion dollar contracts to Boeing and to SpaceX, owned
Speaker 2: by Elon Musk. And you'd expect Boeing to be all
Speaker 2: over this, but of course, as you said, is they've
Speaker 2: had so many problems with their aircraft. I mean, spacecraft
Speaker 2: are so much more complicated. Some of their initial efforts
Speaker 2: at this star line of spacecraft. This is Boeing software bugs,
Speaker 2: meant some of the first rockets they shot went in
Speaker 2: the wrong direction. Then they had flammable tape inside the
Speaker 2: cabin of the space ship, which is probably not good.
Speaker 1: Two liftoffs were aborted.
Speaker 2: And finally when they got a couple of astronauts on
Speaker 2: this spacecraft going to the International Space Station.
Speaker 1: It had thruster problems and.
Speaker 2: Gas leaks that they're still trying to work out what
Speaker 2: this And like you said, is I don't blame the
Speaker 2: astronauts for saying we'd like to understand a little bit
Speaker 2: more of the root cause before we get back in
Speaker 2: this thing and try and make it to Earth. So, now,
Speaker 2: elon Musk, who's getting smashed by governments all around the world.
Speaker 2: But the American the Biden administration can make a choice,
Speaker 2: can't They your astronauts and can come back with Musk,
Speaker 2: or there's a Russian rocket.
Speaker 3: They can hitch a ride with which with which one
Speaker 3: would you trust more? The Russians who've been trying to
Speaker 3: beat us in the space race in forever, you know,
Speaker 3: while might just magically combust on the way home all Boeing,
Speaker 3: which may well do exactly the same thing. And they're
Speaker 3: surmising that, you know, maybe it was like some of
Speaker 3: the valves were too small, Like okay, but before you
Speaker 3: got on a rocket ship to go up to the
Speaker 3: International Space Station, you'd like to think they'd done their
Speaker 3: due diligence.
Speaker 1: To make sure that every little bit.
Speaker 3: Of that vessel was exactly as it should be but no,
Speaker 3: it's Boeing. They have doors fly off mid air. And
Speaker 3: what was the other story? We rely yeah, and they
Speaker 3: were using mental apparently that had been you know, come
Speaker 3: out of China, that hadn't been properly accredited, that came
Speaker 3: showing up dead and you're like, yeah, I'm going to
Speaker 3: go to space on a Boeing rocket. I would have
Speaker 3: gone in totally the other direction, now, you know. The
Speaker 3: one silver lining could potentially be that if you got
Speaker 3: stuck on the International Space Station and you didn't particularly
Speaker 3: like your spouse, it may actually be a really nice
Speaker 3: holiday for a little while. They may well be saying,
Speaker 3: I don't want to go home. I'm quite enjoying it
Speaker 3: up here on the International Space Station. And if they're
Speaker 3: getting up to that sort of fun like the the
Speaker 3: International Space Station Olympics, I mean I want to know
Speaker 3: how they do the diving and all the.
Speaker 2: Stuff that I found that clip offensive to be honest,
Speaker 2: because I felt like they weren't appreciating the gravity of
Speaker 2: the city.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, I can't keep up with the dad jokes.
Speaker 4: I can't dad jokes.
Speaker 1: I'll be here again next week.
Speaker 4: But it's a.
Speaker 5: Brilliant opportunity for Elon to be the hero here, so
Speaker 5: he is now launching a rocket on the twenty fourth
Speaker 5: of September, but it's only going to have two people
Speaker 5: on board instead of the usual four, so they can
Speaker 5: go up there, retrieve the two.
Speaker 4: Lost lambs that Boeing is left.
Speaker 5: Hanging, and return triumphant in February of next year.
Speaker 1: I love it. I absolutely love it.
Speaker 4: I'm like, ahh, what a middle.
Speaker 5: Finger to Boeing, and Elon, who has been so demonized,
Speaker 5: gets to be like, you're welcome.
Speaker 4: Save the day.
Speaker 3: While we're in the US, things just get worse for
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris. Remember she was appointed the Borders Are by
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, and then as soon as she was chosen
Speaker 3: as the Democratic presidential candidate, we were told her she
Speaker 3: was never the Borders Are. There was nothing to worry about, there,
Speaker 3: nothing to see there, even though when she went to
Speaker 3: visit the border one time only once she's actually been
Speaker 3: down there, they sent everyone through to her to move
Speaker 3: on all the illegal immigrants, put them up in hotels
Speaker 3: for a few days, so it all looked lovely and
Speaker 3: clean when she got down there. And we know that
Speaker 3: millions and millions of people have poured over the southern
Speaker 3: border under the Biden administration, because, of course, one of
Speaker 3: the first things that Biden did as president was to
Speaker 3: undo the closure of the border that Trump instituted while
Speaker 3: he was in charge, and to stop building the wall
Speaker 3: that he had begun. Will we find out today that
Speaker 3: it's not only all these people who've poured over the border,
Speaker 3: which we already knew about, but terrorists or alleged terrorists,
Speaker 3: people who've been on terror watch lists have been released
Speaker 3: into the US after they were detected at the border.
Speaker 3: I mean, you'd think if there was anyone you didn't
Speaker 3: want to lead into the US, even though let millions
Speaker 3: of them in, these would be the handful few hundred
Speaker 3: of them that you wouldn't let in. But this has
Speaker 3: come out of a new House Judiciary Committee report that
Speaker 3: says under the Baden Harris administration, of the more than
Speaker 3: two hundred and fifty illegal aliens on the terrorist watch
Speaker 3: list who were encountered by border patrol at the Southwest
Speaker 3: border between fiscal years twenty twenty one and twenty twenty three,
Speaker 3: the DHS has released into American communities at least ninety
Speaker 3: nine with at least thirty four others in DHS custody
Speaker 3: but not yet removed from the United States. What on
Speaker 3: earth are they playing at releasing these people into the community.
Speaker 3: You would think that they would be the easiest ones
Speaker 3: to just very quietly send back home.
Speaker 1: But no, even people on terror watch.
Speaker 3: Lists have been allowed into the US. And I know
Speaker 3: we keep talking about the fact that it's Kamala's record
Speaker 3: that could ultimately bring her down. You just need a
Speaker 3: few of these stories to just keep trickling out between
Speaker 3: now and November to bring her undone, because even if
Speaker 3: you were arrested on Kamala's supporter, you'd have to ask
Speaker 3: the question, why are you releasing potential terrorists into the country.
Speaker 5: And allowing people in from what they know are very
Speaker 5: unfriendly countries. I mean, the border patrol has encountered tens
Speaker 5: of thousands from countries that could present security risks, including
Speaker 5: over two thousand Afghan nationals, over thirty three thousand Chinese nationals,
Speaker 5: five hundred and forty one from Iran, five hundred and
Speaker 5: twenty from Syria, over three thousand from Uzbekistan.
Speaker 4: So even putting the.
Speaker 5: Ones that we know are a security rest to a side,
Speaker 5: you've invited tens of thousands into your country now from
Speaker 5: unfriendly nations. You don't know how many of those have
Speaker 5: nefarious intentions.
Speaker 2: And Nancy Pelosi was right, she said Joe Biden is
Speaker 2: one of the most consequential presidents in history.
Speaker 1: Well, there he has some consequences.
Speaker 4: Has changed the faith for allowing all these.
Speaker 2: People on terror watch lists into the country, that's for sure.
Speaker 1: We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 2: When we come back, we'll look at what's making news
Speaker 2: in tomorrow's papers, including the management of Quantus with some
Speaker 2: new guidelines around how they'll approach political and social issues
Speaker 2: going forward.
Speaker 1: That's coming up in just a moment. Okay, welcome back.
Speaker 2: Let's take a look at what's making news in tomorrow's papers.
Speaker 2: Liz store has got the Australian Right, Thank you.
Speaker 5: James Mcphersonbanese is alternative facts.
Speaker 4: Check out just how alternative these are. Anthony Albanesi has
Speaker 4: denied the.
Speaker 5: Reserve Bank, has blamed higher inflation for asks on state
Speaker 5: and federal budget spending, widening the split between his government
Speaker 5: and the Central Bank, and prompting the economists to declare
Speaker 5: the Prime Minister is wrong.
Speaker 4: Mate.
Speaker 5: Michelle Bullock has stared down the barrel and told the
Speaker 5: entire nation it's due to government spending. So you the
Speaker 5: head of the government then getting up and trying to
Speaker 5: tell people.
Speaker 4: That it's not like, what is this? Are you just
Speaker 4: accusing the RBA.
Speaker 5: So he's not accusing the RBA of lying, he's simply
Speaker 5: lying by saying.
Speaker 3: They say it, we all heard it.
Speaker 5: Okay, I'm trying to gas light us into believing we
Speaker 5: didn't hear our lying.
Speaker 2: Is is this misinformation or is this a very good, great question?
Speaker 4: How many years in jail?
Speaker 3: Very good? And Look, I was skeptical of Michelle Bullock
Speaker 3: being appointed the new governor of the RBA when it happened,
Speaker 3: because I felt that we would be better off with
Speaker 3: someone who hadn't lived in the RBA bubble most of
Speaker 3: their working life. But I think she's proven herself to
Speaker 3: be an excellent RBA governor. She is, you know, so
Speaker 3: much better than Philip Lowe ever was. She is a
Speaker 3: great communicator, and she's very direct. She just says it
Speaker 3: how it is, and she's not afraid to ruffle a
Speaker 3: few feathers as she has in this case. And as
Speaker 3: I was saying on Shari earlier this evening, the comments
Speaker 3: of the Prime Minister and the Treasurer Jim Charmers, have
Speaker 3: been utterly duplicitous because if you read into what Charmers said,
Speaker 3: and he's rebuked the idea that you know, there is
Speaker 3: inflation continuing to go up or it will continue to
Speaker 3: go up because the RBA has forecast at once these
Speaker 3: subsidies of electricity at SPENNTCA come off, that the headline
Speaker 3: inflation rate will increase, and Charmers has basically said, well,
Speaker 3: that's nonsense. It's not like people have spare cash floating
Speaker 3: around to spend. The point is they don't have spare
Speaker 3: cash floating around to spend because they've already had to
Speaker 3: spend all of it to keep up with the price
Speaker 3: increases that have come with the rate of inflation. And
Speaker 3: if you look at the figures from the last quarter,
Speaker 3: it's not discretionary spending that's going up anymore. Discretionary spending
Speaker 3: has gone down and the inflation figures on those discretionary
Speaker 3: items have decreased. The inflation lies in essential goods and
Speaker 3: services like electricity, power, food, etc. So it's not that
Speaker 3: people are just going out spending money willy nilly because
Speaker 3: they want to. They're spending money.
Speaker 1: Because they have to.
Speaker 3: It's a supply and demand thing, as the RBA has said,
Speaker 3: and who is responsible for the supply and demand the government,
Speaker 3: because they've created all this demand with record levels of
Speaker 3: migration and not enough houses to put these people in,
Speaker 3: and not enough school places to put the kids.
Speaker 1: In, et ce.
Speaker 3: That creates the demand that doesn't meet the supply, and
Speaker 3: that's how you get inflation. So Charmers, you say, no,
Speaker 3: the RBA is totally wrong here. You created the problem
Speaker 3: in the first place, as they're trying to tell you,
Speaker 3: you can't claim that you've had.
Speaker 1: Nothing to do with it. It's worse than that.
Speaker 2: It's a double bind for the government because if the
Speaker 2: RBA is saying government spending is contributing to inflation, remember
Speaker 2: it's not just enough for the government to say no, no, no,
Speaker 2: we're not adding to inflation, because the whole point of
Speaker 2: their policy was they said, not only will this not
Speaker 2: add to inflation, this will help to bring inflation down.
Speaker 1: So to say.
Speaker 2: That their policy is adding to the problem is a
Speaker 2: complete discreditation. If that is a word, Liz, it is
Speaker 2: now of Charmer's entire policy. It wasn't meant to add
Speaker 2: it was meant to push downward pressure as the Albanez.
Speaker 1: He loves to see. What we just having is the
Speaker 1: whole policy is bunk.
Speaker 5: Well and we've had this for quite some time now,
Speaker 5: where the RBA is like, what are.
Speaker 4: You guys doing?
Speaker 5: Like when Chalmers brought out his new budget and was like,
Speaker 5: this is gonna be great and don't worry about inflation
Speaker 5: and rate rises because they're just gonna get better and
Speaker 5: my budget is counting on it, and the RBA literally
Speaker 5: came out the next day and we're like, mate, where
Speaker 5: are you getting that from?
Speaker 4: Like that's not for you to say.
Speaker 5: We just seem to be having this nonsensical back and
Speaker 5: forth between the government and what's supposed to be an
Speaker 5: independent body, but clearly the government is trying to tell
Speaker 5: it what to say. Don't tell people it's our fault,
Speaker 5: and the RBA is like, yeah, no, government spending is
Speaker 5: driving this, and the Government's like they didn't even say that.
Speaker 4: It's ridiculous.
Speaker 5: It's like kids in the playyard. Next flash on front
Speaker 5: of yours. Quantous activism only with approval. Quanta CEO Vanessa
Speaker 5: Hudson will have to get bored approval to involve the
Speaker 5: airline in any social or party political issues, such as
Speaker 5: last year's support for the Voice reverendum under recommended changes
Speaker 5: to corporate governance.
Speaker 4: Well, well, well this will be interesting.
Speaker 5: Does this mean we won't get slapped in the face
Speaker 5: with whatever is the current social cause when boarding or
Speaker 5: disbarking from a Quantus flight from here on in? Or
Speaker 5: we will, but this time we'll know it's with the
Speaker 5: blessing of the entire board, instead of Alan Joyce being like,
Speaker 5: here's my latest soapbox.
Speaker 4: Everyone get on board.
Speaker 3: I bloody will hope it means an end to it.
Speaker 3: I mean they should go even further. They should have
Speaker 3: to consult the shareholders before they do any of this
Speaker 3: sort of stuff, because that was my issue with it,
Speaker 3: not so much the fact that a corporate body like
Speaker 3: Quantus had taken a point of view. They're entitled to
Speaker 3: take a point of view whatever.
Speaker 5: I don't want to be to enforce it on every
Speaker 5: customer that then walks in their door.
Speaker 2: Well, in orders, the CEO entitled to turn the airline
Speaker 2: essentially into his privates.
Speaker 3: And this was the issue, right because in the free
Speaker 3: market you can go with whatever you want, et cetera.
Speaker 3: And I always thought if you were an investor in
Speaker 3: quant and they're spending the money that you've invested in
Speaker 3: the company to take out an ad in the paper
Speaker 3: to say we support same sex marriage. I invested in
Speaker 3: Quantus because I want them to run flights and make
Speaker 3: money for me, not spend money on social causes. And
Speaker 3: of course what the board of Quantus has now done
Speaker 3: is gone through everything that happened that led up to
Speaker 3: Alan Joyce leaving the airline. They've now decided they're ripping
Speaker 3: some nine million dollars out of the bonuses that he
Speaker 3: was due to receive because he did such a bad job,
Speaker 3: because what he did was run the reputation of Quantus
Speaker 3: into the ground. And what they're now trying to say
Speaker 3: is well, part of the reason that we lost our
Speaker 3: reputation is because we were seeing not as the national carrier.
Speaker 3: We were seen as the national bandwagon mob that just
Speaker 3: jumped on whatever was the latest cause and spend how
Speaker 3: many there. I mean, let's not forget that Quantus gave
Speaker 3: free flights to Yes campaigners in.
Speaker 1: The Voice referendum.
Speaker 3: And again, I mean I have thought about pretending to
Speaker 3: support the Yes campaigns so I could fly between Sydney
Speaker 3: and Melbourne.
Speaker 4: And fiction less flood.
Speaker 3: You know will have got me a free flight. I mean,
Speaker 3: why wouldn't you get on board with that?
Speaker 4: Show how easily you are bought?
Speaker 5: Caleb Bond to the last slash on the front of
Speaker 5: the oars. Calculation on NDIS price totally broken. Disability service
Speaker 5: providers are demanding a two billion a year top up
Speaker 5: to fix a major mathematical error in how prices are
Speaker 5: set by the agency running the NDIS, which is leading
Speaker 5: to thousands of providers being underpaid by up to ten
Speaker 5: percent and becoming financially unviable. Well this is a bit different,
Speaker 5: isn't it, Because we've been told at nauseum over the
Speaker 5: last few years how NDIS providers are rolling in the dough.
Speaker 5: They bump up their prices knowing well it's taxpayer money.
Speaker 5: Might as well take these flogs for a ride. So
Speaker 5: people at NDIS rather is paying out far more than
Speaker 5: an average client would.
Speaker 4: Be for them the same service. We've been given the
Speaker 4: impression that these NDIS providers have been just laughing in.
Speaker 5: What do you call them baths full of money?
Speaker 2: Well, some of the mar you got to fill for
Speaker 2: Bill Shorton, Because Bill Shorton, of course, is where you
Speaker 2: don't have to fil for Bill Shorton, it's quite hilarious.
Speaker 2: But he's been charged with cut the cost of the
Speaker 2: ndias right, and now he's got the providers saying no, no,
Speaker 2: the model. It's always government modeling that gets you. The
Speaker 2: model was faulty and so we just need extra two
Speaker 2: billion dollars to pay.
Speaker 1: Everyone what they need.
Speaker 2: So you can imagine Bill short and he's trying to
Speaker 2: find like, you know, one hundred thousand dollars a year
Speaker 2: and fifty bucks there, and he's got to stump up
Speaker 2: two billion in extra payments.
Speaker 1: He's supposed to be cutting costs.
Speaker 3: We'd like to throw more money at it. That'll certainly
Speaker 3: fix it. Before we go, let's go to the Advertiser
Speaker 3: tomorrow where it says quit goes the Spears. David Spears
Speaker 3: quit the Liberals top job yesterday in South Australia and
Speaker 3: in a stunning exit statement said he was lacking energy
Speaker 3: and had quote unquote, had a gut full. The thirty
Speaker 3: nine year old pondered whether because he was from the
Speaker 3: southern suburbs, he might have been too different from the
Speaker 3: Liberal Party. The party is in crisis with no clear successor,
Speaker 3: and look I can't half blame him for going because
Speaker 3: Malanowskis is running such a tight ship down there. The
Speaker 3: Libs are going to be in the wilderness for sixteen
Speaker 3: years like they were under ran and weather or why
Speaker 3: would you want to lead the liberal path?
Speaker 2: Con I point out something about your former newspaper. The
Speaker 2: headline says David's no Goliath as he bows out lacking energy.
Speaker 1: David beats Goliath.
Speaker 2: The Adelaide advertising needs to get back to Sunday School.
Speaker 2: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 2: How far would you go to get a spider out
Speaker 2: of your car? You won't believe what this North Queensland
Speaker 2: guy does.
Speaker 1: That's coming up in a second.
Speaker 2: Welcome back, Well caleber great Australian has passed away.
Speaker 3: That's right. There are landmark events in your life that
Speaker 3: you remember where you were when they happened, When Diana died,
Speaker 3: when nine to eleven happened, and people will ask you
Speaker 3: where were you when Jack Carlson died. Now, if the
Speaker 3: name does not ring a bell, he is an ab
Speaker 3: salute Ossie legend. You may remember him for this though.
Speaker 3: When he was arrested in nineteen ninety one for eating
Speaker 3: a meal, a succulent Chinese meal.
Speaker 1: But you just.
Speaker 4: Assured me that I could speak, So sit down inside
Speaker 4: the car.
Speaker 1: You're not assuring anything. I'm under what.
Speaker 5: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
Speaker 1: Have a look at the headlock in. See that chap
Speaker 1: over the head. This is the blak who got me
Speaker 1: on the phoenis pople. Get some cups and why did
Speaker 1: you do this?
Speaker 3: For what reason?
Speaker 4: What is the charge?
Speaker 1: Eating a meal, a succulent Chinese meal. Oh that's you
Speaker 1: nice headlocks up? Yes, I see that.
Speaker 3: You know your judo well. And word has it that
Speaker 3: Copper is competing in the Olympics in Paris this year.
Speaker 1: So mister Carlson was.
Speaker 3: A low level crim you know, he'd done a few
Speaker 3: break and into type things. He was a serial prison escape,
Speaker 3: so he's not all that stupid. But he somehow wrongly
Speaker 3: ended up on a list of like the most wanted
Speaker 3: criminals in Australia. And they busted into this Brisbane restaurant
Speaker 3: in ninety one thinking he was another guy, and carded
Speaker 3: him out and arrested him, had the cameras there ready
Speaker 3: to go, and in the process he gave us one
Speaker 3: of the best bits of Australian news footage ever taken.
Speaker 3: He's died at the age of eighty two. Mister Carlson,
Speaker 3: may rest in peace.
Speaker 1: Amen, before we go.
Speaker 2: Having lived in North Queensland, I mean, you've got snakes,
Speaker 2: you've got crocodiles, you've got poisonous jellyfish, so you wouldn't
Speaker 2: think a spider would bother you too much. But the
Speaker 2: Townsville guy was so bothered by a spider in his
Speaker 2: Nissan pathway he set his car on fire in what
Speaker 2: the newspaper described as a dramatic removal technique which backfired.
Speaker 2: Have a look at the vision and listened to the
Speaker 2: emergency Walker workout calling it in set the car.
Speaker 3: On fire to try and kill a spider.
Speaker 5: I'm known further details.
Speaker 1: Over I mean the vision, the car is completely a
Speaker 1: wreck and burnt.
Speaker 2: Out, But I love the emergency worker. I have no
Speaker 2: further details.
Speaker 1: That's gotta be like.
Speaker 4: Full blown rachnophobia.
Speaker 5: Right there, he's got a lighter and chasing around it.
Speaker 1: Just lower the top. We're going to go, but stick around.
Speaker 1: Coming up is the Rea Penny Show. Good Night,