Speaker 1: Late Well girl, the Late Debate. Well, it's great to
Speaker 1: have your company on the Late Debate. I'm James Macpherson,
Speaker 1: Will Liz Staer and birthday boy Caleb Bonb.
Speaker 2: Happy birthday, Thank.
Speaker 3: You very much. It's terrible that I am now an
Speaker 3: old man. I'm over the hill and I don't know.
Speaker 3: They'll probably sack me tomorrow for being too old. But still,
Speaker 3: it's nice to be here.
Speaker 4: It's a quarter century that gray hair boy I have.
Speaker 3: Actually, I looked in the mirror the other day and
Speaker 3: I noticed a couple of grays and I thought, oh
Speaker 3: my god, we're really in trouble here.
Speaker 5: Well, the good news is you get to spend your
Speaker 5: birthday with us.
Speaker 3: And who else would I want to spend it with
Speaker 3: but my Late Debate family, and that.
Speaker 2: Of course includes all of you at home who let
Speaker 2: me into your lounge rooms and bedrooms every night. It's
Speaker 2: a pleasure.
Speaker 5: Well, happy birthday again. Let's get into the program.
Speaker 1: We've got a lot coming up, including Victorian MP's promoting
Speaker 1: pill testing. Fair enough, but wait till you see what
Speaker 1: they were wearing when they moted.
Speaker 5: It will show you that later. Plus we'll look at
Speaker 5: the papers of course.
Speaker 1: Peter Dutton's nuclear plan is across all of tomorrow's papers.
Speaker 5: We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 1: And speaking of plans, the Gold Coast Bulletin outlines a
Speaker 1: plan to improve surface paradise.
Speaker 5: Get this, Caleb and Liz.
Speaker 1: They're proposing cheaper alcoholic drinks at surfers that Linkbil.
Speaker 4: Caleb's already booked.
Speaker 2: That's where I'm going on the weekend.
Speaker 1: Let's start the program in the UK, where CCTV cameras
Speaker 1: are being used at train stations to secretly monitor people's emotions.
Speaker 1: The cameras were originally installed at eight train stations in
Speaker 1: a bid to reduce anti social behavior, but as most
Speaker 1: of us have figured out by now, the worst anti
Speaker 1: social behavior usually comes from people in the government, and
Speaker 1: so Network Rail, which is the public transport authority, they
Speaker 1: decided to use the cameras to scan people's expressions and
Speaker 1: then record using special AI whether they were feeling sad
Speaker 1: or happy or angry. Because it's not enough for the
Speaker 1: state to know where you're going, they want to know
Speaker 1: what's going on in your head.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 1: Network Rail from now on known as Dystopian Rail, they said, look,
Speaker 1: we were only using the technology because we wanted to
Speaker 1: monitor customer satisfaction.
Speaker 5: Of course, it never occurred to them.
Speaker 1: They could get a pretty good idea of customer satisfaction
Speaker 1: by simply checking what percentage of trains were running on time.
Speaker 1: Oh and they were selling the information to advertisers.
Speaker 5: So there you go.
Speaker 1: The information was revealed after a freedom of information request
Speaker 1: by a civil liberties group called Big Brother Watch. The
Speaker 1: good news in all of this, Caleb and Liz is
Speaker 1: that the Transport Department don't need to do this anymore
Speaker 1: because now the public are aware they've been secretly filmed
Speaker 1: since about twenty twenty two with this pseudo science analyzing
Speaker 1: their expressions.
Speaker 5: Everyone has the same emotion. Now all of the UK
Speaker 5: is thoroughly they's right.
Speaker 3: And look, you'd be going to the railway station just
Speaker 3: trying to look angry, now, wouldn't you, just to see
Speaker 3: what they could possibly do about it? I mean closed
Speaker 3: circuit television CCTV. The operative part of that has always
Speaker 3: been closed circuit, Like the vision is being taken from
Speaker 3: one place, ie in the train station specifically, to one
Speaker 3: other place where.
Speaker 2: It's being monitored for safety.
Speaker 3: If someone starts a fight, whatever, the fat security guard
Speaker 3: can go down there and try and break.
Speaker 2: It up while they wait for the coppers.
Speaker 3: What we are now talking about is a system that
Speaker 3: is not only being monitored by the security guard sitting
Speaker 3: in the room, it's being analyzed, in this case by Amazon,
Speaker 3: so it's going to a third party company, so it's
Speaker 3: being held on their servers, and god knows what happens
Speaker 3: to that then. I mean, if Amazon was hacked, presumably
Speaker 3: they could someone could collect all of that data so
Speaker 3: they could tell and this stuff is highly valuable. Data
Speaker 3: is highly valuable, So some hacker on the other side
Speaker 3: of the world could find out all the people who
Speaker 3: walked through the railway stefe on a particular day, the
Speaker 3: moods they were in, and that is very telling about
Speaker 3: what stage of life you're in, whether you're going through
Speaker 3: a divorce, and all these things might see minor at
Speaker 3: the time, but when they start to piece that together
Speaker 3: with other information and data they've taken from other places,
Speaker 3: it becomes extremely valuable.
Speaker 2: And then in comes the.
Speaker 3: Advertising factor, which blows it all out of the water.
Speaker 3: It's not about safety, it's about monetization. And we all
Speaker 3: know that when you're in a public place a it
Speaker 3: is legal to be filmed in a public place but
Speaker 3: you expect that CCTV is being used for one purpose
Speaker 3: and one purpose alone, and that is to monitor for
Speaker 3: bad behavior.
Speaker 2: This has gone well beyond.
Speaker 3: That now, and we should be really scared about it
Speaker 3: because it starts with one company or one metro outfit
Speaker 3: saying we've got these cameras to monitor our people. What
Speaker 3: if the cops rock up and they want to take
Speaker 3: all of that data. It starts in the railway station,
Speaker 3: then it's on the street, then it's in front of
Speaker 3: your house, dislutely everywhere, and they will be able to
Speaker 3: law enforcement and private businesses be able to track not
Speaker 3: only where you're going every minute of the day, how
Speaker 3: you're feeling every.
Speaker 2: Minute of the day.
Speaker 3: This is really really dangerous that falls into the wrong hands.
Speaker 2: We are stuffed well.
Speaker 4: I think it's far more nefarious than just all for
Speaker 4: advertising purposes. No doubt people are making money off it,
Speaker 4: but I want to know why they want this kind
Speaker 4: of data. One's thoughts and feelings. That's your private sphere.
Speaker 4: That is the one thing that you alone have access
Speaker 4: to know what you're thinking, know what you're feeling at
Speaker 4: any given point. And I find it very curious that
Speaker 4: this program, which we only know about thanks to an
Speaker 4: FOI by a Big Brother Watch Can we get a
Speaker 4: few of those in Australia please? Was launched in twenty
Speaker 4: twenty two. My very first thought was it was in
Speaker 4: twenty twenty two that Bunning's Camart and the good Guys
Speaker 4: here in Australia were busted for the exact same facial recognition. Yes,
Speaker 4: not feelings and emotions that we know of. Who knows,
Speaker 4: but they were busted for that and nobody had been
Speaker 4: told either. So you've got millions of people walking into
Speaker 4: these stores having their faces recognized. Goodness knows what that
Speaker 4: data was actually being used for as well, and people
Speaker 4: are numb the wiser. Nobody is being asked permission. They
Speaker 4: say that there was a small mention of this program
Speaker 4: under the company's privacy policy on their website, but again
Speaker 4: no accountability whatsoever. They just found it because they went
Speaker 4: digging for it. And what are people supposed to do,
Speaker 4: even if they are aware of it not use the
Speaker 4: tube like that is literally the only mode of transport
Speaker 4: for millions of people living in London, living in the
Speaker 4: UK who don't own a car. It's extortionately expensive over there,
Speaker 4: so people are left with absolutely no other option. Anyway,
Speaker 4: even if they were like, yeah, we're wildly uncomfortable about this,
Speaker 4: what are you going to do? Not ride the tube?
Speaker 4: They are normalizing AI powered surveillance and they're not asking permission.
Speaker 4: And this is the tip of the iceberg, because, like
Speaker 4: I say, every time one of these stories make it
Speaker 4: to the media, imagine what else is going on that
Speaker 4: we have absolutely no idea about and they're never going
Speaker 4: to tell you.
Speaker 1: And consider the attitude of the authorities who put this
Speaker 1: program together, because in the documents that were released, it
Speaker 1: is recorded that they had a discussion about whether or
Speaker 1: not this is appropriate. The question was asked, are some
Speaker 1: people likely to find it intrusive? And the answer was
Speaker 1: typically no. But there's no accounting for some people.
Speaker 3: Towards what who doesn't think that's in true? And that's
Speaker 3: the major problem with a we're not told about it.
Speaker 3: You mentioned the privacy policy, it's the anti privacy or
Speaker 3: they always name.
Speaker 4: These things, I know, opposite of what it's actually doing.
Speaker 3: But it's because once you take like everyone uses credit
Speaker 3: cards and debit cards and whatever these so the bank
Speaker 3: knows where you go every Thursday. At the same time,
Speaker 3: they know what you buy, They know how much you spend.
Speaker 3: Once you start putting all of these little crumbs together,
Speaker 3: law enforcement, private business, everyone else can literally work out
Speaker 3: everything you are doing at every moment.
Speaker 5: Law enforcement.
Speaker 1: What my thought when I read this was could it
Speaker 1: be used in evidence against you if you.
Speaker 5: Were accused of a crime.
Speaker 1: Well, our CCTV had him at this station looking guilty.
Speaker 1: Analysis says he was feeling paranoid.
Speaker 3: And that's volatile because previously you would have been able
Speaker 3: that the cops would have gone and asked.
Speaker 2: The tube for the CCTV footage that would have showed
Speaker 2: you moving through.
Speaker 3: The station, you know, prior to or after the alleged crime.
Speaker 3: But now that comes with all this analysis that it
Speaker 3: is creating about what it thinks you're feeling at the time.
Speaker 2: It is value adding to all.
Speaker 3: Of this, and without legislation to stop it, which will
Speaker 3: never get because of course it benefits people like law enforced,
Speaker 3: you can't stop it.
Speaker 4: We are this is minority report. We're living in minority report. Now,
Speaker 4: how soon is it going to be before someone's busting
Speaker 4: in your door because you are thinking about something? And
Speaker 4: it throws out innocent until proven guilty of rea because
Speaker 4: if we're actually sussing out people's thoughts and feelings. Well,
Speaker 4: they're just trying to jolly well ride the tube, and
Speaker 4: then they're tapping into that data. Say you are convicted
Speaker 4: of petty theft or something like that, how much of
Speaker 4: this is going to add value to such a case,
Speaker 4: and the prosecutor, even if it's not brought to court
Speaker 4: because they don't want the fact that they're doing this
Speaker 4: blown wide open, will be relying on that evidence in
Speaker 4: the back of their head knowing no, no, we reckon.
Speaker 4: We definitely got the guy.
Speaker 1: If you're recording my facial expression as I'm catching the
Speaker 1: train first thing in the morning, you would definitely be
Speaker 1: able to tell whether I'd had my coffee or not.
Speaker 3: That yeah, I don't conclude I don't want to be
Speaker 3: filmed first thing in the morning anyway, because I look
Speaker 3: pretty shocking when I wake up.
Speaker 2: But of course, so we've talked about the problems.
Speaker 3: With AI in terms of how they're using it against
Speaker 3: you and they're monitoring everything you're doing. But of course
Speaker 3: the other thing that AI is doing is making it
Speaker 3: more and more.
Speaker 2: Difficult to tell what is real.
Speaker 3: We have this what is called deep fake technology now
Speaker 3: which is where artificial intelligence is used to create something
Speaker 3: that is fake, that is false, be it a video
Speaker 3: or an image, it looks like the person who's saying it.
Speaker 3: It might be a voice recording that sounds convincingly like.
Speaker 2: The person who is supposedly.
Speaker 3: Saying it, and it is basically imperceptible as to whether
Speaker 3: or not it is real. And think about that for
Speaker 3: a minute. I mean, you could be watching a video
Speaker 3: online that is supposedly me, and it's me saying I
Speaker 3: hate jumps racing. Jumps racing should be banned. Now that
Speaker 3: might set off the alarm bells and you go, okay, well,
Speaker 3: I don't believe he would actually say that, but it
Speaker 3: genuinely look like I am saying it if you don't
Speaker 3: believe me. This is an example of how good deep
Speaker 3: fake technology is.
Speaker 6: Second youngest son's suggesting it came out of nowhere. What
Speaker 6: we subsequently learned is it may have come from the
Speaker 6: former president or his legal team acting in bad faith.
Speaker 6: This is deep fake example of what is possible with
Speaker 6: powerful computer and editing. It took around seventy two hours
Speaker 6: to create this example from scratch using extremely powerful GPU.
Speaker 6: It could be improved with more computing time, but ninety
Speaker 6: percent of people cannot tell the difference.
Speaker 2: I mean that is that is imperceptible.
Speaker 3: You would think you were actually watching the real Anderson
Speaker 3: Cooper there on the right. Well down in Victoria, criminals
Speaker 3: have started using this against each other. I love this
Speaker 3: story so much. Bikeis have decided that the best way
Speaker 3: they can get back at each other now is to
Speaker 3: start producing deep fake videos about each other to spread lies.
Speaker 3: Because of coase, people are watching Bikis and Crimson. What
Speaker 3: about watching these videos and thinking that it's actually the
Speaker 3: person that they're talking about. And one recent example that
Speaker 3: the Herald Son got hold of was a supposed news
Speaker 3: report from Channel seven. And the Herald Son has watched
Speaker 3: this footage and they say it looks like a genuine
Speaker 3: Channel seven report about two members of organized crime who've
Speaker 3: been involved in the illicit tobacco wars down in Victoria.
Speaker 3: And it starts off with a piece to camera from
Speaker 3: Cassie Zervos, who's a crime reporter at Channel seven. It
Speaker 3: all looks legit. It says that what these people have
Speaker 3: done will send shock waves through the community. The Herald's
Speaker 3: Son then says the report then throws to some earnest
Speaker 3: bloke who's meant to be a detective, urging the pair
Speaker 3: to turn themselves in and asking for public assistance. Any
Speaker 3: information provided will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and anonymity.
Speaker 3: The fake cop says, we are dedicating all available resources
Speaker 3: to this investigation. It, for all the world, looks like
Speaker 3: a legit detective. Next up as a bogus witness who
Speaker 3: claims to have seen the pair as he made his
Speaker 3: way to his local RSL club for the raffle. That
Speaker 3: fellow says, presumably for authenticity's sake, that he likes to
Speaker 3: get there early because he can't stand for long these days. Now,
Speaker 3: it is all quite comical that bikis are now using
Speaker 3: AI technology to fight against each other. But this is
Speaker 3: where we have come to. This tet is now so
Speaker 3: good that you can create a news bulletin that looks
Speaker 3: like a legit news bulletin and people are watching it
Speaker 3: and they think it's real. They can do it to you.
Speaker 3: They can do it to you, They can do it
Speaker 3: to me. They can even do it to you at home.
Speaker 3: The lines are being blurred by AI as to what
Speaker 3: is real and what is not. That I really worry
Speaker 3: in the next five ten years, how we will actually
Speaker 3: be able to tell what photos, what videos, what words.
Speaker 2: Are legit because you can just create anything.
Speaker 1: Now, this story really upset me because I just watched
Speaker 1: The Godfather for the first time the other night.
Speaker 5: You know the side before have you been watching other
Speaker 5: program So I decided to watch it. It is like it
Speaker 5: Marlon Brandoino.
Speaker 1: So You've got this image of gangsters and organized crime,
Speaker 1: and now I find out there are a bunch of
Speaker 1: computer geets with a milkshake, probably.
Speaker 4: Some computer geet with a gun. Hell, okay, put the
Speaker 4: things together quick.
Speaker 5: Anyway, it's just ruined my image of organized crime. I
Speaker 5: thought it was you know, well.
Speaker 4: Well they're getting sophisticated, right, but the outcomes of things
Speaker 4: like this, Obviously they're doing it to rile up the
Speaker 4: other gang. They're doing it to turn public sentiment against
Speaker 4: the other gang. Like we've got a favorite gang. We
Speaker 4: don't keep a list at home of Like, yeah, but
Speaker 4: I saw this thing on the internet. These guys are worse. No,
Speaker 4: you're all terrible, and we hate the stinking gut.
Speaker 3: Well in the gang world though, because like the real
Speaker 3: life consequences of something like this could be that it
Speaker 3: takes off within the gang world, and they believe it's legit,
Speaker 3: and they also to be the intent right, they got
Speaker 3: somewhat intense.
Speaker 1: So the other side of this is if they decide
Speaker 1: to give up crime, they've got a future in journalist money.
Speaker 5: That news report was really well written.
Speaker 4: I like that, it was very thoughtful. The fact that
Speaker 4: they even had like these people who were being interviewed
Speaker 4: just off the street and old mates like well, I
Speaker 4: can't stand for too long these days all very believable.
Speaker 4: I mean, whoever wrote the scripts.
Speaker 5: When you producers and angels or the you know, the
Speaker 5: camre Keevin.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and I'm sure the AI versions of us would
Speaker 4: be much cheaper. But Sky won't be giving in anytime soon,
Speaker 4: will you will? Our employers, please to the US now
Speaker 4: where Boeing is facing a Senate committee grilling. There has
Speaker 4: been many rumors, many whistleblowers over the years saying things
Speaker 4: are not well at Boeing. Well, the latest headline to
Speaker 4: greet us is this one here saying that dodgy parts
Speaker 4: were delivered brittlely being fitted. What is going on? Of course,
Speaker 4: this is a new whistle blower, the one who was
Speaker 4: facing he was in the middle of testifying at a
Speaker 4: deposition against Boeing months ago, when he suddenly showed up
Speaker 4: dead shot in his truck. Of course, a lot of
Speaker 4: people have trouble believing that John Barnett, the man who
Speaker 4: worked for Boeing for three decades before retiring in twenty seventeen,
Speaker 4: actually did take his own life. There he is there.
Speaker 4: He was known as by his fellow co workers as
Speaker 4: an extremely brave whistleblower who made many, many extremely influential
Speaker 4: and powerful enemies in his last days. So there are
Speaker 4: a lot of aspersions. Quite rightly, I would argue being
Speaker 4: cast about what actually happened to Barnett. But back to
Speaker 4: this Senate committee, they've taken up the cause. You would remember,
Speaker 4: in twenty nineteen, two Boeings crashed, killing everyone on board.
Speaker 4: We've seen several reports since of not quite crashes, but
Speaker 4: certainly near misses and people being injured as a result.
Speaker 4: So finally the federal government in the US is taking
Speaker 4: them to task. His Senator Josh Hawley raking them over
Speaker 4: the coals.
Speaker 7: Help me understand that, I mean, do you get paid
Speaker 7: for transparency? Is that part of is that one of
Speaker 7: the metrics for your income?
Speaker 5: I think the board counts on me for transparency.
Speaker 7: Really, because you're under investigation for falsifying seven eighty seven
Speaker 7: inspection records, the Boeings under criminal investigation for the Alaska
Speaker 7: Airlines flight. You were investigated by DOJ for criminal conspiracy
Speaker 7: to defraud the FAA. This is all in your tenure.
Speaker 7: This doesn't sound like a lot of transparency to me.
Speaker 7: And frankly, Sir, I think it's a travesy that you're
Speaker 7: still in your job.
Speaker 4: Here here you can hear for yourself that litany of abuses.
Speaker 4: And yet Boeing seems to have dodged and weaved their
Speaker 4: way effortlessly through it, whistleblower after whistleblower. But their CEO
Speaker 4: actually paid a visit to this Senate committee in order
Speaker 4: to apologize to the families who had lost their loved
Speaker 4: ones in the two Boeing crashes of twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: And I apologize for the grief that we have caused,
Speaker 3: and I want you to know we are totally committed
Speaker 3: in their memory, the work and focus on safety for.
Speaker 4: As long as long as we're employed by Bombing.
Speaker 2: So again, I'm.
Speaker 4: Sorry, very cold comfort to those families, I'm sure now,
Speaker 4: John Barnett took this up as soon as he retired, basically.
Speaker 4: In fact, he testified that he took it up before
Speaker 4: he retired and would send emails regards the shoddy workmanship
Speaker 4: going on. He claimed that they were deliberately fitting faulty
Speaker 4: parts even back then in order to make these deadlines
Speaker 4: that they had for production, and he was always told
Speaker 4: off for it, he said in person, which he took
Speaker 4: to mean stop making a paper trail. We don't want
Speaker 4: you sending these emails, John Barnett, please just speak to
Speaker 4: us in person so we can brush it under the
Speaker 4: carpet and do absolutely nothing about it. So we know
Speaker 4: that this has been going on for a very long time. Now,
Speaker 4: Thank goodness, the federal government in the US is finally
Speaker 4: taking this seriously and taking up the cause themselves. But
Speaker 4: no justice for the families who have lost their loved ones.
Speaker 4: And we don't know yet whether it will lead to
Speaker 4: any justice in terms of Boeing making airplanes worth flying on.
Speaker 1: None of this news is going to allay the fears
Speaker 1: of nervous flys.
Speaker 5: And it all sort of came to public attention, as
Speaker 5: you said in.
Speaker 1: January, when a door blew off of a Boeing aircraft
Speaker 1: over Portland. Then within weeks a aircraft at Atlanta Airport
Speaker 1: are Boeing lost its front tire as it was going
Speaker 1: along the runway. They had five incidents in four weeks,
Speaker 1: and then Boeing very high profile in the public eye.
Speaker 1: And this latest whistleblower who you spoke about, said that
Speaker 1: in order to avoid inspections, they took faulty parts and
Speaker 1: hit them out the back, and then over time these
Speaker 1: parts were moved again, and then they sort of lost
Speaker 1: track of these parts, which were dabbed with a bit
Speaker 1: of red paint. And the suspicion is some of those
Speaker 1: faulty parts were installed on new aircraft. So if you're
Speaker 1: getting on a Boeing plane, you look at the window
Speaker 1: and there's a dab of red paint on the very
Speaker 1: very many different problem.
Speaker 3: The problem is that you're already on the plane, so
Speaker 3: you're a little bit staff.
Speaker 1: The other interesting part of this is that the CEO
Speaker 1: of Boeing admitted that some employees had recently falsified inspection reports,
Speaker 1: claiming that things had been inspect them when they had not,
Speaker 1: But he reassured people don't worry.
Speaker 5: It won't affect safety.
Speaker 1: Well, what's the point of safety inspections if they don't
Speaker 1: affect safety. And the other revelation was that on some
Speaker 1: planes hundreds of fasteners were installed incorrectly, but again, don't worry,
Speaker 1: it's not going to affect safety. Well, I'd like to
Speaker 1: know what the fasteners were fastening or not going to
Speaker 1: affect safety.
Speaker 3: And the other thing that's come out as well, and
Speaker 3: it's not just Bowing Airbus has been involved in this
Speaker 3: as well, but they've apparently been using Chinese titanium, which
Speaker 3: has been called quote unquote fake because it doesn't come
Speaker 3: with proper documentation so it's not up to spect and
Speaker 3: the aviation authorities in the US now so worried about
Speaker 3: this that you know, they're saying it could potentially cause
Speaker 3: a plane to fall apart in mid air.
Speaker 4: And this makes sense because they used to get the
Speaker 4: real stuff from Russia, so obviously that may not be
Speaker 4: going to well for them at the moment. So now
Speaker 4: they've got this fate like cheap Chinese version they're just
Speaker 4: passing off as the same and it's not working.
Speaker 3: It is absolutely astounding. I mean, the CEO of Boeing,
Speaker 3: David Kolloon, should be Boeing. Boeing gone at this point,
Speaker 3: because seriously, we're talking about historically air travel has been
Speaker 3: safer than car travel, and statistically it still is. But
Speaker 3: when you look at this and Boeing planes are used
Speaker 3: for most domestic flights in this country.
Speaker 2: If you fly Virgin or you fly.
Speaker 3: Quantus, they're Boeing seven three sevens. In general, if you're
Speaker 3: going from Capital City to Capital City, I know Jetstar
Speaker 3: uses air Bus, I think Rex.
Speaker 2: Uses Boeings as well. So they are.
Speaker 3: Used commonly in this country. And when you look at
Speaker 3: what is coming out from the US and the shoddy
Speaker 3: way that it is alleged these planes have been built
Speaker 3: that the federal government in the US is so worried
Speaker 3: about it they're having this inquiry that the FAA is
Speaker 3: worried about the titanium that's being fitted to them, you
Speaker 3: would think twice about getting on a plane. And we're
Speaker 3: not just talking about you can have a car crash
Speaker 3: at twenty kilometers an hour, you can have a car
Speaker 3: crash at one hundred kilometers an hour.
Speaker 2: There's a difference in terms of the severity of potential
Speaker 2: car crash. You're on a plane.
Speaker 3: You know, thousands and thousands of feet in the air
Speaker 3: and something goes wrong, there's nothing you can do about it.
Speaker 3: You can't just sort of swerve to miss a tree
Speaker 3: or swerve to miss a car.
Speaker 2: You can't slow down. You are stuffed.
Speaker 4: And the fact that you're also completely helpful exactly not
Speaker 4: absolutely fact.
Speaker 3: This has been able to go on for so long,
Speaker 3: and I mean, these whistle blowers are talking about decades
Speaker 3: worth of bad stuff being done at Boeing. The fact
Speaker 3: that this has gone on for so long, and it's
Speaker 3: taken this long for it to come out, and only
Speaker 3: now are we getting on top of it. And the
Speaker 3: number one whistle blower turned up dead the day after
Speaker 3: he went and testified.
Speaker 4: Ridiculous. This is as bad as because he was then
Speaker 4: going to face the like the cross the gross examined. Yes,
Speaker 4: so the merely the really meaty art was the next day.
Speaker 4: And he had waited for this moment his time in
Speaker 4: the sun. For thirty years. He'd worked for Boeing and
Speaker 4: then like wrapped up all these complaints against them, tried
Speaker 4: to sort it out internally, retired in twenty and seventeen
Speaker 4: years and years later he finally gets to testify against them.
Speaker 4: Give this deposition and he shows up shot in his
Speaker 4: truck in a parking lot.
Speaker 1: The really crazy thing about this is, despite everything we've mentioned,
Speaker 1: we haven't mentioned the worst thing about flying on Boeing.
Speaker 5: If you've ever sat in economy.
Speaker 1: On a long haul flight, I mean that is taking
Speaker 1: life into your own hands. You know, a lot of
Speaker 1: people accuse the Albenze government of hating Christianity, but you
Speaker 1: can't accuse them of having abandoned religion. They've just provided
Speaker 1: three hundred thousand dollars essentially for research on how to
Speaker 1: protect aminism, animism and ancestor worship. The Daily Telegraph has
Speaker 1: reported that an indigenous akerd has been given three hundred
Speaker 1: grand of taxpayer money to and I quote explore how
Speaker 1: indigenous song lines have protected wales and dolphins over hundreds
Speaker 1: of years. Well, I guess that's money well spent in
Speaker 1: the middle of a cost of living crisis. Of course,
Speaker 1: I gest but it does tell you what the Albanezy
Speaker 1: government regard as sacred.
Speaker 5: Now. The grant was made.
Speaker 1: To Dr Jody Edwards, who's studying this ahead of a
Speaker 1: wind farm being built twenty kilometers off the coast of Illawara.
Speaker 1: Chris Bowen said with regards to these licenses for wind
Speaker 1: farms being awarded, that project developers must engage in specific
Speaker 1: consultation with traditional owners. He said, licenses will only be
Speaker 1: awarded to developers whose proposed projects do the most to
Speaker 1: support Australia's workforce, energy security, protect the environment. And here's
Speaker 1: the crucial bit and cultural heritage of First Nations communities.
Speaker 5: Now you might be wondering.
Speaker 1: What's cultural heritage of First Nations communities twenty kilometers off
Speaker 1: the coast deep under sea. Well, it all comes back
Speaker 1: to these indigenous song lines, which, as explained by the
Speaker 1: academic Wales, are regarded as sacred in fact as tribal
Speaker 1: ancestors and are treated with the same respect you would
Speaker 1: give to an immediate family member. And song lines are
Speaker 1: those paths out at sea which creator beings are traversed
Speaker 1: during the dreaming. The funny thing about this, Calebin is
Speaker 1: is the same people who will be applauding this and saying, oh,
Speaker 1: it's fantastic the government's giving an indigenous academic three hundred
Speaker 1: grand to investigate song lines from the dreaming will be
Speaker 1: the same people who get outraged that the government funds
Speaker 1: Catholic schools because what about the separation of church and state.
Speaker 1: We haven't lost our religion, We've just abandoned Christianity and
Speaker 1: we're returning to paganism.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, I mean she's investigating a form of mythology
Speaker 3: that we just happen to like in this country at
Speaker 3: the moment, because we wouldn't dare say anything bad about
Speaker 3: their version of religion, right as you say, some things
Speaker 3: are sacred and others aren't in the eyes of the
Speaker 3: left and the government. This puts me in a really
Speaker 3: difficult spot because this woman is opposed to the offshore
Speaker 3: wind project, and so if it is her three if
Speaker 3: it's her three hundred thousand dollars worth of research funded
Speaker 3: by the Albanezy government that actually manages to eventually scuffer
Speaker 3: this project, then I'm actually all for it.
Speaker 2: So I'm in a little bit of a difficult position here.
Speaker 3: But it is patently ridiculous that you would hand over
Speaker 3: that amount of money for someone to look into something
Speaker 3: so abstract.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, if we're talking about.
Speaker 3: Song lines on land, and for Aboriginal people on land,
Speaker 3: songlines were essentially like travel routes that they would take,
Speaker 3: and there's famously one that goes for three thousand kilometers
Speaker 3: to Ularo, and they had sort of marked out what
Speaker 3: were the right things to eat and whatever. You know,
Speaker 3: I'm sure back in the day that was of great
Speaker 3: use to them. But a song line for Wales twenty
Speaker 3: kilometers off, sure, I'm not sure has a great deal
Speaker 3: of bearing on anything.
Speaker 2: But if it does the job, you know, get to
Speaker 2: the destination.
Speaker 4: All the nimbies, they're not in my backyard. The people
Speaker 4: who hate these kinds of developments in their area. You
Speaker 4: need to form some sort of alliance with these indigenous
Speaker 4: groups and be like you and me, we can make
Speaker 4: this work for us, because all you have to do
Speaker 4: these days is find some sort of sacred rock. There
Speaker 4: was some trees, the birthing trees that stuff at another proach.
Speaker 4: Yeah yeah, yeah, these are sacred now, can't touch them.
Speaker 4: You could really make it work for you, especially the
Speaker 4: farmers who are finding this problematic. If I was a
Speaker 4: farmer and I had the government trying to get some
Speaker 4: of my land for their ridiculous power lines, so just
Speaker 4: be like, right, I need some indigenous people right now
Speaker 4: to find something incredibly sacred. Check out my pastures and
Speaker 4: tell me what I can work with here. You can
Speaker 4: make this really, really work for yourself. Go back to
Speaker 4: the White House now, the US I should say, we've
Speaker 4: just been there and we are returning. How on earth
Speaker 4: are we supposed to take this White House? Seriously? You're
Speaker 4: already aware that Joe Biden is well passed his best
Speaker 4: years and sometimes doesn't even know where he is. You
Speaker 4: know that Kamala Harris, the VP, finds nothing funnier than
Speaker 4: a question she doesn't know the answer to. She basically
Speaker 4: just cackles and otherwise says things that doesn't make any sense. Well,
Speaker 4: she's now teamed up with the team at Queer Eye.
Speaker 4: You may remember the show Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
Speaker 4: For I don't even know what what is the purpose
Speaker 4: of this? You tell me anyone had any suggestions? Not
Speaker 4: only that, but this fellow, his name is Jonathan van Ness.
Speaker 4: We got to stand behind the Press Secretary's podium and
Speaker 4: have his own presser.
Speaker 2: Everyone in the ways.
Speaker 3: That leads to briefly answer some questions.
Speaker 5: Go ahead, I'm ready, k oh.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Is it true that is all your natural hair?
Speaker 8: Yes?
Speaker 2: I can confirm that this is not a wig. Follow question,
Speaker 2: Do you use your own products?
Speaker 5: I do use JB in here actually explicitly River four
Speaker 5: years now. Question.
Speaker 4: Now, this is supposed to be celebrating the twentieth anniversary
Speaker 4: of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. But you've got
Speaker 4: to wonder, what on earth is the White House doing
Speaker 4: being involved? What on earth does this have to do
Speaker 4: with the government of the day. The obvious answer is,
Speaker 4: of course, this is the new religion that has been
Speaker 4: being pushed, whether it's through the schools, through the universities.
Speaker 4: Every chance they get, they fly the rain bow flag.
Speaker 4: They're pictured with people who subscribe very clearly to the
Speaker 4: LGBTIQ way of life. And so this seems to be
Speaker 4: yet another virtue signal, as in, this is sacred, nobody
Speaker 4: touch it, you can't poke holes in this. That seems
Speaker 4: it's the only answer I can come up with. Like,
Speaker 4: what imagine if this was our PM, you'd be like, elbow,
Speaker 4: he attends Pride, that's fine, it's a massive, massive national event.
Speaker 4: People fly in from around the world to attend Mardi Gras, Okay,
Speaker 4: But if he's hosting Queer Eye for the Straight Guy
Speaker 4: for the twentieth anniversary, You're like, mate, what, what on earth?
Speaker 1: Well, I think it's pretty obvious they're trying to intimidate
Speaker 1: Jishiping and Ladimir Putin to you know, don't attack us,
Speaker 1: because if you do, they'll be hell to pay. And
Speaker 1: I'm sure every dictator in the w is quaking in
Speaker 1: Betterlieve America.
Speaker 2: And it's just the most cringe worthy content.
Speaker 1: Can we talk?
Speaker 3: I like, look, Queer Eyes actually not a bad show,
Speaker 3: I have to admit, But seriously, can you imagine it? Look,
Speaker 3: if we stay on air for twenty years, I'm really
Speaker 3: looking forward to the Prime Minister of the day having
Speaker 3: an official reception at Kirabilly or somewhere in Canberra and
Speaker 3: giving us our celebration for twenty years of the later
Speaker 3: back only seems fair to me. Let's go from the
Speaker 3: madness of the US to the madness of France. Now. Now,
Speaker 3: I don't know about you, I'm not really into soccer,
Speaker 3: or of course, as they call it over in.
Speaker 2: Europe football No football.
Speaker 3: Is Ossie rules as far as I'm concerned. But France
Speaker 3: went to the Euros this year hoping.
Speaker 2: To take it all home. France resurging to the top again.
Speaker 3: Well, they've been a little less concerned about football, it
Speaker 3: would seem, and they become more concerned with politics. You'd,
Speaker 3: of course remember last week the European Union elections in
Speaker 3: which right wing parties absolutely stormed the joint and wiped
Speaker 3: the table clean. And then after that Emmanuel Macron declared
Speaker 3: a snap election in France, which means Marine le Pen
Speaker 3: is in a very good position to take over France. Well,
Speaker 3: the French footballers are really concerned about this. Don't worry
Speaker 3: about actually going out and no know may be scoring
Speaker 3: one or two goals, because that's how it works in soccer.
Speaker 3: They're more concerned with the politics. One of their forwards he.
Speaker 2: Described after a recent game that this situation was extremely serious.
Speaker 3: He said, as citizens, we have to fight to make
Speaker 3: sure that the national.
Speaker 2: Rally doesn't get through.
Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure people sitting at home watching the soccer
Speaker 3: in France are just.
Speaker 2: Like kick a goal man.
Speaker 3: They're not terribly concerned about being told about politics by
Speaker 3: their soccer players.
Speaker 1: We know now the French team will not win another
Speaker 1: game in this championship because they've telegraphed to every opponent
Speaker 1: they'll only be attacking from the left wing. Everyone knows
Speaker 1: very exactly what they'll be doing. Look, this point of sport, Liz,
Speaker 1: is to unify a nation not divide. So the moment
Speaker 1: you start talking about politics as a sportsperson, whether it's
Speaker 1: the left or the right, you're doing the opposite of
Speaker 1: what you're supposed to be doing through sport. But if
Speaker 1: you are going to talk about politics, it's curious to
Speaker 1: me that it only ever comes from the left.
Speaker 5: You never have conservatives.
Speaker 1: Taking a stand, and on the rare occasion that someone
Speaker 1: does speak out on conservative issues. Take the Manly Seven
Speaker 1: for instance, who said we're not going to participate in
Speaker 1: Pride Round. Well, those Rugby league players were pillared in
Speaker 1: the media. They were bigots, they were narrow minded, they
Speaker 1: should be suspended. But you compare that to a couple
Speaker 1: of AFLW Muslim players who said we're not going to
Speaker 1: participate in Pride Round. And you read the reports in
Speaker 1: the ABCNE and the Guardian and they were, oh, this
Speaker 1: is because they're so faithful to their Muslim religion.
Speaker 5: And so the two sides are.
Speaker 1: Treated completely differently when they do take a stand on politics.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, and like you say, everyone wants you to just
Speaker 4: shut up and play the game. That's what we pay
Speaker 4: your top dollar for and that's what we all watch forward.
Speaker 4: Check out this map of France. The brown bits are
Speaker 4: those right wingers. This is a map of the electorate
Speaker 4: of France and how they voted in the recent European
Speaker 4: Union Parliament elections. So whoever's on this team seriously needs
Speaker 4: to get around this map and just figure out, mate,
Speaker 4: it's not far right. It's not the far right you're
Speaker 4: taking on, because when beliefs and values are that widely held,
Speaker 4: they're just referred to as mainstream. But I think I
Speaker 4: know why the Frenchies in the footy don't like lapenn
Speaker 4: She stirred up a lot of controversy a few months
Speaker 4: ago when she said she didn't recognize her country in
Speaker 4: the squad. She highlighted the number of players who were
Speaker 4: born outside French borders, or were the children of immigrants,
Speaker 4: or didn't sing France's national anthem.
Speaker 2: Quote.
Speaker 4: Most of these people consider themselves as representative of France
Speaker 4: one minute when they're at the World Cup, but the
Speaker 4: next they feel like they belong to another country or
Speaker 4: have another nationality in their hearts. Now, she said this
Speaker 4: months ago, and all you've done, Frenchies on the footy
Speaker 4: team is go and prove her right.
Speaker 1: Well, said, well, I don't think we can improve on
Speaker 1: nothing to go to a break. But when we come back,
Speaker 1: we'll look at Peter Dutton's nuclear policy that's all over
Speaker 1: tomorrow's papers. And a radical plan to make surface paradise
Speaker 1: a better place, give everyone easier access to alcoholic drinks
Speaker 1: that's coming.
Speaker 5: Up from just the moment. Welcome back.
Speaker 1: Well, let's look at what's making news tomorrow. No surprises.
Speaker 1: Most of the papers Caleb are featuring Peter Dutton's nuclear policy.
Speaker 3: Indeed they are, and the Australian is no exception where
Speaker 3: they say tomorrow voters nuclear option. Peter Dutton has declared
Speaker 3: the next election will be a referendum or nuclear energy
Speaker 3: and power, after outlining an ambition to build seven atomic
Speaker 3: generators by twenty fifty and greatly increasing government ownership in
Speaker 3: the national electricity market. So he's laid out today the
Speaker 3: seven places where this would happen.
Speaker 2: There is a map on the front.
Speaker 3: The porta Gasta in South Australia, you've got your lawn
Speaker 3: down in Victoria, et cetera. They're all old coal fired
Speaker 3: or what will be old coal fired power stations. They
Speaker 3: will be built on site. So we're not talking about
Speaker 3: places where energy hasn't already been produced, they're creating jobs
Speaker 3: in the community, et cetera. One of the most interesting
Speaker 3: things about all of this, apart from the fact that
Speaker 3: they didn't talk any numbers today, which is a little curious,
Speaker 3: I think they could have got that all out in
Speaker 3: one shot, and I did hear interviews this afternoon with
Speaker 3: the members of the opposition saying, well, you know, we're
Speaker 3: just not rolling it all out in one hit. That
Speaker 3: will come later. I think it sort of shoots a
Speaker 3: hole in their argument a little bit. But the idea
Speaker 3: that we're essentially going to have nationalized powered generation again
Speaker 3: is very interesting because we've for the most part moved
Speaker 3: away from that. The states used to create most of
Speaker 3: their power the state governments. They have systematically sold all
Speaker 3: that often privatized noy You've got a potential federal government
Speaker 3: saying we actually want to get back into the business
Speaker 3: of nationalizing energy again. And you know what, I reckon,
Speaker 3: that'll be quite popular because people looking at their power
Speaker 3: bills can see that since privatization has happened, power bills
Speaker 3: haven't gone down, so maybe they're willing to give it
Speaker 3: another go.
Speaker 5: There's a whole of topsy turvy going on right.
Speaker 1: So you've got the Conservatives arguing for state run power companies,
Speaker 1: and you've got Labor arguing for no, no, keep it
Speaker 1: in private enterprise. You've got Peter Dutton arguing for something.
Speaker 1: You've got Anthony Albanesi now as the man saying no
Speaker 1: to everything. So everything's been turned on its head by
Speaker 1: this policy. This is just one thing from the Australian
Speaker 1: article that amused me. Second paragraph says listen to this,
Speaker 1: Anthony Albanesi, Labor, premiers, unions and environmentalists, it's all the
Speaker 1: same thing. While they repeat themselves four times. Peter Dutton's
Speaker 1: definitely got his lines right on this though. Talking about costings,
Speaker 1: he says, well, you know it may cost this, but
Speaker 1: the governments never come up with a total cost with
Speaker 1: regards renewables. Great point, and in terms of where these
Speaker 1: are going to be located. I think it's a smart
Speaker 1: idea to put one in David little Prowd's electorate.
Speaker 5: So you've got the leader of the.
Speaker 1: National Party saying hey, I'll have one in my electorate.
Speaker 1: That kind of gets rid of the criticism that no
Speaker 1: one wants it. He's willing to put his.
Speaker 5: Hand up for it. And the other thing is his.
Speaker 1: Historical hysterical reaction now against nuclear We've seen it from
Speaker 1: federal members. But the Energy minister in Victoria, Lily Diambrosio,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure if you saw this this evening, but
Speaker 1: she demanded that Peter dutn't explain how he will stop
Speaker 1: nuclear radioactive waste being leaked.
Speaker 5: Into the community, poisoning everybody.
Speaker 1: And she actually described nuclear power as dangerous and deadly,
Speaker 1: which is.
Speaker 4: Tell that to the fifty seven. We're actually using it
Speaker 4: without a single accident for many, many many years now, lady,
Speaker 4: I mean he has said with regard to costing, Dunton
Speaker 4: has said that it will be a fraction of the
Speaker 4: price of the one point two to one point five
Speaker 4: trillion dollars that the alban Ezy government is going to
Speaker 4: be spending on this green energy transition that we keep
Speaker 4: being told is so wonderful. And when you look at
Speaker 4: the costings of the CSIRO who say we're looking at
Speaker 4: about eight billion dollars per power plant, I'm like, mate,
Speaker 4: that is a bug and where to re sign because
Speaker 4: on the one hand, where we're forking out let's say
Speaker 4: one point five trillion for these renewables that we know
Speaker 4: that they're useless when the sun isn't shining and the
Speaker 4: wind isn't blowing. We know that they're incapable of base
Speaker 4: load power, and we know that they need retiring. If
Speaker 4: you're talking about wind turbines, you get twenty years max
Speaker 4: out of him. You've got to get all those down,
Speaker 4: shove them somewhere in a turbine graveyard, and put up
Speaker 4: a whole heat more. It's not sustainable at all, as
Speaker 4: we've talked about at length. So when you compare the
Speaker 4: upfront costs, we're not talking about apples and apples, but
Speaker 4: when you talk about what we're getting for our money
Speaker 4: when it comes to nuclear versus renewables, they are not
Speaker 4: within the same league. Whatsoever. I might take my money
Speaker 4: get it done.
Speaker 1: Every criticism of Dutton's policy, he just turns around and
Speaker 1: points straight back at the opposition. Well you can have
Speaker 1: to subsidize renew nuclear. Well you're doing it to renewables.
Speaker 1: Well it's going to have massive cost overruns, snow at
Speaker 1: two point zero, and on and on it goes. So
Speaker 1: Dutton has a vision that allows him, when he's criticized,
Speaker 1: to point straight back at the government's own failed policies.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I reckon he's on a winner.
Speaker 2: He is.
Speaker 3: It just still makes me so sad had that the
Speaker 3: Coalition was in power for nine years and they did
Speaker 3: not talk about this once. Finally they've got onto it.
Speaker 3: But they had all that time and did nothing about it.
Speaker 3: The other big story of the days on the front
Speaker 3: of the Ods tomorrow as well crime appalling investigation routine.
Speaker 3: Victoria Police is still treating a spade of anti Semitic
Speaker 3: attacks on electric offices throughout Melbourne as individual investigations led
Speaker 3: by local cops. As raids escalate with vandals setting far
Speaker 3: to the inner seasides and killed a shop front of
Speaker 3: Jewish MP Josh Burns. And I thought it was interesting
Speaker 3: to listen to Steve Price the other night, sorry not
Speaker 3: the other night to night describing this as a terrorist attack.
Speaker 3: You know, his rationale was that they have targeted a
Speaker 3: Jewish MP, they have tried to fire bomb his office.
Speaker 2: Why are we not calling.
Speaker 3: That a terrorist attack and why is it not being
Speaker 3: treated by the cops as though it were a terror attack?
Speaker 1: Well, for the same reason that the Australian Christian Lobby
Speaker 1: when their office was firebombed.
Speaker 5: That was treated as a terrorist attack.
Speaker 1: Either it was swept under the carpet because summer techs
Speaker 1: are more serious than others.
Speaker 4: Apparently, Caleb I was more just completely and utterly shocked
Speaker 4: to learn that Labor has a Jewish member in their
Speaker 4: federal Parliament. I mean, how is your interpersonal relationships going
Speaker 4: on right now? Poor Josh, like I genuinely feel for him.
Speaker 4: Just today, Senator.
Speaker 2: Fatima payment Yes called upon.
Speaker 4: The entire Labor Federal party to back recognizing Palestine and
Speaker 4: state immediately a SAP as of now, and he would
Speaker 4: be listening to the likes of Penny Wong and others
Speaker 4: and our own Prime Minister's half last response with regard
Speaker 4: to all things anti Semitism related, Israel related, and being
Speaker 4: like this is the party I'm part of. I mean
Speaker 4: that is rough.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely well, the police are investigating.
Speaker 5: Do you reckon We'll see any result, don't gold yeah,
Speaker 5: bread on anything. We've seen this to the front page of.
Speaker 4: The Gold Coast bulletin. Now will sinc to that these
Speaker 4: are the three dollar discount drinks that Caleb is very
Speaker 4: excited about. Operators on the Gold Coast main party strip
Speaker 4: one action from authorities to avoid economic ruin and intoxication dramas.
Speaker 4: As a new player promotes heavily discounted drinks, furious competitors say,
Speaker 4: drink deals for at drink deals at three dollars for
Speaker 4: a basic spirit normally twelve dollars around will send the
Speaker 4: strip broke and have it basically crawling with degenerates, drunk degenerates.
Speaker 3: Well, what they're asking for is protectionism. They're going to
Speaker 3: the government and the council to complain that someone else
Speaker 3: in the free market has come in and undercut their business.
Speaker 3: What's no job of the government to save you from that.
Speaker 3: If someone can come in and sell drinks for three
Speaker 3: dollars and they think they can make a profit, good
Speaker 3: luck to them. If they don't make a profit, they'll
Speaker 3: shut down and everyone else will be able to go
Speaker 3: back to charging twelve dollars a drink. As far as
Speaker 3: I'm concerned, this is proof that we're becoming a serious
Speaker 3: country again. I mean, you know, you go into the
Speaker 3: pub and ask for pider beer and it's so.
Speaker 2: Twelve to thirteen fourteen dollars.
Speaker 3: Now we're not a serious country for pier beer costs
Speaker 3: your bloody fourteen dollars. For traders who build this country
Speaker 3: and build the places where we are living. They're going
Speaker 3: in the pub every afternoon for a pint.
Speaker 2: And if we can't let them have a reasonably.
Speaker 3: Priced pipe after a hard day at work, then no
Speaker 3: wonder we have oursing problem.
Speaker 5: He and John Secer leaves a CFMB.
Speaker 3: You, I reckon you should become mere subsidized pie for
Speaker 3: all tradees.
Speaker 2: I'm on board with that.
Speaker 1: Let's really quickly look at the Newcastle Herald challenge to
Speaker 1: two Hunter mines over Great Barrier Reef impact. The article
Speaker 1: says the impact on the Great Barrier Reef of extending
Speaker 1: coal mining operations in the Hunter, which is fifteen hundred
Speaker 1: kilometers away, is to be the subject of a federal
Speaker 1: court battle. Environment mentalists are challenging a decision by Tenure
Speaker 1: Plibosek to say that the state of the Barrier Reef
Speaker 1: should not be taken into consideration when approving coal Mind's
Speaker 1: good decision.
Speaker 5: But the Environmental Defender's Office.
Speaker 1: Financed by you and I are going to challenge it.
Speaker 1: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 1: Pill testing in Victoria. But waiting and see what politicians
Speaker 1: recommending it are wearing when they do so.
Speaker 5: That's coming up in the moment.
Speaker 1: Welcome back, all right, birthday boy, help us to understand
Speaker 1: Victorian politicians?
Speaker 5: What on earth is going on down there?
Speaker 3: Well, well, nothing good with their fashion and we know
Speaker 3: that under self appointed fashion correspondent on this program. So
Speaker 3: the Victorian government is currently considering pill testing. There's a
Speaker 3: proposal that we'll be going off to the cabinet. It
Speaker 3: apparently has the support of Decenter Allen and a bunch
Speaker 3: of cross Bench MPs came out in support of the
Speaker 3: pill testing to encourage the government to do it. But
Speaker 3: they rocked up, including Georgie Purcell and a couple of
Speaker 3: others in have a look at this.
Speaker 2: The sunglasses they're wearing.
Speaker 3: That our colloquial referred to as speed dealer sunnies because
Speaker 3: they're the sort of sunnies that your dodgy drug dealer
Speaker 3: would be wearing.
Speaker 2: Look, you know, it's a bit funny.
Speaker 3: I know what they were trying to do, but I
Speaker 3: reckon it proves what a mockery all of this stuff.
Speaker 2: Of pill testing is.
Speaker 3: Because if it was really the great panacea for public
Speaker 3: health and we're really just looking out for the kids,
Speaker 3: you wouldn't rock up and make a joke about drug
Speaker 3: dealers via those sunnies. What it's saying is come along,
Speaker 3: one and all and fill up on your disco.
Speaker 2: That's what they're saying. Good luck to them.
Speaker 3: I hope they don't wear those sunnies in the Parliament
Speaker 3: because God help us all. Actually, you can wear them
Speaker 3: on the tube and then they won't be able to
Speaker 3: see your eyes.
Speaker 2: That's what we should do.
Speaker 1: I gotta admit I wouldn't have known that's what it
Speaker 1: represented had you not pointed it out the side.
Speaker 4: You know that, Caleb, Well, I just maybe it's because
Speaker 4: I am a youth.
Speaker 3: I am a young man, and you two elderly individuals
Speaker 3: just add up with the young people.
Speaker 4: He says it, all of twenty five five years old. Well,
Speaker 4: it wouldn't be a late debate, would it if we
Speaker 4: didn't show you President Biden's latest episode of literally short
Speaker 4: circuiting in the middle of a spent.
Speaker 6: Thanks to all the members of Congress and homeless Security Secretary.
Speaker 5: I'm not sure you're going to do.
Speaker 4: Now. This was anybody else, you would just be like,
Speaker 4: get that guy some medical attention. But we know every
Speaker 4: time he opens his mouth, we are, in fact witnessing
Speaker 4: the Manhattan Project of pharmaceutical stimulants as it is. And
Speaker 4: just remember he is his press secretary just yesterday explaining
Speaker 4: to us that none of these glitches that you see
Speaker 4: are real, they're all deep fakes.
Speaker 8: It tells you everything that we need to know about
Speaker 8: how desperate, how desperate Republicans are here. And instead of
Speaker 8: talking about the president's performance in office, and what I
Speaker 8: mean by that is his legislative wins, what he's been
Speaker 8: able to do for the American people across the country,
Speaker 8: we're seeing these deep fakes, these manipulated videos.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they're totally manipulated. I mean, there's countless examples, but
Speaker 4: they're all they're all manipulated over the last four years.
Speaker 5: We've got to go. That's it from us. Stick around.
Speaker 5: Coming up is the Reader Penah Show.