Speaker 1: Lately. Welcome the late Babe.
Speaker 2: Well, good evening and thanks for joining us.
Speaker 3: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Storer and Caleb Bond. Speaking
Speaker 3: of Caleb Bond, news that's going to really upset him.
Speaker 3: We'll get to it later that the world's fattest cat
Speaker 3: has died. Caleb will probably have more on that for
Speaker 3: us later. Speaking of animals, Sydney mathematicians have proved, no
Speaker 3: matter how long you give them, monkeys typing randomly will
Speaker 3: never reproduce the works of Shakespeare.
Speaker 2: Groundbreaking research. We'll get to all of that, plus what's.
Speaker 3: Making news tomorrow, including research finds a link between mental
Speaker 3: health issues and hot weather, and as well, another interesting
Speaker 3: story tomorrow, the same bureaucrat who headed up Dan Andrews's
Speaker 3: ill fated COVID quarantine program is now heading up Australia's
Speaker 3: immigration system. What could possibly go wrong? We'll get to
Speaker 3: all of that when we look at the papers. But first,
Speaker 3: Australian mining man man magnate Twiggy Forest has launched blistering
Speaker 3: tirade against fossil fuels, accusing those who promote them of
Speaker 3: being dictators and fascists.
Speaker 2: But of course, if you listen to people on the left.
Speaker 3: Everyone these days as a dictator and a fascist, so
Speaker 3: it probably doesn't mean too much. In a podcast to
Speaker 3: be released tomorrow, Australia's second richest man is asked whether
Speaker 3: fossil fuels are reliable and friendly and he launches into
Speaker 3: this explanation. He says, that's such rubbish. I mean, there's
Speaker 3: clever players out there. They're called dictators, fascists, oligarchs who
Speaker 3: send out bots all over the world, AI driven bots
Speaker 3: to create messages saying you've got to stay with the
Speaker 3: oil and gas because you know your energy costs are
Speaker 3: going to go up and you stand to have your
Speaker 3: standard of living going down, and my god, save yourself.
Speaker 3: Stick with fossil fuels, these bots are supposedly saying. He says,
Speaker 3: it's just rubbish. The cheapest form of energy on Earth
Speaker 3: is renewables. Well, Calebrin Liz, I've got a couple of questions. Firstly,
Speaker 3: Australia is one of the greatest exporters of fossil fuels
Speaker 3: coal exports, for instance, So is it Anthony alban Easy
Speaker 3: who's the fascist or is it his Resources Minister Madeline King. Second,
Speaker 3: my quarterly power bill keeps showing prices going up and up,
Speaker 3: so do I refuse to pay it on the grounds
Speaker 3: it's just an AI bond having me on.
Speaker 2: Third, when Twitgy insists that renewables.
Speaker 3: Are the cheapest form of power, is that true or
Speaker 3: is that just something that a billionaire with massive investments
Speaker 3: in renewables says from time to time. And finally, Twiggy
Speaker 3: and all his friends are trying to get Australians to
Speaker 3: move away from coal, which is cheap and reliable, and
Speaker 3: be forced to use renewables without our consent, which sounds
Speaker 3: kind of like what dictators and fascists would do. So
Speaker 3: is this not a case of pot kettle green.
Speaker 4: Liz, I'm just shocked to find out that we're bots.
Speaker 4: We're bots, apparently, only this is misinformation, disinformation saying your
Speaker 4: power bills going up, saying and reliable energy cannot be
Speaker 4: provided to you by green energy as it currently stands,
Speaker 4: we do still need fossil fuels. I read this entire article,
Speaker 4: reading what he'd said on the podcast, and cracked up laughing,
Speaker 4: being like, you must love newscock, buddy, because we are
Speaker 4: onto you and the fast that is currently green energy.
Speaker 5: I do not know why anyone would.
Speaker 4: Listen to this man who has made his fortune for
Speaker 4: desk You is worth fifty eight billion dollars off iron
Speaker 4: or a lot of mining, which means a lot of emissions,
Speaker 4: then transporting that iron ore way more emissions, and then
Speaker 4: a heck of a lot more emissions turning that iron
Speaker 4: ore into steel.
Speaker 5: Where do you get off? You have a.
Speaker 4: Private jet, you have your own yacht, and you're preaching
Speaker 4: to other people about the extremities they must go to
Speaker 4: in order to make this green.
Speaker 5: Dream a reality.
Speaker 4: Lastly, let's not forget that in July this year's failed
Speaker 4: back for Tescu's plan to ensure that he was going
Speaker 4: to create fifteen million tons of this u butte green
Speaker 4: energy by twenty thirty.
Speaker 5: So where's your real passion, mate?
Speaker 4: When you scowled that project back because drum roll please, it.
Speaker 5: Wasn't going to be cost effective.
Speaker 4: I mean, seriously, you're the second richest man in Australia.
Speaker 4: This is apparently your passion, but you're not willing to.
Speaker 5: Lose a dollar or two over pursuing it.
Speaker 4: Do me a favor. Why is anyone listening to this guy?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean the irony is clearly lost on him
Speaker 1: that what he is doing here is exactly what he
Speaker 1: accuses the quote unquote dictators and oligarchs of doing, right,
Speaker 1: because what he's we imagine referring to is you know, Russia,
Speaker 1: in the Middle East and whatever that sells a lot
Speaker 1: of oil, and he's accusing them of running interference so
Speaker 1: that they can continue making money selling their products. But
Speaker 1: here we have man who's invested heavily in renewable energy
Speaker 1: running interference against the competitor so that people will be
Speaker 1: more likely to invest in his product. Where's the difference.
Speaker 1: There is no difference. He's doing exactly the same thing.
Speaker 1: I'd like to see one shred of evidence proof whatever
Speaker 1: he might have, that it is because of Russian bots
Speaker 1: and Middle Eastern AI bots that people have noticed that
Speaker 1: their power bills are going up, and that it's a
Speaker 1: lie that renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy.
Speaker 1: Where's the evidence? Bring it? Look, mister Forrest, you can
Speaker 1: find me email address, sorry, Taylor dot bond, that's goynews
Speaker 1: dot com dot AU. I invite you to email me
Speaker 1: the proof you have that this is all done by bots,
Speaker 1: and we'll show it on the program tomorrow night. I
Speaker 1: have literally never ever heard anyone suggest that there are
Speaker 1: Russian bots or any other sort of sort of bots
Speaker 1: running interference for fossil fuels. I've heard allegations about him
Speaker 1: being used in elections, I've never heard of it being
Speaker 1: used for fossil fuels. If Twiggy Forest is the only
Speaker 1: man in the world who has worked out that this
Speaker 1: is going on, please show it to me. But if
Speaker 1: I knew that all I had to do to were
Speaker 1: in the medium backs was being AI bot, I would
Speaker 1: have done it a long time ago.
Speaker 5: But here's the thing. They don't need to lie. They
Speaker 5: don't need to lie.
Speaker 4: It's the world over, as wetted as they may be
Speaker 4: to the green dream. And yes, we'd love to just
Speaker 4: run solely on renewables, and we are making great headway
Speaker 4: in that space.
Speaker 5: We all admit it's just not up to scratch.
Speaker 4: Yet we can't solely rely on renewables. So this idea
Speaker 4: that it's misinformation disinformation that we still need fossil fuels
Speaker 4: and that it's all so nobody needs to lie about that,
Speaker 4: it's just point in fact, otherwise we would all be
Speaker 4: taking up the promised land of renewable energy, isn't it
Speaker 4: the cheapest, isn't it the best? We'd all just be
Speaker 4: living in the land of milk and honey, powered by renewables.
Speaker 4: The only reason why we can't, the only reason why
Speaker 4: we don't is because we still do need fossil fuels.
Speaker 4: So him coming out saying this is misinformation, disinformation generated
Speaker 4: by aibots.
Speaker 5: N by Russia. It's always Russia.
Speaker 4: I mean, show me a problem that we don't have
Speaker 4: that is apparently Russia's fault.
Speaker 5: It's just nonsensical.
Speaker 3: We've got to give him a little bit of credit, though,
Speaker 3: because there was one other thing he said, and that
Speaker 3: was that the whole carbon credit scheme is a CROC
Speaker 3: that's been invented simply so investment bankers can.
Speaker 5: Trade and something we can agree on.
Speaker 2: That he's right about.
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, they maybe you've been written by aibots as well. Now,
Speaker 1: in barely over twenty four hours, people will be going
Speaker 1: to the polls into the US. I know that you will,
Speaker 1: like I will be glued to the coverage here on
Speaker 1: Sky News all through Wednesday our time, Tuesday their time
Speaker 1: in the US. Now it seems to be a bit
Speaker 1: of the calm before the storm. At the moment, the
Speaker 1: stories have slowed down a bit. You've had the last
Speaker 1: spate of rallies being held by Harris and Trump over
Speaker 1: the weekend. But we are getting to the pointy end
Speaker 1: of this campaign now. Harris, as we know, throughout this campaign,
Speaker 1: at many points, has struggled to articulate what her point
Speaker 1: of view is on anything. Really. She constantly ducks and
Speaker 1: weaves in interviews. If she's pressed on what her policies
Speaker 1: actually are, she simply tells you to go to her website.
Speaker 1: She can't seem to come up with a clear line
Speaker 1: on what she actually believes and would you believe it? CNN,
Speaker 1: of all the athletes in the US, has shown up
Speaker 1: exactly how duplicitous she has been. When she can actually
Speaker 1: come up with a policy, it's a different policy depending
Speaker 1: on which state she's talking to.
Speaker 6: Take a look, Tamala Harris is targeting crucial battleground voters
Speaker 6: with vastly different messages on Gaza and Israel. This ad
Speaker 6: is running in Michigan, which has the largest Arab population
Speaker 6: in America.
Speaker 7: What has happened in over the past nine months is devastating.
Speaker 7: We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering
Speaker 7: and I will not be silent.
Speaker 6: It's a very different story for an ad in Pennsylvania
Speaker 6: targeting Jewish voters.
Speaker 7: I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself,
Speaker 7: and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to
Speaker 7: defend itself because the people of Israel must never again
Speaker 7: face the horror that a terrorist organization called harmas calls
Speaker 7: on October.
Speaker 1: Seventh, What does Kamala Harris actually believe? Who knows? It
Speaker 1: depends on what side of the bed she woke up
Speaker 1: on that morning and who she's talking to. Speaking of
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris not being able to articulate her view on
Speaker 1: anything because she doesn't want to offend anyone, because the
Speaker 1: only thing she's got is that she's not Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: We know that her home state is California. Now at
Speaker 1: the election, as I said, in barely a day's time,
Speaker 1: in California, they will be voting. I was going to
Speaker 1: say protesting that comes into it later, voting on Proposition
Speaker 1: thirty six. Now, that is a proposal that the state
Speaker 1: constitution be amended to bring in a slew of new
Speaker 1: offenses and heavier offenses for theft and drugs. In particular,
Speaker 1: it would increase the penalty for repeat shoplifters. It would
Speaker 1: require drug penalties to be served in jail, so you
Speaker 1: couldn't have home detention. For instance, if you are caught
Speaker 1: with drugs, you would have caught imposed rehab and then
Speaker 1: if you failed that rehab, you would be sent off
Speaker 1: to jail. And also if you are prosecuted for drag dealing,
Speaker 1: the court would have to warn you that if someone
Speaker 1: died as a result of the drugs you sold them,
Speaker 1: you could be prosecuted for murder. Pretty straightforward crime, and
Speaker 1: this sort of thing right well, Kamala Harris was asked,
Speaker 1: how did you vote, because she's already sent off a vote,
Speaker 1: how did you vote on Proposition thirty six? Could you
Speaker 1: give an answer?
Speaker 5: Have you returned the ballot to California and how did
Speaker 5: you vote on thirty six?
Speaker 7: So I have my ballot is on its way to California,
Speaker 7: and I'm going to trust the system that it will
Speaker 7: arrive there. And I am not going to talk about
Speaker 7: the vote on that because honestly, it's the Sunday before
Speaker 7: the election, and I don't intend to create an endorsement
Speaker 7: one way or another.
Speaker 1: I mean, you would think this might be something on
Speaker 1: the minds of people, particularly in her home state of California.
Speaker 1: I mean, take a look at some of this footage
Speaker 1: of looting that has gone on in California. We assume,
Speaker 1: given that she doesn't want to tell us how she's voted,
Speaker 1: that she may well have voted against Proposition thirty six,
Speaker 1: and all of this kind of thing is perfectly acceptable
Speaker 1: to Kamala Harris. There may be a lot more of
Speaker 1: it under a Harris administration. I mean, look, she's got
Speaker 1: the final days to actually come out in the leader
Speaker 1: to the election say look, I believe in something. She
Speaker 1: still cannot do it. If she can't do it, now,
Speaker 1: how are we to expect that if she actually became
Speaker 1: president she'd ever actually be able to make any decisions
Speaker 1: on her own, little on any decisions at all, because
Speaker 1: she does not believe in anything.
Speaker 4: Well, no one expects that from her any right, quite
Speaker 4: as it goes currently, But this would have to be
Speaker 4: the easiest question to answer, How did you vote on
Speaker 4: Proposition thirty six?
Speaker 1: Go for it.
Speaker 4: Just be like, yes, of course, I'm tough on crime.
Speaker 4: Proposition thirty six is simply closing loopholes in the system
Speaker 4: which is making life far too easy for shoplifters and
Speaker 4: drug dealers. Yes, of course I voted for it. She
Speaker 4: could not even do that. And when you look at
Speaker 4: the crime stats in California, the state has gone to
Speaker 4: the dogs, not unusual for a Democrat run state that
Speaker 4: is way too soft on crime.
Speaker 5: Here was her chance to speak to a.
Speaker 4: Very real issue which is not only affecting California, but
Speaker 4: indeed the entire country. And yet she still couldn't just
Speaker 4: give a succinct, simple answer, instead backing your way and saying, oh,
Speaker 4: I'm not going to get into that because it's close
Speaker 4: to the election. Can you imagine if any politician said
Speaker 4: that here, Yes, it's close to the election. That is
Speaker 4: why it's very crucial to give us a point blank
Speaker 4: answer to a very easy question.
Speaker 5: Lady, she cannot do it.
Speaker 4: And as to the Israel Gaza thing, this feeble specimen
Speaker 4: is once again been caught out.
Speaker 5: You don't have a stance on this, really, Who do
Speaker 5: you stand with? Who do you stand with?
Speaker 4: Oh, well, you know in Pennsylvania standing with the Jewish
Speaker 4: community in another state where I know all few more
Speaker 4: Arabs in this area. I'm just going to be seen
Speaker 4: to be all things to all men. But one thing
Speaker 4: that is incredibly true politics. If you try to have
Speaker 4: a message for everyone, you end up having a message
Speaker 4: for no. And I think America has figured that out
Speaker 4: about this woman.
Speaker 3: Yeah, she's an absolute mist She's like a vapor you.
Speaker 3: You can't get hold of her. The only time she
Speaker 3: ever makes any sense is if she's got a teleprompter
Speaker 3: in front of her, which is why she won't do
Speaker 3: mainstream interviews, preferring to perform on Saturday Night Live, because
Speaker 3: they're not going to confront her with the contradictions in
Speaker 3: her own campaign. Like CNN just pointed out there, and
Speaker 3: it was so telling as you said that her reason
Speaker 3: for not giving a position on Proposition thirty six is
Speaker 3: it's too close to the election. I mean, she might
Speaker 3: as well just come straight out and say I don't
Speaker 3: want people to know what I really think lest they
Speaker 3: don't vote for me. But speaking of people voting, you know,
Speaker 3: when you keep close to the bellet, you're supposed to
Speaker 3: be the underdog, aren't you, Because in America it's not
Speaker 3: compulsory to vote, so you really need to mobilize people
Speaker 3: to get out there. So the last thing you want
Speaker 3: is for people to think you're a shoe in because
Speaker 3: then well why would I bother going out into the
Speaker 3: you know, out and voting if you're going to already win.
Speaker 3: But Donald Trump does not thing according to orthodoxy, and
Speaker 3: he's boasting that he's pretty much got this thing in
Speaker 3: the bag.
Speaker 2: Have a listened, not supposed to say this?
Speaker 5: You know, I'm going to be like the fake is
Speaker 5: this saying it's very close. It's really not very close.
Speaker 8: Based on what's been happening the South.
Speaker 4: So close we're leading, We're leading in all seven swings.
Speaker 4: Say it, says, your brother will.
Speaker 2: It's really not very close. I've got this thing in
Speaker 2: the bag.
Speaker 3: There's a story on the front page of Tomorrow's Australian
Speaker 3: which says Trump will either be proved to be a
Speaker 3: genius or a fool, and that little clip will come
Speaker 3: back either to haunt him or to demonstrate, man, the
Speaker 3: guy is an absolute genius.
Speaker 1: It does seem an odd way to rev up you base, right,
Speaker 1: because like you said, what you want to do is
Speaker 1: get people to come out and vote. I mean, I
Speaker 1: would have thought the number one thing you'd be doing
Speaker 1: right now is putting the fear of God into people
Speaker 1: and saying if you don't come out and vote for me.
Speaker 1: You could end up with Kamala Harris for president, for
Speaker 1: heaven's sake, and instead of saying no, d it's all fine,
Speaker 1: don't worry about it now, he may well be right.
Speaker 1: In the polls which currently show it is quite close,
Speaker 1: particularly in the number of the swing states, are wrong.
Speaker 1: I think there is still a large contingent of people
Speaker 1: who are inclined to vote for Trump but almost feel
Speaker 1: ashamed of the fact that they are inclined to vote
Speaker 1: for Trump and won't tell polsters who tend to lean
Speaker 1: to the left what they actually want to do. But
Speaker 1: I don't understand why you would use that as your
Speaker 1: tactic because the media is going to report that it's
Speaker 1: close anyway, So what does it help you to go
Speaker 1: out and say, oh, well, I've got this one in
Speaker 1: the bag. Interesting though, was the polling out of Iowa yesterday,
Speaker 1: which Trump has had in the bag at the last
Speaker 1: two elections, supposedly showing that that could go to Harris.
Speaker 1: Now again, like all of these polls in the swing states,
Speaker 1: they are within the margin of era, So we don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, they could all go to Harris, or they
Speaker 1: could all go to Trump, could be a split down
Speaker 1: the middle. Who knows. Again, it is within the margin
Speaker 1: of era, but I work being in play. It's not
Speaker 1: to think anyone had ever talked about or thought was
Speaker 1: going to happen. Who knows what's going on.
Speaker 4: I want to know where his confidence coming from. Because
Speaker 4: as much as the poles are looking good for Trump,
Speaker 4: when you're talking about the seven swing states, the bottom
Speaker 4: line is.
Speaker 5: Nobody knows until all the votes are counted.
Speaker 4: Your guess is as good as mine. And that's what
Speaker 4: all the polsters basically say to each other. They've all
Speaker 4: got different slightly different polls depending on which polster you're
Speaker 4: tuning into. But at the end of the day, the
Speaker 4: reason why these swing states are called swing states is
Speaker 4: they're highly unpredictable and there's a tiny margin separating the
Speaker 4: winner from the loser. And don't forget we've got the
Speaker 4: dodgy dominion voting machines. You may have seen some of
Speaker 4: those videos online people trying to vote for Trump. Yes
Speaker 4: it's happening again and being unable to.
Speaker 5: We've got some states saying.
Speaker 4: Hang on a minute, we've got more people on our
Speaker 4: electoral role, then we do have eligible voters in our states.
Speaker 4: That's a big problem. We've got the DOJ suing several
Speaker 4: states now who tried to clean up their electoral roles
Speaker 4: to get illegals off or people who weren't eligible to vote.
Speaker 5: So that's going marvelously. I mean, the list of ways.
Speaker 4: In which you're seeing tiny cheats, as well as them
Speaker 4: not allowing the Republican supervisors to be at polling booths,
Speaker 4: that was a whole another shious muzzle. All these tiny
Speaker 4: cheats can go a very long way depending on which counties. Remember,
Speaker 4: each of the states look after their own counting methods.
Speaker 4: Some of them have already flagged. This is going to
Speaker 4: take us days? Really, why this is the twenty first century?
Speaker 5: Why is it going to take you days?
Speaker 4: And I wouldn't be surprised if this actually drags out
Speaker 4: for weeks, as we see quite a bit of Shenanigan's
Speaker 4: playing out post election.
Speaker 3: One of my favorite interviews over the last twenty four
Speaker 3: hours in the US election is this one with Nancy Pelosi.
Speaker 2: Pelosi's eighty four years old.
Speaker 3: Now, remember they got rid of Biden because it was
Speaker 3: obvious after the debate his mental decline was apparent for
Speaker 3: all to see. Now, the Democrats who are masters at gaslighting,
Speaker 3: have turned that back on Trump, and they're trying to
Speaker 3: point out that Trump is suffering from cognitive decline. Well,
Speaker 3: eighty four year old Nancy Pelosi tries to make that argument.
Speaker 3: But if you're going to accuse somebody else of suffering
Speaker 3: from cognitive decline, you should do a little bit better
Speaker 3: of a job hiding your own cognitive decline.
Speaker 2: Have a listen, good morning.
Speaker 9: Wonderful to be with you again on this weekend before
Speaker 9: the election.
Speaker 5: I think that what.
Speaker 9: The ex president just said is a further indication of
Speaker 9: his cognitive degeneration. You saw recently were talking about whether
Speaker 9: he chose electrocution or being eaten by sharks.
Speaker 5: Something's very wrong there.
Speaker 2: I think, Liz, you don't talk that well.
Speaker 5: Well, give her a break. How old is she to.
Speaker 4: Go about a thousand about it that I cannot remember
Speaker 4: a time before that woman was in Congress. I mean,
Speaker 4: it's sad to say, obviously I was old.
Speaker 5: Trust she is and it bows.
Speaker 4: And she wants to pick on his at mental degeneracy.
Speaker 5: Staying in the States.
Speaker 4: Now, there's a brand new issue counter Light that has
Speaker 4: gone absolutely viral.
Speaker 5: People are legitimately asking is this an election decider.
Speaker 4: You may or may not be aware of Peanut the squirrel.
Speaker 4: He is a viral sensation, and just so you're a
Speaker 4: little bit familiar with him before I tell you this
Speaker 4: sad tale of massive government overreach. Here he is during
Speaker 4: the happy days with his owner, Mark Longo.
Speaker 5: Don't get attached.
Speaker 4: What I'm about to tell you is devastating. So is
Speaker 4: a New York squarel right, and he was recently seized
Speaker 4: by the.
Speaker 5: Department of.
Speaker 4: Environmental Conservation to test him and his friend Raccoon.
Speaker 5: He also lived with Mark Longo, and they were euthanized.
Speaker 4: The state came to this guy's house, raided it, took.
Speaker 5: His animals and killed them.
Speaker 4: They said it was because they were there to test.
Speaker 5: Them for rabies.
Speaker 4: Now Here is owner Mark Longo explaining the drastic extent
Speaker 4: they went to in order to get their hands on
Speaker 4: his pet animals that he'd lived with for over seven years.
Speaker 8: It not only tears my family apart, but Peanut was
Speaker 8: the cornerstone of our nonprofit animal rescue and ten to
Speaker 8: twelve dec officers raided my house as if I was
Speaker 8: a drug dealer. I was sat outside my house for
Speaker 8: five hours. I had to get a police escort to
Speaker 8: my bathroom. I wasn't even allowed to feed my rescue
Speaker 8: horses breakfast or lunch. I was sitting sat there like
Speaker 8: a criminal. After they interrogated my wife to check out
Speaker 8: her immigration status, then proceeded to ask me if I
Speaker 8: had cameras in my house, then proceeded to go through
Speaker 8: every cabinet, nook and cranny of my house for a
Speaker 8: squirrel in a raccoon.
Speaker 1: They got a search warrant.
Speaker 10: They got a search warrant, four departments and a judge
Speaker 10: signed off on a search warrant for a squirrel in
Speaker 10: a raccoon, and then they took them and killed them.
Speaker 5: Government overreached, gone nuts.
Speaker 4: Now for some people this might be even a rather
Speaker 4: amusing if you're like the two men next to me
Speaker 4: laughing or trying not.
Speaker 1: To laugh because.
Speaker 2: It's a squirrel. That was a great joke. You did
Speaker 2: very well.
Speaker 4: You guys are the ones with the dad joke, So I.
Speaker 2: Make them mistakenly realize carry on.
Speaker 4: For some this may be a funny story, being like, well,
Speaker 4: why do people care the animals?
Speaker 5: The wild animals? Apparently they weren't supposed to.
Speaker 4: Be kept in a house domestically, even though both of
Speaker 4: them were abandoned, would never have made it in the wild,
Speaker 4: and that's why Mark Longo had taken them under his
Speaker 4: wings and made them viral sensations on the interwebs, raising
Speaker 4: money which he then used to fund a home for
Speaker 4: otherwise homeless animals. But this is a story about the
Speaker 4: government being able to barge into a man's house, treat
Speaker 4: him like a criminal, strip him off his rights, literally
Speaker 4: rifle through all his belongings, take his pets for no
Speaker 4: reason other than to test them for rabies. Can you
Speaker 4: not test an animal for raby while it's still alive
Speaker 4: and then hand it back. No, these guys call themselves
Speaker 4: the Environmental Conservation Department. They're killing animals, not helping anybody.
Speaker 4: And I love Elon Mask actually tweeted about this at
Speaker 4: least three times today. Here's a meme that he posted
Speaker 4: speaking to the issue. Here's Democrats in New York. They're
Speaker 4: not arresting illegals, they're not arresting rapists, They're not arresting
Speaker 4: the murderers that we keep hearing.
Speaker 5: About on the streets of New York.
Speaker 4: No, No, they're going straight after the squirrels. And all
Speaker 4: because some Karen Miles and miles away wasn't even in.
Speaker 5: The same state. Had reported this to.
Speaker 4: The department after seeing the happy couple on socials, couldn't
Speaker 4: bear it, had to report them, and now they're dead.
Speaker 5: There's a special place in hell for Karen's like this.
Speaker 3: This story just goes to prove that old Ronald Reagan
Speaker 3: quote that you know the government is not here to
Speaker 3: help it me the case that governments were there to
Speaker 3: safeguard your liberty. Now, governments exist to get involved in
Speaker 3: every minutia of your life and regulate it. And so
Speaker 3: this guy's got a pet, but it wasn't an authorized pet,
Speaker 3: and so the government. If Peanut had identified as female,
Speaker 3: it would have made a statue for Peanut.
Speaker 1: Or maybe if Peanut identified as a dog or a cat,
Speaker 1: it would have been Okay, you can own one of
Speaker 1: those without a permit. I mean, for heavens say, we
Speaker 1: need justice for Peanut. I mean, Peanut's mother was hit
Speaker 1: by a car and Marx or Peanut and took Peanut
Speaker 1: in and looked after him, as you said, list for
Speaker 1: seven years. Right. Yeah, this is an animal that at
Speaker 1: that point cannot live in the wild. It is a
Speaker 1: domesticated animal. If you released it. It would simply go
Speaker 1: on to die. Someone makes a complaint and they run
Speaker 1: in and say, oh, we've got to make sure he
Speaker 1: doesn't have a rabies. Well, could they have not just
Speaker 1: tech tested Mark and see and his wife and see
Speaker 1: whether they had rabies? Mean, they've been with a bloody
Speaker 1: animal for seven years, right, if the squirrel's got rabies,
Speaker 1: I'd say there's a fair chance they've got rabies as well?
Speaker 1: Who cares? Who cares it was in his house. This
Speaker 1: is what will happen if Kamala Harris is elected president.
Speaker 1: They'll come and take your animals. They'll kill all of them.
Speaker 1: They'll say, I want to take your pet and kill it.
Speaker 1: Before I contested.
Speaker 4: Happened a Trump administration. That Trump would have saved people.
Speaker 1: We already know that Donald Trump is the defender of
Speaker 1: the cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio, and he will
Speaker 1: be the defender of the squirrels of New York as well.
Speaker 1: I want to know, do they not have syringes in
Speaker 1: the state of New York? I mean, could you not
Speaker 1: just take some blood from Peanut the squirrel to see
Speaker 1: whether he had rabies? Why did he have to be killed?
Speaker 1: Reminds me of that case of Molly the magpie, and
Speaker 1: she was a rescue as well and her own. She
Speaker 1: became famous on social media again for hanging out with
Speaker 1: a staffordshre terrrier dog. I mean, for heaven's sake, if
Speaker 1: even as Staffy gets along with a magpie, then it
Speaker 1: might be a pretty extraordinary bird. And someone makes a
Speaker 1: complaint and income the EPA or whoever it was to
Speaker 1: take the magpie away. How do we have any joy
Speaker 1: in this world?
Speaker 3: I think if you're on the key point here, if
Speaker 3: you've got a animal at home you're keeping as a
Speaker 3: pet that's not a regular orthodox pet, don't put it
Speaker 3: on social media. Because that's what happened on the Gold Ghosts.
Speaker 3: That's what's happened in the US. They've put these animals
Speaker 3: on social media, which has then invited every anonymous carren
Speaker 3: to complain.
Speaker 2: Next thing, the government are on your doorsteps.
Speaker 3: Speaking of the government, it's not much better here in Australia,
Speaker 3: we've just found out this weekend that Australia cannot afford
Speaker 3: a planned seven billion dollar military grade satellite system, which
Speaker 3: would ensure we have state of the art defense, but
Speaker 3: we can afford to pay off sixteen billion dollars worth
Speaker 3: of student debt so that Anthony Albanesi can gun a
Speaker 3: vote from twenty year olds at the next election. It
Speaker 3: was just eighteen months ago that the Australian government announced
Speaker 3: with great fanfare this new satellite system. They had gone
Speaker 3: out to tender contracted Lockheed Martin to produce three to
Speaker 3: five satellites that will protect the Australian military from cyber attacks.
Speaker 3: This was going to be incredibly important for our military defense.
Speaker 3: In fact, Air Vice Marshal David Schule said at the time.
Speaker 3: Currently across Defense there is up to eighty nine capabilities
Speaker 3: which depend on satellite communications. Once delivered, the new system
Speaker 3: will increase the resilience, agility and flexibility of Defence's military
Speaker 3: satellite capability. That was just eighteen months ago. But now
Speaker 3: we find out the government didn't allocate any money for
Speaker 3: this seven billion dollar project in the defense budget. So
Speaker 3: a year and a half after announcing this to the nation,
Speaker 3: they've now said, actually we're not going to do it.
Speaker 3: Bear in mind, though we spent what was at four
Speaker 3: hundred billion dollars on the voice referendum six hundred million
Speaker 3: dollars on a rugby team for popwork.
Speaker 2: New Guinea.
Speaker 3: We spend what is it about thirty forty billion dollars
Speaker 3: every year on indigenous affairs, but we can't find seven
Speaker 3: billion dollars. Just announced, as I said, sixteen billion dollars
Speaker 3: wiped off student debt, but can't find seven billion dollars
Speaker 3: to make sure our nation is as secure as possible
Speaker 3: in the likelihood of conflict with China in the next
Speaker 3: few years. This is just one of a litany of
Speaker 3: defense announcements that then turn out to be nothing burgers
Speaker 3: just months years later. We found out only a couple
Speaker 3: of days ago that our six Collins class submarines, five
Speaker 3: of them are currently under maintenance. One of them has
Speaker 3: been having maintenance for two years. We've got one submarine
Speaker 3: that can actually utilize.
Speaker 4: Honestly, China, just come and take us.
Speaker 5: Honestly, we're sitting ducks. They're reading these headlines too, going
Speaker 5: good grief.
Speaker 1: We won't have to.
Speaker 2: Fire a shot.
Speaker 3: The only big thing here is when our young people
Speaker 3: are speaking Mandarin, they won't come next.
Speaker 1: But I mean, you know, you point out all the
Speaker 1: other great expenditure in the budget. I mean where we
Speaker 1: always spend somewhere in the order of one hundred billion
Speaker 1: dollars on the indies and other welfare combined. Right, well,
Speaker 1: you won't have a country left to spend the one
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollars on welfare in the NDEs, we can't
Speaker 1: spend seven billion dollars to make sure that our defense
Speaker 1: infrastructure is not targeted by cyber attacks. And of course
Speaker 1: that will be the new way in which wars are fought.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is a system that would have communicated
Speaker 1: with doubleaf planes and this sort of thing. Right, the
Speaker 1: number one thing if you want to bring down a
Speaker 1: country right now is to attack their internet systems or
Speaker 1: their banking system, which of course is all digital now
Speaker 1: because cash is on the way out, et cetera. You
Speaker 1: can bring a country to its knees like that exact.
Speaker 1: That is how wars are going to be fought. So
Speaker 1: you would think this is the number one thing that
Speaker 1: you would find money to spend on. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: we couldn't possibly do that. When we were asked to
Speaker 1: send a ship up to the Red Sea to defend
Speaker 1: one of the biggest trade routes in the world, Oh sorry,
Speaker 1: we don't have one lying around that you could possibly
Speaker 1: use for that. We're talking about using birds to attack
Speaker 1: drones as in enemy drones, because we don't have any
Speaker 1: enemy drones of our own. We can't get drones for
Speaker 1: another five years or something because we're so far behind.
Speaker 1: Like it's not just the labor government, it should be
Speaker 1: noticed the coalition before them were just as bad. We've
Speaker 1: been so lax in creating defense infrastructure and personnel as
Speaker 1: well that we would need if things ever go down
Speaker 1: the toilet. And we are closer to global conflict or
Speaker 1: certainly conflict in the Asian region with a rising China
Speaker 1: than we have been in decades, and we are totally
Speaker 1: up the creek without a purpose.
Speaker 4: Why is it always defense announcement? So eighteen months ago
Speaker 4: they get all the applaud it. They don't tell anyone
Speaker 4: they've only a lot of our one hundred and fifty
Speaker 4: million dollars, which is that's not even going to get
Speaker 4: the project off the ground. So thanks for nothing. What
Speaker 4: were you thinking? They don't care.
Speaker 5: It sounds awesome. Australia thinks we're legendary. You've got to
Speaker 5: be so.
Speaker 4: Much safer against cybersecurity attacks, etc.
Speaker 5: And so on.
Speaker 4: Trust us where in now where Labor and were awesome?
Speaker 5: So they have the photo ops.
Speaker 4: Everyone applauds, being like, I can't believe we didn't have
Speaker 4: this sooner. Who is that liberal government that did absolutely
Speaker 4: nothing And here we are just a year and a
Speaker 4: half later and they're like, oh, by the way, it's
Speaker 4: not happening. Yeah, So we actually only gave it one
Speaker 4: hundred and fifty million, which was never going to achieve anything,
Speaker 4: not even get the stupid thing off the ground. We
Speaker 4: were essentially lying to you, weren't we because we don't
Speaker 4: have the money and we can't deliver on this project. Also,
Speaker 4: the other option is just go into more debt. I mean,
Speaker 4: we're all at eight and eighty billion dollars in debt,
Speaker 4: and I'm sure, given we're all well aware of the
Speaker 4: situation that Caleb just described, that's how you bring any
Speaker 4: country to its knees. You knock out their internet capabilities,
Speaker 4: their banking systems, all.
Speaker 5: There's a lot of ways to do it.
Speaker 4: Game over, red Rover, I'm sure Australians would be more
Speaker 4: than happy if you just whacked another seven billion onto
Speaker 4: our eight hundred and eighty billion tab, which we're paying
Speaker 4: millions of dollars every single day just in interest. But
Speaker 4: knowing that we would then have this capability, while five
Speaker 4: Eyes is telling us we are attacked almost on the
Speaker 4: daily by Russian intelligence, by Chinese intelligence.
Speaker 5: Cyber attacks are a dime a dozen. We don't talk.
Speaker 4: About it enough, obviously for intelligency reasons. They keep us
Speaker 4: in the dark, and probably so we can all sleep
Speaker 4: at night.
Speaker 5: That's nice.
Speaker 4: But this is something that is absolutely essential, and this
Speaker 4: is something that you want to say you don't have
Speaker 4: money for. You're in charge of the budget, reallocate funds
Speaker 4: or print the money because you're so good at that.
Speaker 1: Well, they could just run the numbers on how many
Speaker 1: upgrades we need to get from Quansas to save seven
Speaker 1: billion dollars somewhere in the budget, and away we go. Now,
Speaker 1: you might be aware of a proposal down in Victoria
Speaker 1: from the Allen government to basically put up twenty story
Speaker 1: towers along the Sandringham train line. Right, So, when this
Speaker 1: came out of the blue a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: people like, hang on, we haven't been consulted about this. Now,
Speaker 1: the Planning Minister Sonia kill Kenny, you will see in
Speaker 1: this footage here standing next to the premiere, nodding along dutifully. Yes,
Speaker 1: she's very supportive of this. Policy. Take a look.
Speaker 11: The activity centers that have been identified here on the
Speaker 11: Sandringham Line is because the Sandringham Line today has the
Speaker 11: capacity in terms of the number of train services that
Speaker 11: run on this corridor, it has the space around these
Speaker 11: train stations. It's had the upgrades in local schools and.
Speaker 1: Kindom Brighton, Malvin Ringwood coincidentally not labor areas, but miss
Speaker 1: Kill Kenny, the planning minister who is now on board
Speaker 1: with the high density developments in Melbourne the Herald Son
Speaker 1: has found the receipts. She's not so on board with
Speaker 1: high density development when it's in her own backyard and
Speaker 1: Nimby is miss Kill Kenny. You can see here in
Speaker 1: this photograph her This was posted to Facebook on her
Speaker 1: MP facebook page. You know she's got her thumbs down
Speaker 1: where there would be a three story building going up. No,
Speaker 1: you can't have three stories in my backyard, but you
Speaker 1: and Brighton you should have twenty stories going up. She
Speaker 1: said in the post. It is entirely inconsistent with neighborhood character,
Speaker 1: the local ecology and landscape and indigenous heritage. Will set
Speaker 1: a really bad precedent. Yes, three stories, it's a really
Speaker 1: bad precedent. When it's in your suburb, but twenty stories
Speaker 1: is okay when it's in a place that votes for
Speaker 1: the Liberal Party.
Speaker 3: Come of the other thing she's been a part of
Speaker 3: is removing the ability for local councils to do planning
Speaker 3: so that residents can't really make their complaints known. But
Speaker 3: back in twenty fifteen as a member of Parliament she
Speaker 3: said it was imperative when you're doing developments.
Speaker 2: That locals are listened to.
Speaker 3: Quote, those best place to understand the social impacts on
Speaker 3: their communities are those who live and work in them.
Speaker 3: And of course now as a minister, she's maneuvered local
Speaker 3: councils so they don't get to.
Speaker 2: Reflect the voice of local residents.
Speaker 4: It's amazing the difference in ministerial portfolio.
Speaker 5: Mate like it.
Speaker 4: It's no mystery why she's changed her tune. But MPs
Speaker 4: always struggle with this, right because they want to talk
Speaker 4: up these massive projects, but at the same time they
Speaker 4: need to be re elected, so they don't want to
Speaker 4: talk it.
Speaker 5: Up in their area because.
Speaker 4: They know their constituents won't like that. So everywhere else
Speaker 4: is fine. They're all the same, They all do the
Speaker 4: exact same thing. Love the projects, desperately need housing.
Speaker 5: Two thumbs up, but.
Speaker 4: Not in my area because what matters to me more
Speaker 4: than anything else is being re elected.
Speaker 2: We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, we look at the papers, including
Speaker 3: the astonishing story of the bureaucrat in charge of Dan
Speaker 3: Andrews's failed quarantine program during COVID. She's now running Autralia's
Speaker 3: immigration system. That's coming up in a moment.
Speaker 2: Welcome back. Well, as you would expect.
Speaker 3: Most of tomorrow's papers, being the first Tuesday in November,
Speaker 3: caleber dominated by the big Race.
Speaker 1: Indeed, they are what a great day it is, Melbourne
Speaker 1: Cup Day, the race that stops a nation. We would
Speaker 1: show you the Herald Sun, of course from Melbourne, where
Speaker 1: the Melbourne Cup is run, but we didn't have it
Speaker 1: in time, so we'll give you the second best, which
Speaker 1: is of course the Advertiser where you can read my
Speaker 1: column every Friday. I hope you do that. By the way,
Speaker 1: it says on the front of the TiSER Tomorrow Legends
Speaker 1: of the Spring. Twenty one years after Nicki Hilton and
Speaker 1: here's sister Paris took the Cup by storm, the fashion
Speaker 1: designer is ecstatic to be back. Chipping Land legend to
Speaker 1: deal the headlines at this year's blockbuster. Now, my two
Speaker 1: colleagues here, being great fans of racing as they are,
Speaker 1: would you like to hand over your tips for the viewers?
Speaker 1: What have you got for me?
Speaker 3: Come on, I'm going for there's a horse I think
Speaker 3: smooth Criminal. It's eight to one, and that would be
Speaker 3: my tip on the second favorite.
Speaker 1: And you, well, that's only because I told you about
Speaker 1: that horse earlier tonight. It's called one Smooth Operator. Clo, Liz,
Speaker 1: have you got one for us?
Speaker 4: If there's a dapple gray, always bet on the dapple Gray.
Speaker 1: Yes, all right, well I do.
Speaker 4: Let's someone who actually knows about it, really really expert.
Speaker 1: I'll give you give.
Speaker 4: You a future to keep your money, because I've only
Speaker 4: ever lost it listening to this man.
Speaker 1: Well, well, my records, my recod's been pretty good so far.
Speaker 1: This bring Carnival, I back the winner of the Everest,
Speaker 1: I back the winner of the core Field Cup, and
Speaker 1: I back the winner of the Cox Plates.
Speaker 4: So it's only when you get it wrong that you
Speaker 4: give me your.
Speaker 1: T That's right, that's right. I'm not doing too badly
Speaker 1: at the moment to get a pen and paper here's
Speaker 1: what I've got for you. Number thirteen one Smooth Operator,
Speaker 1: which James mentioned before, won the Geelong Cup. The four
Speaker 1: all minds out of the Geelong Cup into the Melbourne Cup.
Speaker 1: A traditionally very good. Craig Williams on board. He is
Speaker 1: in formed, it wants the distance, it's normally around the money.
Speaker 1: I think he's the top choice. Akita Sushi would be
Speaker 1: my second line. Jamie Carr, good South Australian jockey, of course,
Speaker 1: is on board. It's coming up off of first at
Speaker 1: Mooney Valley, a second at core Field. It's run the
Speaker 1: distance twice and one of course two miles thirty two
Speaker 1: hundred meters and often in these races it's hard to
Speaker 1: find a horse that has run the distance, so there
Speaker 1: is form there. My third would be Vauban, which was
Speaker 1: here last year and was widely tipped one of Willie
Speaker 1: Mullen's horses from over in Ireland. Now Willie Mullins is
Speaker 1: yet to win the Melbourne Cup. He's come second, he's
Speaker 1: come third, he's come fourth, he's come fifth, but he's
Speaker 1: yet to clinch the win. If Voban is better than
Speaker 1: he was last year, and he looks like he is
Speaker 1: he could be in with a chance. And I'll give
Speaker 1: you a real outside RUFFI the twenty Mostly Cloudy. Now
Speaker 1: he's a good stay. He's totally outclassed in this field.
Speaker 1: But if something goes really wrong, you never know. Mostly
Speaker 1: cloud he could be a chance. And so I have
Speaker 1: to say this so that people don't send in complaints.
Speaker 1: Please gamble responsibly, will you? But it is a fantastic day,
Speaker 1: Melbourne Cup Day. It's the adults day of the year.
Speaker 1: Right every other public holiday and I know it's only
Speaker 1: public holiday in Victoria, but every other public holiday is
Speaker 1: like a family day, right, Melbourne Cup Day is an
Speaker 1: adults day. Whe if you get to go to lunch
Speaker 1: and have some fun. Long may it rain the greatest
Speaker 1: race in the nation.
Speaker 4: Just remember, ladies and gentlemen, chances are.
Speaker 5: You're about to lose.
Speaker 2: So it's not smooth criminal, it's smooth operator.
Speaker 1: One smooth opera.
Speaker 2: That's the one.
Speaker 5: All right.
Speaker 3: Let's go to the front page of the Newcastle Herald,
Speaker 3: otherwise Capable will never stop talking about the horse racing.
Speaker 3: Youth Reach Boiling Point reads the headline. Almost six thousand
Speaker 3: young people aged twelve to twenty four presented to emergency
Speaker 3: departments for mental health problems in Hunt and New England
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty two twenty three. The figure amount of
Speaker 3: thirty three percent increase in the last decade. Now, the
Speaker 3: article goes on to say, there are three primary reasons
Speaker 3: that psychologists believe so many young people are presenting with
Speaker 3: mental health issues. They are social media addiction, climate change concerns,
Speaker 3: and financial pressure. But now, after studying fifty five thousand
Speaker 3: cases over a seven year period, they've added to that
Speaker 3: list of problems hot weather. They found that the number
Speaker 3: of people presenting to mental health wards increased by one
Speaker 3: point three percent for every one degree rise in daily
Speaker 3: mean temperature. So especially those from sort of away from
Speaker 3: the coast where they were lower socioeconomic and didn't have
Speaker 3: access to air conditioning, This, apparently, according to researchers, is
Speaker 3: a major problem for mental health issues.
Speaker 5: I think that's just heat stroch.
Speaker 4: What has that got to do with mental health issues?
Speaker 2: Well, frustrated and annoyed.
Speaker 1: If you're already having a bad, bad time, it probably
Speaker 1: does make you feel a bit worse, right, But just
Speaker 1: get them some e conditions. I don't know. Look, it
Speaker 1: is worrying to think if you look at the broader
Speaker 1: numbers that there's been an increase in the number of
Speaker 1: people presenting the middle health issues. But of course we
Speaker 1: know that young people in particular have it harder than
Speaker 1: they've ever had it basically. And I know people go, oh, well,
Speaker 1: they've had it easier than they've ever had it, But
Speaker 1: I mean, they live in a world now where they
Speaker 1: are connected to the world twenty four to seven all
Speaker 1: the time, right, so the stuff that they are bombarded
Speaker 1: with and the bullying that can come home from the
Speaker 1: school yard to home and so on and so forth, like,
Speaker 1: it's a far more involved world than it ever was,
Speaker 1: So it's no surprise that kids would struggle with that.
Speaker 1: And of course you've got hard economic times, which means
Speaker 1: that parents are making decisions about what they can and
Speaker 1: can't do for their kids and can't buy for their kids, etc.
Speaker 1: There's been an increase across the board in mental health issues. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: that's not going away. We go back to things we're
Speaker 1: talking about before we should be investing money in. That's
Speaker 1: one of them. But again it just gets ignored because
Speaker 1: I know there's some sexy stuff we can talk about instead.
Speaker 1: This isn't sexy, but it's really important.
Speaker 4: Oh it's a sad state of affairs because these guys
Speaker 4: are our future as well. To the front page of
Speaker 4: the Australian Capital, job for Dan's COVID bungles Chief Bureaucracy,
Speaker 4: ladies and gentlemen, the one place you know you can
Speaker 4: only fail upwards. A senior Victorian bureaucrat who ran Daniel
Speaker 4: Andrews's controversial nineteen COVID nineteen quarantine.
Speaker 5: And accommodation programs, is.
Speaker 4: Now overseeing Australia's immigration system from Melbourne, after being secondered
Speaker 4: from the State Labor government to Emma Cassa, who served
Speaker 4: as Victoria's Quarantine commissioner.
Speaker 5: We all remember how well that.
Speaker 4: Went, and Deputy State Controller for the state's COVID nineteen
Speaker 4: accommodation program has been put in charge of the Department
Speaker 4: of Home Affairs Complex Immigration Division from outside Canberra.
Speaker 5: This is the kind of thing that you read and.
Speaker 4: You say to yourself, this has to be a joke.
Speaker 5: This has to be a joke.
Speaker 4: Anyone who has bungled that badly in any manner of
Speaker 4: private business will not even be employed as the janitor
Speaker 4: in the same place of business. But no, now, this
Speaker 4: woman gets given a very serious, crucially important job federally
Speaker 4: in an department that is currently under a lot of
Speaker 4: scrutiny and meaning a lot to every single Australian.
Speaker 2: Are we really that surprised?
Speaker 3: I mean she was given an Australia Day Award for
Speaker 3: her stellar performance during COVID, So now she's been promoted
Speaker 3: and is working for the federal government overseeing, as you said,
Speaker 3: a much more complicated than COVID quarantine team.
Speaker 2: So yep, you just keep failing upwards.
Speaker 5: Part of the thing.
Speaker 1: I mean, the rate of failing upwards within government services
Speaker 1: is incredible, right. I don't know why am I here?
Speaker 1: Why did I not just go straight into the public service.
Speaker 1: I'd be running the show.
Speaker 3: It's like Andrew Giles stuffed up Immigration and then he
Speaker 3: was promoted to Skills and Training Minister.
Speaker 2: So you know, it just keeps on happening.
Speaker 4: Lastly, before we go to a break, diggers get forty
Speaker 4: thousand dollars to hang about. At least they're getting something
Speaker 4: they certainly don't have the equipment they need. The Urban
Speaker 4: Easy government will spend a further six hundred million to
Speaker 4: try to turn around the defense's workforce crisis. Offering forty
Speaker 4: K bonuses to personnel to sign on for another three years. This,
Speaker 4: of course, is coming at a time where we all
Speaker 4: know the personal shortfall is due to hit about five
Speaker 4: thousand by July next year, because we haven't even been
Speaker 4: able to keep it at replacement rate for several years now.
Speaker 5: So will this work?
Speaker 4: Only time will tell. But given the amount of promises
Speaker 4: that are made by Defense, by our government to Defense
Speaker 4: and never delivered on, I think that's another reason why
Speaker 4: anyone considering signing up would be like.
Speaker 5: Actually, you know what, forget it. You guys are a joke.
Speaker 2: Yep, I reckon, You're absolutely right, We're going to go
Speaker 2: to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, the world's fat as cat has died,
Speaker 3: and scientists discover monkeys typing randomly forever would still not
Speaker 3: be able to reproduce the works of Shakespeare.
Speaker 2: Who knew it's coming up in a moment.
Speaker 3: Well, A couple of Sydney mathematicians have debunked the infinite
Speaker 3: monkey theorem. This was an idea that if you left
Speaker 3: monkeys to type randomly on a keyboard forever, they would
Speaker 3: eventually be able to reproduce the entire works of William Shakespeare.
Speaker 3: Turns out they can't, at least not with that attitude.
Speaker 3: Then again, Shakespeare wasn't much good at climbing tree, so.
Speaker 2: There's that as well.
Speaker 3: I've got a theory, though, Caleb and Liz, if you
Speaker 3: let monkeys type for five weeks randomly, that eventually reproduced
Speaker 3: the Guardian.
Speaker 2: Maybe that I don't know, Maybe that's not true. Maybe
Speaker 2: in four weeks they could do it.
Speaker 3: The mathematicians found there's only a five percent chance that
Speaker 3: one monkey, if it typed NonStop forever, could reproduce the
Speaker 3: word bananas. What they didn't discover was whether the monkeys
Speaker 3: just aren't smart enough to do it, or whether they're
Speaker 3: simply too busy running Australia. There's two things that come
Speaker 3: from this. One, research grants are getting weirder.
Speaker 5: How much did we spend on me?
Speaker 2: Second?
Speaker 3: Is it finally time to simply admit the complexity of
Speaker 3: the universe and DNA really does.
Speaker 2: Point to, you know, intelligent design? Caleb, how how are.
Speaker 1: We spending money on this? Like, Okay, there's lots of
Speaker 1: problems in the world, and there were a bunch of
Speaker 1: scientists who woke up one morning and were like, we
Speaker 1: should work out whether monkeys could actually write ShakespeRe. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and then they did it. They did it like I
Speaker 1: don't know. Look, do you wonder what's wrong with the
Speaker 1: university system? Something deals me that this is a large
Speaker 1: part of it. Now I have to tell you about
Speaker 1: the world's fattest cat, Crumbs. He was rescued recently from
Speaker 1: the basement of a Russian hospital where he had been
Speaker 1: apparently raised on a diet of scraps, biscuits and soup.
Speaker 1: He weighed when they found him seventeen point two kilograms.
Speaker 1: He has one fat cat. They put him in a
Speaker 1: fat cat camp.
Speaker 5: He lost three.
Speaker 1: Kilos, but unfortunately he has now died. The people who
Speaker 1: are looking after him at the fat cat camp said,
Speaker 1: sometimes even the strongest cats cannot cope. Sometimes even the
Speaker 1: best doctors, rehabilitation centers and support from people around the
Speaker 1: world are not able to help. And may I say,
Speaker 1: on behalf of all of us here at Sky News
Speaker 1: in the late debate, that we mourn the loss of
Speaker 1: Crumbs the cat, because my god, if a cat can
Speaker 1: get to be that damn fat living off soup and
Speaker 1: biscuits in the bottom of a hospital, he deserves to
Speaker 1: have a statue made of him. As far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: he is an everyday hero.
Speaker 3: Everyday hero when at Capway seventeen kilograms. Crumbs was an
Speaker 3: ironic name. That's a fantastic round since the Reader Penney
Speaker 3: Show