New Laws Will Allow the Use of Military to Break Protests

https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/

Spot

I thought this was in light of the Lindt Cafe siege!

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 9:08am:

New Laws Will Allow the Use of Military to Break Protests https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/ Spot

I agree Spot....This has the makings of a major cock up waiting to happen!!!

::) ::) ::)

A sensible move as this will stop the anti Australian extremist Greenies in their tracks.

Mal's swing behind coal power will trigger massive insanity from the mad as cut snakes extremist Greenies.

So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past...

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 1:38pm:

So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past...

The new laws allow them to be called in at the drop of a hat rather than in an emergency.

Spot

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 1:38pm:

So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past...

Do you have a link to that mate???

:-? :-? :-?

Can they use the army to break up union strikes ?

juliar wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 2:22pm:

Can they use the army to break up union strikes ?

Prolly use the army to break up any gathering

Spot

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 2:09pm:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 1:38pm: So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past... Do you have a link to that mate??? Unfortunately he is right. They were used by labor against the wharfies a long, long time ago and they still regret it. :-? :-? :-?

macman wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 4:07pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 2:09pm: The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 1:38pm: So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past... Do you have a link to that mate??? Unfortunately he is right. They were used by labor against the wharfies a long, long time ago and they still regret it. :-? :-? :-?

Here you go....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1949_Australian_coal_strike

Once legislation is passed (and amended) the Government (any) will be able to call in the military to deal with what ever situation they deem necessary....The military should only be used to defend our nation and it's allies not policing the population....We already have anti terrorism squads in the police force who could have taken out the terrorist but were denied....The problem is soft cocks more worried about their own career than calling the kill when needed!!!

>:( >:( >:(

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 9:08am:

New Laws Will Allow the Use of Military to Break Protests https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/ Spot

What is happening?

A rapid descent down a very slippery slope.

Bam wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 5:26pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 9:08am: New Laws Will Allow the Use of Military to Break Protests https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/ Spot What is happening? A rapid descent down a very slippery slope.

The slippery slope has already been slipped and is very sloppy.
And it all started with legalizing a filthy, perverted practice of SSM.
YUK

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 2:09pm:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 1:38pm: So what? The ALP, when in power, has used the army as strikebreakers in the past... Do you have a link to that mate??? :-? :-? :-?

You don't need a link, just historical knowledge.
Or the ability to google.


Quote:

The 1949 Australian coal strike was the first time that Australian military forces were used during peacetime to break a trade union strike. The strike by 23,000 coal miners lasted for seven weeks, from 27 June 1949 to 15 August 1949, with troops being sent in by the Ben Chifley Federal Labor government to the open cut coal mines in New South Wales on 28 July 1949, with the workers returning to work, defeated, two weeks later.

I wasn't there but I do remember it.
Don't say I don't do stuff for you.

LOL....  eh you already did it...  well done.
if only Aussie had that ability. ::)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEMUsC8ppU0

Bad move. The defence forces should not be used internally in an armed role. Sure use their engineers in natural disasters but they should never be able to turn their weapons on Australians, their role is to defend us from external enemies.

I'd rather have specialist groups handle a terrorist situation than just ordinary police with and ordinary chain of command.
The Lindt Seige showed just how inadequate that situation was.

The fact we enabled Man Haron Monis and allowed him to stay in Australia instead of deporting him years ago shows how weak and inadequate our immigration laws and our pollies are.

Setanta wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 6:51pm:

Bad move. The defence forces should not be used internally in an armed role. Sure use their engineers in natural disasters but they should never be able to turn their weapons on Australians, their role is to defend us from external enemies.

I have no problems with the SAS being used to take out terrorists like the Lindt siege.

The military shouldn't be used for any other civilian issues of law enforcement that is why we have the police.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

"The Kent State shootings (also known as the May 4 massacre or the Kent State massacre) were the shootings on May 4, 1970, of unarmed college students by members of the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University in Kent, Ohio, during a mass protest against the bombing of Cambodia by United States military forces. Twenty-eight guardsmen fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.

Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the Cambodian Campaign, which President Richard Nixon announced during a television address on April 30 of that year. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX95QSKBODo

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:05pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 6:51pm: Bad move. The defence forces should not be used internally in an armed role. Sure use their engineers in natural disasters but they should never be able to turn their weapons on Australians, their role is to defend us from external enemies. I have no problems with the SAS being used to take out terrorists like the Lindt siege. The military shouldn't be used for any other civilian issues of law enforcement that is why we have the police.

I have no problems with response groups getting SAS training but they should be police. I don't want our armed forces used against it's own people. Can you imagine when they don't get it right and then, like police, claim they need more power? No, they should not be used against Australians.

The military has always been used for internal issues right throughout history. The military has been used  to quash rebellions here. Protesters have nothing to fear if they act responsibly. That last Muslim riot in Sydney open my eyes up. The cops got smashed and needed some help.

Setanta wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:16pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:05pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 6:51pm: Bad move. The defence forces should not be used internally in an armed role. Sure use their engineers in natural disasters but they should never be able to turn their weapons on Australians, their role is to defend us from external enemies. I have no problems with the SAS being used to take out terrorists like the Lindt siege. The military shouldn't be used for any other civilian issues of law enforcement that is why we have the police. I have no problems with response groups getting SAS training but they should be police. I don't want our armed forces used against it's own people. Can you imagine when they don't get it right and then, like police, claim they need more power? No, they should not be used against Australians.

With the Lindt siege the police killed an innocent person and wounded 4 others despite knowing there was a single offender with a beard.

I think the SAS would do a far better job compared to the police in dealing with terrorists.


Apart from dealing with armed terrorists there is no other scenario where military should be used defensivley or offensively against Australians.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:21pm:

The military has always been used for internal issues right throughout history. The military has been used here to quash rebellions here. Protesters have nothing to fear if they act responsibly. That last Muslim riot in Sydney open my eyes up. The cops got smashed and needed some help.

After we became a nation?
I have no problem with police having specialist groups and training. I think you'll find the Lindt siege failure was not because of the men on the ground but those higher up, those who because of their failure now want to outsource difficult situations to the army. I reiterate the "defence forces" are there to defend us from out external enemies, not police us. They are not trained and should not be trained to police us. If you think this is OK, perhaps we can do away with police forces altogether and have the military look after it all. It's a bad idea, just look at how the military has been used against it's own people elsewhere.

Setanta wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:29pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:21pm: The military has always been used for internal issues right throughout history. The military has been used here to quash rebellions here. Protesters have nothing to fear if they act responsibly. That last Muslim riot in Sydney open my eyes up. The cops got smashed and needed some help. After we became a nation? I have no problem with police having specialist groups and training. I think you'll find the Lindt siege failure was not because of the men on the ground but those higher up, those who because of their failure now want to outsource difficult situations to the army. I reiterate the "defence forces" are there to defend us from out external enemies, not police us. They are not trained and should not be trained to police us. If you think this is OK, perhaps we can do away with police forces altogether and have the military look after it all. It's a bad idea, just look at how the military has been used against it's own people elsewhere.

The US police are paramilitary. Loads of US cops are war vets. If Australia gets as bad as the US we will go down the same avenue. It all depends on the state of our country socially. Now, I don't think we need soldier cops. But who knows what the future will bring?

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:39pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:29pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:21pm: The military has always been used for internal issues right throughout history. The military has been used here to quash rebellions here. Protesters have nothing to fear if they act responsibly. That last Muslim riot in Sydney open my eyes up. The cops got smashed and needed some help. After we became a nation? I have no problem with police having specialist groups and training. I think you'll find the Lindt siege failure was not because of the men on the ground but those higher up, those who because of their failure now want to outsource difficult situations to the army. I reiterate the "defence forces" are there to defend us from out external enemies, not police us. They are not trained and should not be trained to police us. If you think this is OK, perhaps we can do away with police forces altogether and have the military look after it all. It's a bad idea, just look at how the military has been used against it's own people elsewhere. The US police are paramilitary. Loads of US cops are war vets. If Australia gets as bad as the US we will go down the same avenue. It all depends on the state of our country socially. Now, I don't think we need soldier cops. But who knows what the future will bring?

I hope for my children and grandchildren, this is not the way Australia is headed. When I was in primary school we were on par with Argentina, Argentina went south badly and guess what, their military did against those it was there to protect...

I hope I never live to see our armed forces used internally. Train our police, special response groups, have them commanded by competent people, allow them to make decisions on the ground considering the situation they are in without waiting for someone of the political persuasion to give the OK. There is no need for the army.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:23pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:16pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:05pm: Setanta wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 6:51pm: Bad move. The defence forces should not be used internally in an armed role. Sure use their engineers in natural disasters but they should never be able to turn their weapons on Australians, their role is to defend us from external enemies. I have no problems with the SAS being used to take out terrorists like the Lindt siege. The military shouldn't be used for any other civilian issues of law enforcement that is why we have the police. I have no problems with response groups getting SAS training but they should be police. I don't want our armed forces used against it's own people. Can you imagine when they don't get it right and then, like police, claim they need more power? No, they should not be used against Australians. With the Lindt siege the police killed an innocent person and wounded 4 others despite knowing there was a single offender with a beard. I think the SAS would do a far better job compared to the police in dealing with terrorists. Apart from dealing with armed terrorists there is no other scenario where military should be used defensivley or offensively against Australians.

What is an "armed terrorist"?

In some cases, the difference between a "terrorist", "freedom fighter" and "rebels" is whether the ones applying the label disagrees, agrees or is neutral or undecided about the cause the fighters are fighting for.

For example, the gunman in the Lindt siege was a "terrorist" because we agree about the lack of merits of the cause. But what about the Eureka Stockade? Where does that fit in?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:07pm:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings "The Kent State shootings (also known as the May 4 massacre or the Kent State massacre) were the shootings on May 4, 1970, of unarmed college students by members of the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University in Kent, Ohio, during a mass protest against the bombing of Cambodia by United States military forces. Twenty-eight guardsmen fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis. Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the Cambodian Campaign, which President Richard Nixon announced during a television address on April 30 of that year. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX95QSKBODo

You nailed it again Grap....The Government can use the military against it's own citizens and will do so when it deems necessary???

>:( >:( >:(

A cock up waiting to happen!!!


Quote:

A much broader scope Australian attorney general Christian Porter told journalists that the Lindt Café siege, along with the potential for a Paris terrorist attack-style incident being carried out in Australia, make streamlining the process of calling out “SAS or commando regiments” necessary. However, the call out powers don’t just apply to terrorism. They target “domestic violence.” This is a broad term set out under section 119 of the Australian Constitution, which provides that the federal government should protect states and territories against invasion and rebellion. Indeed, Mr Porter has stated that the ADF could be sent in to quell widespread rioting. While civil liberties advocates stress that these new powers have the potential to be used upon peaceful protests and industrial actions.

>:( >:( >:(

https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 9:23pm:

A cock up waiting to happen!!! Quote: A much broader scope Australian attorney general Christian Porter told journalists that the Lindt Café siege, along with the potential for a Paris terrorist attack-style incident being carried out in Australia, make streamlining the process of calling out “SAS or commando regiments” necessary. However, the call out powers don’t just apply to terrorism. They target “domestic violence.” This is a broad term set out under section 119 of the Australian Constitution, which provides that the federal government should protect states and territories against invasion and rebellion. Indeed, Mr Porter has stated that the ADF could be sent in to quell widespread rioting. While civil liberties advocates stress that these new powers have the potential to be used upon peaceful protests and industrial actions. >:( >:( >:( https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/new-laws-will-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/

"Mr Porter has stated that the ADF could be sent in to quell widespread rioting."

Why is he expecting "widespread rioting"? Perhaps he knows the government's unpopular policies are oppressing the people?

Grendel wrote on Jul 20^th, 2018 at 7:02pm:

I'd rather have specialist groups handle a terrorist situation than just ordinary police with and ordinary chain of command. The Lindt Seige showed just how inadequate that situation was. The fact we enabled Man Haron Monis and allowed him to stay in Australia instead of deporting him years ago shows how weak and inadequate our immigration laws and our pollies are.

They arent talking about "terrorists". They are talking about normal gatherings.

Spot

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 21^st, 2018 at 6:48am:

Grendel wrote on Jul 20th, 2018 at 7:02pm: I'd rather have specialist groups handle a terrorist situation than just ordinary police with and ordinary chain of command. The Lindt Seige showed just how inadequate that situation was. The fact we enabled Man Haron Monis and allowed him to stay in Australia instead of deporting him years ago shows how weak and inadequate our immigration laws and our pollies are. They arent talking about "terrorists". They are talking about normal gatherings. Spot

Well that was not the original suggestion or plan.
This came about due to a terrorist act.
The idea was to give special forces power to act in such cases.

This is the original idea...


Quote:

Currently, the military can only be called upon by state and territory authorities when they’ve exhausted all other options. The new bill would allow for a call out request to be actioned, when it’s decided that ADF personnel can “enhance” the ability of state police in dealing with an incident.

The rest is just idle speculation.