Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: General Discussions (Read 1023345 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2370 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Quote from: DJC – on


According to the march organisers, the objective is to stop the Palestinian genocide by forcing the Australian Government to take action against Israel.


What action would that be ?Military, Economic, expelling their embassy staff?

Who knows?

Recognising the Palestinian state and condemning the genocide is probably as good as it will get.

Calls to cut military equipment trade probably won’t be heeded because many multinational military projects rely on input from Israeli industries.
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2371 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
I think its working then.  The stance of the Aussie government has changed significantly since it started. 

Ultimately its always a mixed bag of why people do these things.  I think its generally OK for it to continue.  Particularly when its a peaceful protest march.  Otherwise people who feel like doing something, might do something less peaceful as an alternative.

The Australian Government’s stance is firmly in lockstep with that of most similar-minded nations. 


"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball
 

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2372 –
I'm reading today that the RedTrump administration is claiming a DNA match for the shooter, just 48hrs after obtaining the samples.

This is CSI Hollywood like precision and efficiency, but my understanding this is also Hollywood fantasy.

Just a month or two back I watched a recent BBC documentary(circa 2025) on crime and modern forensics, that doco reports that even the cutting edge forensic methods still take a few weeks to deliver a definitive result. It's not like TV.

Yet today, less than 48hrs after obtaining samples, we have RedTrump and JD Vance admin claiming definitive DNA match is reported by FBI Director Patel from a dilute sample, that is DNA from fingerprints or body moisture off an incidental surface like a towel or handle.

Ignoring whether they have the right person or not, I'm inclined to believe the BBC version of DNA analysis timelines.

There are different types of analysis, and growing a sample is not the same as matching a sample, and matching a sample the first time is not the same as confirming a match, etc., etc.. Analogously, it can be thought of as solving a seriously tough and importantly unique jigsaw puzzle for the first time, but once it's been done it becomes easier and faster to repeat. Maybe @DJC can give us some insight.

So is this yet another example of the public being misled?

Some might think the issue is trivial, or inconsequential, but to me it is the heart of the debate about truth in government.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2373 –
Straightforward crime scene DNA comparisons can be analysed within 12 hours LP, despite what the BBC said.

While the suspect is not co-operating, there is significant corroborating evidence to link him to the shooting.  The DNA evidence will not be compelling or conclusive but will just add to the body of corroborating evidence.

The troubling aspect for me is that the US hierarchy has jumped on the DNA evidence as if it is a slam dunk.  A “Mickey Haller” lawyer would have a plethora of experts testifying about DNA transference and creating reasonable doubt in the jurors’ minds.
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2374 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Straightforward crime scene DNA comparisons can be analysed within 12 hours LP, despite what the BBC said.
Is that correct for diffuse samples?

My understanding from the doco was that it's quite different for say a blood sample versus some perspiration left on a towel or surface.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2375 –
There is so much BS floating around at the moment regarding this incident.
Sources vary as to the leanings of this guy (the accused shooter) from left of Karl Marx to right of Genghis Khan.
There is a ready acceptance of the fact that this was a lone shooter by some, to suggsetions that it was impossible for anyone but a trained expert assassin to make the shot from that distance and angle from others.
Was he a lone gunman?
We hear that group of interstate plated cars rocked up a few weeks before to his house....Frat party or Operatives from one of many agencies planning the hit
His security guards scratching their arms or stretching has become a sign to "take the Shot"
A bloke stealing Maga Hats from the stalls is an accomplice creating a distraction.
Some suggestions he was in a relationship with his trans room-mate which would certainly give him cause to dislike Charlie Kirk.
Photos seem to show a suspect with completely different facial features to the accused, but that could be explained by the different angles pictures were taken-face front or looking down from an angle.

All of this is supplemented by fake AI, half quotes and downright made up nonsense.

Conspiracy theories abound, and this is actually one where you wouldn't have to stretch the imagination too far to accept a larger conspiracy
I wouldn't believe anything with strong conviction at the moment.
And given the forces involved it may be we'll never know the truth.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #2376 –
Quote from: LP – on
Quote from: DJC – on
Straightforward crime scene DNA comparisons can be analysed within 12 hours LP, despite what the BBC said.
Is that correct for diffuse samples?

My understanding from the doco was that it's quite different for say a blood sample versus some perspiration left on a towel or surface.

Yes, within 12 hours is certainly achievable for DNA extracted from fingerprints or perspiration.  According to forensic scientist Kat Sato, five hours is the minimum time for a standard law enforcement lab and that can be reduced to two hours in a more advanced lab  The time consuming part is running the results through databases, but I'd put money on just a straight comparison with Robinson in this case.
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball