Stephen Murray tweets that the fortnightly Newspoll in tomorrow’s Australian shows no change on two-party preferred, with Labor maintaining its lead of 54-46, and next to no change on the primary vote, with the Coalition steady on 36%, Labor down one to 36%, the Greens up one to 12% and others steady on 16%. However, Tony Abbott is up five on approval to 36% and down seven on disapproval to 53%, and has drawn level on preferred prime minister at 38-38 after Bill Shorten led 41-36 a fortnight ago. Bill Shorten’s personal ratings are also improved, his approval up four to 38% and disapproval down two to 41%.
FarQU
“Twaddle, nothing wrong with rhetorical flourishes, but you said he doesn’t do throwaway lines. He does.”
Everyone does. What I was saying is that his central argument wasn’t a throwaway line.
dtt and caf
I agree with your comments (see above).
At the moment, the statistics favour extra screening of one group which obviously doesn’t mean you don’t do other random screening. If terrorists or drug couriers choose other demographics, you change your target population.
All you have to do is guess better than random and you are allocating resources more wisely.
So Diogenes, why can’t you simply refute my arguments.
[If grandmothers in wheelchairs start to be over represented in terrorism statistics, which has never happened, you would divert resources into screening them.]
Bit late don’t you think?
I would profile you as someone who is overly wrapped up in science and logic, fails to truly grasp that life is in fact deeply illogical, highly irrational, and prone to chance and error. The fact you think having a high IQ is of fundamental importance, as opposed to any of the other types of intelligence, suggest a bit of an imbalance.
[clearly don’t have a very high IQ]
That’s funny. Not that i care and i think IQ is overrated. But it’s pretty funny.
@Leroy/100
Really going overreach with Abbott and personal rating bounce.
[That’s funny. Not that i care and i think IQ is overrated. But it’s pretty funny.]
Most people who are morons think IQ is overrated.
FarQU
You just don’t understand probability. It’s a very basic concept.
[At the moment, the statistics favour extra screening of one group which obviously doesn’t mean you don’t do other random screening. If terrorists or drug couriers choose other demographics, you change your target population.]
So do you have any evidence that this in fact better than a more randomised screening. Evidence, not theory.
FarQU
Evidence that screening Muslims really stringently works? How about El Al’s safety record?
Diogenes, where does calling someone a moron because they disagree (or are even wrong, not that you have presented any evidence) fit into the scale of intelligence?
Doctors have high IQs but they tend to be arrogant tossers. Hence why IQ is overrated. My in-laws are doctors, my sister-in law is a doctor, my grandpa was a doctor. They’re not tossers all the time of course, only when you head off into the realm of the non-logical.
[Evidence that screening Muslims really stringently works? How about El Al’s safety record?]
Only time I ever flew El Al they hand searched every single bag of every single passenger.
Now i suggest that if you hand-searched every single muslim’s luggage you would undoubtedly decrease the chances of a suicide bomb – in the short-term. There would be a response to that, and it is the complete failure of those who support racial-profiling and argue it is effective to address themselves to the issue of what happens next that means they may not in fact be right.
If extra screening of people who look like terrorists leads to an increased likelihood that people who don’t look like terrorists won’t be screened, then there is a case for you to answer. If extra screening leads to terrorists doing something else which kills more people then there is a case to answer.
Diogenes appears too stupid to even realise there are further questions to be answered.
Israel uses racial profiling and has never had a plane blown up.
From someone who called Harris “human scum” ( when you dont have the faintest idea of his arguments because he agreed with profiling) I’m highly amused that you then are concerned about being called a moron when you have given ample evidence of the fact, including that very complaint.
So now racial profiling does work but at some stage in the future someone might get through so it must be the wrong thing to do.
I get it now.
Diogenes
That was my mistake, it wasn’t FarQU who called Harris ‘human scum’, it was a poster by the name of p m z I think.
Diogenes, i did not call Harris ‘human scum’ thank you very much. Poor form. If you can’t get that right not sure why the rest of your views carry much weight.
As I said, i have raised a number of criticisms of your argument and you have provided no evidence to refute them, other than the theory which is that logical things are right.
If racial-profiling leads to alternative ways of killing people, how exactly has that made the world safer.
[Israel uses racial profiling and has never had a plane blown up.]
Correlation is not causation – that’s logic isn’t it?
FarQU
If we agree that every Jihadist on the planet would give their left testicle (before blowing up their right) to blow up an El Al jet, the fact they have yet to succeed in doing so is very persuasive they are doing lots of things right.
Diogenes, what my point was initially was that Sam Harris’ arguments were light weight fluff. And having read his essay that started the debate i stand by that view.
[So now racial profiling does work but at some stage in the future someone might get through so it must be the wrong thing to do]
My view is that racial profiling in screening in American airports will not make an impact on terrorism. It would have done before we knew Muslim terrorists were going to crash planes, but it’s a bit late now.
Racial profiling would work in the short-term, devoid of any real-world context, absolutely. But why i said Sam Harris’ views were light-weight is precisely because of the lack of real-world context to his arguments. You can’t search every single person’s luggage by hand. If you target Muslim-looking people at airports the possibility exists that other avenues will open up, meaning we are not in fact any safer. That seems eminently logical to me.
Guytaur @ 36
The troubles in NI were NOT over religion. If it was no Protestant could be a nationalist and no catholic a unionist. In fact, admittedly a minority, both existed, and exist.
The British media, UK government always wanted it portrayed as a sectarian conflict rob the nationalists of legitimacy. To portray the Irish as needing English rule.
Most rebellions against British rule in Ireland were lead by Protestants.
FarQU
I apologise for the human scum mistake.
Racial profiling, or any profiling, is purely a statistical way of using resources effectively. If you have to screen a million grandmothers in wheelchairs to pick one drug courier compared to ten thousand young males travelling from Columbia, you put more effort into screening the second group.
You still screen the grannie group but at a lower rate. It has been shown to work and is used everywhere. Some drug exporters use different courier types to avoid the profiling and so they are then more likely to get through but overall the pickup rate is higher than random screening.
The terrorist group is much smaller so there are not high enough numbers to reach statistical significance but the Israel experience is still good evidence for it.
FarQU
So long as we’re talking real-world concepts, you seem to think that Islamic fundamentalists would have little trouble finding people to commit suicide attacks on planes that do not fit the profile.
If you had actually read the entirety of the debate I linked, you would see this very issue was brought up. What evidence do you have that it would be easy for a group like Al Qaeda to circumvent the screening? Are there lots of middle-aged, red-blooded Texan jihadist converts out there I’m not aware of?
[If we agree that every Jihadist on the planet would give their left testicle (before blowing up their right) to blow up an El Al jet, the fact they have yet to succeed in doing so is very persuasive they are doing lots of things right.]
No doubt. They have also never blown up an Australian jet and i’m not aware we target Muslim-lookers at screening. It could be that racial-profiling has scared them away and they kill people in different ways. It could be the myriad other measures in place that have taken effect.
Let’s hope they never find an 82 year-old wheelchair bound non-muslim looking grandmother to blow herself up.
FarQU
“Let’s hope they never find an 82 year-old wheelchair bound non-muslim looking grandmother to blow herself up.”
No doubt they’ve tried and utterly failed to do this. For now it’s not unreasonable to assume the next suicide plane bomber will be your run-of-the-mill, stock-standard angry young Muslim male.
FarQU
Overall you would still expect that less terrorists get through if you use the current profile.
Obviously a Muslim terrorist knows they get screened at a higher rate in the US. If they try to recruit someone else, they are making their operation bigger and less secure and more expensive as they have to work a lot harder to get a suitable recruit. That adds to the risk of the operation.
At this point it should be apparent to you that waving this concept away as lightweight is rather premature. There are substantive arguments on both sides.
[I apologise for the human scum mistake.]
No problem.
[You still screen the grannie group but at a lower rate. It has been shown to work and is used everywhere. Some drug exporters use different courier types to avoid the profiling and so they are then more likely to get through but overall the pickup rate is higher than random screening.]
I have no problem with that as it stands. But how do you define success and failure? As you acknowledge when you change you are more likely to get through. Once would be enough. I suggest that Sam Harris’ arguments are light-weight because he is driven by his views on Muslim extremists rather than his views on airport security.
[Are there lots of middle-aged, red-blooded Texan jihadist converts out there I’m not aware of?]
How many do you need? The Liberals have found a few recently.
FarQU
“How many do you need? The Liberals have found a few recently.”
Talking about throw away lines…
[At this point it should be apparent to you that waving this concept away as lightweight is rather premature. There are substantive arguments on both sides.]
It’s not the concept that is light-weight, but rather Sam Harris’ arguments. There are certainly substantive arguments on both sides. Even if one is a moronic person of low IQ. That’s still pretty funny.
Anyhoo, this thick fucker needs to go to bed. Peace to all.
[Talking about throw away lines…]
Ah yes, but i’ve never claimed otherwise.
Nett_NEWS++™ by @Otiose94 http://bit.ly/1nAtjp1 #Environment, #Hunt, Slag & #Science @rowe_david © http://bit.ly/1kj23N6
[I have no problem with that as it stands. But how do you define success and failure?]
Success is defined as the number of successful terrorist attacks on planes per year compared to the number of attempts. At the moment, things are going well and have for the 13 years since 9-11.
Obviously that could change but it has served is well so far. And don’t forget that intelligence might prewarn the officials of a change to terrorists using grannies before it happens so the profile could be updated before it was implemented.
I’ve just had to scroll past half a page of self indulgent drivel and Mod Lib isn’t even here!
Welcome to PB, Fulvio.
I know, I know …
I seem to have fallen victim to Customs Australia profiling. About 10 years ago, when I reached my mid-40s, the customs people seem to have decided a female frequent flyer who flies by herself, and in economy, is likely to be up to something. So I now make sure I have a book with me when I arrive at Sydney airport, so I do not lose my temper about always being selected for the “long” line going through customs, and being searched several times. I think I was picked out 8 times in a row. Next time I travelled with OH, I made him push our bags on a trolley, and give both customs declarations cards to the customs person. I walked a little behind, looking timid and a bit bewildered. 4 times with this now approach now, and not one search.
I think they must think I am smuggling drugs, an drying to put me under pressure to see how I react.
i have not done the statistics – although I am keeping count, but the probability of this happening by chance must not be getting very small.
Oddly, age has worked in the favour of OH. For a long time he travelled with his old student trekking pack, bought for a trip to Nepal as a grad student (true). He was stopped at every airport and swabbed for explosives and patted down. Three years ago he bought some nice new luggage with wheels – almost zero checks since then.
@133 must “now” be getting very small.
For my part, the people who do explosives testing absolutely love me. I get picked out every single time. My 70-year-old mother reports the same thing. Our theory is that there is indeed “profiling”, but it involves picking out harmless looking people on the basis that they’re the least likely to give them any attitude.
You guys sometimes remind me of this..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwpHXtwjP-8
Or is it more like…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP4INdt_-fk
🙂
[For my part, the people who do explosives testing absolutely love me. I get picked out every single time. My 70-year-old mother reports the same thing.]
You know something William, I had to wonder about this exact same thing when I took a round-world ticket in 2003 (and we were all panicking still).
I flew westwards via asia and the uk. But the fun part was in the US. Every single airport took me aside and did the explosive testing thing. I think I even got frisked once. (More would have been nice 🙂 )
Ok, so I was a late 30s, bearded, single male traveler and I think the clincher was I’d stopped over in KL..
I rarely get stopped by customs arriving at a destination.
However entering the departure lounge, particularly in Australia, is another matter.
My somewhat swarthy tones and southern European features mean that every immigration officer, Federal policeman and security guard insists on prodding my hand luggage, waving a wand under my armpits, and sending both myself and my bag through the x-ray machines several times.
It must mean that, for a terrorism suspect, I must have an honest face.
That’s harsh bilbo. I thought you only looked shifty in a TAB / greyhound racing kind of way! :p
Kathy Jackson to return to recalled turc tomorrow for a special one day session. Could be fun.
Morning all. I wonder how long any post MH17 bounce in Abbott’s personal popularity will last as Operation Fool’s Erand unravels? This story illustrates the risks involved.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-28/mh17-afp-again-forced-back-from-malaysia-airlines-crash-site/5629456
Thankfully Angus Houston is giving the orders, not Abbott, or someone might get killed.
Socrates
The journos at the GG gathered expectantly to watch the unveiling of the latest Newspoll and the expected MH17 poll bounce they had worked so hard for. This photo captured the moment the results were revealed.
[142
ruawake
Posted Tuesday, July 29, 2014 at 7:00 am | PERMALINK
Kathy Jackson to return to recalled turc tomorrow for a special one day session. Could be fun.
]
I wonder if the TURC Kangaroo Court will allow cross examination ? Probably not.
Poroti
Yes I can see most of cabinet in that photo – they look even less intelligent not wearing a suit 🙂
Julie Bishop, touted as the next PM, is still waving Neville Chamberlain-like her UN Resolution with its full cooperation and Ukrainian government MOU with its exclusion zone.
Sadly, the bits of paper mean zilch when an existential civil war is on.
Good morning Dawn Patrollers.
ANNOUNCEMENT. I am heading over to WA for the rest of the week to do some work (there’s still life in the old boy!) and as a consequence the Dawn Patrol will be out of action until Saturday or Sunday.
Peter Martin – the red tape has only just begun?
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/lousy-days-loom-for-small-businesses-bombarded-by-jobseekers-20140728-3cpxb.html
And business groups slam it too.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/28/industry-concerned-about-coalitions-40-job-applications-a-month-plan
Do the maths. It’s simply crazy.
https://theconversation.com/ten-job-seekers-per-vacancy-a-reality-check-on-welfare-overhaul-29743
Words fail me.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/abc-investigation-reveals-claims-of-abuse-in-nsw-cult-20140728-zxrct.html
Josh Bornstein – Labour laws do nothing to hurt productivity.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/28/make-no-mistake-labour-laws-do-nothing-to-hurt-productivity
Peter Wicks. Taking Australia to a new low.
http://wixxyleaks.com/in-the-navy-taking-asylum-seekers-hostage-is-a-new-low-even-for-us/
A nice upstanding Sydney family.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/construction-boss-anthony-omeley-charged-with-drug-trafficking-20140728-zxmqg.html
Greg Jericho has a very good look at Australia’s international standing in many areas. There are several interesting active charts.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2014/jul/28/un-scores-australia-high-for-quality-of-life-but-low-on-climate-change-progress
I wouldn’t give these a cent of taxpayers’ money.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/lastminute-website-for-private-schools-20140728-zx8ec.html
Section 2 . . .
Sow and ye shall reap! Perhaps they will need to raise more funds.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/icac-hearings-strain-liberal-party-coffers-20140728-zxnou.html
An expert says the work for the dole scheme simply won’t work and that it’s an entirely political move.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/work-for-dole-schemes-no-help-in-finding-jobs-says-expert-20140728-3cpxd.html
Ben Eltham agrees.
https://newmatilda.com/2014/07/28/work-dole-doesnt-work-and-never-has
Morrison’s legal fight scales up by the day. and Haynes J seems a little unimpressed.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/false-imprisonment-claims-heard-in-high-court-over-157-tamils-held-on-boat-for-a-month-20140728-3cpr3.html
An open letter from Barry Everingham to the “psychotic” Scott Morrison. It’s a ball tearer!!
http://www.independentaustralia.net/australia/australia-display/open-letter-to-psychotic-scott-morrison,6713
This Senate inquiry into excessive out of pocket healthcare costs may well prove to be very interesting.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/college-raises-concerns-at-extortionate-fees-of-some-surgeons-20140728-3cpxa.html
Peter Reith has written a puff piece on J Bishop as PM. You can find it for yourself.
Jenna Price – Abbott should get back to work and stop focussing on MH17. A good read.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/jenna-price-tony-abbott-should-get-back-to-work-and-stop-focusing-on-mh17-20140728-zxmqt.html
Peter Martin – Palmer (and we) have been outsmarted by the Libs on FoFA.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/clive-palmer-conned-by-coalition-20140728-zxka9.html
Murdoch and Abbott – Climate change denialist flat earthers.
http://www.independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/murdoch-and-abbott-climate-change-denying-flat-earthers,6712
Meanwhile in Gaza the world’s other major undeclared war grinds on. What the Israeli’s hope to accomplish escapes me.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/28/israel-military-campaign-continue-mission-accomplished
Have a good day all. The decision on Kate Jackson will be interesting. Is this week not her last chance to provide evidence of her claims against the HSU case for her repaying the missing money?