Some interesting points made in this interview by George Galloway of Kim Iversen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P8QWm2pDaM
Why is this how I found out it was gonna be by fucking FIRING SQUAD‽‽‽
Did you also know he is paralysed from the chest down, is in constant pain, and incontinent. He will be shot in a wheelchair.
He also killed 13 people and wounded 32. Kinda hard to feel bad for him.
I didn’t think anyone should be executed, let alone on a live stream, but the fact that he’s paralyzed doesn’t grant him any sympathy.
I take your point.
However, live-streaming the murder (which is what capital punishment is) of a murderer can reinforce that :
- the US is a violent society which is devolving back to more primitive times when hangings, lynchings, and other executions were used as public spectacle
- this sort of event is put on to make the US govt look strong but only makes it look decrepit trying to distract its people from the economic mess it’s put them in
- it is creating a martyr which could lead to more people becoming radicalised and carrying out more terrorist acts on US soil and elsewhere
- the US is on par with the few countries that still have public executions like North Korea, Afghanistan and Iran, all of which are religious or political extremists.
You also have to consider that sadly and horrifically, mass killings of innocent people are common in the US but this one is being showtimed because it suits the political stance of the Trump govt. This both exploits the situation for political gain but also exposes that the govt is willing to traumatise not only its own people but the international community, and so losing even more respect.
Modern military rounds are alledged to kill via hydrostatic shock. If true, the brain is irreprably damaged and the human destroyed at a speed faster than pain can be conducted via the nervous system.
The truth is there is no way to kill an animal that wants to live which isn’t hideous. The destruction of life is revolting.
That’s not how any of this works. They aim for the heart. Bullets kill by blood loss (mostly). Headshots are for video games. Both soldiers and hunters are taught to aim for center mass.
And “modern military rounds”? Lol. You have no idea what you’re talking about. Military grade ammo is generally less powerful as well as being limited to non-expanding bullets. If anything, civilian “personal defense” ammunition is worse.
Finally, death is an unavoidable part of life. Would you tell a wolf it’s hideous and disgusting for killing a rabbit?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
this is the claim proponents of killing people with guns being reasonable make. Nothing to do with headshots you rude twerp.
I’ll be sure to shit on your floor if I ever visit, since a wolf would do that btw.
Is that so bad? At least it guarantees death; unlike other methods.
Or people could just choose to not watch it.
Ah, I see the this already has dumb ass “don’t watch it then” fans just like it’s another TV show.
All we’re missing is someone complaining about the casting of a crippled brown guy.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s a shit thing to do, and I disagree with capital punishment, not to mention pretty much everything that fucking country is doing at the moment. I’m just not sure that a ban from Australia will have much effect.
Have you considered that a ban from Australia may simply help Australians?
Also, Australia implemented a social media ban for under 16’s which has paved the way for other countries to do the same.
The world needs to send a clear message. Idiocracy was never supposed to be a documentary. Executions are not entertainment.
I agree with all of that, but check out how successful that social media ban has been. It was poorly thought out and rushed through against the advice of all the experts, and is pretty easily circumvented.
The only thing I have any agency over is my own actions. Banned or not, the choice is still ours.
It doesn’t work that way. It’s already been reported in the news and it will continue to be reported and make the rounds on social media. It’s another way for the police state to intimidate it’s citizens. Just knowing that the government wants it’s citizens to be appalled or worse, to get on board with the cruelty is enough whether they actually watch or not.
And, also a way to do psychological damage to society. Hegseth & co are at war with humanity.
The bar is so low and they still find ways to sink it deeper. Imagine telling people from 15 years ago about this happening…
Dude, just ban all content coming out of our country at this point.
We can’t. You’re pushing it onto us. CPAC is an example. We don’t want it either.
How about you blokes fix your shit.
The Pedo-in-Chief would throw feces at the walls if a country stopped talking about him/ boycotted all the bullshit coming from the US.
It’s a good idea.
I truly hope it’s not us but Americans who say NO and demand it not be filmed for public consumption at all.
I overheard a big maga guy at work ranting about how insane it is. It’s hilariously unpopular which means it’s going to happen
Wouldn’t this type of content already be “refused classification” thus disallowed to be broadcast?
Yes. At the very least it will be heavily cut and blurred.
It’s only platforms like YouTube that will be able to stream it censor free.
And therein lies the rub. Most are aware of this. And so they call for it to be stopped. Even as they ponder the ability/outcome of censorship…
It’s almost like the movie Idiocracy was an actual prophecy…🤣
Idiocracy is a documentary.
A website is not a broadcast. So, it can (and would) disallow the content from being broadcast on TV. But not from a webpage.
While we are at discussing the idea, it kinda won’t work. You can block all of the Internet or none of the Internet. You can’t block some of the Internet. If you ‘block’ a site from Australia, people can and will simply VPN to another country and access it there.
But then it isn’t Australia’s problem, as they are technically accesising internet from another country.
I think it’s Australia’s problem if Australia doesn’t want Australian citizens watching this psychopathic garbage.
Usually I’m against censorship, but I understand completely where they’re coming from here.
Oh, I’m well aware of the technical impossibility. I meant legally no one in Australia would be allowed to publish it, so a ban is moot. If it’s likely to be RC for a regular broadcaster, it can’t be published online, either.
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/online-content-regulation
This is where I find the Greens not effective.
Banning it from being livestreamed is impossible and will do nothing.
The government should be condemning the US government for still having the death penalty, and use this as an opportunity to make the arguments to why the death penalty is stupid.
And further why it’s so important for us to not be wholly in bed with the US on everything.
This is where I find the Greens not effective.
Very strange criticism for a minor party that is not in government.
The government should be condemning the US government for still having the death penalty, and use this as an opportunity to make the arguments to why the death penalty is stupid.
Is this supposed to be your very sensible, realistic alternative? Have you been paying attention during the last decade of Australian/US relations?
And further why it’s so important for us to not be wholly in bed with the US on everything.
This is the position of The Greens, and has been for years.
What I mean is effective in their political messaging.
I don’t disagree with them on this, otherwise. It’s fucked. And should be prohibited on all Australian media, online or otherwise.
But part of the conversation now, annoyingly, is whether it’s even feasible to ban all streaming.
I will admit that my criticism was probably a bit overblown, and influenced emotionally by my general dislike of the Greens’ ideas about affecting societal change. (i.e. they’re not anti-capitalist, aren’t democratic in their party structure, and believe we can reform our way to something better through parliament)
I’ll take them over Labor any day though, their heart is in the right place as a party.
Fair enough, I appreciate you adding some nuance to your argument and I can see where you’re coming from. I think their argument for a ban is actually way more feasible than Labor openly criticising the US, though. Labor clearly tries very hard to avoid offending this US administration and would never take a such a strong stand on an issue like this.
Whether a ban would actually be effective in terms of stopping every Australian from viewing the execution is another issue, but in terms of actually implementing something that may have some level of effect, a ban is pretty sensible. That’s exactly the type of solution Labor would go for.
I kind of agree in the sense that (in my view) preventing Australians from watching the US execution is a kind of a fridge issue - possibly a distraction from more important issues, possible a unnecessarily divisive position for The Greens to take. (Probably most people agree that broadcasting the execution is bad; but many people are sensitive about censorship.)
So in that sense perhaps it is a politically unsavvy thing for The Greens to take a position on. But on the other hand, saying & doing stuff like this is what gets them into the media. When The Greens are only talking about pencil-pushing bean-counting by-the-numbers sensible policies on core issues - they are simply ignored. A few people nod and say ‘fair call’, and no one says anything. No one spreads the word. And so very very few people hear anything about it. So when The Green stick to their core message, they just don’t heard. So these little provocative foraying to side-issue end up being pretty much the only news many people hear about The Greens at all.
ISIS does it = terrorism.
US Gov does it = justice.
ISIS
US Gov
They’re both the same.
Just a heads up to everyone else here, this is not sarcasm. I’m pretty sure this user is saying that the US Gov is as bad as (if not worse than, if you read their follow-up comments) ISIS.
depends on your metrics for compariosn ? # of wars conducted ? # of innocents killed ? # of foreign governments overturned ? # of citizens jailed ? the US leads all those metrics for example.
Search online which country is seen as the bigger threat to the world, Americans will be shocked. The surveys are conducted on regular basis so there isn’t any room for mental gymnastics.
The world super power and global hegemon for secular western democracy is the same as a theocratic insurgency terror org? Wow I had no idea.
theocratic insurgency terror org
Are you referring to ISIS or the US government here. It’s hard to tell from the description.
Since the inception, USA has always been imperialist and since the end of World War II, has been involved in more global conflicts than any other countries. USA merely operates on “lesser evil” framework. And up until recently, USA has been secular, but democratic? Hardly to begin with. Just ask black Americans, Native Americans, Filipinos, Vietnamese, Iraqis and Latin Americans. The US ignored the UN resolutions many times, especially on not invading Iraq under false pretense of hiding weapons of mass destruction. So, USA has always been a terrorist state but in different name and face. I would go so far as to say that Trump took off the facade of the country as the shining beacon on the hill. After all, American people had been demanding for authenticity.
Blah, blah, blah, America bad, America bad. I thought the attack on the Russian data centres put you guys out of commision?
I’d rather a lessor evil framework than… Oh wait your not suggesting anything because you’re an empty vessel for campist brain rot.
Nobody cares about “imperialism”, they care about living standards, representation, and economic prosperity. America has strived to realise these ideals and helped other nations reach them to through its international humanitarian efforts and security guarentees.
Any failure to meet their own standards pales in comparison to actual terrorists who don’t have those standards to begin with, so your use of that word really exposes your ignorance.
Btw the UN means nothing, it’s a glorified group chat for tinpot dictators and despots. A majority of the member states fall below 6 on the democratic index, i.e. they are corrupt authoritarian shit-holes.
I’d rather a lessor evil framework than… Oh wait your not suggesting anything because you’re an empty vessel for campist brain rot.
Any failure to meet their own standards pales in comparison to actual terrorists who don’t have those standards to begin with, so your use of that word really exposes your ignorance.
Sorry to say this to you lib, but if Saddam wasn’t toppled, ISIS would not even have come out in the first place. Saddam’s secular regime was what was stopping the theocratic terrorism that you yourself had been criticising. So if you want to talk about “lessor evil”, then maybe you should not be doing your own terrorism. You created ISIS simply because your country wanted oil at the obvious pretense of “spreading freedom”.
Lmao, yea Saddam was a great guy, everyone was cheering for him during the Al-Khald Hall purge. Glad to hear you defend a dictator so openly while speaking about the evils of a secular democracy from the other side of your mouth.
It’s really gross how you remove all agency from literal terrorists because apparently you think so little of Arabs. “ISIS had no choice but to fill a power vacuum with civilian blood, they’re just poor little guys :(”
And again, you are lying about what terrorism is to suit your obvious propaganda.
You’re the one who harped and promoted about choosing “lessor evil” and when it’s turned to you, you are now denying it. In reality, US plays Superman who may have defeated an enemy, but the material destruction and collateral casualties are left to others to clean it all up.
I thought the attack on the Russian data centres put you guys out of commision?
Bold angle coming from a much younger account literally named “tankiesmasher” that seems to only contribute anti-communist talking points.
Ah yes, the pro-American, pro-NATO, pro-Ukraine Russian bots, I must be one of those 🤡
Hope you got a good look at my profile while you were desperately searching for something besides my arguments to talk about.
Ah yes, the pro-American, pro-NATO, pro-Ukraine Russian bots, I must be one of those
No one said, nor implied, you are a Russian bot. It’s disturbing how confidently you missed the point.
That’s not the reason ISIS are labelled as terrorists.
Terrorists kill innocent people to spread terror. The US would never kill innocents except for all the innocents they kill.
Exactly, to spread terror. You’ve correctly identified that motive is a part of the definition. Congrats.
The US is chiefly concerned with fighting militants for material strategic goals, and has laws against targetting civilians.
ISIS is chiefly concerned with butchering anyone, regardless of civilian status, to gain, and maintain through fear, power in a region.
ISIS is chiefly concerned with butchering anyone, regardless of civilian status, to gain, and maintain through fear, power in a region.
Hmm, who does that remind me of? Israel? Yes, that shining beacon of democracy that gets almost unlimited weapons of mass destruction from the US to kill a majority of unarmed civilians.
And btw, the US may have “laws against targetting civilians” but it doesn’t mean these laws are followed. There are ample records of this.
Ample records of disproportionate strikes? Yes. Ample records of targetting civilians? No. Those rules of engagement are absolutely followed, and we know this from the thousands of instances where strikes were called off because civilian presence in the area changed. They keep endless records because they are accountable to Congress.
It’s a moot point when comparing America to ISIS because terrorists definitionally don’t have any concept of proportionality because killing civilians is the goal.
I don’t really care to argue I/P, that conflict is forever fucked and nobody knows anything about it.
Ample records of targetting civilians?
There are many of those. For a start, the IDF sets ‘kill lines’ and declares (without evidence) that anyone who crosses them is a ‘terrorist’ even if it is where they lived for years: https://israelpalestinenews.org/no-civilians-idf-soldiers-reveal-killings-lawlessness-in-gaza/, and there are records of many in the IDF saying ‘there are no civilians here’. To quote from actual people in the IDF: “That evening, our battalion commander congratulated us for killing a terrorist, saying he hoped we’d kill ten more tomorrow,” the fighter adds. “When someone pointed out he was unarmed and looked like a civilian, everyone shouted him down. The commander said: ‘Anyone crossing the line is a terrorist, no exceptions, no civilians. Everyone’s a terrorist.’ This deeply troubled me – did I leave my home to sleep in a mouse-infested building for this? To shoot unarmed people?”
There’s numerous heartbreaking stories of civilians being rounded up, of executions and the like. Children are targeted too: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/06/1167790. Clearly identified Humanitarian Vehicles like fire engines and ambulances have been attacked: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafah_paramedic_massacre.
Massive numbers of civilian houses have been deliberately flattened for no legitimate military purpose, for devastating effect on civilians: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-88500-6_8
In the middle of a critical water shortage for Gazan civilians, civilian water infrastructure has been repeatedly targeted - see for example https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2026/9/1/destroyed-desalination-plant-worsens-gazas-drinking-water-crisis.
The position that all Palestinians and their assets, civilian or not, are fair game for targeting seems to be a long-standing position of the Israeli military: e.g. see “During war there are no civilians” in https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2010/9/8/during-war-there-are-no-civilians. Isaac Herzog (the president) said there are no innocent civilians in Gaza: https://thewire.in/world/northern-gaza-israel-palestine-conflict. “I think it will be possible to declare ‘we have won’ within a few months. Gaza will be completely destroyed, its civilians will be concentrated south of the Morag Axis - and from there, they will leave in large numbers to third countries” - Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
So yes, there are ample records of targeting civilians.
Everyone should know the terror of the usa.
This is what they’ve always been, whether it’s a charismatic or bumbling killer on their throne.
The world should unite against their barbarism.
How myopic. I didn’t realise America’s sole focus since it’s inception has been terror and barbarism. I guess PEPFAR, USAID, the civil rights act, the Marshall Plan, fighting smallpox and polio, and international disaster relief were just cosmic whoopsies that materialised from the ether.
Hopefully Canada will not broadcast it.
It’ll be on the web. Whatever the law Australians and Canadians who want to watch the killing will be able to
If they can stop under 16s accessing social media then they can do this…Oh wait…
Backward shithole.
Play it live on every channel, every screen in the country. Put it on repeat. Show it on street corners and in pubs. Show it in primary schools and high schools. Everyone should see what we’re endorsing by being a US client state. Let those who want to revel in their inhumanity go over every sick detail with glee.
So we shouldn’t be a US client state? What should we be?
not siding with evil would be cool
America is evil, got it 👍
What should we do about it?
Yep. Show the homeless. Show the millions in penal servitude. Show the working poor. Show the communities racked by drugs and violence. Show the school massacres. Show the executions. Show the lynchings. Show the Epstein files. Even most Americans don’t know the truth of their country.
They know. They have always known. We spent years thinking they just accept it, recent years show they don’t just accept it, they perpetuate and some instances cheer it on.
It’s funny to me you’re listing things we’re already aware of thanks to the US being a transparent western democracy. Things that are the subject of heated discussion within the country as well.
the usa is a warmongering duopoly, not a democracy.
It’s obviously a democracy, so idk why you would deny that. Idk what a “warmongering duopoly” is.
There are already 82837463829 execution videos available online. If it’s even going to be broadcast, and with no protection or authentication (doubt), just don’t watch it. And don’t give us that bullshit “protect the kids” answer. How effective was the social media ban? 7% of kids actually blocked going by the last report?
Uncivilized barbarians.
