Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Australian Comedy Group Prods APEC Security

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the blame-canada dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 244

ajdlinux writes "Members of the Australian comedy group The Chaser were arrested today after attempting to breach security at the APEC Leaders Conference in Sydney. Chas Licciardello and Julian Morrow were arrested, along with nine crew members (all are now free on bail), just a short distance away from the InterContinental Hotel where President Bush is staying. They had already cleared at least two police checkpoints, according to CNN, disguised as a Canadian motorcade. 'No particular reason we chose Canada,' said Taylor. 'We just thought they'd be a country who the cops wouldn't scrutinize too closely, and who feasibly would only have three cars in their motorcade — as opposed to the 20 or so gas guzzlers that Bush has brought with him.'" CNN has a photo of Licciardello, dressed as Osama bin Laden, being arrested.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Previous pranks (4, Informative)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493161)

The third series of the Chasers War on Everything started yesterday. Back in the first series they did a prank with Virgin Blue booking e-tickets under the names 'Terry Wrist' and 'Al Kyder' (you can watch the clip here [google.com] ). This prank should be aired this Wednesday.

Tomorrow people living in Sydney will be getting a public holiday and the city will be complete lock down mode.

Re:Previous pranks (0, Flamebait)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493227)

Back in the first series they did a prank with Virgin Blue booking e-tickets under the names 'Terry Wrist' and 'Al Kyder'
With such witty humor, it's surprising that nobody has ever heard of them before. I mean.. puns... Wow.

Re:Previous pranks (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493267)

Actually most people in AUSTRALIA (ie, where they're from) have heard of them.

Re:Previous pranks (-1, Flamebait)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493285)

My previous comment stands.

Re:Previous pranks (2, Insightful)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493393)

You're unpleasant and judgemental - go back to your Friends and your Cheers, I'm sure they suit your intellect perfectly.

Those of us who are sufficiently open-minded to watch a comedy show before deciding whether it is any good or not will, I'm sure, be in for a treat with the third series.

Re:Previous pranks (-1, Troll)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494021)

You're unpleasant and judgemental - go back to your Friends
And you're calling me unpleasant?

Re:Previous pranks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20494207)

No. You're not unpleasant. You a completely and utterly worthless asshole who should have been in the twin towers on 9/11/2001. I'll gladly call myself unpleasant if it means that I'm not the kind of scum you are.

Re:Previous pranks (2, Funny)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493381)

Actually most people in AUSTRALIA (ie, where they're from) have heard of them

I haven't. Does this presuppose the use of television or some such nonsense?

Re:Previous pranks (2, Insightful)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493467)

I haven't. Does this presuppose the use of television or some such nonsense?
They usually have a major boost of awareness after they have their pranks make the world wide media. You, now, know of them because of this prank. I first found out about them after the 'Terry Wrist' prank. (I actually remember reading it on slashdot... yet I can't find the article when searching for it.) They are giving Australia Security a few good lesson.

Re:Previous pranks (4, Informative)

Just because I'm an (847583) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494235)

Yesterday there was a picture of a bomb squad officer in full outfit defusing a sleeping bag published in the daily tabloid. There's been several stories of media officers being told to pick up credentials to access the restricted zone inside the restricted zone, which they can't get into because they don't have their passes, which they're trying to pick up, which they can't... etc. Example [smh.com.au]

On the one hand I can see that the police and the millions of rent-a-cop types have to take everything ultra seriously just incase one of the leaders (though according to most of the news George "Nucular" Bush and some Chinese guy nobody knows the name of are the only ones in town) does end up karking it in Sydney... it would look bad. On the other hand it's all a big farce.

The police bought a truck mounted water cannon [smh.com.au] (but NSW rents a water crane [smh.com.au] to battle bushfires every summer, priorities eh) for this event and cleared jails [news.com.au] to make room for the protesters the police plan to arrest. I guess if they can boast they managed to jail a guy that looks like Osama Bin Laden they'll get the merit badge they were after.

Re:Previous pranks (4, Funny)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493973)

I haven't. Does this presuppose the use of television or some such nonsense?
Unless we've had a sudden population drop it merely presupposes that you don't constitute most Australians. Seeing as I am one too you can't possibly be more than 50%

Re:Previous pranks (2, Insightful)

Usekh (557680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494035)

Or reading newspapers, reading websites. You know basically being aware of the world around you :)

Re:Previous pranks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493475)

As if that matters. Doesn't everyone know that if they aren't popular in America, they don't really exist, they're just a figment of someone's imagination?

Re:Previous pranks (1)

robotoverflow (738751) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493429)

From what I remember that prank was about pointing out the fact that airport security is not actually paying attention to the threats that they're supposedly protecting us from, if anything at all. Those names they used were even announced over the PA system without staff so much as batting an eyelid.

Am I the only one who sees the irony in using sarcasm to express how low-brow puns are? ;)

Re:Previous pranks (5, Funny)

sqldr (838964) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493309)

Their finest moment has to be wheeling a trojan horse full of greek soldiers into the turkish embassy.. (can we park this here?)

Re:Previous pranks (3, Informative)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493399)

Their finest moment has to be wheeling a trojan horse full of greek soldiers into the turkish embassy.. (can we park this here?)
Sure. Here [google.com] it is. The Australian Army actually let them into the courtyard of their base. At least then someone yelled check out the horse. But amazingly the Opera House is part of the APEC lock down yet during the Torjan Horse prank they went right past security with the horse.

Re:Previous pranks (2, Informative)

phobos13013 (813040) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493421)

Or you can just watch all the episodes here. [abc.net.au] Now the question is, will the US pressure AU to treat them as terrorists, etc., and put them away indefinitely and levy heavy sanctions against the ABC? They should just let this one fade away, the only result of something like this will be to get the Chasers more publicity. Which actually, can be a killer in the guerilla media style they emulate.

Re:Previous pranks (3, Insightful)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493545)

I didn't link to the ABC website because it is supposed to be for Australians only to view. They aren't doing anything to non-Australians but if at the end of the month most of their bandwidth bill is from international traffic be sure they will start ip locking it. The ABC is happy with their content being available on as many possible channels (they even upload torrents of their shows to bit torrent networks) as long as they aren't paying the bandwidth bill.

Re:Previous pranks (1)

lazybeam (162300) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493823)

Well it's downloading at about 4KB/s here :( And I'm on cable!

I slept my favourite tv night. /me also search for spicks and specks vodcast...

Re:Previous pranks (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493915)

By all means, link to the torrents. I have 10 mbit pipe up, and I'm not afraid to share :)

Re:Previous pranks (1)

pasamio (737659) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493919)

The ABC already has this in place much like the BBC does for some parts of their site. I was in the States a few months back and couldn't get the podcast on iTunes for some reason, went to the website and got a nice message saying "Come to Australia and you can download this." Also the ABC peers onto PIPE in Australia which used to be free traffic for people, now its a rather limited set of people for who its free to disappointingly.

Re:Previous pranks (3, Insightful)

unfunk (804468) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495305)

levy heavy sanctions against the ABC?
But... how the hell would that work, considering that the ABC is a publicly funded corporation? I'm sure if Little Johnny cut the ABC's funding much further, plenty of Aussies will be up in arms over it. It really is the last bastion of quality television journalism in this country.

No particular reason (4, Funny)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493187)

"No particular reason we chose Canada" ... except for the two I'm about to mention.

"Security was working" (4, Funny)

Alicat1194 (970019) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493193)

Which is why they only let them through 2 checkpoints (2 being the secret number of the day).

Re:"Security was working" (5, Insightful)

ben there... (946946) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493315)

According to the video, they didn't catch on until one of them stepped out dressed as Osama bin Laden. The only reason they were caught was their completely absurd attire. And the security guys pat each other on the back for that. I'm not sure which part is funniest, but I'm definitely laughing.

The real terror (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493197)

Bush was probably most afraid somebody would have asked him a real question, like where his buddy Osama is at.

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
- George Orwell

Should have dressed up as Norman Hsu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493769)

That way, we could have a fugitive have direct access to senior elected members of our government.

As long as they're Dems, anyway...

tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493221)

Any particular reason for this story other than another kdawsonfud attempt to get a slam in at Bush?

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (-1, Offtopic)

moseman (190361) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493341)

Yeap - that is it. kdawson has a direct phone line to the DNC.

I think it would be a fun prank to cane these basters on youtube.

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (3, Funny)

faloi (738831) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493383)

Any particular reason for this story other than another kdawsonfud attempt to get a slam in at Bush?

Sure. The technology hooks are self evident. You can, ummm, find clips of the guys on youtube. And, err, well, we're pretty sure one of them had a cell phone. And the cameras, don't get me started about the cameras!

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493417)

The phone probably even had a SIM CARD in it!

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (5, Insightful)

Guzzitza (1000386) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493841)

Well, considering the government is spending 170 million on security, which includes a lot of technological crap - such as choppers flying around blocking mobile phone signals, it seems important to note that all you need is 3 cars, a couple of flags, and a fake sticker to bypass all that security... I know it isn't massively relevant, but it is funny.

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494559)

The Chasers have been mentioned on here before. A 16 year old issued a bunch of bogus DMCA take-down notices to youtube about their stuff. They thought it was pretty funny.

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493533)

Seriously...News for Nerds my ass. kdawson is turning out to be michael reincarnated: A tool using slashdot as his own personal soapbox.

Hey kdawson, this ain't your blog. Stop posting stuff that doesn't matter to most slashdotters.

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493741)

I voted this story up on the Firehose last night. If it were posted by another editor, would you be as vituperative?

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493819)

If it didn't have the offtopic Bush slam in it, would you have been so supportive of it?

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud (1)

eloki (29152) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494113)

Any particular reason for this story other than another kdawsonfud attempt to get a slam in at Bush?


You mean apart from the fact it's funny and is filed under the Humour section? :) APEC is a reasonably major political/economic forum for the region, I don't see this as being gratuitous.

Yep, that's Osama, alright! (3, Funny)

objekt (232270) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493223)

I'd recognize that hat anywhere!

Morons without borders (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493239)

Hope they yuk it up in court. At least they weren't asked to show a receipt.

Major embarassment (4, Insightful)

evilgrug (915703) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493279)

It frightens me that there's a very real chance that had castmember Chas Licciardello not been dressed up as Osama Bin Laden, they could have made it all the way inside.

Of course the police are spinning this and saying that due to the arrests its 'proof' that security works and the $170 million spent on security was well worth it, despite the fact that Candian flags and fake APEC stickers on the hood are all that's required to get within ten metres of the President's hotel.

Re:Major embarassment (5, Insightful)

Richard W.M. Jones (591125) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493635)

It frightens me that there's a very real chance that had castmember Chas Licciardello not been dressed up as Osama Bin Laden, they could have made it all the way inside.

It frightens you? Why?

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

Rich.

Re:Major embarassment (4, Informative)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493863)

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.
You can catch up with John Howard every morning during daily walks. The Chaser did a prank about this during the first series after a school kid came up to Howard with a screw driver and hugged him. You can watch it here [google.com] (low quality).

Re:Major embarassment (4, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493883)

It frightens you? Why?
Because when Heads of State violently die it tends to cause chaos, political/economic instability and/or wars.

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?
That's the dumbest thing I've heard today.
There is always going to be some extreme nutters who hate the current leaders and their policies.

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.
I agree that it's a shame, but you have at least one Representative. Talk to them. They are your voice to the PM.

Re:Major embarassment (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494457)

And if you're in Benalong?

Re:Major embarassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20494947)

There is always going to be some extreme nutters who hate the current leaders and their policies.

Sequestering protestors who object to $DEAR_LEADER's policies in "free speech zones" remote from the event, while allowing those who agree with them to get much closer, does nothing to deter said extreme nutters. I'm sure your average Lee Harvey Oswald-type assassin would have no problem masquerading as a dittohead if it meant that he could get close enough to take a shot.

This sort of security system has little to do with deterring assassination and lots to do with keeping protesters off of the news.

Re:Major embarassment (1)

Dr Caleb (121505) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495401)

"Because when Heads of State violently die it tends to cause chaos, political/economic instability and/or wars."

Perhaps if the citizens want you dead, you are doing something wrong? As you and other posters point out - you can't stop the crazies, but you can stop the regular Joes by simply doing your job well enough not to anger anyone that much.

" I agree that it's a shame, but you have at least one Representative. Talk to them. They are your voice to the PM."

Ahhh, to be young and naive again.

Re:Major embarassment (2, Insightful)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493895)

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

I think there's an issue of practicality there, though. If we could walk up to our leaders (without having to pretend to be Canadians in a motorcade) then there'd be too many people crammed around them all trying to argue about dozens of different things!

If only politicians could do what the people want, rather than what the people need.

(I'll leave it up to the reader as to whether the previous sentence is sincere or sarcastic, as best suits their PoV)

Re:Major embarassment (1)

crush (19364) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494563)

Why?

Think of the children you monster. If you're not cowering under the bed then ... oh why do I bother, you're obviously some sort of a terrorist or you wouldn't want to argue with your democratically elected representative.

Re:Major embarassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20494957)

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.


Wow! You just gave me this flash back.
I was in Ottawa in 1990 when the first Iraq war (Gulf war) started. As a student I had only my 12 years old Walkman to fetch news report. I was told by neighbors "We are at War", being a nerve wreck I went for a walk listening to my walkman.
In 30 minutes I was in front of the Parliament. No one there. I start walking around, listening to all kinds of analysis on the Gulf situation and reports from the "live Baghdad bombing" thru the now famous CNN reports.

Suddenly I see several big black cars stop near me, 6 guys (MIB types) quickly walk pass me, and I see Brian Mulroney, our then Prime Minister walk into the parliament about 10 feet in front of me. I then realize I was in front of the main front door. 15 seconds later I was alone again.

Since then I do have some snickering watching all of today's security. What happened to our beautiful country? (Countries?)
Did the terrorists won? Perhaps not but they certainly managed to change our way of life.

Re:Major embarassment (4, Informative)

SlayerofGods (682938) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493757)

Actually... if they hadn't been stopped he wouldn't have gotten out. Therefore they were pulled over first, which seems to indicate that the security was on to them at least some what.

And truthfully from a security stand point this makes sense.
You don't want to stop a motorcade at the first checkpoint otherwise an enemy (I know it's Australia, just saying) could just set up watching the check point and wait for his target to be stopped there. What they should be doing is wave an 'obvious' motorcade through the first level of security and then check them out deeper in where it's safe.

Further the article doesn't make it clear what these check points were. Perhaps the first one was just a couple of guys on foot charged with turning away anyone that doesn't have clear business in the area, and not what everyone pictures when they think of a check point as barbed wire, sandbags, gates, guys with machine guns, ect. /Just saying

Re:Major embarassment (1)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494123)

I agree with your points but they let them reach Bush's Hotel without stopping them. This implies that security wasn't on to them enough.

Re:Major embarassment (1)

westyx (95706) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494467)

No, it does not make sense. The further bad guys get in the more freedom they have to do something. You stop all you can in the outer ring, restricting movement as much as possible.

If the enemy can view their attempt at being stopped, it means they haven't got close to what's being protected. It doesn't matter in this case what the checkpoint was made of, everything should have been stopped and accounted for, and that hasn't happened here at all.

Re:Major embarassment (4, Insightful)

SlayerofGods (682938) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494825)

If the enemy can view their attempt at being stopped, it means they haven't got close to what's being protected.
But what you're trying to protect is the people in the motorcade. By stopping them in plain view you're in fact putting them at risk.

Let's say you stop everyone at the checkpoint and the enemy knows this. All he has to do is find a spot overlooking the checkpoint (not hard in a dense urban area), bring a machine gun, then just wait till the target shows up. So Bush's 10 car motorcade comes rolling up and are all force to stop to be cleared. Now all the guy has to do is open fire at the cars which are basically trapped between the checkpoint gate and the car behind them and even if he can't tell which one Bush is in he's bound to hit something before anyone can react in the chaos.

The only way to protect against this is to either build massive secure checkpoints which would be hard in the middle of an active city. Or have multilayered security where the outer checkpoints make sure guys carrying machine guns don't get through and the inner security makes sure everything is safe and you don't have guys dressed like bin Laden wondering around.

But really though, the news article simply doesn't give you enough information to properly critique Sydney security. For example, why was the motorcade pulled over? Did they simply get lucky or was it proper procedure to check out motorcades once they've cleared the other checkpoints? How close were they to hotel? A 'block adjacent to the InterContinental Hotel' was rather vague. Were they close enough that if it had been a car bomb that people in the hotel would have been at risk? Was there still more security between where they were pulled over and where the diplomats were staying? IE if they had punched the gas would anyone important been at risk?

The news media is just doing what the news media does, trying to be sensational. I take everything they say with a grain of salt.
In the end though was security not as strong as it could be? Probably. But is it as bad as the news is making it sound? Probably not.

Re:Major embarassment (1)

westyx (95706) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494955)

I understand where you're coming from, but if they were concerns about those then the convoys would go from the checkpoint into a sheltered bay where they would be inspected/challenged, and then let through. I doubt they did a check for guns, because they would have noticed the guy dressed as osama, along with a lack of bodyguards. It's a big embaressment for the police.

(realistically, there's no way bush's convoy would be stopped, ever. the checkpoints and convoy would be in radio contact, and they'd just be waved through).

Re:Major embarassment (5, Informative)

unfunk (804468) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495203)

But really though, the news article simply doesn't give you enough information to properly critique Sydney security. For example, why was the motorcade pulled over? Did they simply get lucky or was it proper procedure to check out motorcades once they've cleared the other checkpoints? How close were they to hotel? A 'block adjacent to the InterContinental Hotel' was rather vague. Were they close enough that if it had been a car bomb that people in the hotel would have been at risk? Was there still more security between where they were pulled over and where the diplomats were staying? IE if they had punched the gas would anyone important been at risk?

The news media is just doing what the news media does, trying to be sensational. I take everything they say with a grain of salt.
In the end though was security not as strong as it could be? Probably. But is it as bad as the news is making it sound? Probably not.
Well, the fact that you're reading a CNN report on it kinda skews the whole thing - check out http://www.abc.net.au/news [abc.net.au] for a more Aussie view on it. The Lateline (our country's best/most reliable news program) report claimed that the motorcade pulled up - of their own accord - outside Bush's hotel, and that security wasn't alarmed until Chaz stepped out, dressed as Osama bin Laden. The chief of police then went on record as saying that his boys did a good job, and that the arrest of the eleven people involved proved that the $160 million was well spent.

I'm sorry? Would it have been "well spent" if those cars were laden full of explosives and detonated outside the hotel? I doubt it.

That said, I love the chaser boys; they know a good prank when they see one, and also know when they're crossing the line... not that it ever stops them.

Re:Major embarassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20495195)

But the Slashdotters will spin it their way so that it is one more thing to try to make government look bad yet these nerds around here could never possibly accomplish anything besides being bitter and jealous toward everyone in the world.

Of course a lot of Slashdot readers are 'sheep' and are grunts of the tech industry, wouldn't surprise anybody as nothing on Slashdot makes national news or their voices ever have any affect in the real world, besides being worried about what SCO/Microsoft/Copyright all the time it can make you turn a blind eye to the real problems of a half assed unpolished linux desktop.

Re:Major embarassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493939)

I think it's frightening that whole city blocks can be barricaded and declared off-limits for the people who live there so that a bunch of politicians can feel secure from the plebs. What's even more frightening/revealing is that they think they have to do that. By the people, for the people, not against the people.

Re:Major embarassment (1)

Organic User (1103717) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494349)

I think it's frightening that whole city blocks can be barricaded and declared off-limits for the people who live there so that a bunch of politicians can feel secure from the plebs.
No one lives in the CBD. Unless you sleep in your office this shouldn't effect you because it is going to be a public holiday and you should have no reason to be in the CBD. (Many joke about sleeping under your desk because in Australia you are taxed for travel to work expenses... the rational given is that you could theoretically sleep under your desk...)

The only people that are effect are people like me that need to get to the airport tomorrow. In normal conditions it should take me 30 minutes to travel to the airport. I was told by the RTA to give an extra 3 hours for travel or go to the North Shore and get to the airport from there. This is like telling someone to go to Jordan (okay no boarder crossing required but same principle) to travel from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv.

Re:Major embarassment (3, Insightful)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495093)

No one lives in the CBD. Unless you sleep in your office this shouldn't effect you because it is going to be a public holiday and you should have no reason to be in the CBD.

There's quite a few apartment buildings in, or very near, the lockdown zone. The Toaster, for example, is right next to the Opera House. Not to mention things like the ferry terminal being smack bang in the middle of it all, the pubs, hotels, general tourist attractions, etc. The Sydney CBD isn't like, say, central London - it's not a deserted wasteland on a non-work day.

Whoever thought Sydney was an appropriate place to hold something like APEC should be fired for incompetence. An island resort or relatively isolated hotel(s), would have been a far saner place to have all the meetings. Much less disruption to local residents, businesses and tourists, much easier and cheaper to secure.

Re:Major embarassment (2, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493951)

>It frightens me

How many new laws and restrictions on liberty would it take to reassure you?

It may frighten you (1)

tietokone-olmi (26595) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493953)

But for me, it gives me hope.

Re:Major embarassment (2, Informative)

JonathanR (852748) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494053)

It doesn't frighten me at all. The whole episode is a complete farce.

Tell me: Why can the CBD of the biggest Australian metropolis suffer a complete lock-down in the name of a pyjama-party for a few world leaders, while Melbourne can't even host a car-free day [theage.com.au] in part of its CBD? It strikes me that something is wrong with our priorities.

Downer on the comedy group's motives (4, Interesting)

.c (115916) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493283)

"Whatever you think of the humor of 'The Chaser,' the honest truth is they were clearly not going to harm anybody in a physical way," Downer said. "They presumably were, as is the nature of their show, aiming to humiliate a lot of well-known people."
For a politician, this type of harm could be career-ending -- public opinion is everything.

This is Australia (2, Insightful)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493917)

We already know all politicians are dick heads, we don't worship them (or want to) as many Americans seem to do.

Re:Downer on the comedy group's motives (2, Funny)

lazybeam (162300) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493957)

Not in Australia. Pollies here love being satired!

Re:Downer on the comedy group's motives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20494095)

Well, you're entire country is descended from criminals so its not like any of you have an illustrious family background to maintain :-p

Re:Downer on the comedy group's motives (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494489)

Have you seen Alexander Downer? This will help his image.

His best moment, IMHO, was a radio interview where the headphones had a problem. "It's broken," BANG, "It's FUCKING BROKEN."

Re:Downer on the comedy group's motives (1)

apt142 (574425) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494891)

My question then is, What could they do to make him look [bushorchimp.com] any dumber [about.com] than [youtube.com] he [youtube.com] already [wikipedia.org] is [rawstory.com] ?

Have they gone too far this time? (5, Informative)

hools1234 (789912) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493295)

These guys are seriously the funniest thing on Australian TV. They are extremely witty and some of their comedy is so well thought out, you really wonder where they get it from. There is some great footage of this weeks episode on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxXAr0R43dQ [youtube.com] where they try to see how big a weapon they can smuggle in to a jail, including a rocket, a small canon (disguised poorly as a babies pram) and a tank! Some very clever gags about APEC also. Have they gone too far this time though? With times so security conscious, dressing up as Osama and getting that close to the US Presidents quarters, they are lucky they weren't fired upon! Funny though.

Re:Have they gone too far this time? (3, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493979)

Have they gone too far this time though? With times so security conscious, dressing up as Osama and getting that close to the US Presidents quarters, they are lucky they weren't fired upon!

No, they haven't gone too far. By pointing out that the US has a huge and unnecessary motorcade in a foreign country, it opens my eyes to yet another fleecing of America by the douchebags in office. By pointing out that people may be arrested for nothing more than a prank mostly because it embarrassed the security forces supposedly increased for the visit of someone "so important", it shows me that the countries we live in suck compared to 10 years ago.

Someone needs to continually point out the failures and by doing it with comedic value, a larger majority of people will pay attention.

Re:Have they gone too far this time? (2, Insightful)

deniable (76198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494181)

That's what one of the senior cops said. Something about all the snipers on the building would have shot them. If that's the case, the snipers are a bigger threat than a terrorist.

hilair (3, Insightful)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493297)

I've seen some of their clips on youtube and they're pretty damn funny!!

Over here in the UK, the main Aussie telly we're blessed with are neighbours and home & away - I would swap war on everything for neighbours any day!!

Re:hilair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20494973)

You can podcast it from the ABC website [abc.net.au] .

If they had tried to do that in the U.S. (4, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493331)

After their arrest, the Bush administration and Justice Department officials immediately hold a press conference to brag about how they've busted up another terrorist cell, ending with "See, all these new wiretapping laws are working!"

when everything is perceived as a threat (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493375)

& everyone must be kept in the 'dark' about everything.

it's conceivable that there's been some kind of offense to humanity committed.

sun's newclear power repels unprecedented evile
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, @08:20AM (#20462703)
it's both a fairytail & whoreabull malady @once?

previously (dis)allowed post(s):

many of US never look up (or ever really see anything)
(Score:?)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 03, @09:34PM
too busy getting somewhere? we could still afford to pay attention, as it is cost effective, & time efficient.

it's not as though we weren't already being treated to more misinformation than we could ever disbelieve.

infactdead corepirate nazis still WAY off track
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 01, @09:35AM (#20433195)
it's only a matter of time/space/circumstance.

previous post:
mynuts won 'off t(r)opic'???
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30, @10:22AM (#20411119)
eye gas you could call this 'weather'?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8004881114 [google.com] 646406827 [google.com]

be careful, the whack(off)job in the next compartment may be a high RANKing corepirate nazi official.

previous post:
whoreabull corepirate nazi felons planning trips
(Score: mynuts won, robbIE's 'secret' censorship score)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, @12:13PM (#20072457)
in orbit perhaps? we wouldn't want to be within 500 miles of the naykid furor at this power point.

better days ahead?

as in payper liesense hypenosys stock markup FraUD felons are on their way out? what a revolutionary concept.

from previous post: many demand nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the felonious execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the ife0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

Transcript of the arresting moment (4, Funny)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493443)

Guard: Where are you from?
Australian Mimicking A Canadian: We're the Canadian delegation. Where's the hockey rink?
Guard: We don't have a hockey rink here, Sir. [Addressing AMAC bin Laden.] Are you from the Middle East, Sir?
AMAC-BL: Yes, from Montreal.
Guard: Who is Margaret Atwood?
AMAC-BL: [pause] She's the wife of Wayne Gretzky.
Guard: Step out of the car, Sir.

Glad to hear someone thinks they're funny. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493549)

Because this prank, and the others in the comment thread, don't strike me as being the least bit funny at all. Frankly, I think people have forgotten how to be funny.

Re:Glad to hear someone thinks they're funny. (1)

JonathanR (852748) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494381)

Ah, why not lighten up a little David?

APEC Protest Coverage (2, Insightful)

essence (812715) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493591)

You can get some grass roots coverage of the protests against APEC at Sydney Indymedia [indymedia.org.au] .

Had to be the chasers (1)

Lightster (1084511) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493627)

Hahahah, As soon as I read the title I thought, its the chasers isn't it.

Re:Had to be the chasers (1)

Usekh (557680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493855)

I heard it on the news and they just said "A commedy group" and had the same first though :) had to be Chasers.

Great stuff ! (0, Troll)

unity100 (970058) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493669)

nice to see there are still witty people in australia, despite the latest prime minister, who gives the feeling of rattlesnake when you look into his eyes.

Utterly Un-Australian (3, Insightful)

Malekin (1079147) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493773)

I feel that it was utterly un-Australian to arrest these guys. It was a complete waste of police & justice system resources, and really only a pathetic attempt to legitimise the $170 million spent on the ridiculous security theatre show borking up Sydney's CBD.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (2, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493921)

Calm down, Sparky. What would be un-Whatever would be to charge or convict them. Merely detaining them and then moving them off site while you figure out if they are who they say they are is common sense.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

SlowTurtle (1031756) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494029)

I think he was referring to one of the Chasers episodes where they test what is actually "un-australian." It's a good episode...

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494039)

Then I shall steal it from the intartubes forthwith. Theft is the Australian thing to do, as I understand it.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

Usekh (557680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20493929)

I agree. At least semi-seriously ;) I mean larrikanism and taking the piss like this is one of the things I love about Australia. Unfortunately they don't seem to have a place in Howard's vision of Australia.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

smegged (1067080) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494005)

Are you kidding? The coallition members are by far more cooperative with the Chaser guys, particularly Costello. It's the labor party members (I'm looking at you Beazley) that have traditionally reacted badly to them.

You have enough fodder to criticise the coallition without slandering them. Locking these guys up was procedure for anyone who broke through security, which they did. I doubt that the PM even found out about it until after the news had broke and they'd been incarcerated.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494233)

Look how far Howard has gotten. He's a good politician. He'll chuckle and let them go for points with the voters.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

Archades54 (925582) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494073)

It was probably done just to double check that they were safe and not going to do anything harmful. It is possible they COULD have had explosives etc, a few arrests and checking around is better than the ultra slim but still real chance that the headlines tomorrow could have read Comedy act suicide bombs, or whatever.

And hell, it tests out 170 million dollars worth of security.

Re:Utterly Un-Australian (1)

_14k4 (5085) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494423)

I may be feeding the troll here, but for f*ck's sake... they knew what they were getting into when they decided to go through with the prank. That is, after all, why it is called a "prank"...

They've also, probably, broken some Canardian laws, too...

Am I the only one? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20493977)

Am I the only one that thinks they aren't funny at all?

"Oh wow, look I can insult you! Ha Ha!"

WTF?

unparalleled hypocracy (2, Interesting)

michaelmuffin (1149499) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494257)

So those who tag themselves as the leaders of the free world are restraining their populace with barbed wire fences, armed riot police, and undemocratic bans on demonstration. Howard's use of the word `violent' (which the media has perpetuated without question) to describe protesters is a pretext to take away more free speech and freedom of assembly rights and to characterise /all/ dissent as criminal. Everyone remember Heiligendamm earlier this summer? The APEC summit will turn out the same way.

Re:unparalleled hypocracy (1)

mabu (178417) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494911)

The worst part about all this is that there will probably be thousands of protesters with legitimate issues they want raised. And the news media will find the one tripped-out, bearded, hippy-dude beating on a djembe screaming "legalize meth!" and splatter that all over the television as an example of a typical activist.

Re:unparalleled hypocracy (1)

michaelmuffin (1149499) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495103)

That's exactly what I mean. The corporate media has every reason to maintain the status quo, so they marginalise dissent by ignoring dissenters. There will certainly be reporting, but it will be about that "legalise meth!" guy and it will ignore the issues that the protesters came to protest. The Sydney Indymedia [indymedia.org.au] coverage is great, by the way.

Re:unparalleled hypocracy (1)

mabu (178417) | more than 7 years ago | (#20495219)

The same thing happened in the states during the WTO protests in Seattle. They found some drunk asses smashing stuff and focused on that as if the entire flock of protesters were just there to dance in the street and break things.

It's always funny to see comedians arrested. (1)

deweycheetham (1124655) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494407)

You got to love any comedian who is willing to get arrested for comedy's sake.

Bring on the Fools...

eep (2, Funny)

Verte (1053342) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494475)

Remember why the Glasshouse got axed? You can't be critical of the Liberal party's ridiculous actions! Especially when [click]

On the topic of the Chaser (5, Informative)

smegged (1067080) | more than 7 years ago | (#20494813)

Just an FYI for everyone out there, the Chaser is a show which is broadcast by the ABC, a PUBLICALLY FUNDED channel here in Australia. They constantly poke fun of security, politicians and current affairs shows (among other things). They are a great example of democracy done right.

For some interesting clips see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3SfNANtig [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnP0snh_1cU [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3grHjibNdA [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BOMOVV2pf0 [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc5xTZGUrRQ [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GViD0Zwc3Bg [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-6F8GN8eXI [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwJ9s1RdGhc& [youtube.com]

Many more are freely available on youtube and other sites. The ABC doesn't mind you distributing them either.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?