It's nothing to do with "wrongthink". It's a completely unrelated topic.
Imagine if you were involved in a conversation about the negative impacts of the tobacco industry on society, and I just jumped in with "cars are by far more dangerous than air travel".
Regardless of whether what I said is true, it has nothing to do with the existing conversation. You'll notice that I chose a very easy to prove fact for my hypothetical interjection here. You very much did not state a provable fact, but I'm going to ignore that because whether or not what you said is provable, it's still completely unrelated to the topic being discussed.
It's nothing to do with finding you "disagreeable". It's pretty basic etiquette when having a conversation.
I'm not really sure why you think I would be your border guard, or how you assume I would treat a person in that scenario even if I was? I very much dislike the policy being discussed - warrantless 'demands' to access a phone when crossing the border, I'm just trying to explain to you that
- (a) it's unrelated to COVID in any way; and
- (b) in my experience the assumption by foreigners (typically Americans but probably not exclusively) that Australians are all "hopping mad" about the government reaction to COVID is vastly overblown. A small number of very vocal, selfish shitheads protested and pretended to be people they're not (i.e. buying hi-vis gear to appear as if they're construction workers). The vast majority of the population has just the slightest bit of common decency and sense of community well being. There's a reason 5x as many cases in the US resulted in deaths, and why the death rate (i.e. deaths per n population) was 3.6x higher - and that's using data updated very recently, so it includes the past 12-18 months when restrictions have been lifted everywhere.
> It's nothing to do with finding you "disagreeable". It's pretty basic etiquette when having a conversation.
Please tell me more about this etiquette while calling me a foodstuff.
Indeed Covid is the unrelated topic, my opening words: Regardless of where you stand on Covid ...the original reasons for draconian law enforcement meant to be temporary are long gone..
The mentality however remains. I can only hope not permanently.
Not litigating the past, talking about the present. I say this with all sincerity, come back tomorrow perhaps and reread the exchange with fresh eyes.
> I'm not really sure why you think I would be your border guard, or how you assume I would treat a person in that scenario even if I was?
You would with some probability jump to conclusions that I'm part of the outgroup and treat me with a heavyhand as demonstrated by this whole exchange. These are not good vibes, hence, unpleasant and disappointing enough for me to steer clear. And I'm quite sure you are more reasonable than the typical border agent.
> in my experience the assumption by foreigners (typically Americans but probably not exclusively) that Australians are all "hopping mad" about the government reaction to COVID is vastly overblown
Wonderful, what does that have to do with this foreigner? Are you starting to understand the issue?
> Please tell me more about this etiquette while calling me a foodstuff.
I'm sorry you don't appreciate porcine slang. Would you prefer "Why are you going off like a bucket of prawns in the sun?" Or if you like crustaceans but prefer it was a bit snappier (no crab pun intended), how about "Don't come the raw prawn mate?"
> the original reasons for draconian law enforcement meant to be temporary are long gone..
How many times do people have to tell you that these measures are unrelated to COVID and pre-date it? COVID is thus not the "original reason" for the law in question, and never has been.
> The mentality however remains.
What mentality?
As much as this hasn't affected me yet personally (and I currently live as an expat in a country that is definitely a popular destination for some of the shifty fuckers they're actually looking for) I'm against the policy, and I would imagine most of my Australian friends would consider it overly invasive if they were told to hand over their PIN.
Are you somehow trying to suggest that because Australians in general approved of the restrictions put in place during the pandemic, that they're also likely to approve of this? I very much doubt that.
> You would with some probability jump to conclusions that I'm part of the outgroup
What "outgroup"? What are you even talking about?
> treat me with a heavyhand as demonstrated by this whole exchange
Calling someone out for talking shit about a topic they clearly don't know anything about is hardly "heavy handed".
> Wonderful, what does that have to do with this foreigner?
Well you're a foreigner who yet again made pretty ridiculous claims about Australians and their thoughts regarding how the government handled the pandemic.
> Well you're a foreigner who yet again made pretty ridiculous claims about Australians and their thoughts regarding how the government handled the pandemic.
I keep telling you I’m not an anti vaxer. I keep telling you I’m not talking about the the pandemic.
Those people who disturb you so is the outgroup I’m talking about.
I’m not that, has diddly to do with me, but you can’t snap out of that fixation.
> How many times do people have to tell you that these measures are unrelated to COVID and pre-date it? COVID is thus not the "original reason" for the law in question, and never has been.
I never said that Covid is the reason for the law in question , look carefully, you got on that all on your own!
How many times can I clarify that? That’s the mentality I’m talking about.
Snap out of it.
A border guard searching your phone pre and post Covid is no longer the same. God help you if he starts assuming wrong things about you now, like you are about me, understand?
That’s the entire point. Covid is over, the animosities remain and run deep.
Me, and the other people who replied to tell you the same thing, and the countless others who downvoted you on the same assumption.
> A border guard searching your phone pre and post Covid is no longer the same.
They're searching for terrorists/kiddie fuckers/porn 'smugglers'. That's it. I think their approach is completely wrong, but that's what they're searching for.
None of those particular things has anything to do with the pandemic.
> God help you if he starts assuming wrong things about you now
Why? Whether I refuse to give him my PIN; or I give it to him and he finds nothing of interest; or he does find something of interest: none of that relates to the attitudes of people regarding the pandemic, because none of the things they're searching for are even remotely related to the pandemic.
> That’s the entire point. Covid is over, the animosities remain and run deep.
What animosities? It's like you've branched out from carrying on like a pork chop and decided to add a side of word salad to the conversational plate.
> I’m not talking about the the pandemic.
> Then why even mention it?
Listen bud, you can treat antivaxers and bogans like lepers if you want. It is not my problem, they are your cross to bear as fellow citizens. I also think they are retarded, but you seem incapable of understanding this or where we differ.
Read the thread again and observe how you jump to conclusions about strangers (I must be an American who fell down the rabbit hole with those people online and am also like them) and the way you treat people you don't like. That's all.
I don't think you are quite your old selves and don't want to get caught up in your culture wars.
> Why? Whether I refuse to give him my PIN; or I give it to him and he finds nothing of interest; or he does find something of interest: none of that relates to the attitudes of people regarding the pandemic, because none of the things they're searching for are even remotely related to the pandemic.
Hard to believe they are sifting through phones at the border "just looking for kiddie fuckers". There is a reason why you think their approach is completely wrong. You know that makes no kind of sense, it is security theatre.
There is a fellow Australian in this thread describing being searched three times.
In reality you are at the mercy and at the discretion of the border guy. And if he acts like you've acted here and comes across an antivaxer I have a reasonable expectation he would give them a hard time out of spite. Or indeed whomever rubs them the wrong way.
I get how it is supposed to work, I am not claiming anything remotely like they are actively targeting this or that group as defined in the law. I'm talking about how it is enforced.
It isn't something I read online either. Because of this atmosphere people have bad experiences. Normal people.
No point in talking in circles, I'm guessing you'll stay with your cognitive disonnance and keep yelping at me like I'm an antivaxer and this isn't registering at all so I'll wish you the best and stop here.
> observe how you jump to conclusions about strangers
Conclusions are based on observations mate.
> culture wars
a few noisy fuck wits pretending to be construction workers so they can protest is hardly a culture war buddy.
> Hard to believe they are sifting through phones at the border "just looking for kiddie fuckers".
I gave you a paraphrased list of what they've told the media and the Senate they're looking for. An exact quote is
> Border force said a phone would only be seized where officers suspect it has “special forfeited goods” such as “illegal pornography, terrorism-related material and media that has been, or would be, refused classification”.
Given that they have sniffer dogs checking for fucking bananas it doesn't really surprise me that they want to check for porn, and the numbers quoted aren't exactly a large percentage of the number of travellers.
> There is a reason why you think their approach is completely wrong.
Yes, because it's done without a warrant. My issue is not with the government investigating suspected crimes. My issue is with random staff peeking at shit without sufficient oversight, and the potential for mishandling of legal, but sensitive material that may be held on a device.
> You know that makes no kind of sense, it is security theatre.
As I said, I think it needs to be backed by a stronger case (enough to convince a judge to grant a warrant), but that doesn't mean it's useless.
> There is a fellow Australian in this thread describing being searched three times.
And we know zero about the context of why he was initially searched.
> In reality you are at the mercy and at the discretion of the border guy.
That's literally the case in every border crossing everywhere.
> if he acts like you've acted here and comes across an antivaxer I have a reasonable expectation he would give them a hard time out of spite
If someone turns up at the border and starts waffling on like a pork chop about COVID or any other completely irrelevant topic then yes I would imagine he is treated like the twat that he's being. Short of another pandemic, there's basically no scenario where a persons vaccination history or beliefs are going to come up while crossing the border. If you rock up at the border wearing a t-shirt that says "vaccines are for suckers" or whatever, I'd imagine it'll go about as well as wearing a t-shirt that says "I fuck kids". Yes, you're potentially going to have a shit time. Yes, you absolutely brought it on yourself.
> I'm talking about how it is enforced.
Yes, I already told you I believe that the way this policy is currently applied needs more oversight and transparency.
> It isn't something I read online either. Because of this atmosphere people have bad experiences. Normal people.
What atmosphere? People learning the consequences of their own stupid actions isn't an atmosphere.
You keep referring back to anti vaxxers being treated poorly and then throw in these mysterious "normal people". What's normal?
But again - as has been pointed out to you already, the policy in discussion is 100% unrelated to COVID, or lockdowns for that matter.
You might as well claim that Australia has strict biosecurity rules and doesn't let you bring in a banana because of COVID lockdowns.