Daily Mail

A recent survey has revealed that nearly six in ten Britons support the deployment of national troops to Ukraine, should a ceasefire agreement be reached. The poll, conducted by YouGov, found that 58 per cent of respondents either “strongly” or “somewhat” back such a move, while only around a fifth oppose it.

The results showed differences in opinion among political affiliations. Support for troop deployment was highest among one major party’s voters at 67 per cent, closely followed by another at 66 per cent. Meanwhile, 70 per cent of one smaller party’s supporters backed the move, while only 44 per cent of a right-wing party’s supporters expressed agreement.

The poll also highlighted that while a majority of the public favours military involvement, there is resistance to tax hikes to fund increased defence spending. Around 55 per cent of respondents opposed raising taxes for this purpose, indicating a preference for reallocating funds from other areas.

The government has suggested that if British troops are deployed, they would be part of a European peacekeeping force tasked with monitoring a ceasefire agreement. Officials have stressed that such a mission would be vital not only for Ukraine’s security but for the stability of the entire continent.

The urgency of discussions on Ukraine has intensified following recent diplomatic moves by the United States, with negotiations being conducted between Washington and Moscow. The absence of Ukrainian representation in these talks has raised concerns among European allies, prompting an emergency summit in Paris. Leaders from several European nations attended, emphasizing the necessity of ensuring Ukraine’s role in any peace agreement.

During the summit, European officials reiterated the need for increased defence commitments. Some leaders called for a greater share of military funding from European nations to meet global security demands. The current defence spending target of 2.5 per cent of GDP remains under discussion, with calls from international allies to raise it further.

As diplomatic efforts continue, the focus remains on securing a sustainable peace that guarantees Ukraine’s sovereignty. European leaders have stressed the importance of maintaining strong support for Ukraine and ensuring any negotiated agreement is both lasting and enforceable. While discussions over financial commitments and troop deployments remain ongoing, the latest poll suggests that public sentiment largely aligns with the government’s stance on increasing military support for Ukraine.

ABC News

A 72-year-old Western Australian man has been found guilty of breaching the state’s Aboriginal Heritage Act after building a bridge on his own property without approval.

Tony Maddox, a real estate agent from Toodyay, 85km northwest of Perth, constructed a concrete bridge over a creek on his land, unknowingly disturbing the ‘Rainbow Serpent’—a sacred figure in Noongar mythology. Authorities argued that his actions disrupted the site by removing a significant amount of silt from the waterway.

Facing a maximum penalty of nine months in jail and a $20,000 fine, Mr Maddox instead received a $2,000 fine, a spent conviction, and was ordered to pay $5,000 in legal costs when he appeared before the Perth Magistrates Court on Monday. Despite avoiding the harsher penalties, he described the verdict as “shattering” and “quite unbelievable.”

Under the Aboriginal Heritage Act, it is illegal to excavate, destroy, conceal, or alter registered heritage sites. Mr Maddox maintained that he was unaware the creek was protected under these laws and said no Indigenous elders had expressed concerns to him prior to the charges.

However, Magistrate Andrew Matthews rejected his defence, ruling that while the works did not cause significant damage, they had altered the site.

Prosecutor Lorraine Allen stated that the case should serve as a warning to others, reinforcing the importance of protecting Aboriginal heritage sites.

In a staggering display of legislative absurdity, this new law has emerged that is not only devoid of factual basis but threatens to set a dangerous precedent across Australia. Mr. Maddox has taken a firm stand against this blatant nonsense, calling for its immediate repeal before it infects other states with its sheer stupidity.

This law, based entirely on myth rather than any shred of scientific or historical evidence, represents a worrying trend of emotion-driven policymaking overriding rational thought. Without any proof to support its claims, it is nothing more than a work of fiction being imposed upon the public under the guise of legal authority.

Mr. Maddox has rightfully pointed out that laws should be based on verifiable evidence, not on superstitions or politically motivated fabrications. “It is an absolute disgrace that we are even entertaining such nonsense in a modern society,” he declared. “We are allowing fantasy to dictate policy, and if we don’t stop it now, we will see more of these ridiculous laws creeping in under the radar.”

Mr. Maddox was charged under this absurd law for allegedly violating its restrictions, despite no factual basis for its enforcement. Authorities claimed he had breached regulations that have no grounding in evidence, further demonstrating the law’s utter lack of credibility. His case highlights the dangers of allowing mythology to become the foundation for legal action, punishing individuals based on fiction rather than fact.

This is not just an isolated case—it is a slippery slope. If one baseless law is passed without resistance, it opens the floodgates for an endless stream of irrational policies. Australians deserve better than to be subjected to legal frameworks built on mythology and unproven claims.

The time to act is now. This law must be struck down before it gains traction and spreads further, eroding the foundation of common sense and logical governance in this country. Mr. Maddox has sounded the alarm—now it’s up to the people to ensure their voices are heard and demand the immediate repeal of this absurd legislation.

Before the outbreak of war in the Pacific, Darwin’s port, its airfield facilities, its coastal defence batteries, and its steadily growing garrison were of vital strategic importance. The Japanese Empire was becoming increasingly aggressive in the region, and Darwin played a critical role as a deployment base for the defence of the Dutch East Indies. Its location and infrastructure made it a prime target should hostilities escalate.

That escalation came swiftly. On the morning of 19 February 1942, the war arrived on Australia’s doorstep in a brutal and unprecedented fashion. At 9:58 AM, the first wave of Japanese aircraft descended upon Darwin, launching a devastating assault on the city’s military and civilian infrastructure. More than 188 Japanese aircraft, fighters, bombers, and dive bombers rained destruction upon the harbour, the airfields, and the township. A second wave of 54 bombers followed later that morning, completing what would become the most devastating attack on Australian soil.

The raids were meticulously planned and executed by the same Japanese fleet that had struck Pearl Harbor just ten weeks earlier. The first wave primarily targeted shipping in the harbour, sinking eight vessels, including the USS Peary, a U.S. Navy destroyer, and the Australian hospital ship Manunda, which suffered significant damage. The airfields, crucial to Australia’s northern defence, were also heavily bombed, with at least 30 aircraft destroyed. The second wave focused on military and civil facilities, ensuring that Darwin’s capacity to serve as a strategic base was severely crippled.

The human cost was staggering. Over 250 people, including Australian and Allied service personnel, merchant seamen, and civilians, lost their lives. Hundreds more were wounded. Chaos reigned as survivors sought shelter and assistance, many unaware of whether further attacks would follow. The city was left smouldering, its streets strewn with wreckage, its people in shock.

Despite this catastrophe, the defence of Darwin was far from over. The city endured another 63 attacks between 1942 and 1943, with enemy bombers targeting northern Australia in a relentless campaign to disrupt Allied operations. While other towns, including Broome, Townsville, and Horn Island, also suffered from Japanese air raids, none bore the brunt of attack as Darwin did on that fateful day in February.

The bombing of Darwin was a harsh awakening for Australia, shattering any lingering illusions of geographic invulnerability. It prompted an urgent strengthening of national defence, increased coordination with Allied forces, and a renewed determination to repel any further threats. It also instilled a lasting resilience in the people of northern Australia, who rebuilt their communities despite the ever-present risk of further attacks.

Today, we pause to remember those who lost their lives in the attacks on Darwin and the broader northern campaign. We honour the courage of those who defended Australia, from airmen and naval personnel to soldiers and civilians who stood their ground in the face of adversity. Their sacrifice reminds us of the price of war and the enduring spirit of a nation that stood firm in its darkest hours.

Lest we forget.

Treatment of Bankstown nurses labelled as "double standards" by Senator

ED: My view

The comments and actions of Senator Fatima Payman are deeply concerning and highlight the dangerous reality of Islamist extremism infiltrating Australian politics. By sympathising with jihadist nurses who openly threatened to murder Jewish patients, she has demonstrated a shocking disregard for Australian values of tolerance, equality, and the rule of law. This is not just an issue of “public humiliation” but of outright incitement to violence, which has no place in our society. Attempting to shift blame onto so-called “Islamophobia” while downplaying Islamist threats of murder is not only disgraceful but also proves that even so-called moderates within this ideology will defend the indefensible. This moment exposes the deep fractures in Australian multiculturalism, as radical voices are given platforms to normalise extremism. There can be no place in Australia for those who enable or justify jihadist violence.

Australia’s acquisition of the UH-60M Black Hawk marks a major shift in the nation’s military aviation strategy. After years of operational challenges with the MRH-90 Taipan, the Australian Army is returning to a combat-proven, highly reliable platform. In this video, we take an in-depth look at the history, capabilities, and future of the UH-60M Black Hawk in Australia.

Kyiv Independent

While the Kremlin hails the upcoming discussions in Saudi Arabia as a step towards peace, Kyiv insists any agreements made without its participation are invalid. Understandable. If I were in Zelenskyy’s shoes, whose fate is likely being decided by a foreign nation, I would also be angry.

Zelenskyy is adamant that Ukraine must be included in any negotiations regarding its future.

On Monday, the Ukrainian president emphasized that “Ukraine regards any negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine as ones that have no result, and we cannot recognize… any agreements about us without us.”

He criticized the US for excluding Ukraine and its European allies from preliminary talks.

The hastily arranged meetings between Trump and Putin’s officials have set off alarm bells in Kyiv.

The US and Russia are scheduled for talks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, accompanied by Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz and special envoy Steve Witkoff, is set to meet the Russian delegation led by Sergei Lavrov and Yuri Ushakov.

The meeting was reportedly just postponed from Thursday to Friday.

The US aims to gauge Russia’s seriousness about ending the war, while Moscow frames the talks as a chance to end its diplomatic isolation.

European leaders believe this is giving Russia a platform, which they firmly oppose.

DroneShield Release (PHOTO: DroneShield)

DroneShield, a global leader in counter-drone defence technology, has officially been registered with both the United States and Australian governments under AUKUS, enabling the export of most military and dual-use goods, technologies, and services to the United States and the United Kingdom without the need for an export license.

This development marks a significant milestone in enhancing defence trade and cooperation between AUKUS partners. By eliminating licensing requirements for qualifying products and technologies, the agreement streamlines trade, reduces administrative barriers, and accelerates the delivery of critical capabilities to allied defence forces.

The AUKUS trilateral export agreement, which took effect on September 1, 2024, represents a generational shift in defence industry collaboration. By creating a seamless trade environment between Australia, the US, and the UK, this initiative strengthens industrial partnerships, enhances interoperability, and supports the rapid deployment of cutting-edge defence technologies.

With registration now in place, DroneShield is positioned to leverage the full benefits of this agreement. The removal of export licensing requirements provides a competitive advantage by reducing lead times, simplifying regulatory processes, and expanding opportunities to engage with defence and security partners across the AUKUS nations. This streamlined approach allows for more efficient collaboration on joint projects, research initiatives, and advanced technological developments.

The Australian government has committed $28 million in the 2024-25 budget to support industry engagement and implementation of the new framework. This investment reflects the commitment of AUKUS nations to fostering deeper defence collaboration and ensuring that key capabilities are delivered swiftly and effectively.