# The terrorists have won



## wayneL (31 July 2007)

The objective of terrorism is to inject constant fear into the lives of a population. 

Mission accomplished.

The only thing I'm wondering, is who are the terrorists? A few malcontents hiding in caves or our western governments and mainstream media?

Someone made this observation:

Real terrorism is played down by governments.
False terrorism is played up by governments.

I wonder.


----------



## Bluesky (31 July 2007)

wayneL said:


> The objective of terrorism is to inject constant fear into the lives of a population.
> 
> Mission accomplished.
> 
> ...




Good to see some ppl have an open mind, u are 100% correct


----------



## disarray (31 July 2007)

no, the object of terrorism is to *effect change* by injecting constant fear into the lives of the population. it is pointless creating terror for terrors sake, it is a method for enforcing your ideals on others.

i don't see any evidence of changes moving society towards fulfilling the "terrorists" goals. sure we have tighter security and some restricted liberties, but that doesn't go far towards building an islamic state. all it really does is piss people off and make them dislike muslims more than they already do.

i don't see much evidence that the population is scared. just because the government and media ramp it up doesn't mean people are paying attention to it. many people don't trust the government, while many others are either too stupid or too self-absorbed to notice what is going on anyway

dramatic forum posts aside, the terrorists have not won, they haven't created a culture of fear despite the blatherings of zero iq tv and they certainly haven't accomplished anything resembling a mission.

so who are the terrorists? they are islamic fundamentalists who wish to bring in sharia law and extend the historic islamic caliphate. do they have any chance of effecting this in australia? none whatsoever. 

another thing is the monocultural viewpoint taken by both sides of the "terrorist" campaign. its the same with aborigines. it's always culture A vs. white people, or religion B vs. christianity and this is far too narrow. australia has a huge asian population who seem to be conveniently left out of the ramblings of both left and right of the political and religious equation. definately a silent section of the population there, putting their heads down and working hard to make things happen.

anyone with any sense already knows governments and the media cannot be trusted, and their purpose is to push their own agendas and maintain some level of control over society. the sheeple will always be led, so make sure you and yours think for themselves and forge their own path wherever possible.


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 July 2007)

I would say the terrorists have won at least a battle, a milestone, namely to instill fear.
have they won hearts and minds? - pretty difficult when there are people's hearts etc splattered all over the place. 
have they won "the war"?  
let's define our terms before going there. 

but lets just say, the "good guys" (and who are they?)  sure as hell don't seem to be winning at the moment - either battle or war .


----------



## 123enen (31 July 2007)

Talk about instilling fear.....
I remember when this new "anti-terror" legislation was introduced ,the scaremongers amongst us were up in arms protesting how dangerous it would be.

I remember the scaremongers saying that a suspect could be arrested under this legislation and "disappear". The suspect would not be able to contact anyone to advise his/her status and nobody was allowed to discuss the situation. People could be arrested and the world would not know what was going on.

Well, let me say the whole world knew what this man was going through.
Everybody knew where he was and his safety and well being was assured through this unpleasant ordeal.


----------



## caribean (31 July 2007)

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." 
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials 

No comment.....


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2007)

disarray said:


> i don't see any evidence of changes moving society towards fulfilling the "terrorists" goals. sure we have tighter security and some restricted liberties, but that doesn't go far towards building an islamic state. all it really does is piss people off and make them dislike muslims more than they already do.



Missed the point.

When you consider the government and media are more responsible for the promulgation of fear than a few Muslim malcontents, then it is the gu'mint and the media who are the actual terrorists. This being the case, there is massive evidence that "terrorist goals" are indeed being achieved. eg The restriction of civil liberties which you mention.



			
				Benjamin Franklin said:
			
		

> Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2007)

123enen said:


> Talk about instilling fear.....
> I remember when this new "anti-terror" legislation was introduced ,the scaremongers amongst us were up in arms protesting how dangerous it would be.
> 
> I remember the scaremongers saying that a suspect could be arrested under this legislation and "disappear". The suspect would not be able to contact anyone to advise his/her status and nobody was allowed to discuss the situation. People could be arrested and the world would not know what was going on.
> ...



The fact remains that the legislation is in place and the potential still remains.


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2007)

Whatever happened to the stoic Anglo-Celtic tradition, the stiff upper lip, the Blitz Spirit, the iron resolve, not to be intimidated into cowering, sniveling, fear riddled panty-waists, being told by how much to be scared by either a manipulating gu'mint or a few radicals who are statistically far less dangerous than the local hoodlums.

That's what I want to know.

I mean have you seen the regulations regarding taking toothpaste onto a plane... after that whole scare was completely discredited?

How long before we all have one of these http://www.livescience.com/technology/060531_rfid_chips.html


----------



## >Apocalypto< (31 July 2007)

wayneL said:


> The objective of terrorism is to inject constant fear into the lives of a population.
> 
> Mission accomplished.
> 
> ...





Great thread Wayne,


----------



## Smurf1976 (31 July 2007)

123enen said:


> Well, let me say the whole world knew what this man was going through.
> Everybody knew where he was and his safety and well being was assured through this unpleasant ordeal.



Your argument is speculation backed up by a single example. For all you and I know, there could be another 100 locked away that we've never heard about. We have no idea as to what is actually going on - and that's the greatest danger.


----------



## moneymajix (31 July 2007)

My opinion is this - don't give it energy. 

Focusing on it gives it more power.

No more posts from me on this topic.

LOL.


----------



## kitehigh (31 July 2007)

disarray said:


> no, the object of terrorism is to *effect change* by injecting constant fear into the lives of the population. it is pointless creating terror for terrors sake, it is a method for enforcing your ideals on others.
> 
> i don't see any evidence of changes moving society towards fulfilling the "terrorists" goals. sure we have tighter security and some restricted liberties, but that doesn't go far towards building an islamic state. all it really does is piss people off and make them dislike muslims more than they already do.
> 
> ...




Great post disarray.

I agree with your sentiments 100%.

I sugguest people watch the documentary "obsession" and you will get a good understanding of the fundalmentalist movement.


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 July 2007)

wayneL said:


> Whatever happened to the stoic Anglo-Celtic tradition, the Blitz Spirit, the iron resolve,....   a few radicals who are statistically far less dangerous than the local hoodlums......



well the Anglos and the Celcs have been bashing each other over the head for years, lol, so yes after a while you get used to it I guess

These new blokes use explosives m8! - potentially dirty nuclear stuff! - not if but when.  remember the anthrax scare - real worry surely!

I think eternal vigilance every which way - not only against these loonies - but equally against spin doctoring and prejudice of any kind - exposure of frauds, mistakes, political spins  

btw if you want exposure of the the bias of the press, no better place than "Media watch" - best damned show on TV

plenty of dicussion , etc - That's why I enjoy reading these posts 
report strange behaviour, bags or cases left in public places etc  - YOU BET.
people hanging around bridges etc.  *Sydney will get plenty of TV on this in the next few weeks believe me *( APEC coming up etc) 

Make it so that Chaser has a hard job making our various security forces look foolish (although I personally don't know what I'd do if they approached me lol)

("pass the parcel" in an Irish pub - fastest game ever invented ! )
fear- yes , but controlled and enlightened, surely.


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 July 2007)

> btw if you want exposure of the the bias of the press, no better place than "Media watch" - best damned show on TV



MW always reminds me of that song "who takes care of the caretaker's daughter while the caretaker's busy taking care"  : 1one cent


----------



## Lounge Lizard (31 July 2007)

Most people have added the thought of dying from terrorist attack to the myriad of other things you might die from.  Car accident, shark attack, bee sting, accidentally cutting your throat while shaving in the morning etc etc.  We're all pretty desensitised now.  The only real threat from terrorism that remains is if some loony actually gets their hands on a WMD, whether it be be an islamist or some other flavour fruitcake.

It's a pity George, John and Tony just spent several hundred billion looking in the only place on earth where there probably isn't any liklehood of such a threat originating.


----------



## disarray (31 July 2007)

wayneL said:


> Missed the point.
> 
> When you consider the government and media are more responsible for the promulgation of fear than a few Muslim malcontents, then it is the gu'mint and the media who are the actual terrorists. This being the case, there is massive evidence that "terrorist goals" are indeed being achieved. eg The restriction of civil liberties which you mention.




i understand you are saying that the government are terrorists because they are pushing the fear. i am saying that people aren't scared of the government.

the restriction of civil liberties is just another play by the government for greater control over our lives. this is nothing new. it doesn't make them terrorists, it just makes them a government. and judging by the fact that the howard government has been in for several terms now, the majority of people seem to agree with these policies. does this make everyone who voted liberal a supporter of "terrorism"? i think not.

maybe people want greater security. maybe people are willing to give up some liberties in exchange for security against aggressive cultures who have taken root in the midst of our society. maybe, just maybe, people are sick of all the "i do what i want when i want" attitudes and the social problems that come with it and are looking for greater social cohesion and direction. maybe people are getting over liberalism because they see that people need control or we have disorder. maybe we need to bring back corporal punishment in schools and kick bad parents up the ass. maybe the times they are a'changin?


----------



## Kimosabi (31 July 2007)

*ter·ror·ism*

_–noun _

1.  the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, *esp. for political purposes*.

2.  *the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism* or terrorization.

3.  a *terroristic method of governing* or of resisting a government. 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2007)

disarray said:


> i understand you are saying that the government are terrorists because they are pushing the fear. i am saying that people aren't scared of the government.



No they're not scared of the government, that's not their goal at this stage. But they are trying to make people unreasonably frightened of a terrorist threat, a threat that is blown out of all proportion to the actual risks in order to implement a different agenda.

It's working.

As far as the actual Islamist threat, we have the capabilities to fight that successfully without some of the absurd measures put in place, which I argue actually detract from our effectiveness in that aim.


----------



## disarray (1 August 2007)

people will never be more scared of the government than they are of incompatible immigrants. after decades of liberalism society is swinging to the right, mostly as a reaction to the changing nature of society.


----------



## stockGURU (1 August 2007)

disarray said:


> people will never be more scared of the government than they are of incompatible immigrants.




I think you're speaking for youself here. "Incompatible" immigrants - whatever that means - don't bother me as long as they are law abiding. However I do worry about the misuse of government power to trample on the civil liberties of its citizens.


----------



## --B-- (1 August 2007)

i find it quite ironic that the opening post claims the terrorists have won and achieved their aim of creating fear, when it appears to me that the post itself was designed to do just that?

claims that our civil liberties have been eroded and as a population we are living in fear are, to me, ridiculous.

i fully agree the media propagates fear through their relentless campaign of promoting the "war on terror" however in my opinion, this does not reflect the true attitudes of ordinary people. 

it is without a doubt fundamental islamic extremists exist and for various reasons wish to inflict terror on western countries, through different means. to ignore this threat as minor and therefore not worthy of appropriate action is, to me, irresponsible.


----------



## juw177 (1 August 2007)

--B-- said:


> it is without a doubt fundamental islamic extremists exist and for various reasons wish to inflict terror on western countries, through different means. to ignore this threat as minor and therefore not worthy of appropriate action is, to me, irresponsible.




Replace extremist with communist and the story plays out the same.


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2007)

--B-- said:


> i find it quite ironic that the opening post claims the terrorists have won and achieved their aim of creating fear, when it appears to me that the post itself was designed to do just that?
> 
> claims that our civil liberties have been eroded and as a population we are living in fear are, to me, ridiculous.
> 
> ...



A ludicrous straw man argument, absolute nonsense. You obviously have not read:


			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> we have the capabilities to fight that successfully without some of the absurd measures put in place, which I argue actually detract from our effectiveness in that aim.
> Yesterday 09:44 AM



When people willingly forgo civil liberties our fathers and grandfathers fought and died for, people are scared.

Islamist terrorism has been around since 1948.. what's different now? Media and the pollies beating it up is what.


----------



## disarray (1 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> Islamist terrorism has been around since 1948.. what's different now? Media and the pollies beating it up is what.




and a mass migration of humanity to the west. and a period of global economic development unrivalled in human history. and mass communication letting people instantly exchange information over vast distances instantly. and a single world superpower enforcing their will wherever they want without a superpower counterbalance. the world has never been like it is now.

now you want to claim government policy is absurd and the internal threats can be dealt with much more effectively. please elaborate.

oh and stockguru, an example of incompatible immigrants for you.


----------



## trading_rookie (1 August 2007)

> Islamist terrorism has been around since 1948.. what's different now?




It wasn't at our doorstep in 1948 and in the 70's and 80's the PLO and similar organisations were focusing on Israel, not the west. Recall the Black September attack in West Germany, their aim was to kill Israeli athletes and officials, not 'westerners'.


----------



## chops_a_must (1 August 2007)

trading_rookie said:


> It wasn't at our doorstep in 1948 and in the 70's and 80's the PLO and similar organisations were focusing on Israel, not the west. Recall the Black September attack in West Germany, their aim was to kill Israeli athletes and officials, not 'westerners'.




So when the Zionists were killing westerners and brits in the late 40s, how did we deal with the problem then?


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2007)

disarray said:


> now you want to claim government policy is absurd and the internal threats can be dealt with much more effectively. please elaborate.



The current level of legislation forces the authorities to take their eye off the ball. For instance, airport security is pedantic and ridiculous. Concentrating on how much toothpaste you have is completely asinine, founded upon a fabricated threat and dodgy chemistry. The really logical things are not being done at all.

The Haneef situation could have been handled with pre-existing laws without problem.


----------



## disarray (1 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> The current level of legislation forces the authorities to take their eye off the ball. For instance, airport security is pedantic and ridiculous. Concentrating on how much toothpaste you have is completely asinine, founded upon a fabricated threat and dodgy chemistry. The really logical things are not being done at all.




... like racial profiling


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2007)

disarray said:


> ... like racial profiling



Well, I don't think racial profiling is kosher, but certainly cultural and/or nationality profiling should perhaps be considered.

For instance during "the troubles", an Irishman was the most likely perpetrator of terrorism. This is not a racial distinction.


----------



## trading_rookie (2 August 2007)

> So when the Zionists were killing westerners and brits in the late 40s, how did we deal with the problem then?



Firstly, chops I'm pretty sure besides the Brits, no other 'westerners' were killed by the Zionists' nor their enemy the Palestinian national socialists' over some 'white paper' proposed by the Brits and despised by both sides.

At the end of the day, it was brillant campaiging by the Zionists to get the necessary support from the UN and US by lobbying them, even though neither was in favour of more Jewish migration to then Palestine.  

What could the Brits do?, economically and militarily they were a spent force with WWII ending and now trying to keep the extreme Zionists and Arabs from culling one another as well as protecting themselves...sounds like the losing battle they faced in Northern Ireland before they realised only recently that power sharing appears to be the answer over military force.

The fact that the Brits stopped two ships full of European Jewish refugees from landing in Palestine causing them to sink with nearly all onboard drowning also won the Zionists and moderate Jews public sympathy. To think, they've survived an horrific ordeal the Holocaust, only to be let down once again. Of cource this adds to public pressure for supporting the Jews and abandoning the white paper.

The Palestinians did themselves no favours by not coming to the negotiating table when the discussion turned to partitioning Palestine between Jewish and Arab enclaves and the fact they wouldn't abandon their nazi puppet Amin al-Husayni thus lacking any real and creditable leadership...has anything changed today?


----------



## chops_a_must (2 August 2007)

trading_rookie said:


> At the end of the day, it was brillant campaiging by the Zionists to get the necessary support from the UN and US by lobbying them, even though neither was in favour of more Jewish migration to then Palestine.



It's always interesting to see how the words, "murder" and "terrorism" (which in fact is credited to being developed by zionists) are so easily substituted for the word "campaigning" depending on what side you are on.

Like you say, "has anything changed today?"


----------



## juw177 (2 August 2007)

THE TRUTH ABOUT TERRORISM

0: People killed in the USA by terrorism/WMD in 2006.
(Thousands killed by the US and its allies in foreign countries.)

0: People killed in the UK by terrorism/WMD in 2006.

0: People killed in the USA by terrorism/WMD in 2005.

52: killed in the UK by terrorism/WMD in 2005 (all on "7/7").

0: People in the USA killed by terrorism/WMD in 2004.

0: People in the UK killed by terrorism/WMD in 2004.

0: People in the USA killed by terrorism/WMD in 2003.

0: People in the UK killed by terrorism/WMD in 2003.

0: People in the USA killed by terrorism/WMD in 2002.

0: People in the UK killed by terrorism/WMD in 2002.

2,752: in USA killed by terrorism in 2001 (all on "9/11").

0: People in the UK killed by terrorism/WMD in 2001.

0: People in the USA killed by terrorism/WMD in 2000.

0: People in the UK killed by terrorism/WMD in 2000.


WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD

1.2 MILLION: People in killed in road accidents EVERY YEAR.

430,000: Americans killed by cigarettes EVERY YEAR. (The equivalent of 9/11 repeated every two days forever.) Bush's response to a real threat? His election promise to stop the Justice Department's law suit against the tobacco industry.

400,000: Americans die each year from obesity (while much greater numbers around the world starve to death).

11,000: the people killed in America every year by guns, a human tragedy equivalent to a new 9/11 every 3 months.


----------



## trading_rookie (2 August 2007)

Zionists' were 'campaigning' the UN and US on their ground...pretty sure they left their 'murdering' and 'terrorism' devices at home. To think if the Arabs had done the same the outcome could have been different...

Thanks for clearing up the origins of 'murder' and 'terrorism'...I'm pretty sure every historian will be quite pleased to know it was them and not the 11th century secret Islamic order the 'assassins' who too murdered and harassed their enemies...


----------



## --B-- (2 August 2007)

juw177 said:
			
		

> THE TRUTH ABOUT TERRORISM




While your post is bordering on the completely irrelevant, i note with amusement that you omitted the many many dead in Madrid and Indonesia. but hey, whatever suits your argument...

not to mention the 1000's more killed by islamic extremists in middle eastern countries..

not to mention all that is done to combat road deaths..

not to mention the fact that plenty is done to combat health related deaths - which are mostly all self-inflicted.

are you saying that we shouldnt do anything about islamic extremism?


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2007)

trading_rookie said:


> Zionists' were 'campaigning' the UN and US on their ground...pretty sure they left their 'murdering' and 'terrorism' devices at home. To think if the Arabs had done the same the outcome could have been different...
> 
> Thanks for clearing up the origins of 'murder' and 'terrorism'...I'm pretty sure every historian will be quite pleased to know it was them and not the 11th century secret Islamic order the 'assassins' who too murdered and harassed their enemies...



Pulleeeze!

As if every gu'mint, since Adam was a boy wasn't doing the same... and still does.


----------



## trading_rookie (2 August 2007)

Sorry Wayne, think you're missing the point...that being the zionist 'successfully' campaigned, the Arabs did not. 

ps - meeting to attend so no one think I'm bailing this one!


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2007)

--B-- said:


> While your post is bordering on the completely irrelevant, i note with amusement that you omitted the many many dead in Madrid and Indonesia. but hey, whatever suits your argument...
> 
> not to mention the 1000's more killed by islamic extremists in middle eastern countries..
> 
> ...



The typical straw man argument is trotted out yet again that balanced argument is somehow supporting the Islamists. That Bill O'Reilly stuff getting a bit worn out mate. 

The truth is B, that statistically, there is more risk of being killed by the local nut-case than any terrorist attack. The impingement of civil liberties is simply not warranted by the actual threat and actually does SFA to stop the terrorism anyway.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 August 2007)

trading_rookie said:


> Thanks for clearing up the origins of 'murder' and 'terrorism'...I'm pretty sure every historian will be quite pleased to know it was them and not the 11th century secret Islamic order the 'assassins' who too murdered and harassed their enemies...




The content of the brackets pertained to the latter term.

The Irgun _is_ credited with being the first group to use "terrorism" in a fashion in which we know it today. Kind of hypocritical isn't it?

Quote from the much maligned wikipedia lol:


> Irgun was a clandestine militant Zionist group that operated in Palestine from 1931 to 1948. In addition to smuggling Jews into Palestine, the Irgun began in 1936 a policy of responding to acts of terror against Jews by committing terrorist attacks against random Arabs. These attacks were intended to instill fear in the Arab side, in order to cause the Arabs to wish for peace and quiet. These "retaliation and revenge" acts continued until the formation of the State of Israel in 1948.
> 
> In addition to the terrorist acts against Arabs, the Irgun also was involved in fighting against the British rule of Palestine. Their goal was to respond against British policies they disagreed with, and ultimately, to force the British to grant Jews the right to form their own nation in Palestine, Their most famous attack was the bombing of the King David Hotel which was the centre of the British administration in Palestine. In 1948, the group was formally dissolved and its members integrated into the newly formed Israeli Defense Forces.




How does "successful" use of terrorism, validate it as a campaigning tool? Who knows? Under this criteria, current Islamist terrorists are just "campaigning" IMO. It's this sort of discrepancy in evaluation which rightly leads Muslims to assess the west as racist.


----------



## Kimosabi (2 August 2007)

I came across this really interesting documentary on Terrorism, it goes into great depth as to who is REALLY behind most of today's TERRORISM...

Terrorstorm ==> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=6885277369482418431


----------



## --B-- (2 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> The typical straw man argument is trotted out yet again that balanced argument is somehow supporting the Islamists. That Bill O'Reilly stuff getting a bit worn out mate.




there was no argument in his post that i could detect wayne. i hardly consider my comments a straw man argument.

Simply rattling off the number of deaths in the US and UK hardly constitutes a refutable argument. do you consider the fact that he has omitted many many deaths from the "toll" as balanced argument?



> The truth is B, that statistically, there is more risk of being killed by the local nut-case than any terrorist attack. The impingement of civil liberties is simply not warranted by the actual threat and actually does SFA to stop the terrorism anyway.




what impingement of civil liberties are you referring to wayne? not being able to take toothpaste on a plane?

how are you able to say the measures introduced actually do SFA? 

we have seen arrests in australia. are you able to say nothing would have happened had these arrests not taken place?


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2007)

trading_rookie said:


> Sorry Wayne, think you're missing the point...that being the zionist 'successfully' campaigned, the Arabs did not.
> 
> ps - meeting to attend so no one think I'm bailing this one!



I'm not missing any points, for my point was nothing to do with the zionists per se.

You made the point about the "assassins", intimating that this is an exclusively Islamic phenomenon and/or created by them.

Excuse me for a few moments while I recover from a fit of laughter.

Every society does that and always has done.

As far as the Zionist campaign; what is the difference between a campaign and terrorism? Well you already answered that. The winners campaign, the losers commit terrorism, but in reality the only difference is in perception, the mechanics are identical.


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2007)

--B-- said:


> there was no argument in his post that i could detect wayne. i hardly consider my comments a straw man argument.



[/QUOTE]


--B-- said:


> are you saying that we shouldnt do anything about islamic extremism?



A straw man is attributing to someone an argument they never made. That is what you have done in the above.



> what impingement of civil liberties are you referring to wayne? not being able to take toothpaste on a plane?



Oh come on!



> how are you able to say the measures introduced actually do SFA?
> 
> we have seen arrests in australia. are you able to say nothing would have happened had these arrests not taken place?



Explain how the the arrests would not have been made under the previous legislation and I'll concede the point. The truth is they have made no difference.

The most recent fiasco adequately demonstrates why these muppets should have the powers they do. Whether Haneef is guilty or innocent, these clowns have cocked up big time, an absolute comedy of errors, a litany of lies, and disgraceful @rse covering.

The additional powers simply remove rights from normal law abiding citizens and could be the slippery slope into something much worse.


----------



## --B-- (2 August 2007)

> A straw man is attributing to someone an argument they never made. That is what you have done in the above.



fair enough, i suppose in my haste to point out the sillyness of the post i neglected to detect the total lack of an argument. 



> Oh come on!



im genuinely interested for you to explain how your civil liberties have been impinged?

and as in the example of car accidents - would you consider the law that we must wear seat belts an impingement of your right not to? 

sounds silly however i see remarkable similarities.



> Explain how the the arrests would not have been made under the previous legislation and I'll concede the point. The truth is they have made no difference.



some research is required to refresh my knowledge however ill attempt this.



> The most recent fiasco adequately demonstrates why these muppets should have the powers they do. Whether Haneef is guilty or innocent, these clowns have cocked up big time, an absolute comedy of errors, a litany of lies, and disgraceful @rse covering.



is your problem with the laws or those whose duty it is to enact / enforce them?


----------



## mark70920 (2 August 2007)

This arrest isn't about terrorists , like the tampa wasn't about border control , it all about the upcoming election.

John Howard is playing wedge politics , they nail this bloke to cross guilty or innocent , they release very limited information create a public uproar and if the oppostion leader backs them, they accuse him of having no leadership  skills , no vision etc if he opposes them he is accused of being weak against suspected terrorism etc, they then release additional information supporting their position making the opposition look even worse.(Just wait to election time and watch the new information spill out)

Your all being Conned by little John again


----------



## --B-- (2 August 2007)

mark70920 said:


> This arrest isn't about terrorists , like the tampa wasn't about border control , it all about the upcoming election.
> 
> John Howard is playing wedge politics , they nail this bloke to cross guilty or innocent , they release very limited information create a public uproar and if the oppostion leader backs them, they accuse him of having no leadership  skills , no vision etc if he opposes them he is accused of being weak against suspected terrorism etc, they then release additional information supporting their position making the opposition look even worse.(Just wait to election time and watch the new information spill out)
> 
> Your all being Conned by little John again




lol... geez, evil johhny did well to arrange the terrorist attack in glasgow and the subsequent evidence against Haneef, and all the while ensuring the British govt,. numerous federal agencies and the leader of the opposition among others are all complicit in his election ploy...

funny stuff indeed....


----------



## mark70920 (2 August 2007)

--B-- said:


> lol... geez, evil johhny did well to arrange the terrorist attack in glasgow and the subsequent evidence against Haneef, and all the while ensuring the British govt,. numerous federal agencies and the leader of the opposition among others are all complicit in his election ploy...
> 
> funny stuff indeed....




John Howard is an opportunist , he didn't sink that boat or pick them up in the Tampa either, he just siezed on there misfortune and used it to his political advantage.
Things were going badly in polls and when the Haneef brief hit his desk I bet you couldn't get the smile of his face , better than a lotto win for the Libs.

Do something popular badly so people are bound to criticise you and let the media and opposition do the rest. Wedge politics


----------



## --B-- (2 August 2007)

mark70920 said:


> .
> Do something popular badly so people are bound to criticise you and let the media and opposition do the rest. Wedge politics




oh im quite sure many will criticise John Howard no matter what he does.


----------



## Julia (2 August 2007)

mark70920 said:


> John Howard is an opportunist , he didn't sink that boat or pick them up in the Tampa either, he just siezed on there misfortune and used it to his political advantage.
> Things were going badly in polls and when the Haneef brief hit his desk I bet you couldn't get the smile of his face , better than a lotto win for the Libs.
> 
> Do something popular badly so people are bound to criticise you and let the media and opposition do the rest. Wedge politics




Are you suggesting that if Kevin Rudd were currently in power he would not do exactly the same?  They are all politicians.  If they didn't use any given event to their political advantage we would accuse them of being asleep at the wheel.

Wayne:  I'm also genuinely interested to know how your own personal rights have been affected by the terrorism legislation.  I haven't experienced being unable to do anything I want to do.


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2007)

http://www.cla.asn.au/Articles/060808AreOurRights.pdf


----------



## --B-- (3 August 2007)

what a cop out


----------



## Julia (3 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> http://www.cla.asn.au/Articles/060808AreOurRights.pdf




Wayne, that's 15 closely typed pages of someone else's words.
All I was looking for from you is a couple of sentences just explaining how you personally have actually been affected by the altered laws.


----------



## chops_a_must (3 August 2007)

Julia said:


> Wayne, that's 15 closely typed pages of someone else's words.
> All I was looking for from you is a couple of sentences just explaining how you personally have actually been affected by the altered laws.




Being photographed in public by undercover cops is a good one...


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2007)

Julia said:


> Wayne, that's 15 closely typed pages of someone else's words.
> All I was looking for from you is a couple of sentences just explaining how you personally have actually been affected by the altered laws.



I thought that would be compelling enough, but no.

Now to give you what you want would require me to give away details I don't want to give, but on small example:

I have 2 machines that are not networked. I often want to get info from one machine to the other, so rather than messing about with floppy disks, I just email it from one machine to the other. Takes a few moments to get to the server and back.

Last year, I sent some rather long Amibroker code via the same method, only after about an hour, it didn't arrive. Suspecting delays at the server, I sent a  test email, which arrived within a minute. 

4 HOURS LATER, my email of code turned up. Suspicious, I asked an acquaintance who works at the Geraldton Spy Station if emails get intercepted. Yep, they certainly do... and he said "you're probably on a list".  WTF!

So, I've tested this a few times and played a few games, by throwing in a few innocuous "key words" in emails. They are always intercepted and take hours to arrive.

You may think that's ensuring your safety. I thinks it's unacceptable and on the slippery slope.

That's all I'll get into.


----------



## caribean (3 August 2007)

It's amazing isn't it...how many Australians have all of a sudden become interested in international politics....yes, don't scramble to your keyboards...i'm talking about the vast majority of Johny come lately's out there...if we are talking about "suitable" immigrants, then, we should be looking for people with aboriginal characteristics,since they have been here for tens of thousands of years, and we,for a mere two hundred or so......
oh!! yes i forgot,...but they lived like savages and never developed the land...
well at least they didn't pollute and trashed everything they touched...who are the greedy savages really??
Back to the point...i come from a different country and i do consider myself an assimilated Australian, and the first thing i noticed when i came here 20 or so years ago, is the general lack of interest in international politics, the only occasional comment i heard was: don't worry mate, those people "over there" have always killed each other, anyway....
I wonder how many people had an interest in it, prior to say, the recent events in the US....
And how many have been following what's been going on on this little planet the last 50 years or so....
What's been going on in places like South America, Central America, Africa, South East Asia.....
Believe it or not those beings, suffering "over there" are people just like you and i....
It appears that governments from certain countries have used the back yards of some of these people to play their little dirty wars on....and the ones that did not yield....well... divide and concour...
Can we really trust governments to do the right thing? that is the question....


----------



## chops_a_must (3 August 2007)

caribean said:


> I wonder how many people had an interest in it, prior to say,9/11....
> And how many have been following what's been going on on this little planet the last 50 years or so....
> What's been going on in places like South America, Central America, Africa, South East Asia.....



Yep. After "9/11" I was concerned at how many people became experts on middle east politics. Given... I was only in year 12 at the time. But I had been involved in politics a long time before, watched foreign correspondent each week, lateline each night, and handed out how to vote cards. And no-one cares, or knows anything until something major happens, and by then it is too late to really gain any understanding without an emotional bias. But even in my teens, I felt that no-one had much of an understanding of international politics in australia, and it remains so. Which is disturbing.


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2007)

caribean said:


> I wonder how many people had an interest in it, prior to say,9/11....



I received my wake up call in 1990.


----------



## caribean (3 August 2007)

Sorry people i changed "9/11" to "recent events in the US" not because i fear
i might be of interest to some foreign country's weird security organization,
(there was a very interesting doco on SBS about USA's NSA, Wayne), but because it suits the point better, besides that,if what they said in that doco is true, then  i think i'm already marked anyway.


----------



## disarray (3 August 2007)

wayneL said:
			
		

> So, I've tested this a few times and played a few games, by throwing in a few innocuous "key words" in emails. They are always intercepted and take hours to arrive.
> 
> You may think that's ensuring your safety. I thinks it's unacceptable and on the slippery slope.
> 
> That's all I'll get into.




you want privacy? encrypt your emails. don't get into a flap because people are snooping, its hardly unexpected.



			
				caribean said:
			
		

> we should be looking for people with aboriginal characteristics,since they have been here for tens of thousands of years, and we,for a mere two hundred or so




no, we should be looking for people from cultures that are civilised, developed and don't have any religious hangups. asians have integrated well because their societies have all of these characteristics.



			
				caribean said:
			
		

> well at least they didn't pollute and trashed everything they touched...who are the greedy savages really??




human beings are the greedy savages. and aborigines were responsible for the extinction of the megafauna that once inhabited australia, and they brought fire as a method of land management. just because a people inhabit a place for thousands of years doesn't make them super magically in tune with mother earth or any crap like that.



			
				chops_a_must said:
			
		

> But I had been involved in politics a long time before, watched foreign correspondent each week, lateline each night, and handed out how to vote cards




george negus was my hero. my first overseas adventure was to syria because of him.



			
				caribean said:
			
		

> I wonder how many people had an interest in it, prior to say, the recent events in the US




i think you'll find that this board probably has a higher percentage of people who are aware of world affairs than you would find on say, the big brother board



			
				caribean said:
			
		

> Can we really trust governments to do the right thing? that is the question




ummmm no. have we ever? of course not, human nature will always come to the fore.


----------



## Kimosabi (3 August 2007)

> Originally Posted by *caribean*
> 
> 
> _I wonder how many people had an interest in it, prior to say,9/11...._




Well, I bought all the anti-muslim crap after 9/11, hung around a Military Forum for a while trying to find out what was really going on in the World, then I got interested in shares/economics etc, because of the Resorces Boom, discovered http://ml-implode.com/, alternative economic/financial news, then came across Ron Paul, learned about Reserve Banks, etc, which then led to me looking at 9/11 again, boy has the last 6 months popped some brain cells...


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2007)

disarray said:


> you want privacy? encrypt your emails. don't get into a flap because people are snooping, its hardly unexpected.



The above comment is nothing more than an argumentative dis.

I am doing nothing illegal. But folks wanted an example, I gave one. It illustrates that my civil liberties have been impinged by the gu'mint. Case closed.


----------



## Pat (3 August 2007)

disarray said:


> human beings are the greedy savages. and aborigines were responsible for the extinction of the megafauna that once inhabited australia, and they brought fire as a method of land management. just because a people inhabit a place for thousands of years doesn't make them super magically in tune with mother earth or any crap like that.



Well, i'd like to think so. Every animal, and plant has an impact on its surrounding environment. Compared to our society the impact the Aboriginies have made is.... I think this is the point.


----------



## caribean (3 August 2007)

Hi disarray, answering someone's argument by choosing the 20% possibly incorrect component when you are ignoring the rest 80% just for the purpose
of giving an answer is i think not a way to go....i'm not perhaps the most intelligent around here, nor am i very good with expressing myself with words,
there's no precision in these arguments mate...it's a bit like trading, look at the forrest not the trees.
No offense meant by the way.....


----------



## theasxgorilla (3 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> 4 HOURS LATER, my email of code turned up. Suspicious, I asked an acquaintance who works at the Geraldton Spy Station if emails get intercepted. Yep, they certainly do... and he said "you're probably on a list".  WTF!




I thought you were out in the middle of no where trying to stay out of trouble!


----------



## disarray (4 August 2007)

wayneL said:
			
		

> The above comment is nothing more than an argumentative dis.
> 
> I am doing nothing illegal. But folks wanted an example, I gave one. It illustrates that my civil liberties have been impinged by the gu'mint. Case closed.




but when haven't civil liberties been impinged? the spanish inquisition? salem witch trials? world war 1 & 2? spying, dobbing in your neighbour and various propaganda pieces about "you never know who is listening" is as old as civilisation. regardless of whether or not you are doing something illegal, the onus has ALWAYS been on the individual to protect themselves from the government, not the other way round. if you trust the government then all is well, if you don't then it is up to the individual to take steps to protect themselves. the americans have taken this to extremes with the second amendment, but there are other ways to keep your information private - don't sign up for crap on the web, encrypt your emails, put false information in the census if you want and so on.



			
				Pat said:
			
		

> Well, i'd like to think so. Every animal, and plant has an impact on its surrounding environment. Compared to our society the impact the Aboriginies have made is.... I think this is the point.




i don't think we can really compare a stone age civilisation of 1 million vs. a modern tech multicultural civilisation of 20+ million. while we have made a much bigger footprint on the environment the differences in what both have are enormous, starting with life expectancy, health and then moving onto the trinkets we have. if we want to live beyond 35 without being plagued by body parasites then the environment must suffer. i do think we are starting to learn more about balance (as every society has to do).



			
				caribean said:
			
		

> Hi disarray, answering someone's argument by choosing the 20% possibly incorrect component when you are ignoring the rest 80% just for the purpose




it's not ignored, i agree with much of what you say  no offence is taken or meant.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> ....Last year, I sent some rather long Amibroker code via the same method, only after about an hour, it didn't arrive. Suspecting delays at the server, I sent a  test email, which arrived within a minute.   4 HOURS LATER, my email of code turned up.



well I think the king and all the kingsmen (and their horses!!) are bloody FINKS .... I mean they couldn't even put humpty du...

hang on ... there's a knock at the door .. be right back .....


----------



## wayneL (4 August 2007)

disarray said:


> but when haven't civil liberties been impinged? the spanish inquisition? salem witch trials? world war 1 & 2? spying, dobbing in your neighbour and various propaganda pieces about "you never know who is listening" is as old as civilisation. regardless of whether or not you are doing something illegal, the onus has ALWAYS been on the individual to protect themselves from the government, not the other way round. if you trust the government then all is well, if you don't then it is up to the individual to take steps to protect themselves. the americans have taken this to extremes with the second amendment, but there are other ways to keep your information private - don't sign up for crap on the web, encrypt your emails, put false information in the census if you want and so on.



I take your point, but we live in an era where we DO have civil rights/liberties, even as they are being stripped away.

Maybe this is the anomaly, but our fathers died on battlefields so we could enjoy freedom. Now their children are p!ssing it away through apathy and by being fooled by propaganda.

The cost was too great for us not to defend it now.


----------



## Julia (4 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> I take your point, but we live in an era where we DO have civil rights/liberties, even as they are being stripped away.
> 
> Maybe this is the anomaly, but our fathers died on battlefields so we could enjoy freedom. Now their children are p!ssing it away through apathy and by being fooled by propaganda.
> 
> The cost was too great for us not to defend it now.




But how effective is such a defence in reality?  You are probably amongst a very small percentage of the population who has not sunk into apathy as a result of frustration.  Whilst I admire your passion I don't imagine it will yield you any real results, sadly.

An example is the recent announcement by the Beattie govt in Qld about Council amalgamations.  There is much outcry and anger throughout the State about this.  Thousands marched on Parliament yesterday with loud cries of " we're not gonna take this" etc etc.  It won't make a scrap of difference.  The amalgamations will happen.

Government supporters will say that this is why we elect governments:  to make decisions for us and they have a point I guess.


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2007)

Julia said:


> Government supporters will say that this is why we elect governments:  to make decisions for us and they have a point I guess.



I like the Swiss system of Citizen Initiated Referendums. That is democracy. 

http://www.basiclaw.net/Principles/Direct democracy.htm

Democratic governments are supposed to make decisions on behalf of the people, not for the people. Otherwise what is the difference between dictatorship and democracy? The choice of dictator?


----------



## caribean (5 August 2007)

It appears to me, that a handful of these northern European countries have got a lot of things sorted out quite well, and their citizens appear to be more intelligent and well balanced people (at least from a political point of view) than say the rest of the world.
Why is it that we seem to follow every new idea coming out from one particular country or maybe two,and you do know which ones i mean....
The other thing i could never understand is why does a country with just 17 million population needs to have so many parliaments (federal and states) and all the bureaucracy that goes with it?
Are there any studies out there that show how much bureaucracy we carry per head of population, and compares us with the rest of the world?
As i've stated above, it appears to me, i don't have facts.


----------



## Sean K (5 August 2007)

caribean said:


> The other thing i could never understand is why does a country with just 17 million population needs to have so many parliaments (federal and states) and all the bureaucracy that goes with it?
> Are there any studies out there that show how much bureaucracy we carry per head of population, and compares us with the rest of the world?



Would be interesting to know. I think our geography necessitates seperate administration. Tyranny of distance and all that. Even with wifi.


----------



## theasxgorilla (5 August 2007)

caribean said:


> Why is it that we seem to follow every new idea coming out from one particular country or maybe two,and you do know which ones i mean....




Language is a big factor, IMO.  The ability to get ideas from other places is limited by language barriers.

Don't feel bad though, for better or worse many of these countries have around 80% of their adult population with high English language competence, so we influence them.  Fortunately it seems to be limited to lifestyle things like beach culture, beer and music.  For some reason they don't like our politics.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> I like the Swiss system of Citizen Initiated Referendums. That is democracy.



ok folks, we have a motion on the books - Hansel suggests we ban all Citizens! - and Seikos and ....

PS pisstakes apart, it does sound promising


----------



## Julia (5 August 2007)

wayneL said:


> I like the Swiss system of Citizen Initiated Referendums. That is democracy.
> 
> http://www.basiclaw.net/Principles/Direct democracy.htm
> 
> Democratic governments are supposed to make decisions on behalf of the people, not for the people. Otherwise what is the difference between dictatorship and democracy? The choice of dictator?




Yep, exactly what we have here in Qld, Wayne.  Democracy has given way to a smiling dictator.


----------



## Duckman#72 (5 August 2007)

Julia said:


> Yep, exactly what we have here in Qld, Wayne.  Democracy has given way to a smiling dictator.




Ha ha!!

But can I slightly amend that please Julia.............."given way to a smiling dictator _that tends to apologise a lot." _ We really are lucky to have the world's "sorriest" Dictator.

Duckman


----------



## caribean (5 August 2007)

But after all.....i enjoyed a great dive this week on my small NSW coastal town... later i had a great dinner party with some friends, and while i was sipping my Taylors cab sav watching the sea, i'm thinking.... we are living in the greatest country in the world....and at the very least we're allowed to voice our political opinions, cheers, hope you had a good weekend.


----------



## Julia (5 August 2007)

caribean said:


> But after all.....i enjoyed a great dive this week on my small NSW coastal town... later i had a great dinner party with some friends, and while i was sipping my Taylors cab sav watching the sea, i'm thinking.... we are living in the greatest country in the world....and at the very least we're allowed to voice our political opinions, cheers, hope you had a good weekend.




Thanks for that, caribean.  You are right to remind us.  So easy to get upset about the bits we don't like.


----------



## numbercruncher (28 February 2008)

Big new study just released, apparently only a small minority of Muslims (7pc) support the Radicals/Nutjobs.



> Thursday February 28, 04:22 AM
> 
> Muslim support for radicals just 7%: survey
> WASHINGTON (AFP) - A huge survey of the world's Muslims released Tuesday *challenges* Western notions that equate Islam with radicalism and violence.
> ...







> About 93 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims are moderates and only seven percent are politically radical, according to the poll, based on more than 50,000 interviews.




http://au.news.yahoo.com/080227/19/15z7t.html


Apparently this is good news ! 7pc is only 100m people for the west to keep their eye on  I guess we can stand down ASIO etc etc 

What a study to release to the public and then try put positve spin on it, I always whudda thunk that 1pc or less of Muslims supported Radicals, amazing.


----------



## dalek (28 February 2008)

numbercruncher said:


> Apparently this is good news ! 7pc is only 100m people for the west to keep their eye on  I guess we can stand down ASIO etc etc
> 
> What a study to release to the public and then try put positve spin on it, I always whudda thunk that 1pc or less of Muslims supported Radicals, amazing.




This 7% number is particularly alarming when you consider it is likely to only represent those with radical views that have "outed" themselves.


----------



## saltyjones (28 February 2008)

terrorism has been part of life in australia for decades. kidnapping children from  aussie mothers & taking them to m##### countries has been going on for so long without it being a headline story. just ask my wife. in the early 1980's in her grief she befriended many woman in sydney with the same marriage trauma. those kidnapped kids have been brainwashed all their childhood by the ###### fathers. just ask to find out more!  i say just ask the multitudes of those aussie mums who have lived half lives without the presence of their kids........serious stuff that has never been challenged by social commentary. and it went on for decades.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (28 February 2008)

more then 7% of australians supported the killing of 100,000s of iraqis.


----------



## numbercruncher (28 February 2008)

Stormin_Norman said:


> more then 7% of australians supported the killing of 100,000s of iraqis.






Yes sure they did ....


Majority of those killed in Iraq have been killed by Terrorists, wouldnt of happened had the US not invaded, but the way your statement is worded is just plain false and inflammatory.


----------



## Tinpusher (28 February 2008)

*Stormin* is on the money...



> Deaths attributed to coalition forces accounted for 31 percent of the dead.
> 
> Although the "proportion of deaths ascribed to coalition forces has diminished in 2006 ... the actual numbers have increased each year."



http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/11/iraq.deaths/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm

Now that report is 18 months old, but 31% of 655,000 is *203,050*. *Stormin* is dead right, Aussie 'supporters' (voters?) of the Iraqi disaster have as much blood on their conscience as anyone.


----------



## disarray (28 February 2008)

all iraqi death figures are highly disputed and i'd wait for the journal to see what "attributable to action by US-led coalition forces" means. until then, suggesting allied forces have killed over 200,000 civilians is a bit over the top.

anyway related to this whole terrorism thread something happened today which made me think of an overlooked issue which ties in with multiculturalism, terrorism and all that - the social compact.

way back when the social compact was simple, obey the king or lose your life. absolute power was held by the nobility and the great mass of people did what they were told under pain of death. today the social compact is more elaborate but in essence it is based on this very simple ideal - "you would do the same for me". 

in mike moores "sicko" he asked an old canadian guy "why should you and i have to pay extra (taxes etc.) to provide health care, support etc. for others?" to which he replied "they would do the same for me". this was touching stuff and i earnestly believe this is the way it should be, but its changing, we can all see it (increasing stress and hostility is a dead giveaway) but no one is talking about it.

capitalist consumer culture is one factor ruining the social compact. as wealth is concentrated among fewer and fewer people there is resentment between the haves and have-nots, they all look at each other and say "well fk you then" and the social compact is fractures. this is why public health, education, welfare and other services are essential to keep society stable and provide a reasonable minimum quality of life to everyone in society. this is currently under pressure because of government policy and corporation profit mongering.

another thing ruining the social compact is multiculturalism. recent immigration practices have led to the introduction of undereducated, tribal minded and aggressive people (characterised mostly by lebanese muslims and africans) who piss on the concept of social compact because it is an alien concept to them (outside small tribal / family loyalties), and they take full advantage of the systems costing the rest of society more and breeding resentment amongst wider society (ala cronulla).

anyway i think this is related to the whole terrorism thing because terrorism seeks to fracture social compacts and drive wedges between communities, creating fertile ground for further conflict and furtherance of the cause.

we are doing the same thing to ourselves with business practices that are screwing people for profit and social policies which ignore peoples needs (labor government will get to work sorting this now).

in addition certain aspects of multiculturalism are doing the same. most cultures have arrived, taken part in the compact and we have a great society, but there are certain sections that are doing the "social work" of terrorism by setting up aggressive little enclaves and disdaining the rest of society.

so all the freedoms we enjoy, the lifestyle we lead, the peace and stability we take for granted, these are all fragile things based upon the knowledge that if you support your neighbour, he will support you. take that away (through bad policy and practice) and your freedoms, stability and peace will all fall away - starting with the freedoms. it has already begun.


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2008)

disarray said:


> all iraqi death figures are highly disputed and i'd wait for the journal to see what "attributable to action by US-led coalition forces" means. until then, suggesting allied forces have killed over 200,000 civilians is a bit over the top.
> 
> anyway related to this whole terrorism thread something happened today which made me think of an overlooked issue which ties in with multiculturalism, terrorism and all that - the social compact...



Great post disarray. Bang on the money IMO.

How do we restore this social compact. I, for one, would like it back.


----------



## Julia (28 February 2008)

wayneL said:


> Great post disarray. Bang on the money IMO.
> 
> How do we restore this social compact. I, for one, would like it back.




Wayne, I think so would all of us.

Disarray, thanks - thoughtful and rational remarks.


----------



## lolaba (29 February 2008)

To add to *disarray*'s comments about multiculturalism:

I know a girl who had a baby with an African refugee. While she’s very young, she seems to be the sole provider for the child. He drives around in a late model Lancer, her car is a falling to bits Barina. He rarely works. There are suspicions of beatings, owing to facial bruising attributed to “a fall”.  Apparently, beating women is part of the “culture”.   We can do without this kind of “multiculturalism”. I think that migrants (this includes refugees) should not be granted citizenship for five years. If, in that time, they commit crimes of violence, they should be sent back to their homeland where they will fit in much better. It should be a condition of their residency.  Question - how did the above-mentioned bludger a-hole manage to afford a late model car?


----------



## Tinpusher (1 March 2008)

I know a girl who had a baby with _a white bogan_. While she’s very young, she seems to be the sole provider for the child. He drives around in a late model Lancer, her car is a falling to bits Barina. He rarely works. There are suspicions of beatings, owing to facial bruising attributed to “a fall”. Apparently, beating women is part of the _meth addicted white bogan_ “culture”. We can do without this kind of “_anti-social trash_”. Question - how did the above-mentioned bludger a-hole manage to afford a late model car?

Cuts both ways my friend. Racism and hypocrisy - I love it!


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

Well how to handle the terrorists is a matter requiring the wisdom of Solomon.
imo.

No need to panic.
But the threat is very very real.
And the solution to the problem is exceedingly tricky.

Just as some of the extreme anti-terror laws have been criticised by legal professors in Aus as being counterproductive.   

One thing it doesn't need imo is a clown like GW Bush administering things. 

Would be great to hear that the US Patriot Act received a bit of rewrite for instance. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act


----------



## jman2007 (26 March 2008)

Some very worrying news coming out of Iraq,

Reclusive Shia cleric Moqtada Al-Sadr's Mahdi army currently under siege by Iraq security forces in Basra.  In my view, this was always going to happen once the British force pulled out of Basra, leaving behind a security vacuum.

Admittedly, the Iraqi security forces have yet to be _independently_ fully tested in battle, given that they probably feel they cannot tolerate a 10,000-15,000 string militia in their midst, this is a very serious test of their character. However, I have grave doubts in their ability to carry this task out, which essentially seems to be the subjugation and disarming of the powerful Mahdi militia.

The unrest has now spread to 4 major southern cities, including Iraq threatening, in my view, any hard-won security gains made by US and Iraqi forces.  Al-Malaki has given the militia 72 hours to disarm....but if they don't, what then?... This whole scenario puts at risk the case-fire declared by Moqtada Al-Sadr last year, and may signal a tragic return to the grim days of sectarian kidnappings and murders on the streets of Iraq.

Iraq may need to learn to accomodate and accept the presence of shia militias, similar to the way Hezollah have carved out a niche for themselves in Lebanon.  Dialogue and negotiation should be the order of the day, not violence.

Is there any hope here?...at all?...

jman


----------



## explod (26 March 2008)

jman2007 said:


> Some very worrying news coming out of Iraq,
> 
> Reclusive Shia cleric Moqtada Al-Sadr's Mahdi army currently under siege by Iraq security forces in Basra.  In my view, this was always going to happen once the British force pulled out of Basra, leaving behind a security vacuum.
> 
> ...




What's changed, Saddam imposed plenty of violence, then GWB heaps more and still trying.  Outside interfearance has never worked nor will it.  (Same in Aphganistan, USSR got beat and so will the West.   That terrorists have infiltrated is propaganda, it is just the locals who hate the occupiers because they have lost family members, culture and the means to provide for themselves.    Soverign states must be left to work out their own destiny;  Unless they are siting on a heaps of oil, then it seems to be different.

What a distastful thread this is. Ahhggg

Shame the starving millions across drought stricken Africa didn't have a bit of oil.


----------



## jman2007 (26 March 2008)

explod said:


> What's changed, Saddam imposed plenty of violence, then GWB heaps more and still trying.  Outside interfearance has never worked nor will it.  (Same in Aphganistan, USSR got beat and so will the West.  That terrorists have infiltrated is propaganda, it is just the locals who hate the occupiers because they have lost family members, culture and the means to provide for themselves.  Soverign states must be left to work out their own destiny;  Unless they are siting on a heaps of oil, then it seems to be different.
> 
> What a distastful thread this is. Ahhggg
> 
> Shame the starving millions across drought stricken Africa didn't have a bit of oil.




Well I tend to think this is more of internal issue for the Iraqis to solve, so yes, soveriegn states should be be left to sort out their own disturbances.  In many ways, GWB has done Iran a huge favour in Iraq.  For years, the majority Shia were simmering away under the brutal Ba'ath Party regime, who managed to keep a lid on any internal dissent mostly through violence and intimidation.

But with the withdrawal of the British from Basra, this has enabled Iran to extend its long arm back into southern Iran and yield more influence through Moqtada Al-Sadr. I have to admit, without Al-Sadr yielding his considerable influence and calling a cease-fire last year, the situation on the ground could be much, much worse....not that the current situation could be called acceptable by any means. So I still feel Al-Sadr has an important role to play in Iraq, and by that I mean for the better, the time has long passed for the opportunity for his influence to be nullified, as much as it would pain many people to admit.

jman


----------



## mayk (27 March 2008)

Where is Iraq oil going? No one seem to care. I, for one, will like some good journalist to find out the truth? 


Iraq seems a lost cause to me, soon the shia and sunni American trained armies will fight each other, while the world will see in wonder what is happening there. 

In all sincerity , a good solution will be to impose military rule ( and for God sake, get rid of this petty show of democracy), by Iraq Army. Increase the army recruitments and impose strict laws, till peace and order is restored. 

USA never had an imperalistic experience and thus always suffer after wining the initial war ( on the back of brute force). When you win a war, the important lesson is to implement military rule for a while, make people understand that the law is supreme, and then after a while give some authority to the people. Which is what UK ( after some bitter experience) learned from its empire. 

This youngesters( USA ) of today will never understand the wisdom of old fellas( UK. France etc). 

America is trying to establish Democracy in Iraq, in a region where no one cares about it. It is a sham democracy, which is imposed on people and bear little fruit.


----------



## noirua (16 October 2021)

Murder of MP Sir David Amess was terrorism, 'potentially linked to Islamist extremism', say police​16 October 2021




__





						Murder of MP Sir David Amess was terrorism, 'potentially linked to Islamist extremism', say police
					





					www.msn.com


----------

