The Australian Politics thread: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese


The Australian Politics thread: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese

Author
Message
rusty
rusty
World Class
World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
mcjules wrote:
rusty wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
rusty wrote:
Terrorist attack in Paris reportedly 11 people dead, terrorists on the loose. Despite this guess folks like nonorganic and afroman will continue their denialism of the Islamist threat and claim there is no problem.


Australian politics huh?

-PB


Is Islamist terror and the preventative measures taken by security agencies thus far not an Australian issue?

So rather than attacking notor and afroman who from what I've read have concerns about personal freedoms rather than condoning the acts of these dickheads, what do you suggest the government should do?

Should we remove freedom of religion as a tenant of our society and ban islam?
Should we become more of a police state and give authorities more powers to surveil whoever they want?
Should we deport everyone that doesn't share the same views as the government?


Notor condoned and defended the attacks when he assigned blame to the west for invading and dropping bombs on Islamic countries rather than the individuals who perpetrated the attack. There are lots of people out there like notor who sympathise with terrorists and are more concerned about the civil liberties of people who may be planning to carry out a terrorist attack than those of greater society.

In regards to your question the government should do whatever it reasonably can to prevent a terrorist atrocity happening in Australia. If that means assigning greater powers to police and other agencies to enable them to effectively detect and monitor potential terrorist planning then all Australians, including Australian Muslims should support this. Taking a blase, denialist approach to possibility of terrorism in Australia makes the possibility of what just happened in Paris happening here or worse a lot stronger.


Edited
9 Years Ago by rusty
Carlito
Carlito
Legend
Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K, Visits: 0
SlyGoat36 wrote:
Seen idiots on Facebook say it's the magazines fault for being racists, it's the Wests fault.

Then you have some idiotic friends .
Edited
9 Years Ago by MvFCArsenal16.8
TheSelectFew
TheSelectFew
Legend
Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)Legend (30K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K, Visits: 0
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:
SlyGoat36 wrote:
Seen idiots on Facebook say it's the magazines fault for being racists, it's the Wests fault.

Then you have some idiotic friends .


Tbf ive seen it on other forums and threads etc. They deflect reports and resort to conspiracy CIA bullshit.


Edited
9 Years Ago by TheSelectFew
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
rusty wrote:
mcjules wrote:
rusty wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
rusty wrote:
Terrorist attack in Paris reportedly 11 people dead, terrorists on the loose. Despite this guess folks like nonorganic and afroman will continue their denialism of the Islamist threat and claim there is no problem.


Australian politics huh?

-PB


Is Islamist terror and the preventative measures taken by security agencies thus far not an Australian issue?

So rather than attacking notor and afroman who from what I've read have concerns about personal freedoms rather than condoning the acts of these dickheads, what do you suggest the government should do?

Should we remove freedom of religion as a tenant of our society and ban islam?
Should we become more of a police state and give authorities more powers to surveil whoever they want?
Should we deport everyone that doesn't share the same views as the government?


Notor condoned and defended the attacks when he assigned blame to the west for invading and dropping bombs on Islamic countries rather than the individuals who perpetrated the attack. There are lots of people out there like notor who sympathise with terrorists and are more concerned about the civil liberties of people who may be planning to carry out a terrorist attack than those of greater society.

In regards to your question the government should do whatever it reasonably can to prevent a terrorist atrocity happening in Australia. If that means assigning greater powers to police and other agencies to enable them to effectively detect and monitor potential terrorist planning then all Australians, including Australian Muslims should support this. Taking a blase, denialist approach to possibility of terrorism in Australia makes the possibility of what just happened in Paris happening here or worse a lot stronger.

If you see that as condoning the attacks, then in the same fashion, you're condoning the attacks by saying governments aren't doing enough to stop it.

Also you use the word reasonable, some of us think giving law enforcement authorities the ability to spy on people without a warrant is beyond reasonable. Does that mean we are denying that terrorism is possible in Australia?

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
rusty
rusty
World Class
World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
mcjules wrote:
If you see that as condoning the attacks, then in the same fashion, you're condoning the attacks by saying governments aren't doing enough to stop it.

Also you use the word reasonable, some of us think giving law enforcement authorities the ability to spy on people without a warrant is beyond reasonable. Does that mean we are denying that terrorism is possible in Australia?


How am I condoning the attacks? :lol: There's no foolproof way to stop terrorism, it's just something we have to live with and deal with as best as possible. If there are people in our society who are actively planning to commit an act of terror don't you want our agencies finding out who these people are and stopping them?

Unfortunately if you think law enforcement authorities shouldn't be allowed to do what is reasonably necessary to identify and prevent terrorist attacks then you don't take the prospect of terrorism happening here in Australia very seriously, and therefore are a denialist. This isn't like the government invading peoples privacy to crack down on illegal movie downloads, this is terrorism; bombs, murder, blood, guts etc. It's serious shit. If we just sit in on our heads and do nothing and pretend there is no real threat there will be very severe consequences to pay.





Edited
9 Years Ago by rusty
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
Back on topic.

Looks like a lot of minor parties are appearing up in Townsville to be on the ballot papers lol.

With no second house in QLD, I've never really looked into what happens should the LNP not get a majority to form Government, is it hung like it is for the Federal system?

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
notorganic
notorganic
Legend
Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)Legend (21K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K, Visits: 0
Top rusty kek
Edited
9 Years Ago by notorganic
SlyGoat36
SlyGoat36
World Class
World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)World Class (5.9K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K, Visits: 0
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:
SlyGoat36 wrote:
Seen idiots on Facebook say it's the magazines fault for being racists, it's the Wests fault.

Then you have some idiotic friends .


Not friends, just comments I've been reading on the news report posts.
Edited
9 Years Ago by SlyGoat36
LFC.
LFC.
Legend
Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K, Visits: 0
Its a real laughing matter isn't it PB the state of affairs in politics, especially up there.
Proves what a bunch of fucktard voters there is and deserved, the Sunshine Sate alright, right up where it don't shine :lol:

Love Football

Edited
9 Years Ago by LFC.
Carlito
Carlito
Legend
Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K, Visits: 0
SlyGoat36 wrote:
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:
SlyGoat36 wrote:
Seen idiots on Facebook say it's the magazines fault for being racists, it's the Wests fault.

Then you have some idiotic friends .


Not friends, just comments I've been reading on the news report posts.

then those fuckwits are idiots. There are fuck tards on both sides of the spectrum
Edited
9 Years Ago by MvFCArsenal16.8
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
notorganic wrote:
Top rusty kek

Pretty much.

Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp, he says that you condone the attack because you give a reason as to why the attacks might occur (i.e. bombing middle eastern countries). He suggests that authorities not having enough power is a reason why the attacks might be occurring. Both are reasons/explanations, why is one condoning the attack and the other isn't? Just to clarify, personally I think neither statements condone the actions.

The rest was just as much of a waste of time.

Edited by mcjules: 8/1/2015 01:45:13 PM

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
M.L. wrote:
Its a real laughing matter isn't it PB the state of affairs in politics, especially up there.
Proves what a bunch of fucktard voters there is and deserved, the Sunshine Sate alright, right up where it don't shine :lol:


Yup, will take another 3-4 years for things to balance out again.

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
rusty
rusty
World Class
World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
mcjules wrote:
notorganic wrote:
Top rusty kek

Pretty much.

Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp, he says that you condone the attack because you give a reason as to why the attacks might occur (i.e. bombing middle eastern countries). He suggests that authorities not having enough power is a reason why the attacks might be occurring. Both are reasons/explanations, why is one condoning the attack and the other isn't? Just to clarify, personally I think neither statements condone the actions.

The rest was just as much of a waste of time.

Edited by mcjules: 8/1/2015 01:45:13 PM


The authorities have nothing to do with why the attacks are occurring, there involvement is limited to preventing not causing them. Whereas notor and many others argue the west involvement in dropping bombs in the ME and invading Islamic countries is a precipitating a lot of terrorist activity, and thus mitigating the accountability of those directly responsible.
Edited
9 Years Ago by rusty
imonfourfourtwo
imonfourfourtwo
Pro
Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K, Visits: 0
paulbagzFC wrote:
M.L. wrote:
Its a real laughing matter isn't it PB the state of affairs in politics, especially up there.
Proves what a bunch of fucktard voters there is and deserved, the Sunshine Sate alright, right up where it don't shine :lol:


Yup, will take another 3-4 years for things to balance out again.

-PB


Yeah, the whole unicameral situation really doesn't sit well with me. This election looks like it will be the stabiliser as far as provided a real opposition is concerned but really the LNP should maintain government...unless Tones wants to stick his beak in and talk more about changing the GST like he changed the petrol tax before the Victorian election.

Newman, "Labor, through the support of wasted votes going to independents and minor parties, could fall across the line."

Maybe democracy is different up in Queensland, but I thought the idea was that every vote counts? Even if the vote gets exhausted before going to the final two in the count, if you don't want to vote for either major party that's a perfectly valid vote. And people say Labor want a nanny state...

Edited by imonfourfourtwo: 8/1/2015 08:52:17 PM
Edited
9 Years Ago by imonfourfourtwo
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
rusty wrote:
mcjules wrote:
notorganic wrote:
Top rusty kek

Pretty much.

Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp, he says that you condone the attack because you give a reason as to why the attacks might occur (i.e. bombing middle eastern countries). He suggests that authorities not having enough power is a reason why the attacks might be occurring. Both are reasons/explanations, why is one condoning the attack and the other isn't? Just to clarify, personally I think neither statements condone the actions.

The rest was just as much of a waste of time.

Edited by mcjules: 8/1/2015 01:45:13 PM


The authorities have nothing to do with why the attacks are occurring, there involvement is limited to preventing not causing them. Whereas notor and many others argue the west involvement in dropping bombs in the ME and invading Islamic countries is a precipitating a lot of terrorist activity, and thus mitigating the accountability of those directly responsible.

"mitigating accountability' :lol: Even if that was true, it's not the same as condoning.

On the relinquishing of freedoms for "security", in China the authorities have the power to do pretty much whatever they want yet they still have terrorist attacks.

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
Joffa
Joffa
Legend
Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)Legend (86K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K, Visits: 0
Hundreds protest, some sewing lips shut, amid rising tension in Australian refugee camp

Source: Reuters - Wed, 14 Jan 2015 07:23 GMT


Author: Reuters

By Matt Siegel

SYDNEY, Jan 14 (Reuters) - Hundreds of asylum seekers have gone on hunger strike at an Australian immigration detention centre in Papua New Guinea, rights groups said on Wednesday, with some sewing their lips shut to highlight fears for their security.

Australia uses offshore detention centres in Papua New Guinea and the tiny South Pacific island nation of Nauru to process would-be refugees trying to reach the country, often in unsafe boats after paying people-smugglers in Indonesia.

The detention centre on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea was the scene of deadly riots in February 2014, in which one asylum seeker was killed and more than 70 injured after residents overran the camp, attacking detainees with makeshift weapons.

The protests began after detainees were told they would be moved into new accommodation, which they feared they make them more vulnerable to attack, said Ian Rintoul, executive director of the Refugee Action Coalition.

"Things have just come to a head. It's impossible to exaggerate the real fears that people have for their safety and for their lives," he told Reuters.

Manus Island is one of the poorest regions of Papua New Guinea and residents have repeatedly expressed anger at the prospect of refugees being resettled in a community already lacking jobs.

Many of the detainees have been in the camps as long as 18 months and a technical problem has left them without running water for bathing.

A photograph provided to Reuters on Wednesday shows what appears to be a detainee with his lips stitched shut. Others also had their lips sealed with stitches, a source with knowledge of the camps said.

"Refugees inside the Manus Island detention camp are clearly suffering and have resorted to self-harm in an act of desperation," opposition Greens Party Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said in a statement.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott's tough line on people smuggling has been credited with grinding the trade to a virtual halt, but thousands remain in camps like Manus Island.

Under new laws instituted by former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, none of the asylum seekers in Papua New Guinea will ever be eligible for resettlement in Australia, even if they are found to be genuine refugees.

The government says that the camps have helped to remove the financial incentive for people smugglers, in the process saving hundreds of lives that might otherwise have been lost at sea in rickety boats.

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Peter Dutton did not respond to requests from Reuters for comment.

Settling in Papua New Guinea would also appear to be out of the question.

"There simply is no safe arrangement for resettlement in Papua New Guinea. It is a gaping whole at the end of the Australian government's offshore processing arrangement and as long as that exists, there isn't a remedy," Rintoul said.

(Editing by Robert Birsel and Nick Macfie)
http://www.trust.org/item/20150114072138-l8otc/?source=leadCarousel
Edited
9 Years Ago by Joffa
WaMackie
WaMackie
Pro
Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)Pro (3.1K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3K, Visits: 0
https://manusleaks.wordpress.com/2014/11/25/exclusive-aria-nominees-links-to-mistreatment-of-asylum-seekers-revealed/

Exclusive: ARIA Winners Links to Mistreatment of Asylum Seekers Revealed

Brisbane pop band Sheppard have had a stellar year. In the space of 12 months the eponymously named group – centred around siblings George, Amy and Emma Sheppard – have hit the top of the Australian charts; achieved international success; appeared on the Ellen De Generes show; toured Europe; and scored a lucrative advertising deal with Subway. Their spectacular rise has culminated in the band scoring nominations in 7 categories at the upcoming ARIA awards, including Song of the Year for their hit single Geronimo, and Album of the Year for their debut 11 track release Bombs Away.

Their rise has all been made possible by the financial backing of their parents, Greg and Linda Sheppard, who reputedly invested their life savings in their children’s musical careers. The Sheppard’s are a close-knit family, and despite their ever-increasing fame the band members continue to live at home in their parents $3 million mansion in the trendy inner-Brisbane suburb of Newstead.

Yet unbeknownst to their fans, the band’s rise to fame and riches was built upon a pyre of broken dreams in far away Manus Island, where more than a thousand asylum seekers rot away behind razor wire in the sweltering Papua New Guinean sun.There the people who have traveled halfway across the world in a leaky boat are closely guarded by security guards employed by a company named Wilson Protective Services PNG Limited (Wilson Security) who run the Manus Island detention center.

Greg Sheppard – manager of Sheppard, father of the 3 principal members, and chief financier of the band’s career – is a Director of the company. He is one of 3 men, a most unholy trinity, directly responsible for the alleged torture, abuse and rapes that have occurred – and continue to occur – on Manus Island. One of three men who call the shots and run the show. A member of a most unholy trinity.

The other 2 members of the trinity are his fellow directors Gary Koch and John McMellan, executives of the Australian registered Wilson Security Pty Ltd, the company that sponsors a V8 Supercars motor racing team to the tune of about $5 million a year.

Greg Sheppard and his rev-head mates run the company that is alleged to have cable tied or handcuffed detainees to chairs, tortured and beaten them for 3-4 days, then threatened to rape and murder them if they proceeded to give evidence about the murder of a fellow inmate by contracted security guards.
Edited
9 Years Ago by WaMackie
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0


-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
u4486662
u4486662
World Class
World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K, Visits: 0
paulbagzFC wrote:


-PB

I ended up pretty much the same as you.
Edited
9 Years Ago by u4486662
imonfourfourtwo
imonfourfourtwo
Pro
Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)Pro (2.9K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K, Visits: 0
So how about that knighthood going to Prince Phillip? A matter of there not being two Australians among the 23 million of us deserving of it, or simply the PM honouring his nation of birth?
Edited
9 Years Ago by imonfourfourtwo
australiantibullus
australiantibullus
Pro
Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)Pro (2.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.3K, Visits: 0
imonfourfourtwo wrote:
So how about that knighthood going to Prince Phillip? A matter of there not being two Australians among the 23 million of us deserving of it, or simply the PM honouring his nation of birth?
Maybe His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Grand Master and First and Principal Knight Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Member of the Order of Merit, Companion of the Order of Australia, Additional Member of the Order of New Zealand, Extra Companion of the Queen's Service Order, Royal Chief of the Order of Logohu, Extraordinary Companion of the Order of Canada, Extraordinary Commander of the Order of Military Merit,Canadian Forces Decoration, Lord of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, Privy Councillor of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty, Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom didn't have enough recognition for marrying the queen?

Edited by australiantibullus: 26/1/2015 09:57:49 AM
Edited
9 Years Ago by australiantibullus
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
Hope it sparks the republic debate again [-o<

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
u4486662
u4486662
World Class
World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K, Visits: 0
imonfourfourtwo wrote:
So how about that knighthood going to Prince Phillip? A matter of there not being two Australians among the 23 million of us deserving of it, or simply the PM honouring his nation of birth?

Didn't he ask an Aborigine is he still threw spears?
Edited
9 Years Ago by u4486662
u4486662
u4486662
World Class
World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K, Visits: 0
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-philip-quotes-relive-65-1445185
Edited
9 Years Ago by u4486662
u4486662
u4486662
World Class
World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K, Visits: 0
To a woman solicitor, 1987: “I thought it was against the law for a woman to solicit.”

Lol.
Edited
9 Years Ago by u4486662
Carlito
Carlito
Legend
Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K, Visits: 0
Wth. Tony losing the plot
Edited
9 Years Ago by MvFCArsenal16.8
u4486662
u4486662
World Class
World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)World Class (8.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K, Visits: 0
Asking Cate Blanchett to fix his DVD player because she worked “in the film industry”, 2008: “There’s a cord sticking out of the back. Might you tell me where it goes?”

Double lol.
Edited
9 Years Ago by u4486662
rusty
rusty
World Class
World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
Wow, feeling a bit sorry for Greece right now. Faced between a choice of austerity and outright annihilation they chose to destroy themselves. Hope can do terrible things.
Edited
9 Years Ago by rusty
rusty
rusty
World Class
World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)World Class (6.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
mcjules wrote:
rusty wrote:
mcjules wrote:
notorganic wrote:
Top rusty kek

Pretty much.

Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp, he says that you condone the attack because you give a reason as to why the attacks might occur (i.e. bombing middle eastern countries). He suggests that authorities not having enough power is a reason why the attacks might be occurring. Both are reasons/explanations, why is one condoning the attack and the other isn't? Just to clarify, personally I think neither statements condone the actions.

The rest was just as much of a waste of time.

Edited by mcjules: 8/1/2015 01:45:13 PM


The authorities have nothing to do with why the attacks are occurring, there involvement is limited to preventing not causing them. Whereas notor and many others argue the west involvement in dropping bombs in the ME and invading Islamic countries is a precipitating a lot of terrorist activity, and thus mitigating the accountability of those directly responsible.

"mitigating accountability' :lol: Even if that was true, it's not the same as condoning.

On the relinquishing of freedoms for "security", in China the authorities have the power to do pretty much whatever they want yet they still have terrorist attacks.


Security won't prevent terrorist attacks from ever occurring, only the ones they're able to identify and stop in time. Australian security agencies have already quashed planned terrorist attacks in Australia, trampling on the precious civil liberties of many, saving many lives.


Edited
9 Years Ago by rusty
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
rusty wrote:
mcjules wrote:
rusty wrote:
mcjules wrote:
notorganic wrote:
Top rusty kek

Pretty much.

Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp, he says that you condone the attack because you give a reason as to why the attacks might occur (i.e. bombing middle eastern countries). He suggests that authorities not having enough power is a reason why the attacks might be occurring. Both are reasons/explanations, why is one condoning the attack and the other isn't? Just to clarify, personally I think neither statements condone the actions.

The rest was just as much of a waste of time.

Edited by mcjules: 8/1/2015 01:45:13 PM


The authorities have nothing to do with why the attacks are occurring, there involvement is limited to preventing not causing them. Whereas notor and many others argue the west involvement in dropping bombs in the ME and invading Islamic countries is a precipitating a lot of terrorist activity, and thus mitigating the accountability of those directly responsible.

"mitigating accountability' :lol: Even if that was true, it's not the same as condoning.

On the relinquishing of freedoms for "security", in China the authorities have the power to do pretty much whatever they want yet they still have terrorist attacks.


Security won't prevent terrorist attacks from ever occurring, only the ones they're able to identify and stop in time. Australian security agencies have already quashed planned terrorist attacks in Australia, trampling on the precious civil liberties of many, saving many lives.


So you advocate an open slather then? Just for "security" or for every potential crime? If it's just for security do you think there's any risk of misuse? It's pretty hard to have them publicly accountable when they can censor everything.

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
GO


Select a Forum....























Inside Sport


Search