Hostage situation in Sydney

[sheepdog]

Attached jw: don't I look like a royal fuckhead regarding my post on the weekend

Might owe jw a beer for his assistance on that one, who was very classy in the manner in which he helped you out. More than happy to oblige.

Sidenote: most of my posts are majority tongue in cheek/shit stirring that scarcely contain any truth.

Except this one.

[HeartFc]

 

 

I am guessing the large majority just caught their normal bus from Bronte to Sydney CBD tuned into a Russell Brand Podcast alone.

 

 

 

[Nate]

To be honest, does it really matter whether we label this guy a terrorist or a mentally ill criminal? 

 

In my mind both terms are synonymous and at the end of the day, this person inflicted harm upon innocent people irrespective of what we label him. 

[n i k o]

In the context that "terrorism" has been used by the media and governments then yes it is important. An "act of terrorism" puts a blanket thought over a Middle Eastern attack on western society. An act of "a mentally ill criminal" is simply a random event that doesn't threaten anyone at large.

[HeartFc]

The problem with not calling him a terrorist is the fact that it denies his connection to extremist Islam. No he does not represent the larger muslim community but he does represent extreme Islam... which believe it or not is a problem on planet earth. Ask Pakistan.

[SF33]

 

work as a nation to never let something like this happen again.

The hashtag is a pretty good start at achieving this. Hatred breeds hatred and will only create more situations like what has just occurred, the hashtag and the sentiments behind it are doing the exact opposite.

Don't get me wrong, this is the usual social media attention seeking lame gay behaviour that I'm not a fan of, but given it's creating a culture of peace and unity rather than hatred, I have no problem admitting that I'm giving this one a pass. Just seems to me that some lame social media campaign is a lot better than seeing race riots and shit like that.

 

 

I think the long-term effectiveness depends on how many people put their money where their mouths are and actually do it. Particularly high-profile people. I saw Harry Kewell post it, along with multiple Geelong footballers, but somehow I can't see Harry hopping on a train to Central tomorrow morning. Imagine how much of a free hit it would be for a political leader (or several) to get on board?

 

I can't see many doing more than making a post about it, but if it means that incidents like the one on the train in the City Loop and North Melbourne are stopped quickly, or that they don't even begin, then I can't see how it's a negative. And the pissy little hashtag campaign may have played a small part.

[SF33]

The problem with not calling him a terrorist is the fact that it denies his connection to extremist Islam. No he does not represent the larger muslim community but he does represent extreme Islam... which believe it or not is a problem on planet earth. Ask Pakistan.

 

I'm not sure he did during the siege (though that's certainly the perception that he wanted to give). We don't know enough about it, but my guess is that the trigger for this was his escalating legal problems (and how much his accessory to murder and sexual misconduct charges had to do with his religion is unclear). Seems pretty telling to me that I haven't heard any extremist group even acknowledge him. And I can't imagine that if he was, that they would have seen his actions as any real success. He couldn't control his hostages. He made demands that weren't met and did nothing to punish the inaction. He couldn't get his message out publicly, so we're not even sure why he had a bug in his arse on Monday (though we can assume).

 

Of course we can say that technically the description as a 'terrorist' is correct, but then it's also correct for someone committing armed robbery, a car jacking, aggravated rape, or a number of other crimes where a weapon is used to menace a victim. To me, an act of terrorism should have the following elements:

 

1. 'I/we did this'

2. 'I/we did this because...'

3. 'We will do this again if...'

 

The threat here has almost certainly died with Monis. I'd be willing to bet that he wasn't acting out of any greater political/religious ideology, that it was entirely out of selfish/personal reasons.

[hedaik]

LIKE THIS POST IF YOU SUPPORT PEACE

 

 

1 LIKE = 1 HUG

Edited December 17, 2014 by hedaik

[cadete]

LIKE THIS POST IF YOU SUPPORT PEACE

 

 

1 LIKE = 1 HUG

FWIW this post is still a slightly less blatant attempt for likes than a Good Old FB Critique Post.

[Begbie]

 

 

 

I am guessing the large majority just caught their normal bus from Bronte to Sydney CBD tuned into a Russell Brand Podcast alone.

 

 

 

 

Fuck that cunt winds me up

[HeartFc]

The siege and his direct connection to extremism both make it clear imo. Sure he wasn't part of a group as such but he still believed in the same values as terrorist groups. He made hate speeches in sydney and had 14.7k likes on his Facebook. I can't believe it's even being discussed?? He was an enemy of both non muslims and moderate muslims, can't we just face the issue head on instead of this leftist pussys foot crap.

Yesterday I saw people posting pics of anders breivik, the Westboro inbreds and the fkn crusades!!! Normally I'd laugh but these pics have 120k likes and people out and out saying Christians and the church are evil.

Criticize Christianity you're a cool progressive forward thinker... call a terrorist a terrorist... ur racist bigot.

This country is ripe for the picking.

[jw1739]

There's no strict definition of what "terrorism" actually is, but IMO it's generally accepted to embody the following:

- it is perpetrated for political, religious or ideological reasons;

- it is targeted at another political system or culture for the purpose of causing that system or culture to break down to a greater or lesser extent;

- it is directed at random members of the target political system or culture for the purpose of creating fear so that they change the way they live their everyday lives.

 

There may be similar "acts" perpetrated by other members of our society, but that's irrelevant if the motives do not embody any of the above. However, if any "act" embodies the above then to my mind it's a "terrorist act."

 

As HeartFc says, this issue must be recognised as fact, faced head on, and dealt with. Otherwise it is a cancer that will slowly grow within our society as it is doing elsewhere.

Edited December 17, 2014 by jw1739

[SF33]

There's no strict definition of what "terrorism" actually is, but IMO it's generally accepted to embody the following:

- it is perpetrated for political, religious or ideological reasons;

- it is targeted at another political system or culture for the purpose of causing that system or culture to break down to a greater or lesser extent;

- it is directed at random members of the target political system or culture for the purpose of creating fear so that they change the way they live their everyday lives.

 

There may be similar "acts" perpetrated by other members of our society, but that's irrelevant if the motives do not embody any of the above. However, if any "act" embodies the above then to my mind it's a "terrorist act."

 

As HeartFc says, this issue must be recognised as fact, faced head on, and dealt with. Otherwise it is a cancer that will slowly grow within our society as it is doing elsewhere.

 

That's fine. Each to their own. I just find it pretty telling that we haven't heard anything from (what I'd consider to be) real terrorist groups supporting Monis, or even acknowledging him. I haven't heard about any support for him whatsoever. And I think that's because:

 

a) Everything he did from the time he went in there was strictly for himself and not some 'greater good' revolution.

 

b ) He completely ****ed everything up from start to finish. I mean, come on, even I was thinking 'Wait, that's not the ISIS flag' when the photo went up. He couldn't find a single accomplice (perhaps we should be focusing on the fact that he couldn't even find one person to join him on Monday, who would have made him achieving whatever it was he wanted immeasurably easier, more than however many thousand likes he had? Doesn't that say a bit about how much support he has/had?). Hostages were running out of the store en masse and he did...nothing in response. If a body count was what he was after, a more ruthless/decisive terrorist would have got double figures without a problem. If he had been affiliated with a terror group, I imagine it would see him as a complete embarrassment.

Edited December 17, 2014 by SF33

[cadete]

The siege and his direct connection to extremism both make it clear imo. Sure he wasn't part of a group as such but he still believed in the same values as terrorist groups. He made hate speeches in sydney and had 14.7k likes on his Facebook. I can't believe it's even being discussed?? He was an enemy of both non muslims and moderate muslims, can't we just face the issue head on instead of this leftist pussys foot crap.

Yesterday I saw people posting pics of anders breivik, the Westboro inbreds and the fkn crusades!!! Normally I'd laugh but these pics have 120k likes and people out and out saying Christians and the church are evil.

Criticize Christianity you're a cool progressive forward thinker... call a terrorist a terrorist... ur racist bigot.

This country is ripe for the picking.

Mate, I actually saw PPL on FB saying Abbott was picking on Muslims because he attended a Jesuit School.... because apparently the fact that the Jesuits fought the Muslim Moors five hundred years in Spain was very relevant to Abbott's political mindset in 2014

 

FFS I guess that makes Bill Shorten, Job Watson, Daniel Hannebery and John Eales all Anti Muslim as well FWIW.

[HeartFc]

A terror act doesn't need to be validated but a certain group, it doesn't need to be very organised or even make sense. Look up "lone wolf terrorism".

[HeartFc]

 

The siege and his direct connection to extremism both make it clear imo. Sure he wasn't part of a group as such but he still believed in the same values as terrorist groups. He made hate speeches in sydney and had 14.7k likes on his Facebook. I can't believe it's even being discussed?? He was an enemy of both non muslims and moderate muslims, can't we just face the issue head on instead of this leftist pussys foot crap.

Yesterday I saw people posting pics of anders breivik, the Westboro inbreds and the fkn crusades!!! Normally I'd laugh but these pics have 120k likes and people out and out saying Christians and the church are evil.

Criticize Christianity you're a cool progressive forward thinker... call a terrorist a terrorist... ur racist bigot.

This country is ripe for the picking.

Mate, I actually saw PPL on FB saying Abbott was picking on Muslims because he attended a Jesuit School.... because apparently the fact that the Jesuits fought the Muslim Moors five hundred years in Spain was very relevant to Abbott's political mindset in 2014

 

FFS I guess that makes Bill Shorten, Job Watson, Daniel Hannebery and John Eales all Anti Muslim as well FWIW.

 

 

 

LOL fuck me dead, you can't make this shit up.

 

The funniest thing was the timeline of events from a few leftist FB pages:

 

First reports emerge - Abbott and Hockey have "created" a distraction from the budget report.

Siege continues into the night - Abbott calls Murdoch to sensationalise events.

2 innocent die at the hands of monis - Nothing.

Next day Afternoon - "#illridewithyou".

[SF33]

A terror act doesn't need to be validated but a certain group, it doesn't need to be very organised or even make sense. Look up "lone wolf terrorism".

 

And again, that's fine. But if we're acknowledging that it was just one nutter in this case, the 'issue that needs to be met head on' as people have been saying, is vastly different to what it is for a terror cell operating within Australia. For this specific example, the issues are: how was he able to do this, when he's been on the radar for about a decade as a nutter and he'd been outed as a fraud by his own (at the time) Shia people over five years ago?

 

Then, the issue becomes 'how can you stop someone that isn't on the radar (a 'cleanskin' regardless of race/religion), like Monis was, if such a situation ever came up?' And I think, no matter what civil liberties could be taken away to try to combat such a hypothetical threat, the answer to that can only ever be: 'You get lucky'. If someone with no criminal record, who isn't on any sort of 'watch list' decided to go into the CBD tomorrow and murder a few random people, chances are they'd have some degree of success, no matter what additional laws are put in place. And terror groups would specifically recruit and hide such people, as the respective groups in Northern Ireland used to.

[cadete]

 

 

The siege and his direct connection to extremism both make it clear imo. Sure he wasn't part of a group as such but he still believed in the same values as terrorist groups. He made hate speeches in sydney and had 14.7k likes on his Facebook. I can't believe it's even being discussed?? He was an enemy of both non muslims and moderate muslims, can't we just face the issue head on instead of this leftist pussys foot crap.

Yesterday I saw people posting pics of anders breivik, the Westboro inbreds and the fkn crusades!!! Normally I'd laugh but these pics have 120k likes and people out and out saying Christians and the church are evil.

Criticize Christianity you're a cool progressive forward thinker... call a terrorist a terrorist... ur racist bigot.

This country is ripe for the picking.

Mate, I actually saw PPL on FB saying Abbott was picking on Muslims because he attended a Jesuit School.... because apparently the fact that the Jesuits fought the Muslim Moors five hundred years in Spain was very relevant to Abbott's political mindset in 2014

 

FFS I guess that makes Bill Shorten, Job Watson, Daniel Hannebery and John Eales all Anti Muslim as well FWIW.

 

 

 

LOL fuck me dead, you can't make this shit up.

 

The funniest thing was the timeline of events from a few leftist FB pages:

 

First reports emerge - Abbott and Hockey have "created" a distraction from the budget report.

Siege continues into the night - Abbott calls Murdoch to sensationalise events.

2 innocent die at the hands of monis - Nothing.

Next day Afternoon - "#illridewithyou".

 

You got to love how every Leftist Journalism Student (70% of all Journalism Students if we are honest) all have dreams of being nothing but a print journalist yet spend 90% of their time going on about how much they hate Rupert Murdoch and what he has done to the media.

 

Well I think you better you change your view on Rupert boys and girls (And all those at Fairfax) because in five years time the only daily newspapers going around in this country will all by owned by the bloke.

[HeartFc]

Yea but you're forgetting they're planning a revolution. Their leader says it's not far off...

Actually I'm really looking forward to Russell Brand (a man who made his money due to our current system) has to sell his collection of womems leather pants to have enough money to paid for chickpeas and his share house rent.

[mulhollanddrive]

What it showed was technology hasn't come as far as I thought.

 

Don't think have robots they can send in to do stuff.  Vending machine that shoot tasers.

[AyeCee]

The thing that is getting me all worked up over this whole thing is the fact that it seems a strong majority of people are now not even able to entertain a differing point of view, or give a thought to a simple question posed towards them

In terms of the racial and religious belief argument, I find it astounding that a largely homogenous society cannot even consider questioning why a small minority of a different culture should not be looked at as in to why they keep producing members who are obviously unhappy with the way of life that the majority of the country believe in. Let's be honest, this wasn't the first time an attack like this has happened for this reason, and it won't be the last.

I'm not saying that we should kick all muslims out, and honestly believe that the vast majority are peaceful citizens. My concern rises at the realisation that no one can even discuss reasons and concerns over why a culture clash is happening, as any comments are instantly shot down as racist, ignorant ideas, even if there is a legitimate concern behind them.

The same thing is happening with this gun law debate.

As soon as anyone even mentions perhaps looking at why gun crime is committed, and if in fact gun laws here are the reason for such low rates, they get ridiculed publicly, and told to 'go live in America'.

Statistics and case studies are provided by those who are clearly passionate about reclaiming a freedom, yet the ones who call for others to not be 'sheeple', blindly follow and applaude those who insult and berate others for simply having a thought.

Sadly, the desire to be seen as politically correct through 'progressive' thinking has completely shut down any debate on any slightly controversial topic. I personally don't see this as being progressive.

[Deviant]

Your point, being that it's hard to talk about things freely, is bloody spot on. 

 

My point to add to that is: People with no idea, having a say and it becomes a case of the blind leading the blind. 

[jw1739]

Spot on about freedom of debate and discussion. The very worst way of dealing with an issue is to suppress discussion, because the issue simply festers and gets worse. As the extremist Islam issue is.

 

As someone who was a volunteer fire fighter in the CFB in Tasmania, I'm also very irritated by armchair experts who have never been in an emergency situation in their lives and who criticise everything about the way emergencies are handled. It's bad enough being in a wildfire and out of water; I never want to be in a situation involving a lunatic brandishing a gun.

[HeartFc]

The pseudo-intellectual socialists won't consider another point of view or even look at simple straight forward fact because they're blinded by their own preconceived notions and giant egos. Besides that twat Russell Brand, Cent Uygur has to be the biggest embarrassment of a "journalist" on the planet. He claims to be the only un-bias person who speaks on the topic of religious extremism (LOL). All he does is completely misrepresent every persons argument and embarrassingly just flat out lies to make them look like racists or bigots.  

 

When he sat down with Sam Harris (A well know author and neuroscientist) a few months ago he showed how out of depth he really was. He was completely intellectually raped and his constant talking over, subject changing and over all childish behaviour painted a picture of the typical stupid leftist moron who thinks they know better than everyone else. If you're interested in the topic do yourself a favour and watch the interview. 

[Jestr]

Concerns are legitimate and anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool

[cadete]

Their would be plenty of honest discussion if they could some how find a way to blame this on the Catholic Church or even those pesky Zionist and their Chocolate Shops.

Edited December 19, 2014 by cadete

[SF33]

The thing that is getting me all worked up over this whole thing is the fact that it seems a strong majority of people are now not even able to entertain a differing point of view, or give a thought to a simple question posed towards them

In terms of the racial and religious belief argument, I find it astounding that a largely homogenous society cannot even consider questioning why a small minority of a different culture should not be looked at as in to why they keep producing members who are obviously unhappy with the way of life that the majority of the country believe in. Let's be honest, this wasn't the first time an attack like this has happened for this reason, and it won't be the last.

I'm not saying that we should kick all muslims out, and honestly believe that the vast majority are peaceful citizens. My concern rises at the realisation that no one can even discuss reasons and concerns over why a culture clash is happening, as any comments are instantly shot down as racist, ignorant ideas, even if there is a legitimate concern behind them.

The same thing is happening with this gun law debate.

As soon as anyone even mentions perhaps looking at why gun crime is committed, and if in fact gun laws here are the reason for such low rates, they get ridiculed publicly, and told to 'go live in America'.

Statistics and case studies are provided by those who are clearly passionate about reclaiming a freedom, yet the ones who call for others to not be 'sheeple', blindly follow and applaude those who insult and berate others for simply having a thought.

Sadly, the desire to be seen as politically correct through 'progressive' thinking has completely shut down any debate on any slightly controversial topic. I personally don't see this as being progressive.

 

I agree. It definitely warrants an analysis of the factors in play. But people on both sides of the divide don't want to give it the degree of analysis it requires. We could compare how simplistically people look at this issue with the issues we have with the Indigenous population at home. They're not all the same: some are happy to live in a modernised culture alongside the rest of us, while others would rather stay in their own communities, live off the land and basically be left the f*** alone. And people have got to understand that.

 

I'm not too sure how these things work, but I've always just assumed that when we see a group of Australian citizens (presumably first and second generation migrants) being arrested for 'planning a terrorist attack on Australian soil' that the alarm must have initially been raised by people within their own community. Surely the law-abiding Islamic population hates these c***s as much as the rest of us, right?

 

Even though it doesn't seem to me like this was a typical 'Islam v the West' attack and that the same thing could have happened with some true blue Aussie with a screw loose who'd just lost a custody dispute, I think anyone who wants to talk about what happened at the start of the week without wanting to discuss the issues that you have raised is a coward and a moron. Monis was a nutcase, he was an Islamic zealot and in retrospect, it seems like warning bells should have been ringing all over the place for many years.. But I still believe that the long-term answer is a better understanding and improved trust between our cultures, rather than fear and more hatred.

Edited December 19, 2014 by SF33

[Jestr]

There is only one way attempt of understanding the other culture and to accommodate their needs and believes.

If you are still unsure why don't you travel to Egypt or Saudi Arabia and demand your rights and believes are respected over there.

You'll be up for a rude shock or perhaps worse.

We are not prepared for harsh reality of the situation

We are soft here....way too soft

[SF33]

There is only one way attempt of understanding the other culture and to accommodate their needs and believes.

If you are still unsure why don't you travel to Egypt or Saudi Arabia and demand your rights and believes are respected over there.

You'll be up for a rude shock or perhaps worse.

We are not prepared for harsh reality of the situation

We are soft here....way too soft

 

So fight fire with fire, you reckon? Where has that ever worked?

 

And I have travelled to the Middle East, including Egypt, for what it's worth. Got no idea what a 'They're heaps worse over there' argument is meant to achieve.

[Jestr]

I'm not suggesting any violent approach is justified here.

I'm simply stating that while we are retreating and allowing huge concessions to appease other groups, we would not be allowed anything remotely similar as guests or residents in their land.

[Nate]

I guess the key difference is that countries like your Saudi Arabias have a largely homogeneous culture whereas we are and have been for some time, a rather diverse multicultural country with no real outlined "culture" so to speak. The only thing that comes remotely close is the bogan "Straya" stereotype which seems to be equally resented here. 

 

Culture is a weird thing though, nothing else in the world brings people together more and alternatively, nothing divides them more.

[SF33]

I'm not suggesting any violent approach is justified here.

I'm simply stating that while we are retreating and allowing huge concessions to appease other groups, we would not be allowed anything remotely similar as guests or residents in their land.

 

Fair enough. I guess I just don't see it as much of a concession really. Just a case of people choosing to do something pretty minor to draw a line in the sand and say 'Enough of this suspicion and hatred between sections of our community.' That doesn't diminish the memory of the victims, or anything else.

 

And although it certainly could have been a lot more powerful if more people (especially more famous people) had actually gone ahead and done it, my guess is people within the Islamic community would have been pretty blown away with how much it took off and just how much tacit support they had in the wider community. I can't see that as anything but a positive, to be honest.

[Shahanga]

I hope this incident allows the government to go and have a look at the process of accepting refugees.  I would think 99% of "refos" come here looking for a better life.   There are a number of people who came to Australia after WWII in that status who had an incredible positive contribution to this country, and even if that wasn't the case, taking in the desperate is just the right thing to do.  

 

This bloke though - he wasn't in the 99%.  If he had some sort of temporary status, we may have been able to deport him after he wrote those despicable letters to the dead servicemans' families.  This was not someone with just a different political view- this was behaviour completely out of kilter with what we expect of our citizens.  I know the lefties will hate me for saying it, but if we'd shipped him back to Tehran then and there we would have saved at least 3 lives.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Shahanga

[Jestr]

Honestly who really cares what lefties have to say, especially in this situation

What you said is correct btw

Edited December 20, 2014 by Jestr

[carlings]

http://www.9news.com.au/National/2015/01/29/09/13/Inquest-into-Sydney-siege-begins-this-morning

 

Begs the question, should the snipers have acted as soon it was evident hostages were about to be shot (assuming the sniper had a clear shot to take him down)

[thisphantomfortress]

http://www.9news.com.au/National/2015/01/29/09/13/Inquest-into-Sydney-siege-begins-this-morning

 

Begs the question, should the snipers have acted as soon it was evident hostages were about to be shot (assuming the sniper had a clear shot to take him down)

 

Really depends on how clear the shot was and frankly I don't think that is something we will ever know. Tragically two people died but I think police handled the situation fairly well all things considered.

[malloy]

http://www.9news.com.au/National/2015/01/29/09/13/Inquest-into-Sydney-siege-begins-this-morning

Begs the question, should the snipers have acted as soon it was evident hostages were about to be shot (assuming the sniper had a clear shot to take him down)

Really depends on how clear the shot was and frankly I don't think that is something we will ever know. Tragically two people died but I think police handled the situation fairly well all things considered.

Can't agree more. The fact that the gunman didn't kill anyone initially indicates that he was unlikely to kill anyone at all, thus The police trying to wait it out seems highly justified. As to whether a sniper had a clear shot when shots started being fired, I wouldn't have thought so for two reasons 1. It is not likely he would have been near a window as the police took some time to react as they did not know what was happening 2. Even if he was visible it was stated that one of the hostages who died had attacked the gunman. It would be near impossible to get off a clear shot in this situation.

It shits me how people can have a go at the police over this for what is a very tough situation to deal with and the likelihood that the majority would not have actually been in a situation similar despite any training.

[Tesla]

It shits me how people can have a go at the police over this for what is a very tough situation to deal with and the likelihood that the majority would not have actually been in a situation similar despite any training.

Yet the average power tripping shit cunt police officer who will never find himself in a situation even close to as dangerous or serious as this is seemingly above reproach.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Tesla