Jump to content
Melbourne Football
thisphantomfortress

Waleed Aly - I for one accept our new SJW overlord

Recommended Posts

cadete    6,068
1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Weekly insight into our glorious leaders mind

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-of-dissent-20160526-gp45fc.html

Seriously what a joke... apparently Democracy is falling apart in his mind because the Australian Public are not voting specifically for Leaders. It's the bloody voting purely on the Charisma of Leaders when interviewed on TV that leads the electorate to such a position. 

His correct is saying Abbott came about due to discontent but why are PPL discontent? Its because they took a chance at being opportunistic on a Leader's Personality and ended up being conned. 

He even mentions PPL getting behind the "Kevin 07" crap as some great movement forward in the Australian Electorates thinking, honestly it was the bullshit of Kevin 07 with his completely arrogant unachievable idealistic policies that lead us to the Prime Ministerial Merry Go Around we are in the first place.

Likewise if you want to delve further back into Australian Politics to the other time the electorate really got behind the voting in of a Personality it was with fucken Gough. Now Gough deserves credit for some of his policies namely Medicare but his recklessness lead the nation ended up in its greatest state of Political Turmoil in its short history and with the most negative boring Government of all time. 

PPL like Abbott and Fraser come about when the Electorate feel like they are conned by those who offered hope and then end up getting fucked around... a similar reaction happened to America when they fell for the Idealism of President Carter.

Edited by cadete
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bt50    3,239

Probably belongs in TTIM, but fuck i hate Susie O'Brien. How that fuckstain has a column thats able to be viewed by so many people is beyond me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    705
1 hour ago, cadete said:

Seriously what a joke... apparently Democracy is falling apart in his mind because the Australian Public are not voting specifically for Leaders. It's the bloody voting purely on the Charisma of Leaders when interviewed on TV that leads the electorate to such a position. 

His correct is saying Abbott came about due to discontent but why are PPL discontent? Its because they took a chance at being opportunistic on a Leader's Personality and ended up being conned. 

He even mentions PPL getting behind the "Kevin 07" crap as some great movement forward in the Australian Electorates thinking, honestly it was the bullshit of Kevin 07 with his completely arrogant unachievable idealistic policies that lead us to the Prime Ministerial Merry Go Around we are in the first place.

Likewise if you want to delve further back into Australian Politics to the other time the electorate really got behind the voting in of a Personality it was with fucken Gough. Now Gough deserves credit for some of his policies namely Medicare but his recklessness lead the nation ended up in its greatest state of Political Turmoil in its short history and with the most negative boring Government of all time. 

PPL like Abbott and Fraser come about when the Electorate feel like they are conned by those who offered hope and then end up getting fucked around... a similar reaction happened to America when they fell for the Idealism of President Carter.

Didn't get that at all from the article. He didn't say that the democracy was in trouble nor did he say much about Kevin 07 as a movement. I thought that the piece tried to put too much into a 600 word essay and therefore was unable to dig too deep into anything but recent articles in The New Yorker and other blog sites delve much deeper into what he was saying (no Australian examples that I can think of).

Australians, like all other peoples vote for a leader. Whether that leader amounts too much can only be seen in hindsight - and yes there will always be people who will say "I told you so" but the overall electorate can only judge in hindsight. Then there is the beauty of a truly functioning democracy when the electorate decides that the party in power is a spent force with little to offer - which is what I believe happened in 1996 and 2007 when Labour and Coalition governments were spent (see Downers confession regarding that the policy tank was empty).

What Ali did say is that today's political climate was delivering leadership that was always against something. Interestingly enough, Matthew Guy upon becoming leader expressed the same sentiment and said that the State Liberal party must also show what it was for rather than what it was against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bt50    3,239
12 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

Interestingly enough, Matthew Guy upon becoming leader expressed the same sentiment and said that the State Liberal party must also show what it was for rather than what it was against.

He's not doing a very good job at that....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,068
1 hour ago, NewConvert said:

Didn't get that at all from the article. He didn't say that the democracy was in trouble nor did he say much about Kevin 07 as a movement. I thought that the piece tried to put too much into a 600 word essay and therefore was unable to dig too deep into anything but recent articles in The New Yorker and other blog sites delve much deeper into what he was saying (no Australian examples that I can think of).

Australians, like all other peoples vote for a leader. Whether that leader amounts too much can only be seen in hindsight - and yes there will always be people who will say "I told you so" but the overall electorate can only judge in hindsight. Then there is the beauty of a truly functioning democracy when the electorate decides that the party in power is a spent force with little to offer - which is what I believe happened in 1996 and 2007 when Labour and Coalition governments were spent (see Downers confession regarding that the policy tank was empty).

What Ali did say is that today's political climate was delivering leadership that was always against something. Interestingly enough, Matthew Guy upon becoming leader expressed the same sentiment and said that the State Liberal party must also show what it was for rather than what it was against.

I agree 100% with what you said in bold...

However Aly as always is being an idealistic know it all as the reality is that their is only ever one right way to run an election campaign and that is the one that gives you the best chance of winning. Political Parties exist to win Elections and form Governments... and that is they decide the central theme of their Electoral Campaign.

When discussing the upcoming Australian Election he is making something that is very simple seem a lot more complicated than what it is... the rules of Election Campaigning are so simple that each Party already knows how the other will run its campaign because they know the rules of the Political Game and what they would do if they were their opponent.

Now due to a of number factors from both sides which all basically lead back to the failure of the promised land of Rudd 07 and the fragile deal made by Rudd with the Gillard and her ALP Creanites prior to 2007 election... a campaign around a Warm and Fuzzy Leader is not going to win over the pissed off Australian Public right now. Leaders in general are not in Fashion.

The one point he is right about it that Abbott never learnt to stop punching like an Opposition Leader when in Government and learn to hold back more and block as if he had then this election would have been a much more pedestrian affair. Mind you some PPL could quite fairly argue that Abbott probably should have been afforded some more time in the ring. 

What I do think is interesting to see how well Daniel Andrews (Who does not strike me as an intellectual MP) has been able to go from Mr Negativity to Mr Progressive with such ease. I think the guys in Canberra could take a few lessons from this guy in when to be negative and when to be positive.

Edited by cadete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, cadete said:

What I do think is interesting to see how well Daniel Andrews (Who does not strike me as an intellectual MP) has been able to go from Mr Negativity to Mr Progressive with such ease. I think the guys in Canberra could take a few lessons from this guy in when to be negative and when to be positive.

I have been pretty surprised at how well Andrews has done in all honesty. He has really made himself almost likeable now he's in office

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    705
27 minutes ago, cadete said:

I agree 100% with what you said in bold...

However Aly as always is being an idealistic know it all as the reality is that their is only ever one right way to run an election campaign and that is the one that gives you the best chance of winning. Political Parties exist to win Elections and form Governments... and that is they decide the central theme of their Electoral Campaign.

When discussing the upcoming Australian Election he is making something that is very simple seem a lot more complicated than what it is... the rules of Election Campaigning are so simple that each Party already knows how the other will run its campaign because they know the rules of the Political Game and what they would do if they were their opponent.

Now due to a of number factors from both sides which all basically lead back to the failure of the promised land of Rudd 07 and the fragile deal made by Rudd with the Gillard and her ALP Creanites prior to 2007 election... a campaign around a Warm and Fuzzy Leader is not going to win over the pissed off Australian Public right now. Leaders in general are not in Fashion.

The one point he is right about it that Abbott never learnt to stop punching like an Opposition Leader when in Government and learn to hold back more and block as if he had then this election would have been a much more pedestrian affair. Mind you some PPL could quite fairly argue that Abbott probably should have been afforded some more time in the ring. 

What I do think is interesting to see how well Daniel Andrews (Who does not strike me as an intellectual MP) has been able to go from Mr Negativity to Mr Progressive with such ease. I think the guys in Canberra could take a few lessons from this guy in when to be negative and when to be positive.

To me, Australian political parties (if not all political parties in democracies) tend to be given direction by the leader. A really bad leader will not be able to organise his parliamentary colleagues, be able to determine what matters to the electorate, will not be able to develop or articulate policies, etc. Also, as a voter I don't have the time or expertise to read/understand each policy in different portfolios (eg Veteran Affairs, Defence Procurement, etc). So I need to rely on the leader to make sure that things don't go wildly astray in the areas which I am least interested. So the Leader and leadership are important roles in our political process (I will also add that this holds true for sporting teams as well).

Now Australians, unlike the Americans, don't like charismatic leaders all that much. Hence I can only think of two charismatic leaders in my lifetime - Whitlam and Hawke. I am told that Sir Robert Menzies was charismatic but I wasn't around for that period.

I think that you are 100% right regarding that a warm and fuzzy leader won't cut it. It never has. And Rudd was no Hawke.

I also agree that Abbott should have been allowed to remain PM and contest the election because in the longer term it would have helped the Liberal Party. Right now the NSW division is tearing itself apart over who supported who in the leadership ballot. The party will contionue to have deep divisions because of the ousting of TA. Instead if TA had been ejected by the electorate, then he would have much less recourse in the future.

And Daniel Andrews has certainly read the mood of the electorate better than Baillieau did and the dies was cast for Napthine. I recall reading in his first year as opposition leader his plan for winning the election and although without detail you can see that what has been happening all along. John Cain was also of a similar mould in that he lifted a lot of social restrictions (put an end to the 6pm closing time, etc) but where JC came undone was in the economics department. Time will tell with DA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,097
11 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

I have been pretty surprised at how well Andrews has done in all honesty. He has really made himself almost likeable now he's in office

Putting aside the $1bn+ he threw away cancelling a road that will be built eventually, the non-stop huge pay rises that he has to keep giving to public sector employees now because he overpaid paramedics as soon as he got in office and now every other public sector employee also demands to be ridiculously overpaid, and the fact he inherited a very strong budget and financial position that allows him to spend a bunch of money; aside from all that yeah he has been pretty good TBH. I like his approach of basically just doing what he was gonna do regardless of whining from NIMBY cunts (eg 'skyrail'). Something politics in this country seems to be missing in recent times, someone with the balls to piss people off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Putting aside the $1bn+ he threw away cancelling a road that will be built eventually, the non-stop huge pay rises that he has to keep giving to public sector employees now because he overpaid paramedics as soon as he got in office and now every other public sector employee also demands to be ridiculously overpaid, and the fact he inherited a very strong budget and financial position that allows him to spend a bunch of money; aside from all that yeah he has been pretty good TBH. I like his approach of basically just doing what he was gonna do regardless of whining from NIMBY cunts (eg 'skyrail'). Something politics in this country seems to be missing in recent times, someone with the balls to piss people off.

I think this is basically it. Ideologocally I don't agree with him, but politically I respect him. Objectively speaking Victoria Labor have generally produced some decent leaders. It's a shame that it hasn't translated to the alp since the 80s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    705
30 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Putting aside the $1bn+ he threw away cancelling a road that will be built eventually, the non-stop huge pay rises that he has to keep giving to public sector employees now because he overpaid paramedics as soon as he got in office and now every other public sector employee also demands to be ridiculously overpaid, and the fact he inherited a very strong budget and financial position that allows him to spend a bunch of money; aside from all that yeah he has been pretty good TBH. I like his approach of basically just doing what he was gonna do regardless of whining from NIMBY cunts (eg 'skyrail'). Something politics in this country seems to be missing in recent times, someone with the balls to piss people off.

I can tell you that Baillieau pissed off the big end of town really quickly (within weeks) and they never returned to him. With Napthine they left the door open but by that stage Andrews was already having a cup of tea with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,068
1 hour ago, NewConvert said:

John Cain was also of a similar mould in that he lifted a lot of social restrictions (put an end to the 6pm closing time, etc) but where JC came undone was in the economics department. Time will tell with DA.

Kennett did more for Social Restrictions than Cain, it was his laws that turned the Melbourne into the Never Sleep City we know now as opposed to when it a desert out of Working Hours. As a kid once a night game was over at the MCG on a Friday night the only PPL really in the city were pity rough.

Of course he mainly made these laws because of the Economic Crises Cain and Co and gotten the state into... still its humorous that Kennett created the Hipster Paradise of Melbourne.

1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

I think this is basically it. Ideologocally I don't agree with him, but politically I respect him. Objectively speaking Victoria Labor have generally produced some decent leaders. It's a shame that it hasn't translated to the alp since the 80s

Victoria from a Melbourne perspective when compared to other states to have had pretty good governments from Kennett onwards... some have been obviously worse than others for different reasons (like the last one) but there have been none that have massively formed roadblocks in terms of halting progress.

38 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

I can tell you that Baillieau pissed off the big end of town really quickly (within weeks) and they never returned to him. With Napthine they left the door open but by that stage Andrews was already having a cup of tea with them.

Ted always reminded me of a Medieval King, he was in power because he was born to the state's oldest richest family and possibly because he was tall and strong enough to whack someone on the head with a Battlehammer and he only did what he wanted to do, when he wanted to do it. 

Modern Politicians would have ended up dead as Medieval Kings in a few months... likewise Medieval Kings who leave the office at 3pm half the time and care more about their Castle in Portsea beachfront than the City's ability to dock ships end up dead in today's world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,500
5 hours ago, NewConvert said:

I can tell you that Baillieau pissed off the big end of town really quickly (within weeks) and they never returned to him. With Napthine they left the door open but by that stage Andrews was already having a cup of tea with them.

As you know, it's not just pissing people off that's required, it's doing it whilst going about your business in such a way that it still garners respect.

Baillieu is on a list of 2 of the worst premiers I've seen in Victoria, is in my bottom 3 nationally (I've moved around a lot) and is certainly the worst conservative  in power I've ever had the misfortune to live under. To quote an eRthmoving contractor I knew in the Kimbereley "He couldn't find his arse in two grabs"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,540

LOL what disingenuous turd, pretending he's the type of Muslim that the public fear. Get fucked. 

I dont agree with Sonia when it comes to a blanket ban but I understand her fear but not the way Waleed Aly frames it. He didnt say it but he implied it was irrational fear. Btw he didnt give an alternative to the internment comment, I've got one.

Maybe instead of spending time being a smug cunt he should stare straight into the camera and tell Muslims to get off their poor little victimised bums and get out onto the streets and protest against the radical Islam. You know why he wont ever do that, its because he knows very well that most Muslims either quietly support radical (aka textbook islam) or don't have the balls to admit their religion has a major problem. Very vocal bunch when someone draws Muhammad, but when a group of medieval cunts burn a toddler alive or chuck a fag off a building in the name of their religion... crickets. 

Just look at how "moderate" Muslims treat a fellow Muslim like Maajid Nawaz, a guy who stands for true liberal principles and calls for reform. When he came to Australia, NOT ONE muslim group responded to his invitation for dialogue and TWO members of the muslim community rocked up. Whats that tell you? 

 

Keep going Aly, blame the west, blame white people, blame capitalism, you're only digging the graves of Muslims in Europe. Civil war ain't pretty. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
n i k o    4,817
23 minutes ago, HeartFc said:

LOL what disingenuous turd, pretending he's the type of Muslim that the public fear. Get fucked. 

I dont agree with Sonia when it comes to a blanket ban but I understand her fear but not the way Waleed Aly frames it. He didnt say it but he implied it was irrational fear. Btw he didnt give an alternative to the internment comment, I've got one.

Maybe instead of spending time being a smug cunt he should stare straight into the camera and tell Muslims to get off their poor little victimised bums and get out onto the streets and protest against the radical Islam. You know why he wont ever do that, its because he knows very well that most Muslims either quietly support radical (aka textbook islam) or don't have the balls to admit their religion has a major problem. Very vocal bunch when someone draws Muhammad, but when a group of medieval cunts burn a toddler alive or chuck a fag off a building in the name of their religion... crickets. 

Just look at how "moderate" Muslims treat a fellow Muslim like Maajid Nawaz, a guy who stands for true liberal principles and calls for reform. When he came to Australia, NOT ONE muslim group responded to his invitation for dialogue and TWO members of the muslim community rocked up. Whats that tell you? 

 

Keep going Aly, blame the west, blame white people, blame capitalism, you're only digging the graves of Muslims in Europe. Civil war ain't pretty. 

I enjoy your rants, quality work

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nate    2,567

I agree with his stance on encouraging constructive responses and wanting to put an end to hysteria, but I'm annoyed he went down the "I'm scared for the future of this country" path.

You put an end to hysteria by putting an end to sensationalist journalism and mainstream media fear-mongering.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,097

Actually I kind of agree with Wally this time. The first bit at least, about Sonia. As much as I've made clear where I stand on this issue and disagree with her, I don't think she should have been blasted like she has been. Especially when on the same day you had Pauline Hanson making a complete fool of herself on Q&A, I think it was obvious there is a very big difference between an ignorant racist moron like Pauline Hanson who can't even string a sentence together to explain her view on Islam and someone like Sonia who tried to make some sort of rational argument.

This is exactly why people vote for Pauline Hanson in the first place, because the PC crowd have made it impossible for there to be a debate on any issue as they just smash social media with their faux outrage whenever it comes up. I very much doubt most the people who voted for her are as extreme as her, but they just see her as the exact opposite of the PC crowd.

I do believe Sonia's comments were made out of fear, and that's what I hate most about terrorisim, the irrational fear it creates. The reason it's irrational is because it's a fuck load more likely you'll die or be harmed in some other way. So it makes no sense to me to pursue extreme solutions to try and curb terrorism when we don't pursue extreme solutions to curb other dangers (and rightly so).

As for @HeartFc post, honestly I don't see the logic in what your saying. Firstly protesting radical Islam sounds like the biggest waste of time imaginable. You think ISIS are sitting there thinking "oh shit these people in Australia sure are outraged by our actions taking to the streets like this and protesting. We better stop our terrorist attacks because it's really bad PR"? If anything, protesting radical Islam helps them. It spreads more fear and gives them more attention, exactly what they want. Secondly I don't see why Muslims should be forced to protest it when it has nothing to do with them. That seems to be the part that some people don't understand, radical Islam and terrorisim committed in its name has nothing to do with the average Muslim. If you're saying they should protest radical Islam because if there was some Mohammed comic they'd take to the streets in protest, we'll I'm not sure your right. I reckon the average Muslim has better shit to do with their time, but I could be wrong. It would actually annoy the fuck out of me seeing cunts protesting a Mohammed comic, I'm all  for freedom of speech and expression and I don't make exceptions.

I'd actually love to be able to say that if there was a large amount of Muslims in Australia protesting a Mohammed comic then HeartFc and Pauline Hanson and a bunch of other people were right all along, Muslims are trying to Islamify Australia. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure publishing Mohammed comics is probably illegal in Australia given the ridiculous anti discrimination laws, having very limited freedom of speech and expression is already part of Australian law and culture, so it wouldn't be a case of Muslims trying to introduce Shania law into Australia, our laws and our culture (given it accepts these laws) are already fucked when it comes to freedom of speech and expression.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,540

@Tesla The reason id like to Muslims protesting against radical islam is more symbolic rather then some sort formula to defeat ISIS. I want to be filled with confidence, currently I am not. Yes the average westernised Muslim probably doesnt give a shit and they dont really take Islam that seriously anyway, I'm not suggesting they should apologise for a radicals. My concern is that theres always more outrage from the Muslim community when theres a Mohammed cartoon then there is for a radical blowing himself up. Wouldn't it be more offensive if someone claimed they were speaking for your religion by killing children? Screaming Allah Akbar in the process? Saying it was their Islamic duty? Using Mohammad's way of life as a motivator? Using specific scripture to spread hate, held dear to you?

This is either a case of A ) quietly agreeing (fellow radicals and or/and fundamentalists), B ) lying and denying the obvious connection (those posing as moderates) or C ) being completely ignorant of the facts (the average knock about muslim and leftard). Theres simply no other door to which one can walk through. To ball park it ill take an educated guess at a 15/35/50 split. 

The only time I've seen and heard of muslims protesting against the radical element has been a bit anti-climatic. The protest is always framed as "islam means peace", "terror has no religion". Its always a denial more than a call to action or reform. The only really passionate and forceful protest I've seen from muslims against ISIS were from the Kurds but they seem extremely secular and that has a lot to do with direct oppression of their people and Turkey being cuntish. Shia Muslims seem more keen on protesting too but its pretty rare considering the scale and frequency of islamic terrorism around he world. 

The point is this, more muslims around the world protest against cartoons than muslims protest radicals who supposably tarnish their religion. Couple that with Pew research polls, the treatment of liberal muslims who call for discussion and general state of the middle east over history and you have a pretty red pilling situation forming in the frontal lobe.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/

 

54 minutes ago, Tesla said:

I'd actually love to be able to say that if there was a large amount of Muslims in Australia protesting a Mohammed comic then HeartFc and Pauline Hanson and a bunch of other people were right all along, 

Now it wasn't a cartoon but a film and it might've only been 500 or so in Sydney but this was a global protest where people were killed. The chants, the signs and attacking of police and bystanders was disgusting. Same Muslim outage with the danish cartoons and Charlie Hebdo. Im sensing a pattern.

BTW I watched QandA and Hanson was a disgrace. She doesnt have the restraint, right approach or intellect to be given a genuine platform. She's simply a bogan hoover, sucking in all the fellow drongos. Problem is no one else is willing to step it up and give a clear and more understanding explanation of the dangers of mass islamic immigration. She's a fuckwit and makes me look bad when I try and have a conversation on the topic.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,500
7 hours ago, HeartFc said:

LOL what disingenuous turd, pretending he's the type of Muslim that the public fear. Get fucked. 

I dont agree with Sonia when it comes to a blanket ban but I understand her fear but not the way Waleed Aly frames it. He didnt say it but he implied it was irrational fear. Btw he didnt give an alternative to the internment comment, I've got one.

Maybe instead of spending time being a smug cunt he should stare straight into the camera and tell Muslims to get off their poor little victimised bums and get out onto the streets and protest against the radical Islam. You know why he wont ever do that, its because he knows very well that most Muslims either quietly support radical (aka textbook islam) or don't have the balls to admit their religion has a major problem. Very vocal bunch when someone draws Muhammad, but when a group of medieval cunts burn a toddler alive or chuck a fag off a building in the name of their religion... crickets. 

Just look at how "moderate" Muslims treat a fellow Muslim like Maajid Nawaz, a guy who stands for true liberal principles and calls for reform. When he came to Australia, NOT ONE muslim group responded to his invitation for dialogue and TWO members of the muslim community rocked up. Whats that tell you? 

 

Keep going Aly, blame the west, blame white people, blame capitalism

Islam can't deal with its problem of fringe psychos unless they admit they have a problem. All I ever hear them do is blame some other cunt for these cunts. Oh if you wer e nicer to that bloke he wouldn't of felt like he had to kill all your family and friends. Go on, say sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dylan    4,126
On 5/27/2016 at 0:52 PM, Tesla said:

Putting aside the $1bn+ he threw away cancelling a road that will be built eventually, the non-stop huge pay rises that he has to keep giving to public sector employees now because he overpaid paramedics as soon as he got in office and now every other public sector employee also demands to be ridiculously overpaid, and the fact he inherited a very strong budget and financial position that allows him to spend a bunch of money; aside from all that yeah he has been pretty good TBH. I like his approach of basically just doing what he was gonna do regardless of whining from NIMBY cunts (eg 'skyrail'). Something politics in this country seems to be missing in recent times, someone with the balls to piss people off.

I hope they get sky rail done and continue the level crossing removals. You'll find that these two things will have a much bigger impact on congestion than the 'sexy' projects of road and rail tunnels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,097
3 hours ago, Dylan said:

I hope they get sky rail done and continue the level crossing removals. You'll find that these two things will have a much bigger impact on congestion than the 'sexy' projects of road and rail tunnels. 

Well they're different really, level crossings are more of an issue for local trips, new freeways and tunnels are more about cross town trips. Both need investment and our state government is never going to have more money than currently so more should be happening really.

But as someone who lives near two of the level crossings being currently removed (and I refuse to believe it's possible there are two worse ones in the state, only reason they lasted this long is because it's an extremely safe Labor area), I actively avoid these level crossings so yeah removing them will have a much bigger impact on my life than a tunnel to the east that I'd probably only use a few times a year.

Btw Skyrail is great, love the butthurt, and love seeing NIMBY cunts not getting their way for once. It's really not that bad a solution, unless you compare it to completely unrealistic and affordable alternatives.

Edited by Tesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,500

So the seat of Herbert went (at least for now, being recounted) to labor by 8 votes.

"My vote doesn't matter".

Incidentally 9.5% of the voters didn't vote! 

Anyone know of a closer ballot than that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    705
10 minutes ago, Shahanga said:

So the seat of Herbert went (at least for now, being recounted) to labor by 8 votes.

"My vote doesn't matter".

Incidentally 9.5% of the voters didn't vote! 

Anyone know of a closer ballot than that?

The only one I can think of is 1985 Victorian upper house where the count was a draw so the returning officer put the name of the two finalists in a hat and drew the name of the winner. Needless to say this was appealed to the courts and a re-election was held where the Liberals won the seat. Nothing happened to the returning officer because IIRC she did what the law stipulated (yep you draw the winner out of a hat) and subsequently the law was changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,068
3 hours ago, HeartFc said:

QUICK WALEED SAY SOMETHING, WE NEED YOU!

 

CoSa_oDXEAAaS41.jpg

I was thinking the other day, what would it actually take or how much of this shit would it take for PPL when these things to happen... not just tune into Waleed and pat him on the back and think everything is gonna be okay.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    705
5 hours ago, cadete said:

I was thinking the other day, what would it actually take or how much of this shit would it take for PPL when these things to happen... not just tune into Waleed and pat him on the back and think everything is gonna be okay.

Elaborate please. Are you saying that we should do what HeartFC wants and declare war against all Islamic countries? That we should do as The Catholic Kings of Spain did in the 16/17th century and expel all the Muslims from the West? That we should do like in WW2 and incarcerate all Muslims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,097
1 hour ago, NewConvert said:

Elaborate please. Are you saying that we should do what HeartFC wants and declare war against all Islamic countries? That we should do as The Catholic Kings of Spain did in the 16/17th century and expel all the Muslims from the West? That we should do like in WW2 and incarcerate all Muslims?

"Deus vult" - Cad, 2016

Edited by Tesla
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,540
2 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Elaborate please. Are you saying that we should do what HeartFC wants and declare war against all Islamic countries? That we should do as The Catholic Kings of Spain did in the 16/17th century and expel all the Muslims from the West? That we should do like in WW2 and incarcerate all Muslims?

Nice strawman, unfortunately for you this isn't Facebook and you wont get your standard 50 progressive zombies liking your comment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeffplz    795

All the immigration is rooted in the creation of Israel. It fucked up Jordan, it fucked up Syria, and now with ISIS, it's fucking up Europe. It's not like the refugees want to stay in Europe-- they want to go home, if they had one to go to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris p    166
3 hours ago, jeffplz said:

All the immigration is rooted in the creation of Israel. It fucked up Jordan, it fucked up Syria, and now with ISIS, it's fucking up Europe. It's not like the refugees want to stay in Europe-- they want to go home, if they had one to go to.

Dont forget it's the jews who are loudest voices of mass immigration for western nations as well as the other SJW fucked up pursuits 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GreenSeater    2,690
3 hours ago, jeffplz said:

All the immigration is rooted in the creation of Israel. It fucked up Jordan, it fucked up Syria, and now with ISIS, it's fucking up Europe. It's not like the refugees want to stay in Europe-- they want to go home, if they had one to go to.

I'd say it goes back moreso to the end of WW1 when the Allies decided to split up the Ottoman Empire into cookie cutter straight line border countries to divide up the resources without considering different traditional tribal and historical borders and causing almost a century of conflict. Israel just compounded the issues.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeffplz    795
6 minutes ago, GreenSeater said:

I'd say it goes back moreso to the end of WW1 when the Allies decided to split up the Ottoman Empire into cookie cutter straight line border countries to divide up the resources without considering different traditional tribal and historical borders and causing almost a century of conflict. Israel just compounded the issues.

Completely correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeffplz    795
32 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

So you're saying this is turkeys fault ;)

I can't think of any bants tbh, i'm too tired. But tbh you can say it's Turkey's fault, the Ottoman Empire triggered its own demise in the 16th-17th century with shitty rulership and incompetent decisions. I did an extended essay on teh topic 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jestr    1,230

Where are the political, cultural, religious, intellectual (if there are any) or any what so ever leaders in muslim community when those cowards and murderes kill and maim in the name of Allah.

Who do they target? Innocent families and people who are often sympathetic to their plight and welcoming them.

Same people who are publicly critical of western government's treatment of muslims and against any involvement in the war in Middle East. Same people who take to the streets to show that we are against the agendas of multinational corporations which are sponsoring acts of war to further their greedy business "plans"

those so called terrorists should simply be referred to as thugs and cowards for attacking soft targets and ignoring the real enemy.

why.....because it's easier to hack at innocent people on the train going to work then to plan and coordinate an attack on a military or well protected commercial identity.

 

Political correctness, soft lay back attitude is what allowing them to prosper.

we must be really sick of our own culture, roots, history. We becoming nothing but Self loathing caricatures who are allowing to be punished and have no rights in our own country

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,097
5 minutes ago, Jestr said:

Where are the political, cultural, religious, intellectual (if there are any) or any what so ever leaders in muslim community when those cowards and murderes kill and maim in the name of Allah.

I hear this all the time and it's simply not true, the Grand Mufti of Australia (as well as others) condemns/denounces these attacks every time.

Here is an example of the latest incident being condemned https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/27/australias-grand-mufti-denounces-of-french-priest-by-isis

Edited by Tesla
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jestr    1,230
2 minutes ago, Tesla said:

I hear this all the time and it's simply not true, the Grand Mufti of Australia condemns/denounces these attacks every time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×