Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 5:38pm:

Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

What risks?

SOB

PS its friggin 11-9

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 5:46pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish? What risks? SOB PS its friggin 11-9

If the reason they attacked in the first place is still there then why wouldn't another 9-11 be on the cards?

THAT REASON!!  ::)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 5:59pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:46pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish? What risks? SOB PS its friggin 11-9 If the reason they attacked in the first place is still there then why wouldn't another 9-11 be on the cards? THAT REASON!!  ::)

And what was that reason? The reason given was that yanks wouldn't get out of their country and their business. Yeah that reason is still there. Has nothing to do with us.

If the yanks want to keep provoking them then the yanks may cop it again yeah.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 6:10pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:59pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:46pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish? What risks? SOB PS its friggin 11-9 If the reason they attacked in the first place is still there then why wouldn't another 9-11 be on the cards? THAT REASON!!  ::) And what was that reason? The reason given was that yanks wouldn't get out of their country and their business. Yeah that reason is still there. Has nothing to do with us. If the yanks want to keep provoking them then the yanks may cop it again yeah. SOB

...and Bali!!??!!

I think we need to be more honest with ourselves about the differences between Islam and Australian values. Our society has benefitted greatly from the separation of church and state and people are very vocal with criticism of the church. For some reason it is often the opposite with Islam - you aren't meant to talk about it in case it winds up the Muslims. I think this is the wrong way to respond. We need to have an open discussion about it.

I hope the outcome of that would be stricter entry requirements barring people who are fundamentally opposed to democracy, human rights, freedom etc.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 6:20pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 6:10pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:59pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:46pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish? What risks? SOB PS its friggin 11-9 If the reason they attacked in the first place is still there then why wouldn't another 9-11 be on the cards? THAT REASON!!  ::) And what was that reason? The reason given was that yanks wouldn't get out of their country and their business. Yeah that reason is still there. Has nothing to do with us. If the yanks want to keep provoking them then the yanks may cop it again yeah. SOB ...and Bali!!??!!

Who did bali and what was their reason? Nothing to do with us. The fact that some aussies were there has nothing to do with it. The aussies were not the target.

SOB

So who was the target?

freediver wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 6:43pm:

I think we need to be more honest with ourselves about the differences between Islam and Australian values. Our society has benefitted greatly from the separation of church and state and people are very vocal with criticism of the church. For some reason it is often the opposite with Islam - you aren't meant to talk about it in case it winds up the Muslims. I think this is the wrong way to respond. We need to have an open discussion about it. I hope the outcome of that would be stricter entry requirements barring people who are fundamentally opposed to democracy, human rights, freedom etc.

What has that got to do with 11-9 and australia which have nothing to do with each other anyway? Do you have to do this in every thread?

SOB

You think that 9/11 and the conflicts between Islam and western values have nothing to do with the risk of terrorism?

freediver wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 6:46pm:

So who was the target?

I dont remember. It wasnt australians. Look it up. Google is your friend.

SOB

freediver wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 7:36pm:

You think that 9/11 and the conflicts between Islam and western values have nothing to do with the risk of terrorism?

Not in australia. Unless we provoke them like the yanks are doing.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 9:25am:

freediver wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 7:36pm: You think that 9/11 and the conflicts between Islam and western values have nothing to do with the risk of terrorism? Not in australia. Unless we provoke them like the yanks are doing. SOB

Do you realise we have had our own home grown terrorists already?

How do you suggest we 'not provoke them'? Should we stope criticising them for wanting to disband democracy, destroy personal freedoms and stone people to death for thought crimes and consensual sex?

If the Vatican started sponsoring terrorism, would you respond be demanding we stop routing pedophiles out of the church?


Quote:

I dont remember. It wasnt australians. Look it up. Google is your friend.

You know I am wrong even though you can't remember anything at all about it?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 9:29am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 9:25am: freediver wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 7:36pm: You think that 9/11 and the conflicts between Islam and western values have nothing to do with the risk of terrorism? Not in australia. Unless we provoke them like the yanks are doing. SOB Do you realise we have had our own home grown terrorists already? How do you suggest we 'not provoke them'? Should we stope criticising them for wanting to disband democracy, destroy personal freedoms and stone people to death for thought crimes and consensual sex? If the Vatican started sponsoring terrorism, would you respond be demanding we stop routing pedophiles out of the church? Quote: I dont remember. It wasnt australians. Look it up. Google is your friend. You know I am wrong even though you can't remember anything at all about it?

You? I wasnt even talking to you. You asked a question out of the blue i figgered it was because you didnt know.

Our home grown terrorists are aussies though. Not the same ones the yanks are provoking. Our domestic terrorists are a different kettle of fish but not what we were talking about.

SOB

You think we should ignore home grown terrorists is assessing the risk of terrorism?

I don't see much difference.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 10:24am:

You think we should ignore home grown terrorists is assessing the risk of terrorism? I don't see much difference.

Dont you try to put words in my mouth. I didnt say that and you know it. I said we arent talking about domestic terrorism. This thread was about 11/9 and its effects on oz which are nil.

SOB

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 5:38pm:

Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

Yeah. But we have no risks of terrorism in that context. Have we?

SOB

Sure we do.

Are you suggesting we respond to the threat of terrorism by pretending it does not exist, hoping it will go away, conveniently forgetting who was targeted in Bali, and insisting our home grown terrorists have nothing to do with the broader threat?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 11:49am:

Sure we do. Are you suggesting we respond to the threat of terrorism by pretending it does not exist, hoping it will go away, conveniently forgetting who was targeted in Bali, and insisting our home grown terrorists have nothing to do with the broader threat?

Bali was not australian terrorism and was not targeting australians. I am not saying we should ignore domestic terrorism. Our domestic terrorism is not the same terrorism that the 11/9 crap is about. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Why do you think bali was anything to do with australian domestic terrorism anyway? It was indonesians in indonesia.

SOB

I suggest we freak out and sell off all our freedoms in the name of safety.
Oh wait...
That already happened.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 12:20pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 11:49am: Sure we do. Are you suggesting we respond to the threat of terrorism by pretending it does not exist, hoping it will go away, conveniently forgetting who was targeted in Bali, and insisting our home grown terrorists have nothing to do with the broader threat? Bali was not australian terrorism and was not targeting australians. I am not saying we should ignore domestic terrorism. Our domestic terrorism is not the same terrorism that the 11/9 crap is about. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Why do you think bali was anything to do with australian domestic terrorism anyway? It was indonesians in indonesia. SOB

Here is a similarity for you: they were all perpetrated by Islamic extremists who reject basic western values.

Do you think you can draw nice neat borders around terrorists to keep them contained?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 12:57pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 12:20pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 11:49am: Sure we do. Are you suggesting we respond to the threat of terrorism by pretending it does not exist, hoping it will go away, conveniently forgetting who was targeted in Bali, and insisting our home grown terrorists have nothing to do with the broader threat? Bali was not australian terrorism and was not targeting australians. I am not saying we should ignore domestic terrorism. Our domestic terrorism is not the same terrorism that the 11/9 crap is about. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Why do you think bali was anything to do with australian domestic terrorism anyway? It was indonesians in indonesia. SOB Here is a similarity for you: they were all perpetrated by Islamic extremists who reject basic western values. Do you think you can draw nice neat borders around terrorists to keep them contained?

Ahhhhh. Yeah I shoulda known since ive seen it in other threads. Only muslims are terrorists and all muslims are terrorists, Sorry to disappoint you but we dont have an Islamic terrorist problem in australia. The domestic terrorists are australian.

In fact most terrorist attacks in australia (perpetrated by australians) that I know of havent even hurt any ppl because they have targeted information and data.

No. Look it up yourself. I am not going to spend any time looking them up for you. There was 1 on a telecom thing in the 80s that set the datacommunications in oz back about 20 years apparently. Dont remember any others but im sure you will find them.
'
SOB

Quote:

Sorry to disappoint you but we dont have an Islamic terrorist problem in australia. The domestic terrorists are australian.

They also happen to be Muslims. At least, the last bunch to get arrested were. Are you still trying to put nice neat borders around terrorist? One bunch is Australian. One is Indonesian. One is Saudi working in the US. One is British. One is Spanish. Just ignore the fact that they are all Muslims because it is inconvenient to whatever silly agenda you are pushing?

You will not have much luck assessing the risk of terrorism if you think making silly points is more important than acknowledging reality.


Quote:

In fact most terrorist attacks in australia (perpetrated by australians) that I know of havent even hurt any ppl because they have targeted information and data.

You'll have to forgive me for focussing on the threat posed by terrorists out for mass slaughter of people.


Quote:

There was 1 on a telecom thing in the 80s that set the datacommunications in oz back about 20 years apparently.

;D

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 2:23pm:

Quote: Sorry to disappoint you but we dont have an Islamic terrorist problem in australia. The domestic terrorists are australian. They also happen to be Muslims. At least, the last bunch to get arrested were. Are you still trying to put nice neat borders around terrorist? One bunch is Australian. One is Indonesian. One is Saudi working in the US. One is British. One is Spanish. Just ignore the fact that they are all Muslims because it is inconvenient to whatever silly agenda you are pushing? You will not have much luck assessing the risk of terrorism if you think making silly points is more important than acknowledging reality. [quote]In fact most terrorist attacks in australia (perpetrated by australians) that I know of havent even hurt any ppl because they have targeted information and data.

You'll have to forgive me for focussing on the threat posed by terrorists out for mass slaughter of people.


Quote:

There was 1 on a telecom thing in the 80s that set the datacommunications in oz back about 20 years apparently.

;D[/quote]

What "silly agenda" would that be? Only silly agenda i see is you trying to push your islamiphobia onto me.

In australia the only terrorists i know of (the domestic terrorists) have been australian. Dunno what their religions were but its irrelevant since their objectives were political.

If you have evidence that "islamists" are plotting something perhaps you should give your information to the police or ASIO or something.

What was "the last bunch"?

Ok. Lets focus on the threats. What threats? oh the mass slaughtering of ppl. What mass slaughter of ppl? You mean that guy in tasmania? Sorry not a muslim.

SOB

Quote:

In australia the only terrorists i know of (the domestic terrorists) have been australian. Dunno what their religions were but its irrelevant since their objectives were political

The reality is that they were Muslims and their religion is relevant. Ignoring this reality will increase the risk of terrorism.


Quote:

What was "the last bunch"?

Some Muslim extremists in Melbourne.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 6:45pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 6:20pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 6:10pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:59pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:46pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish? What risks? SOB PS its friggin 11-9 If the reason they attacked in the first place is still there then why wouldn't another 9-11 be on the cards? THAT REASON!!  ::) And what was that reason? The reason given was that yanks wouldn't get out of their country and their business. Yeah that reason is still there. Has nothing to do with us. If the yanks want to keep provoking them then the yanks may cop it again yeah. SOB ...and Bali!!??!! Who did bali and what was their reason? Nothing to do with us. The fact that some aussies were there has nothing to do with it. The aussies were not the target. SOB

Turn a blind eye if you want: you aren't the world dood, you are one loser in it!

The rest of us want answers..................

  :o :o

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 9:24am:

freediver wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 6:46pm: So who was the target? I dont remember. It wasnt australians. Look it up. Google is your friend. SOB

Just because you don't care doesn't mean anything!

We're all piss-heads and from time to time forget we have legs....

....doesn't mean we haven't got them!!

If you wan't to live in a fairly land where two massive buildings getting toppled in the financial hub of the world, in front of the world, on live tv by the very symbols of it's own 'freedom'- planes - means nothing then go ahead!

THE REST OF US HAVE FUNCTIONAL LIVES TO LIVE!!  :-*

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

Fascists supports Fascists!

There's a problem and if there's no change the problem will remain, logically!!

What the problem is exactly is the question I am asking!!!

We're talking about a  world that turns here...  :-?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 12:20pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 11:49am: Sure we do. Are you suggesting we respond to the threat of terrorism by pretending it does not exist, hoping it will go away, conveniently forgetting who was targeted in Bali, and insisting our home grown terrorists have nothing to do with the broader threat? Bali was not australian terrorism and was not targeting australians. I am not saying we should ignore domestic terrorism. Our domestic terrorism is not the same terrorism that the 11/9 crap is about. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Why do you think bali was anything to do with australian domestic terrorism anyway? It was indonesians in indonesia. SOB

Right, I AM OFFICALLY MAKING THE CALL YOU ARE OFF THE WALL!  :-X

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

Quote: In australia the only terrorists i know of (the domestic terrorists) have been australian. Dunno what their religions were but its irrelevant since their objectives were political The reality is that they were Muslims and their religion is relevant. Ignoring this reality will increase the risk of terrorism. [quote]What was "the last bunch"?

Some Muslim extremists in Melbourne.[/quote]

It seems that the propaganda is insidious. All reference is gone of domestic terrorists in australia before 2002 that i can find, Im not going to spend days looking for it. 2002 must be when we joined the great propaganda war of GW Bush. Oh well. Have fun being scared of muslims mate.

I will lastly point out that we have had no mass slaughterings in australia by muslim groups. Its comm0on sense but obviously you want to be islamiphobic because thats what you are told to be.

SOB

Here you go. There is a whole section on Muslim Australian terrorists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Australia

Face reality. The world has changed. Muslim extremists are now the biggest terrorist threat and will continue to be for a long time.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

Here you go. There is a whole section on Muslim Australian terrorists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Australia Face reality. The world has changed. Muslim extremists are now the biggest terrorist threat and will continue to be for a long time.

As i said i saw it. 2002 onwards. Nothing before that. "War on terror" propaganda. Have fun being islamophobic.

SOB

So it's all a big conspiracy and Muslims extremists are not turning to terrorism? We don't have Muslims right here on this forum making excuses for the 9/11 terrorists or blaming anyone but fellow Muslims? Are they CIA plants?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 4:04pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 3:10pm: Quote: In australia the only terrorists i know of (the domestic terrorists) have been australian. Dunno what their religions were but its irrelevant since their objectives were political The reality is that they were Muslims and their religion is relevant. Ignoring this reality will increase the risk of terrorism. [quote]What was "the last bunch"? Some Muslim extremists in Melbourne.

It seems that the propaganda is insidious. All reference is gone of domestic terrorists in australia before 2002 that i can find, Im not going to spend days looking for it. 2002 must be when we joined the great propaganda war of GW Bush. Oh well. Have fun being scared of muslims mate.

I will lastly point out that we have had no mass slaughterings in australia by muslim groups. Its comm0on sense but obviously you want to be islamiphobic because thats what you are told to be.

SOB[/quote]

Does this count as a terrorist attack, they were inspired by religion and politics-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Broken_Hill

Why do muslims and their Islamic apologists whitewash that event?

Yes much better to be Judeophobic like tht unemployable SOB who fritters away the days on the internet.

Baronvonrort wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 4:48pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 4:04pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 3:10pm: Quote: In australia the only terrorists i know of (the domestic terrorists) have been australian. Dunno what their religions were but its irrelevant since their objectives were political The reality is that they were Muslims and their religion is relevant. Ignoring this reality will increase the risk of terrorism. [quote]What was "the last bunch"? Some Muslim extremists in Melbourne. It seems that the propaganda is insidious. All reference is gone of domestic terrorists in australia before 2002 that i can find, Im not going to spend days looking for it. 2002 must be when we joined the great propaganda war of GW Bush. Oh well. Have fun being scared of muslims mate. I will lastly point out that we have had no mass slaughterings in australia by muslim groups. Its comm0on sense but obviously you want to be islamiphobic because thats what you are told to be. SOB

Does this count as a terrorist attack, they were inspired by religion and politics-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Broken_Hill

Why do muslims and their Islamic apologists whitewash that event?

Yes much better to be Judeophobic like tht unemployable SOB who fritters away the days on the internet.[/quote]

My only point in this thread is that 11-9 has nothing to do with australia. freewhatever twisted things around so they were about islamics again. Obviously since 2002 australia has been fighting the GW Bush "war on terror" even though we have nothing to do with it. Too bad. Have fun with your islamophobia. BE AFRAID if you want to.

Dont worry if we provoke them enough they will come after us too.

You have no idea about my employment status. I could be your boss for all you know. In fact you are sacked.

SOB

If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 5:13pm:

If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it?

Good question.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 5:45pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:13pm: If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it? Good question. SOB

So, you're just going to pretend Bali wasn't revenge for supporting America in it's wars!!!?????!!!

Gee, give me a cat makeover and call me Einstein NOW!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ::)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 6:38pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:45pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:13pm: If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it? Good question. SOB So, you're just going to pretend Bali wasn't revenge for supporting America in it's wars!!!?????!!! Gee, give me a cat makeover and call me Einstein NOW!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ::)

Bali wasnt an attack on australia Einstein.

SOB

Quote:

freewhatever twisted things around so they were about islamics again.

No SOB. That is what this thread is about. Merely insisting that Islamic terrorism is unrelated to Islam doesn't really give you any credibility. It certainly doesn't mean other people should refrain from discussing the role of Islam in assessing the risk of terrorism.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 6:44pm:

Quote: freewhatever twisted things around so they were about islamics again. No SOB. That is what this thread is about. Merely insisting that Islamic terrorism is unrelated to Islam doesn't really give you any credibility. It certainly doesn't mean other people should refrain from discussing the role of Islam in assessing the risk of terrorism.

Liar

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 6:42pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:38pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:45pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:13pm: If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it? Good question. SOB So, you're just going to pretend Bali wasn't revenge for supporting America in it's wars!!!?????!!! Gee, give me a cat makeover and call me Einstein NOW!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ::) Bali wasnt an attack on australia Einstein. SOB

YES IT WAS!!!  ;D ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 6:51pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:42pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:38pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:45pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:13pm: If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it? Good question. SOB So, you're just going to pretend Bali wasn't revenge for supporting America in it's wars!!!?????!!! Gee, give me a cat makeover and call me Einstein NOW!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ::) Bali wasnt an attack on australia Einstein. SOB YES IT WAS!!!  ;D ;D

No. It wasnt. Bali = indonesia. A few aussies got caught up in it but it wasnt an attack on australia or even australians.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 6:55pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:51pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:42pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 6:38pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:45pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 5:13pm: If 9-11 had nothing to do with us, why are we fighting because of it? Good question. SOB So, you're just going to pretend Bali wasn't revenge for supporting America in it's wars!!!?????!!! Gee, give me a cat makeover and call me Einstein NOW!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D  ::) Bali wasnt an attack on australia Einstein. SOB YES IT WAS!!!  ;D ;D No. It wasnt. Bali = indonesia. A few aussies got caught up in it but it wasnt an attack on australia or even australians. SOB

A few Australians????

Buddy, do you realise what terrorism is?

Indonesia is bigger than just Bali dood!!

202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians.

Do you think that was an accident?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident?

Was it accidental of the US and UK to kill millions of innocent people in the last century?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident?

No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia.

SOB

Orgasm wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? Was it accidental of the US and UK to kill millions of innocent people in the last century?

In the last decade . . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:13pm:

Orgasm wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? Was it accidental of the US and UK to kill millions of innocent people in the last century? In the last decade . . . . SOB

Well every year millions die due to the system they enforce around the world

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB

You can believe that all you want but you are not the Australian population!

Perception is everything in politics and war is just ugly politics!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:15pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You can believe that all you want but you are not the Australian population! Perception is everything in politics and war is just ugly politics!

That is very offensive to war

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB

You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:46pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about.

Are you really worried about terrorists?

Not in a personal sense. But you are talking to someone who set up a politics website.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 7:46pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about.

No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple.

SOB

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2012 at 8:49pm:

Not in a personal sense. But you are talking to someone who set up a politics website.

e-alqaeda?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 9:41am:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about. No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple. SOB

So you say. You also say you forgot who the real target is. Are you suggesting it is some kind of accident that Australians made up 88 of the 202 dead? Or is your position one of those ones that comes without any kind of explanation or justification?

Would it have even been possible to get a higher percentage of Australians on that scale without coming to Australia?

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 12:13pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 9:41am: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about. No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple. SOB So you say. You also say you forgot who the real target is. Are you suggesting it is some kind of accident that Australians made up 88 of the 202 dead? Or is your position one of those ones that comes without any kind of explanation or justification? Would it have even been possible to get a higher percentage of Australians on that scale without coming to Australia?

It was not an attack on australia. the target was not australians.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 12:29pm:

freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 12:13pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 9:41am: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about. No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple. SOB So you say. You also say you forgot who the real target is. Are you suggesting it is some kind of accident that Australians made up 88 of the 202 dead? Or is your position one of those ones that comes without any kind of explanation or justification? Would it have even been possible to get a higher percentage of Australians on that scale without coming to Australia? It was not an attack on australia. the target was not australians. SOB

sob, I SENSE YOUR MOMENTUM HAS COME TO AN END!

  :D :D :D

Now, I'm not claiming to be judge but you can't control what people think after they've read your statements trying to make the case it isn't our problem!

  ;) ;)  :'(

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 1:44pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 12:29pm: freediver wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 12:13pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8th, 2012 at 9:41am: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about. No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple. SOB So you say. You also say you forgot who the real target is. Are you suggesting it is some kind of accident that Australians made up 88 of the 202 dead? Or is your position one of those ones that comes without any kind of explanation or justification? Would it have even been possible to get a higher percentage of Australians on that scale without coming to Australia? It was not an attack on australia. the target was not australians. SOB sob, I SENSE YOUR MOMENTUM HAS COME TO AN END!   :D :D :D Now, I'm not claiming to be judge but you can't control what people think after they've read your statements trying to make the case it isn't our problem!   ;) ;)  :'(

Why do you have to claim another countries terrorist attack as australian?

SOB

It's a globalised world now mate: you just don't get it!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 9:41am:

freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:11pm: freediver wrote on May 7th, 2012 at 7:10pm: 202 people died in Bali. 88 of them were Australians. Do you think that was an accident? No it wasnt an accident it was a terrorist attack but it wasnt an attack on australia. SOB You are splitting hairs Borg. 88 dead Australians, and you pretend we have nothing to worry about. No. Its not splitting hairs. It was not an attack on australia. Australians were not the target. simple. SOB

The Bali bombers said Australian's were the target, in this video around the 2min 10 sec mark onwards.

The Bali bombers said they were aligned with al qaeda and learnt how to make explosives in Afghanistan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLQ3_yWIzjA

Lolol a youtube. I guess all the news sources @ the time and the court cases and the indonesians and all were wrong then.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

Lolol a youtube. I guess all the news sources @ the time and the court cases and the indonesians and all were wrong then. SOB

I used youtube for that because the bali bombers confessed in person to why they did it in that interview which was shown on TV.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 6^th, 2012 at 5:38pm:

Any particular thoughts on how Australia should conduct itself in a post 9-11 world so that the risks of Terrorism diminish?

Just point out that the reasoning why Osama sent his minions was because of the USA bombing his allies in the Middle East and supporting Israel a bit too much. That should put the responsibility back on the USA.

Some other things might include questioning that USA why they needed to support a lunatic like Osama bin Laden, instead of letting the Russians kick his arse? Probably averting the Middle East becoming a threat to the world.?

Quote:

Some other things might include questioning that USA why they needed to support a lunatic like Osama bin Laden, instead of letting the Russians kick his arse?

So you support what the Russians were doing at the time?

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2013 at 8:27pm:

Quote: Some other things might include questioning that USA why they needed to support a lunatic like Osama bin Laden, instead of letting the Russians kick his arse? So you support what the Russians were doing at the time?

I would support the Russians over what they were doing in Afghanistan over what the Afghanistanis would do to the Russians if it was the other way around.

So what were they doing?

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2013 at 10:45pm:

So what were they doing?

Trying to make Afghanistan more like Europe whilst also maintaining the communist agenda. Meanwhile, the Americans were supplying the Taliban with ammunition to fight against (communism). Now, the Americans are fighting to undo all the poo that they set out to prevent.

Quote:

Trying to make Afghanistan more like Europe

In what way?

freediver wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2013 at 3:28pm:

Quote: Trying to make Afghanistan more like Europe In what way?

Women equality, rights of people to an education, various rights that are enjoyed in Europe that weren't found in Afghanistan. Promotion of a secular society.

Democracy?

freediver wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2013 at 4:03pm:

Democracy?

Not really sure about that. Maybe. I'll finish watching the documentary on that later tonight.

What documentary?

Why would they make it more like Europe, rather than more like Russia?

freediver wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2013 at 4:45pm:

What documentary? Why would they make it more like Europe, rather than more like Russia?

Well, that's kind of my point about questioning to whether or not they would make Afghanistan a democracy. I did consider that they wouldn't make the country more people friendly than Russia.

It sounds to me like someone is trying pretty hard to spin it.

What is the doco called?

1979 - 1989 Soviet - Afghan War

(CNN report)