Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Russell Brand actually raises some very interesting ideas and discusses them in a well thought out manner
More people who do this the better
Has anyone else watched Four Lions before?
Great movie.
Exactly, he had absolutely no connection with IS in any way. His previous reports signify a violent, hateful person. This siege was an extension on his violence – none of them served any divine purpose but intrinsic hate.
And he's right on about big Tony and his jingoism (which is probably the thing Mid Australia love about the guy). He has hijacked a totally irrelevant mental case's actions as justification for a preservation of 'Australia:' war, immigration, surveillance being the tools he'll use to say are protecting us. Of course every single able government will do these things anyway and that's an adult truth.
What I find amazing, though, is people will neglect to accept media hyperbole and agenda if it comes from this forum (because the posters who express it are dislikable – or they're easy to gang up on when some MOR, indifferent, baselessly-smug poster will belittle them to boost their own lives [lol on a forum] via likes). But as soon as a guy like Rusty Brand says it, the ideas are somehow verified?
That's fine, and fwiw, I agree that Abbott, the armed forces and the media absolutely did the right thing by not giving into the gunman's demands (something that Brand was critical of), but his comments re the overall media coverage were spot on imo, which is why I don't think merely dismissing his opinion because he's a 'comedian' is necessary (like some people have insinuated).
But it wasn't an ISIS attack at all, the media baselessly speculated that it was. The TV stations did limited research, which is what journalism was once about, and the "it's not ISIS" angle was then pretty hard to widely establish.Look I disagree with what Abbott has done in 99% of cases but in this instance Brand could not be more wrong. People aren't stupid, they saw the flag in the window and straight away drew their own conclusions. Add to that airspace and buildings evacuated do you really think anyone would by the just a hostage situation line? Abbott used the political line to try and water the thing down and let the police do their job.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...on-Monis-no-kin-comes-forward-claim-body.html
So no Muslim funeral directors are accepting Monis's body and they would rather his body dumped at sea.
If no one comes forward to claim his body TAXPAYERS could fund his burial arrangements. Lost for words at the inhumanity of it if we as taxpayers have to pay for this scum human being to be buried
How? I get 17.
First escapees (3)- John, Stefan, Paulo (Lindt employee you mentioned)
Second Escape (2) - Elly, Bae
Third Escape (6) - Jarrod, Harriette, Viswakanth, Puspendu, Joel, Julie (the one that Katrina was said to have protected while dying. This would mean that Katrina was shot by this stage but there are no mentions of shots being fired)
Fourth escape (1) - Fiona
Still inside (5) - Tori, Katrina, Marcia, Selina, unnamed woman (the 4th hostage youtube video one)
There was 6 still inside - for some reason (which I find incredibly curious) media aren't naming the women in the 4th hostage video that you mentioned. She could be seen leaving on a stretcher however (she was the bigger lady). Her mum was also in there and could be seen leaving the building after the raid. A few papers have reported the names of both women.
At risk of being shot for posting anything from Bolt, here's his take on why the terrorist's demands weren't met:
"Negotiators would be concerned that if they put Tony Abbott on the line, Monis could ratchet up his notoriety even further by using the moment to execute a hostage, an unacceptable risk for all.
Police knew this had happened in domestic sieges. “They say, I just wanted to speak to mum and dad, and then they can make very dramatic statements such as killing themselves or killing someone,” said Mr Van Grinsven."
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...why_police_wouldnt_let_monis_speak_to_abbott/
You're quite right- it isn't one of his articles. It's his blog, from which he puts together his articles.That's not a Bolt article; he's just reposted an excerpt.
Excellent question. Good to see people thinking through these things.But assuming the cafe would have some sort of security cameras inside, would it have been possible for the police to have 'hacked' the cameras so they could have been viewed through a laptop or the sorts?
At risk of being shot for posting anything from Bolt, here's his take on why the terrorist's demands weren't met:
"Negotiators would be concerned that if they put Tony Abbott on the line, Monis could ratchet up his notoriety even further by using the moment to execute a hostage, an unacceptable risk for all.
Police knew this had happened in domestic sieges. “They say, I just wanted to speak to mum and dad, and then they can make very dramatic statements such as killing themselves or killing someone,” said Mr Van Grinsven."
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...why_police_wouldnt_let_monis_speak_to_abbott/
they claim this vid is censored, is it true, why, if so?
they claim this vid is censored, is it true, why, if so?
First time I've seen full video of it. How many shots are required to stop one man? And the last round of firing a good 2 mins after the first bunch?
From watching that (and yes I'm an armchair expert) the friendly fire chances are highly probable. Unfortunately for the victims its too late, but they'll learn a lot from that.
There's three gunfights, the first one when the entered, then another one half a minute later, then another one 3 minutes after entry.First time I've seen full video of it. How many shots are required to stop one man? And the last round of firing a good 2 mins after the first bunch?
.