- Moderator
- #226
This is my point if someone or a group of people are openly threatening to do harm like set off bombs in Fed square then that my friend should be treated as a crime.
It is a crime. And quite a serious crime at that.
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.
BL v StK · WB v FRE · RIC v HAW · ADE v SYD · NM v COL · GWS v PA ·
Read the wrap-up and post your "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here.
EUFA EURO 2024 - Group Stage ⚽ EPL 24/25 starts Aug 17
This is my point if someone or a group of people are openly threatening to do harm like set off bombs in Fed square then that my friend should be treated as a crime.
some local imam should take them to a public state capital execution in riyadh, or, maybe the private ones where the executioner is hooded like some black balaclava kkk guy at hellfire club, and watch them wield the axes, and then ask this juvenile jihadis, is this what they want in melbourne, and did their grandparents who emigrated to the antipodes want them to start wielding axes on the infidels, or did they go/come here, for a good life, or to destroy life.It is a crime. And quite a serious crime at that.
Might actually workMake em wear Burkas and let the women take 4 husbands.
That'll change their tune.
Too bad we won't find out the truth about these raids after anti terror laws of 2 years ago have completely stopped the press from investigating "terror" cases. Journalists face up to 10 years for reporting info on any related case. Publics right to know will have to come from big brother.
just a definite article noun Scare. thats all it isToo bad we won't find out the truth about these raids after anti terror laws of 2 years ago have completely stopped the press from investigating "terror" cases. Journalists face up to 10 years for reporting info on any related case. Publics right to know will have to come from big brother.
La vie est un art ponographique!I guess the thing is what if leaked information jeopardises ongoing investigations? There might be informants leaking 'wheres' and 'whens' that might be compromised.
Then again, the case of Mamdouh Habib proves that our justice system (and that of allied nations) is far from perfect. If mistakes and worse are made I would not want them to be swept under the rug either.
just a definite article noun Scare. thats all it is
#SCARE
Too bad we won't find out the truth about these raids after anti terror laws of 2 years ago have completely stopped the press from investigating "terror" cases. Journalists face up to 10 years for reporting info on any related case. Publics right to know will have to come from big brother.
thing is, it is sought of zero sum for the poli(es) in Canberra, there is an argument that it increases the barriers to entry, of turfing out the incumbent, as we know the populace usually make a decision to vote out the incumbent, rather than vote in Kevin 07.Well done....You've just adumbrated the closed-circle-loop trick perfectly.
The only interests it reinforces is the intelligence bureaucracy, and the ADF, and those idjits in the ADF unions, the army grunt unions.
Pretty much.
Another step to validating increased surveillance, & the 'secret- intel-classified' droobs, taking control of govt policy & existing 'outside' of & 'over & above it'....AKA C.I.A in the U.S.
Too bad we won't find out the truth about these raids after anti terror laws of 2 years ago have completely stopped the press from investigating "terror" cases. Journalists face up to 10 years for reporting info on any related case. Publics right to know will have to come from big brother.
Isn't there religious vilification laws as well?
And by denying that it is "faith" I them do not have to respect their belief, because their belief is just an opinion, without the backing of an organised religion or deity that I may need to be concerned about. I can them dismiss their opinions as "nut jobs ".
Andrews did not say they weren't motivated by faith, he said it was not an act of faith. Just like the man who murders his wife and says it was out of love was not committing an act of love. There is nothing at all wrong with what Andrews said, he was rejecting their claims that they were somehow acting on behalf of God. It would be nice if people actually understood what he was saying before criticising him.I have no idea what you're arguing or how it has anything to do with what I was saying.
I'm saying that their actions were motivated by their faith. Andrews seems to reckon they're not. I have no idea what you're adding.
I have no idea what you're arguing or how it has anything to do with what I was saying.
I'm saying that their actions were motivated by their faith. Andrews seems to reckon they're not. I have no idea what you're adding.
Make em wear Burkas and let the women take 4 husbands.
That'll change their tune.
Yes, it would.If Jihadis are are smeared and buried with bacon after they die, would that prevent them from going to paradise according to Islam?
.... Too extreme?
this is the result.
but for what purpose. so we will just intern out japanese citizens and german citizens again. we had both those Australian citizens didnt we, in internment camps in the previous wars? or am i conflating some actual POWs on domestic soil and the American internment camps...
whatever, yeah, we know the results with the increased surveillance. It is not for liberty. And for whose end, but for a very very narrow subsection of bureaucratic interests in Canberra and at Lowy Inst and ANU. no one else.
Yes, it would.
Andrews did not say they weren't motivated by faith, he said it was not an act of faith. Just like the man who murders his wife and says it was out of love was not committing an act of love. There is nothing at all wrong with what Andrews said, he was rejecting their claims that they were somehow acting on behalf of God. It would be nice if people actually understood what he was saying before criticising him.
I don't call their belief a "faith". "Faith" implies to me something positive.
There most certainly is a distinction; he's saying their motivation and claim is wrong, and the general public should not accept it as a valid motivation. It was an act of delusion dressed up as faith. Again, just like the man who murders his wife and children 'out of love'. He might claim it was an act of love, but it most certainly wasn't, he was wrong and we should all acknowledge that he was wrong. It was an act of delusion dressed up as love, it wasn't actually love. The more the general public accepts it as delusion, the fewer people might be convinced to act in a similar manner.I understand it and there is NO difference in your distincation.
If you act out of faith then your act is an act of faith.
You're creating a distinction that does not exist.
So you're suggesting that you know better than the perpetrators if their acts are motivated by faith or not? The concept of faith seems pretty subjective based off conversations that I've had with others. What is faith to one person is not necessarily faith to another. Attempting to standardise the concept of faith so that you can pretend that attempted terrorists are not really Islamic is the real delusion here.There most certainly is a distinction; he's saying their motivation and claim is wrong, and the general public should not accept it as a valid motivation. It was an act of delusion dressed up as faith. Again, just like the man who murders his wife and children 'out of love'. He might claim it was an act of love, but it most certainly wasn't, he was wrong and we should all acknowledge that he was wrong. It was an act of delusion dressed up as love, it wasn't actually love. The more the general public accepts it as delusion, the fewer people might be convinced to act in a similar manner.