Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
ISIS

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 70, 71, 72 ... 126, 127, 128  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2015 10:37 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
To be fair, Morrigu works in an environment that would make most level headed Australians heads explode. They just would not cope with it.

She is as left as anyone here in ideology, but has the intelligence to temper ideology with reality.

It's a very understandable and respectable sentiment at the emotional working level for Morrigu, but not a blueprint for moving forward on social policy. The reality of global change is the infinitely greater reality that encompasses Morrigu's workplace, I'm afraid.

So, Morrigu, disagreeing with the broader validity of something is not to refuse to empathise with your work. Note, I'm not the one politicking to reduce your pay and conditions for doing such tough and essential work, so perhaps it's others who don't quite get it rather than me Wink

Mugwump wrote:
^ yes, that's a very sensible post, Morrigu. I think that's how most level-headed Australians feel.

That's the equivalent of republishing a satiritical piece from The Onion without checking its context, though. Morrigu has done very well to maintain the balance she has, as Stui says, but the converse of that is she has been overexposed to quite different experiences than the average person in the suburbs.

That is, you have just used Morrigu's very unique, local work context and have tried to generalise it to the lives of the broader population, which is absurd considering most people have a grand total of zero interactions with kicking, spitting old men on most days! If most people feel like that from their living room sofa--and indeed much stronger given Morrigu's sense of proportion--to quote House M.D., they're idiots!

Eds.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2015 11:56 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

pietillidie wrote:

So, it's mostly not about us. There is no real, actual context of overwhelming oppression and threat for us aside from non-statistical TV terrorism, which agreed is a stress and one we should deal with by pulling the media and the hystericals into line.


I agree with much of what you say about the pressures on minorities and the importance of trying to manage and mitigate this as we struggle with increasing Islamic militancy in our nation. Then i read the sentences above, and i think that you really don't get it. 9/11 might have been "non-statistical" to you, but 3000 dead human beings is statistical to me. 55 dead in London and 180 odd in Madrid might be non-statistical. But these are the greatest mass murders ever committed in each of those countries, all in the last 15 years, all arising from one ideology. Is there any level of mass murder that would make you acknowledge that we have a serious guerilla war in our midst that is not going away? And your response to that is to "pull the media into line" ???

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 12:25 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
watt price tully wrote:
Skids, Pa Marmo & Senator Lambie on Islam:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZignPUwvvPU


Funny you should mention that.

Quote:
Jacqui Lambie receives beheading threat, ordering her to help implement Sharia law in Australia


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-01/lambie-threatened-with-beheading/6271732


With enemies like those, who needs friends?

Extremists are always good news for each other, and bad news for everybody else. Don't buy the outrage on either side; they're both getting off on this big time.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 12:29 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pa Marmo wrote:
3.14159 wrote:
Pa Marmo wrote:

None of the above are/were Christians, you can call yourself whatever you like, but by their fruits you will know them. No proper Christian could perform any of the acts mentioned above. You people have no idea what constitutes and actual Christian.


99% of Muslims consider ISIS in the exact same way!


Of course they do, you've surveyed them all and they told you so.


I actually did post some interesting survey results a few pages back if you care to read them. If you can't be bothered, I'll summarise them: ISIS ain't exactly flavour of the month in the Middle East right now.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 12:54 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Mugwump wrote:
pietillidie wrote:

So, it's mostly not about us. There is no real, actual context of overwhelming oppression and threat for us aside from non-statistical TV terrorism, which agreed is a stress and one we should deal with by pulling the media and the hystericals into line.


I agree with much of what you say about the pressures on minorities and the importance of trying to manage and mitigate this as we struggle with increasing Islamic militancy in our nation. Then i read the sentences above, and i think that you really don't get it. 9/11 might have been "non-statistical" to you, but 3000 dead human beings is statistical to me. 55 dead in London and 180 odd in Madrid might be non-statistical. But these are the greatest mass murders ever committed in each of those countries, all in the last 15 years, all arising from one ideology. Is there any level of mass murder that would make you acknowledge that we have a serious guerilla war in our midst that is not going away? And your response to that is to "pull the media into line" ???

You don't make decisions on the basis of a 9/11 beyond the sensible, for the same reasons you don't ask cops in Missouri to develop a national race relations policy. (Geez, take a few stats courses if you feel the odd event is statistically meaningful!).

Managing those stressors is about leadership, and the judicious use of ethical public communications to counter distortions, not pour petrol on them. Abusing tragedies and shocks is something total fruitboxes like Bush/Cheney and friends did. In response, the nutters spent 3T getting just as many US citizens killed, crashing the world economy and creating ISIS in the process.

So, the real world you refuse to acknowledge includes fruit bats of many species, not just terrorists, including those in suits you refuse to view plainly according to basic facts, despite clear contradictions such as their love affair with the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world today, Saudi Arabia; their failed perfect market financial legislation; their idiotic wars; their idiotic provocations such missile defense shields in Eastern Europe; and on and on.

Things move forward because a certain core of people stay rational and lead, taking the discomfort of administering fair and contextual judgement; I assume you would want to be one of them. Leadership is never an arse kissing or popularity context; it's about people trusting you to get the important things right, rather than expecting you to fold every time there's a bit of emotion in the air or a bit of long-term discipline and focus is needed.

Need I repeat the record of the buffoons who don't deserve to be listened to: Vietnamese immigrants will never fit in!; the Indonesians will invade!; the Yellow Peril is upon us!; multiculturalism is ruining society!; Stop the Asian Invasion!; the Chinese are taking over our economy!; the immigrants are taking our jobs!; the streets were much safer when I was a kid!; Mabo will enable Aboriginal peoples to take your house!; there's nothing to Apologise for!; they're drowning their children just to get a visa!; why aren't we invading North Korea!; we can take Afghanistan!; the Iraqis will greet us with open arms!; we need a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe!; the immigrants are driving down wages!; we need a strong leader like Tony Abbott to tackle these things (the biggest LOL)).

Yes, you can add the half-arsed left and whatever far left whackiness you like to that list. But on the issues of race and international relations, the same folk who hold those views have been wrong on almost everything without exception.

Yes, we have a significant terrorism security threat and I support most of the visible measures (the rest needs far more extensive judicial and legislative oversight and critique before any of us can comment on it).

Guerrilla war--good one Hannity! Stop watching TV as if the media is embedded in statistical reality.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm


Last edited by pietillidie on Mon Mar 02, 2015 1:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 1:32 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

pietillidie wrote:
Mugwump wrote:
pietillidie wrote:

So, it's mostly not about us. There is no real, actual context of overwhelming oppression and threat for us aside from non-statistical TV terrorism, which agreed is a stress and one we should deal with by pulling the media and the hystericals into line.


I agree with much of what you say about the pressures on minorities and the importance of trying to manage and mitigate this as we struggle with increasing Islamic militancy in our nation. Then i read the sentences above, and i think that you really don't get it. 9/11 might have been "non-statistical" to you, but 3000 dead human beings is statistical to me. 55 dead in London and 180 odd in Madrid might be non-statistical. But these are the greatest mass murders ever committed in each of those countries, all in the last 15 years, all arising from one ideology. Is there any level of mass murder that would make you acknowledge that we have a serious guerilla war in our midst that is not going away? And your response to that is to "pull the media into line" ???

You don't make decisions on the basis of a 9/11 beyond the sensible, for the same reasons you don't ask cops in Missouri to develop a national race relations policy. (Geez, take a few stats courses, would you; it doesn't matter if you feel something is statistical!).

Managing those stressors is about leadership, and the judicious use of ethical public communications to counter distortions, not pour petrol on them. Abusing tragedies and shocks is something total fruitboxes like Bush/Cheney and friends did. In response, the nutters spent 3T getting just as many US citizens killed, crashing the world economy and creating ISIS in the process.

So, the real world you refuse to acknowledge includes fruit bats of many species, not just terrorists, including those in suits you refuse to view plainly according to basic facts, despite clear contradictions such as their love affair with the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world today, Saudi Arabia, or idiotic wars, or idiotic provocations such as the push for a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe.

Things move forward because a certain core of people stay rational and lead, taking the discomfort of administering fair and contextual judgement; I assume you would want to be one of them.

Yes, we have a significant terrorism security threat and I support most of the visible measures (the rest needs far more extensive judicial and legislative oversight and critique before any of us can comment on it).

Guerilla war--good one Hannity!


You know perfectly well that we're not talking about statistical theory, but about your dismissal of the terrorist incidents of the last 15 years - including the deaths of 3000 people at work - as "non-statistical". It's the dismissive way you talk about this stuff, compared to your grieving over acts of street abuse by nutters, that makes one wonder. Any incident that killed 3000 people (and was just for starters) is massively significant ; even your much-invoked Iraq War flowed from it.

No idea who Hannity is, but let me know which course I should go to for that one.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 2:38 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

No, you know perfectly well it is undisciplined to get the proportions and broader context wrong; criminally negligent to form policy on gut feelings; and criminally insane to abuse the fluctuating uncertainties of public emotion and form life-or-death policy according to them on the fly. Of course it was a massive incident! It was nihilistic madness beyond imagination. But that means you ought to be even more cautious and ensure you don't make things worse by getting more folk killed and creating even more terrorism. Reacting like a wounded baboon is criminal mal-leadership.

If you want to discuss security policy, let's discuss it. It worries me because it's so intransparent and vulnerable to corruption, and I sure as hell want it to know I'm being protected from extremists. Heck, I would politick and push for that policy if we knew anything serious about it, and it didn't involve creating even more terrorism in the footsteps of that lying fraud, now oil industry consultant, Tony Blair.

But if you want to give an open slather to destructive, unstable political narcissists, keep turning things astatistical and hysterical, and keep telling yourself that, because other people in important suits agree with you, you're being responsible.

Flaky leadership and knee-jerk reaction are negligent and egregious errors for people in positions of responsibility and influence. If the emotions or traumatic stress from such events are distorting people's thinking, they ought to do the responsible thing and recuse themselves from public debate, or from trying to influence policy. Being traumatised or emotional does not give people the right to create more trauma and destruction, or to think they deserve to be listened to after getting so much wrong, so many times.

Even worse, using this stuff for short-term electoral gain at the expense of sane medium-term policy, as The Slimy Weasel has already started doing in Australia and will keep doing until he and his sponsors gets their way--damaging the economy, wages, careers, social coherence and quality, and social and international stability in the process--will amount to yet another horrific act of approved national damage.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:15 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, no, it's not "criminal" to do any of the things you mention, because the very definition of the "crime" depends on your interpretation of complex realities with unpredictable consequences. That's where The Left always get into trouble - by defining truth and law in political terms, rather than in parliamentary terms. Invading Iraq was wrong, and not worth the risk. But it was a risk, not an act of simple murder. I don't have the sense of self-certainty to know, beforehand, that it might not have worked. I just judged that it wasn't worth the risk.

I come back to the same point. For the first time in 75 years we have an enemy that wants to kill us without limit, without any negotiable political aim. In the last 15 years it has carried out the largest acts of mass murder in the history of the Us, the Uk and Spain, and it will succeed again if we do not treat it with the utmost seriousness. I just don't see how that is a matter which can be dismissed as not statistically significant.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:39 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Mugwump wrote:
Actually, no, it's not "criminal" to do any of the things you mention, because the very definition of the "crime" depends on your interpretation of complex realities with unpredictable consequences. That's where The Left always get into trouble - by defining truth and law in political terms, rather than in parliamentary terms. Invading Iraq was wrong, and not worth the risk. But it was a risk, not an act of simple murder. I don't have the sense of self-certainty to know, beforehand, that it might not have worked. I just judged that it wasn't worth the risk.

I come back to the same point. For the first time in 75 years we have an enemy that wants to kill us without limit, without any negotiable political aim. In the last 15 years it has carried out the largest acts of mass murder in the history of the Us, the Uk and Spain, and it will succeed again if we do not treat it with the utmost seriousness. I just don't see how that is a matter which can be dismissed as not statistically significant.

Nice moral framework there, Gandhi. But my friends told me I could play roulette with the planet!

We had clear evidence to know doing anything in Afghanistan and Iraq--of all countries on earth--would be very high-risk and unpredictable; we also knew the war would be managed by clearly incompetent, ignorant fanatics with massive conflicts of interest. It was a predictable laughing stock and act of criminal negligence by any rational measure. No effort now will ever hide that; those concerned will forever be haunted by it and dismissed as disgraces, including John Howard.

More importantly, anyone who fails to get the big things right, and fails to play the percentages is always going to get these things wrong. Your ears ought to prick up whenever you hear people tripping over their tongue trying to justify going against the obvious knowns: We're all Homo sapiens in the end; hysteria, trauma and anger beget bad decisions; intransparency begets corruption; power gap begets corruption and ignorance; distance begets corruption and ignorance; globalisation is stopping for nobody; the media and our personal experiences are unreliable; most people struggle with statistics and big numbers; a billion people, such as a billion Muslims, can't be hated; no large group is ever uniform and ought never be assumed so; we know very little about life in other countries; all cultures have their own inner logic; economic and demographic forces set the parameters for most things; economies must evolve and change; cultures, including our own, must evolve and change; the other guy pretty much wants what you want; the other guy can't be trusted, yet can't be hated, so you need security even as you try to embrace him and become friends; no people group is exceptional, and we are no exception!; people who have been flaky idiots all their life like Tony Abbott will continue to be flaky idiots for the rest of their life unless exposed to major life-changing events such as personal tragedy; accidents happen, so don't elect morons even in the good times; the very same humans, including ourselves, have a huge capacity for good and bad; all humans have a huge capacity for self deception; fight like hell to nullify or win wars before they start because they are likely to unleash hell; inter alia.

I'm sure there are more you can add, but whenever you hear emotive, bumbling special pleading on these types of things--the ignoring of the big the knowns without clear, genuine, evidenced cause, pushed by untrustworthy people with a record of getting things wrong, and pushed by an untrustworthy media seeking hysteria-based circulation and favour with major sponsors, there is a huge chance they'll be wrong.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:57 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ no disagreement with most of your truisms above, except for "the other guy pretty much wants what we want". I doubt that one very much, yet it is perhaps the most important.

As for roulette, and the percentages, I envy your certainty about applying percentages to a very complex reality after a radically novel event such as 9/11. And though I think there is something of real value in your world view, I don't sense the humility and uncertainty in the face of complex and novel events that makes for good policy. But I imagine you think I'm too flexible and forgiving.

Anyway, I'm about to get on a plane to - of all places - New York. Enjoy Germany if you are still there.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:12 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Mugwump wrote:
^ no disagreement with most of your truisms above, except for "the other guy pretty much wants what we want". I doubt that one very much, yet it is perhaps the most important.

As for roulette, and the percentages, I envy your certainty about applying percentages to a very complex reality after a radically novel event such as 9/11. And though I think there is something of real value in your world view, I don't sense the humility and uncertainty in the face of complex and novel events that makes for good policy. But I imagine you think I'm too flexible and forgiving.

Anyway, I'm about to get on a plane to - of all places - New York. Enjoy Germany if you are still there.

Two last comments on this topic for a long while as I'm about to hit a busy patch (much to everyone's relief, I'm sure!):

1. Humility is what those same idiots who keep making the same mistakes on these matters by defying basic commonsense, over-trusting their gut feelings, and disrespecting facts and due diligence lack; your definition is back-to-front.

2. I worry about security all the time; a lot more than you think and possibly even more than most people because I don't trust the claims, intransparency, and whim of anyone's power, including our own. Of course I fear extremists! But how the hell can we even know how well we're being protected from extremists? Fawning, encouraging words directed at some mysterious, unaccountable security apparatus does not generate a sense of security in me. Only a vigorous public critique of the facts, and a host of checks and balances without the usual BS exceptions, can play that role.

Have a great, safe trip to NY!

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:22 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree, there wasn't a lot of humility on display from Wolfowitz et al, that's for sure. And I certainly don't want to be an apologist for the recklessness of the Iraq War. But one of my heroes, Winston Churchill was wrong most of his life til the circumstances changed radically and he became right. History is a very fickle thing, almost unknowable.

Good luck with the busy patch.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Morrigu Capricorn



Joined: 11 Aug 2001


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Christ on a bike WTF are you on about PTID???? Rolling Eyes

Talk about stating the bleedin obvious you don't seem to get the bleedin obvious!

Firstly I was not talking about patient reactions - the spitting and the cursing don't come from patient too often - my workplace and community whilst diverse is not unique!

Secondly yep great your mum worked in Springvale - not a lot different to Footscray would have thought. What you seem unable to grasp is that there is a big (huge) difference between the community being afraid of immigrants "not fitting in" and the intent from some Muslim - and they are not first generation - not even second in many instances folk to impose their culture and beliefs on all members of the community!

It is that that gets the majority of people off side more than any terrorist blah blah blah - as I said 2 way street is tolerance and acceptance!

_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:11 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/28/poll-27-of-uk-muslims-sympathize-with-charlie-hebdo-paris-deli-jihad-murders/

99% appalled? No. Try 73%.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
3.14159 Taurus



Joined: 12 Sep 2009


PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

My god you can be obtuse!
Sympathise does not mean support!
The "sympathy" stems from a deep religious belief that their Profit must be depicted by man lest it cloud his words.
Charlie Hebdo has long history of mocking Islam that many/most true Muslims find offensive but that doesn't mean they agree with what happened on that day!

The same goes for ISIS!
Many Muslims support the idea of an autonomous Islamic state (the current boarders were drawn up nearly 100 years ago by the British with little thought or planning for the different religious, ethnic, cultural, and historic boundaries) but are appalled and saddened by what is happening in that part of the world and the adverse effect it is having on Western perceptions of Islam.
So yes many "sympathise" but few, a VERY few condone the beheadings and other acts carried out in it's name! (Daesh).

Call me a cynic but it seems the government and media like to ramp up ethnic tensions in a bit to take attention away from what is happening in Cabinet room or the media needs to sell more papers.

The sad part about all this is it does nothing to the heal the rifts between the 2 ideologies (Western democracy and Islam) and adds further fuel to the fire.

Toneing down the rhetoric and start engaging in dialogue is the one thing hard nosed right-wingers are NOT interested in doing!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 70, 71, 72 ... 126, 127, 128  Next
Page 71 of 128   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group