0
   

Rice: Gun Rights Important As Free Speech

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 03:34 pm
Yeap, I could add some French, Italian and German papers now (again) as well.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 03:47 pm
JustWonders wrote:
I think you "only quoted from that one" because you can't find evidence for your claim.

However, I'm sure dlowan can find one for hers and will be along momentarily.


Okay, since you didn't want to look it up by yourself:

Quote:
Police Commissioner Ken Moroney promised a review of tactics -- even the possibility of using water cannons -- to break up unruly crowds.

"We have witnessed this weekend amongst the worst violence that I have ever seen in my policing service of 40 years," Mr Moroney said. "Never in my working life did I ever imagine a mob, a drunken mob, turning on a woman, an innocent woman, who happened to stray into their path."
The Australian, 13 December 2005

That's again not "utterly innocent", but at least he said 'innocent'.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 03:48 pm
Well, first, calm down, nimh. When I posted that Walter couldn't find evidence for his claim, I wasn't referring to the SMS messaging, but his agreeing with dlowan that those attacked were "utterly innocent".

Second, I can totally imagine whites engaging in violence...of any type.

Third, you don't know enough about "my world" to make informed judgments any more than I know enough about yours to judge you.

It's been widely reported that there have been "incidents" of Lebanese Muslims disturbing white Australian women at these public beaches (some say for years), plus there are reports of lifeguards being beaten by Lebanese gangs.

"Utterly innocent" to me doesn't necessarily mean "non-criminal" (as in "without a criminal record"). Actually, I thought dlowan meant it as in "unprovoked".

Do you honestly think that thousands of Australians decided to just go to the beach and beat up Muslims for the heck of it without any provocation whatsoever?

I'm not so sure, but if you, Walter or dlowan have evidence to support that, then I'd be happy to read it.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 03:55 pm
JustWonders wrote:
Do you honestly think that thousands of Australians decided to just go to the beach and beat up Muslims for the heck of it without any provocation whatsoever?


I'm following this since more than five days by now, read about the history etc: yes, I honestly think so, since there are no other reports.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 04:30 pm
From your own source, Walter:

Quote:
Some Cronulla residents claim to be sick of "Muslim" interlopers taunting and abusing women in bikinis, assaulting their boyfriends, and claiming "ownership" of the beach.

Some Cronulla residents who joined Sunday's melee saw a recent attack on three lifesavers, allegedly by a group of Lebanese youths, as the last straw.

and...

"You have groups of young, ethnic men who are floating. They're under-employed, they don't listen to news and they don't pay attention to tough talk from senior police or politicians," he said.

Researcher Dr Michael Kennedy, a NSW police detective for 20 years, said Muslim Lebanese communities were closely grouped around the Lakemba Mosque, in the Bankstown area.

"We've found these have become ethnic islands, more so than in cities like Melbourne," he said.

"You've got a lot of young people who didn't go to Year 12, a lot who are finding it hard to find jobs, so they hang out with friends and extended family."


Similar to the riots in France, I think. Plus, the Muslim faith of some of these Lebanese would be in conflict with the values of many white Australians, hence the alleged "harrassment" on some of the beaches.

I'm not Australian, but I go to the beach. I wear bikinis. I'd resent it, too, if I got harrassed because someone's religion forbade it. I wouldn't become violent over it, but I can see how years of that type of abuse would fester to the point of eruption.

No easy answers here if those in one world refuse to respect another's. Maybe Australia will have to ban bikinis and alcohol altogether.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 04:42 pm
You certainly know, JW, that the Lebanese community in Sydney was recently celebrating a great event with their three Saints they have there?
And certainly you are aware that about 150,000 Catholic Lebanese live around there? (Maronite Catholics are united with the Roman Catholic Church as you are aware of.)
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 04:47 pm
Maronite Schmaronite . . . they're all towel-heads to any right thinking enemy of the World-Wide Islamic Plot to Destroy Everything That's Good and Holy in Christendom, Inc. . . .
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 04:49 pm
I understand there are both Christian Lebanese and Muslim Lebanese living in and around Sydney.

Somehow I doubt it's the Christian Lebanese that have a problem with bikini-clad women or alcohol.

You, perhaps, hold the opposite opinion.

How does one say "c'est la vie" in German?

Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 05:00 pm
I think, most, if not all, pronounce it it French here - why do you ask?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 05:02 pm
Smile
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 05:22 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
A: In OZ, you cannot, as you have no right to defend yourself.


Eh, did they change their laws recently? Shocked
According to my sources - here: Crimes Act 1900, Section 421, New South Wales - at least this state still has got (they even 'modernised it some time ago) relevant laws.
So I had thaought , others have it well.


Actually, I'd say basic self-defense is a human right that they would have regardless of whether it was in a statute.

But the right will have limited impact if they are not allowed to carry a suitable self-defense weapon. That is something that Australians are no longer allowed, which is a tragedy.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 05:30 pm
dlowan wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Right....

Now you're out shopping and suddenly you're attacked by a group of Muslim thugs, who don't like you because you are white.

How do you defend yourself?

A: In OZ, you cannot, as you have no right to defend yourself.

That's not sanity. That is retarded.


Lol...so, you would have been happier if a lot of people had died, as they do in your race riots?


Also, careful, your retarded bigotry is showing.

Whle it seems there may have been some fairly equal thuggery between gangs of Lebanese and Anglo thug idiots, the riot in question began as predominantly Anglo Australian thugs attacking utterly innocent Muslims.



Whether it is better for people to die or not depends on who is doing the dying.

If it was the case of members of a lynch mob being killed by those they were trying to lynch, then yes, I'd say the deaths were an improvement.

That applies regardless of the race of the lynch mob or the intended victim.

I am glad the lynch mob didn't catch their victims (at least they didn't judging from what was posted here), but I would have preferred having those Muslims properly armed.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 06:12 pm
JustWonders wrote:
Third, you don't know enough about "my world" to make informed judgments any more than I know enough about yours to judge you.

Well, I certainly dont understand it.

I mean; considering the reports we've read, which statement is at least closer to the truth?

dlowan: "utterly innocent Muslims were attacked"

Considering we have the newspapers reporting that the mob ended up attacking, "indiscriminately", "anyone who appeared of Mediterranean ethnicity", I'd say there's a fair chance that innocent Muslims were attacked, no?

cjhsa: "suddenly you [Australians] are attacked by a group of Muslim thugs, who don't like you because you are white"

Considering the nazi and racist appeals made during the mob violence, this reversal of responsibility in at least this outburst of violence seems tasteless at least.

Yet it is dlowan's assertion that you're relentlessly questioning, whereas you quoted cjhsa's without any question or comment.

That to me, is just weird.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2005 08:25 pm
Wrong again, nimh. I quoted cjhsa's comment to my post showing the NRO article on gun control. I will take this opportunity, however, to revise my personal comment in that post. I could imagine gangs of youths in the USA going to other suburbs and trashing cars and violently assaulting people, but they would have a very, very, very good reason.

Dlowan posted right after that with her "utterly innocent" remark, and I took it to mean that thousands of Australians went to the beach and assaulted Muslims without any reason whatsoever.

I still don't buy that. But, hey, if you and dlowan want to add me to your "list" of those you consider bigots, be my guest.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/23/2024 at 03:24:16