Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..
So the net gain is what we all already know?
Why do you say I'm happy about Australians being killed by foreigners?
You are making this up.
The fact that you are so against any action being taken against Australians who kill foreigners seems to indicate that you don't see it as being very wrong. If that's not being happy with mass murder of foreigners then it's practically indistinguishable from being happy with it.
If you were NOT happy with Australians killing foreigners, you would support action being taken against alleged mass murderers.
So MSN thinks murder shouldn't be investigated if it doesn't result in some ROI that benefits Australia?
As if Justice is not a valid outcome?
And Carantoc is ok with Australian service personnel committing warcrimes in the dark to instil fear in our oppononents.
Good to know
I hate that this is now politicised. Cheap politicians use this for their little gains. Sad really.
On the original comment, I was in an army (not Australian), trained as a squad leader for 6 months before taking general duties, but was not in a war.
We had heaps of classroom time.
A lot of military tactics, arms, political brainwashing...
Arrest approach, setting handcuffs, physical combat etc.
But no ethics, moral stands, nothing about war crime, prisoners treatment.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
So MSN thinks murder shouldn't be investigated if it doesn't result in some ROI that benefits Australia?
As if Justice is not a valid outcome?
And Carantoc is ok with Australian service personnel committing warcrimes in the dark to instil fear in our oppononents.
Good to know
But murder was investigated years ago, and BRS was disgraced as a result. I think it's an extremely grey area applying civilian standards to a war.
Australia needs an investigation into the AFP in how they allocate their limited resources. I think they may be failing us.
If they investigated those who kill Australians with the same vigour as they chased an Australian soldier who may have killed some foreigners then I may not have the same opinion.
Why hasn't Puneet Puneet been brought to justice, why wasn't the Bondi shooter watched more closely prior to murdering so many Australians? Why is there no progress on the Australian Aid worker murdered in Gaza?
D3, you didn't mention anything regarding my point in my first post about Australia inviting Israel's president here some months back.
Based on how you perceive others, I could extend that to mean that you are complicit with genocide and the war crimes committed by Israel.
- which is good to know
Select to expand quoteObelix said..
But no ethics, moral stands, nothing about war crime, prisoners treatment.
That does surprises me, maybe BRS will use that in his defence.
If soldiers are not taught ethics, prisoner treatment etc, how are they supposed to know what to do when faced with that situation in the field?
FFS, of course Australian personnel get training in Rules of Engagement based on international law.
NCOs and officers also get training and education in ethics as part of their promotion training.
And considering the SAS are trained in operating with minimal oversight out in the field, it is very unlikely that they are unaware of rules regarding unarmed prisoners.
They are among the best trained soldiers in the world, so that they know what to do in difficult and challenging situations. (Which include the likely situation where they have prisoners far from support).
Commentators should afford him the presumption of innocence as per Australian law and social values and he should be shown the respect a decorated veteran deserves until proven otherwise.
Whatever he did or didnt do needs to be seen through a lense that understands its was a war against an enemy that doesnt play by the rules we impose on our soldiers. They don't wear uniforms, they hide amongst civilians and have no obligations to international rules of war they would respect.
Select to expand quotecammd said..
Commentators should afford him the presumption of innocence as per Australian law and social values and he should be shown the respect a decorated veteran deserves until proven otherwise.
Whatever he did or didnt do needs to be seen through a lense that understands its was a war against an enemy that doesnt play by the rules we impose on our soldiers. They don't wear uniforms, they hide amongst civilians and have no obligations to international rules of war they would respect.
Agreed.
After the Heston Russel witch hunt based on hear say no one really should comment on a trial polluted by the media.
We should also respect the 21 soldiers who testified against him. If he was German, Japanese, Iranian, Iraqis, or any one else right wingers would be baying for blood.
Australians have a proud heritage of playing by the rule book. Let the courts do their job.
edit
www.facebook.com/share/1Asmr8CEhr/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Select to expand quotehilly said..
We should also respect the 21 soldiers who testified against him. If he was German, Japanese, Iranian, Iraqis, or any one else right wingers would be baying for blood.
Australians have a proud heritage of playing by the rule book. Let the courts do their job.
edit
www.facebook.com/share/1Asmr8CEhr/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Yeah baying for blood goes both ways, I do agree, let the courts do their job, the cops are not above stiching people up.
Remember Cardinal Pell, the cops had to actually advertise for alleged victims because there was no complaints. An man innocent put in jail for the most heinous crimes he never commited. There was no shortage of people baying for his blood simple because they don't like Christians or Israel Falou. The guy was blatantly discriminated against as proven by the court case yet the mob wanted him cancelled, hung drawn and quartered.
Select to expand quotecammd said..
Adds a lot of perspective on the BRS witch hunt to me. I think it clearly demonstrates the idea of how we define an unarmed innocent civilian. It means something quite different to an average person sitting at a desk in the city (hilly), compared to a specialist soldier who is on the field in Afghanistan, fighting an unknown enemy.
My other takeaway from the podcast is how they chose to go after 400 soldiers, rather than the chain of command above them. IDK, but I think its a stitch up. Hard for me to understand the time and money spent to go after our soldiers in such an aggressive way.
On a side note I strongly disagree what many commentators are saying: that Australians are split on this issue on right vrs left basis.
I agree it's not left vs right politics it seems a lot of people are not happy about how our soldiers get treated.
I am dubious about the charges, its clear msm journalists routinely beat up stuff to sell stories. They are full of self righteousness whilst having zero morals.
As mentioned in the poscast a criminal case isn't the balance of probablilties like the defamation case it has to be beyond reasonable doubt. Seems like a lot of doubt exists.
I'm not sure what to think of the arrest taking place in Sydney in order to have more favourable demographics for the prosecution in the jury selection. That's disgusting if that was the motivation for the time and place of the arrest given BRS offered for months to surrender himself. It's no wonder people are losing trust in the establishment.
I read the comments here and if they are reflective of the general population then it just reinforces my belief of why we lost and why we are unlikely to ever win another war we start.
Apparently the Australian SAS are the best trained soldiers in the world, they got sent to war to defend our values, the battlefield comprised innocent unarmed civilians - and we still lost the fight.
D3, hilly, whoever - could you explain to me like I am a 10 year old, headmaster, why the western coalition lost the war ?
Select to expand quote
Remember Cardinal Pell, the cops had to actually advertise for alleged victims because there was no complaints. An man innocent put in jail for the most heinous crimes he never commited. There was no shortage of people baying for his blood simple because they don't like Christians or Israel Falou. The guy was blatantly discriminated against as proven by the court case yet the mob wanted him cancelled, hung drawn and quartered.
Nice Defense of Pell But here are a few things you either conceal or are not aware of because you are stuck in a far right fish bowl.
George Pell won the appeal on a legal technicality This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell's earlier appeal, made an error about the nature of the correct legal principles, or their application.
Here is further reading if you wish to educate yourself
theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156
Also no mention of the findings of the Australian Royal Commision into institutional response child sexual abuse
The child sexual abuse royal commission in 2020 released a bombshell un-redacted report examining the failings of George Pell during his time as an assistant priest, bishop, auxiliary bishop and cardinal in Australia.The report found he both knew about child abuse, particularly within the Victorian diocese of Ballarat, and failed to take proper steps to act on complaints about dangerous priests.
Seem to have a lot in commonwith your orange cult leader
He was acquitted by the High Court because the evidence didn't establish guilt.
Anti zionist, anti catholic, anti ranga, you seem a bit of hater IanR
Select to expand quotecammd said..
He was acquitted by the High Court because the evidence didn't establish guilt.
Anti zionist, anti catholic, anti ranga, you seem a bit of hater IanR
From what I read in IanR's link that's not correct.
I understood from it that the High Court acquitted him upheld his appeal because the evidence couldn't establish guilt, more than it didn't.
To re-phrase it as I understood it - the Jury found him guilty based primarily on an assessment of credibility of witnesses. He appealed saying the facts meant it was not possible for things to have happened in a way they must have happened if he was guilty . Two of the three appeal judges then (according to the high court) failed to take into account the possibility he may have not done it when they assessed the appeal, and the High Court then reviewed and determined the evidence did in fact support his appeal, which was the facts of the case (not the emotion of it) did not support the possibility of guilt in the manner he was accused (i.e. the evidence presented did not establish it was possible for him to have been where he would have to have been for the time he would have had to have been there).
So the 'legal principal' appears to be one of a fair judgement based on facts versus a judgement based on emotional credibility of one persons character over another and the assumption of guilt before the assumption of innocence.
Select to expand quoteIanR said..
Remember Cardinal Pell, the cops had to actually advertise for alleged victims because there was no complaints. An man innocent put in jail for the most heinous crimes he never commited. There was no shortage of people baying for his blood simple because they don't like Christians or Israel Falou. The guy was blatantly discriminated against as proven by the court case yet the mob wanted him cancelled, hung drawn and quartered.
Nice Defense of Pell But here are a few things you either conceal or are not aware of because you are stuck in a far right fish bowl.
George Pell won the appeal on a legal technicality This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell's earlier appeal, made an error about the nature of the correct legal principles, or their application.
Here is further reading if you wish to educate yourself
theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156
Also no mention of the findings of the Australian Royal Commision into institutional response child sexual abuse
The child sexual abuse royal commission in 2020 released a bombshell un-redacted report examining the failings of George Pell during his time as an assistant priest, bishop, auxiliary bishop and cardinal in Australia.The report found he both knew about child abuse, particularly within the Victorian diocese of Ballarat, and failed to take proper steps to act on complaints about dangerous priests.
Seem to have a lot in commonwith your orange cult leader
Cammd is more concerned with histotical sex offences by Pakistani men in the UK than any acknowledgment of uncomfortable home truths about Christian Organisations and their leadership in Australia.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
Cammd is more concerned with histotical sex offences by Pakistani men in the UK than any acknowledgment of uncomfortable home truths about Christian Organisations and their leadership in Australia.
From what I read in cammd's posts that's not correct.
I understood it is a difference between the police actively advertising and soliciting to find alleged victims in Pell's case and the police actively silencing and deterring alleged victims who approached the police in the UK Pakistani gangs grooming sexual abuse cases.
Perhaps if the application of investigation and policing was generally perceived to be more consistent / transparent / equitable then myscreenname wouldn't have started this thread ? We can but speculate.
Seabreeze headmaster's (hilly, D3, IanR) - could you explain to me like I am a 10 year old, why the western coalition lost the war ?
Select to expand quoteD3 said..IanR said..
Remember Cardinal Pell, the cops had to actually advertise for alleged victims because there was no complaints. An man innocent put in jail for the most heinous crimes he never commited. There was no shortage of people baying for his blood simple because they don't like Christians or Israel Falou. The guy was blatantly discriminated against as proven by the court case yet the mob wanted him cancelled, hung drawn and quartered.
Nice Defense of Pell But here are a few things you either conceal or are not aware of because you are stuck in a far right fish bowl.
George Pell won the appeal on a legal technicality This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell's earlier appeal, made an error about the nature of the correct legal principles, or their application.
Here is further reading if you wish to educate yourself
theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156
Also no mention of the findings of the Australian Royal Commision into institutional response child sexual abuse
The child sexual abuse royal commission in 2020 released a bombshell un-redacted report examining the failings of George Pell during his time as an assistant priest, bishop, auxiliary bishop and cardinal in Australia.The report found he both knew about child abuse, particularly within the Victorian diocese of Ballarat, and failed to take proper steps to act on complaints about dangerous priests.
Seem to have a lot in commonwith your orange cult leader
Cammd is more concerned with histotical sex offences by Pakistani men in the UK than any acknowledgment of uncomfortable home truths about Christian Organisations and their leadership in Australia.
You dismiss the thousands of crimes including rape, torture and murder in the UK ignored or suppressed by the establishment that didn't want to appear racist or undermine multiculturalism. Explain to me how is that different from a church dismissing or suppressing abuse so reputation isn't damaged.
Seems to me its the same behaviour.
I don't dismiss them, just point out that you only seem to be concerned by one of these things.
Like you said, decades of cover up for the Church in Australia isn't that much different.
But you we're yet to hear you speak out against these Christians who pose such a threat to our community.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
I don't dismiss them, just point out that you only seem to be concerned by one of these things.
Like you said, decades of cover up for the Church in Australia isn't that much different.
But you we're yet to hear you speak out against these Christians who pose such a threat to our community.
You dont make any sense.
In one sentence you refer to me speaking out against cover ups by christians
The very next sentence you say your yet to hear me speak out against those christians
Do you even understand what you write.
Select to expand quotecammd said..
He was acquitted by the High Court because the evidence didn't establish guilt.
Anti zionist, anti catholic, anti ranga, you seem a bit of hater IanR
Typical moronic statement for a poorly Educated Aussie MAGA
Provide evidence of your assertion based on court records
I know you can't because they don't exist.
Only Right on one of those comments, I'm a Ranga and very proud of but that doesn't mean I think every ranga is a great man. I'm Roman Catholic by education and heritage, I even studied the New Testament to a HSC level but my faith does not blind me to the evils of many clergy
You are right I'm anti Zionist as I am anti Any religious nationalist movement. Like the Christian Nationalist in the USA or The Islamic Nationalist in Iran
Any form of Nationalist Movement I am Opposed to like the Nazis of the 1930 and 1940
Your the one that is the Hater with your anti Islamic racist attitudes
Select to expand quoteIanR said..cammd said..
He was acquitted by the High Court because the evidence didn't establish guilt.
Anti zionist, anti catholic, anti ranga, you seem a bit of hater IanR
Typical moronic statement for a poorly Educated Aussie MAGA
Provide evidence of your assertion based on court records
I know you can't because they don't exist.
Only Right on one of those comments, I'm a Ranga and very proud of but that doesn't mean I think every ranga is a great man. I'm Roman Catholic by education and heritage, I even studied the New Testament to a HSC level but my faith does not blind me to the evils of many clergy
You are right I'm anti Zionist as I am anti Any religious nationalist movement. Like the Christian Nationalist in the USA or The Islamic Nationalist in Iran
Any form of Nationalist Movement I am Opposed to like the Nazis of the 1930 and 1940
Your the one that is the Hater with your anti Islamic racist attitudes
Are you anti Palestinian, that's a religious nationalist movement.
Btw, you need to get something for that tds, everytime you post there is some reference to trump or maga or orange cults. I think he's got into your head.
Select to expand quotecammd said..D3 said..
I don't dismiss them, just point out that you only seem to be concerned by one of these things.
Like you said, decades of cover up for the Church in Australia isn't that much different.
But you we're yet to hear you speak out against these Christians who pose such a threat to our community.
You dont make any sense.
In one sentence you refer to me speaking out against cover ups by christians
The very next sentence you say your yet to hear me speak out against those christians
Do you even understand what you write.
So are you going to argue that we shouldn't allow either of them in Australia?
Select to expand quoteD3 said..cammd said..D3 said..
I don't dismiss them, just point out that you only seem to be concerned by one of these things.
Like you said, decades of cover up for the Church in Australia isn't that much different.
But you we're yet to hear you speak out against these Christians who pose such a threat to our community.
You dont make any sense.
In one sentence you refer to me speaking out against cover ups by christians
The very next sentence you say your yet to hear me speak out against those christians
Do you even understand what you write.
So are you going to argue that we shouldn't allow either of them in Australia?
Your just getting ridiculous, the threads about BRS and whether or not it's a stich up.
Select to expand quotecammd said..Select to expand quote
Are you anti Palestinian, that's a religious nationalist movement.
Btw, you need to get something for that tds, everytime you post there is some reference to trump or maga or orange cults. I think he's got into your head.
Um Palestinian is not a Political or Religious Movement it is a population group or race
There are even Christian Palestinians being persecuted by the Israeli army right now in Lebanon
The depths of your ignorance astounds me
Select to expand quotecammd said..D3 said..cammd said..D3 said..
I don't dismiss them, just point out that you only seem to be concerned by one of these things.
Like you said, decades of cover up for the Church in Australia isn't that much different.
But you we're yet to hear you speak out against these Christians who pose such a threat to our community.
You dont make any sense.
In one sentence you refer to me speaking out against cover ups by christians
The very next sentence you say your yet to hear me speak out against those christians
Do you even understand what you write.
So are you going to argue that we shouldn't allow either of them in Australia?
Your just getting ridiculous, the threads about BRS and whether or not it's a stich up.
Nice deflection there without answering, you're getting lots of practice at that. And I'll take the your complaint of threadjacking as a compliment from you.
I don't think it's a stitch up, I think it is poorly timed and should have been fully investigated years ago.
As i heard an RSL spokesperson say "Justice delayed, is justice denied".
But once the whole defamation thing played out, it absolutely needed to thoroughly and transparently investigated and brought to trial if that's what evidence turned up.
Once the defamation case brought all this to light, it would have been Un-Australian to sweep it under the rug and pretend we never saw it.
