Jerry_Atrick

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-29/bureau-of-meteorology-ordered-to-fix-website-after-backlash/105945832?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other

Gripe of the Week: I am sitting in a new city commuter train.. very nice and comfy and shiny new. I need to go for a leak and guess what, even though it is a city commuter, it has toilets (dunnies for you people downundah). Open the door, the dunny isn't flished and there mound of dunny paper next to the dunny all with shit streaks. Some of them are stuffed in the hand towel bin. FFS! What is wrong with society today.. why are people so shit, sometimes? Yes, we had graffiti when we were kids and the occasional accident, but this was intentional. How hard is it to put dunny paper in the bowl and hit the button marked F. I hit the button and whoosh - all the stuff in the bowl was cleaned away. Sometimes humanity pisses me off. Foul fingered rant over.

From an ABC News Quote quiz: After reasing this thread, it was an easy guess. The site looks OK to me..

I ended our family netfix subscription about 6 months ago or more.. A lot of the movies I wanted to watch aren't on it, and it was numbing the kids minds. Well, one has flown the coup and the other doesn't seem to miss it.

Both Montague Street and York street are iconic. Wouldn't have either any other way.. you can see the water under York street and the height and warnings under Montague street. Shows up human numpties..

These types of laws are already in place over here.. can still get rentals

Aye, it will

The "You hear?" in my poultry (intended) attempt at humour was meant to be interpreted as urea... Should have said you're ear.. but that would have been worse!

Reconstituting it, you hear?

I have tried to stick with the facts.. I may have missed some - I'm not perfect. You're correct about the 8 or 10 Palestinians that were killed as corroborators..and just because others do it does not make it right.. what basis was their information? However, that wasn't the only Palestinians that were killed. There were something like 27 others.. However, it was a fight between Hamas and some other clan/power broking family. This isn't the original article I read, but makes cleat that it is a fight for power: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg5e551j593o The other article merely mentioned a family. I also believe I wrote what is the threshold that takes what has happened from trying to neutralise the threat to unjustified. And I stated that 60,000 people is too high.. Ahh.. there it was.. I am not saying Israel is without fault and never had.. My question had been what else were they to do? I wasn't aware of the retaliation nor the two IDF soldiers shot when I wrote my last response. Yes, I would suggest, especially given the stages of the conflict and delicate ceasefire, it was a step too far and not in good faith. I still maintain, looking at the history of the place, it wasn't a sign they want to indiscriminately kill Palestinians, unless a) they didn't issue their warnings as they previously had done, or (not and) they were targeting a site not known to be a Hamas hideout or whatever. Israel has for years responded similarly to similar events.. presumably as a sho of strength to dissuade Hamas - but we know how that ends. So yes, I agree Israel was reckless at best, but probably trying to make a statement. As for Netanyahu being a war criminal - currently it is alleged. No trial has taken place. There has been a committal proceeding. I haven't read the report to determine if the probable case is really justified... And to be honest, who am I to say against a collaboration of senior international legal experts. But, on reading an article, both Hamas leaders and Netanyahu and another Israeli minister are indicted (doesn't make it right); but it is not genocide they are indicted on, but intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly2exvx944o Very different crimes. Yet, unless you can contribute additional facts, intention is going to be a very grey area in this case. Not so, for Hamas

What are the facts that I have missed? That 60k Palestinians are dead? I haven't missed that. What about the other facts surrounding that fact? I haven't seen anyone here proffer corrections or rebuked except that I am biased. Sorry doesn't hold water with me because, well, it should be obvious.

Genocide is defined by the UN and a summary of it is here: https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/Genocide Convention-FactSheet-ENG.pdf The key wording being: "The definition contained in Article II of the Convention describes genocide as a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part. It does not include political groups or so called “cultural genocide”." Yes - there is an ICC warrant for Netanyahu, but that does not mean guilty. I doubt they intend to wip out the Palestinian population - they have the means to do it already without riskng their troops and their actions would surely be less discriminate? However, by Hamas perpetrating acts knowing that Israel would have to respond, and by Hamas hiding behind their citizens in readiness for the response - well - exactly where does the intent lay? Oh, get real. All thorugh the war, Israel stated they would stop if Hamas return the hostages and lay down their arms. No one pressured Hamas to do that, well, except for Chump. Certainly the public opinion wasn't that. Now, imagine if Hamas did return the hostages and lay down their weapons? Oh, hang on, Hamas is stil killing Palestinians.. Go figure with that conspiracy theory.

Despite my jimmied knee, I went to collect some gum boots (they are called wellies, here) my partner and I lent her for some horse race meet. She asked if we could go for a drive and started to talk to me about a personal boy issue she was having. Our conversation was direct and I really was appreciative of the fact that I have manage to carve ou5 a relationship with her wher she feels comfortable she can talk to me about issues daughters likely don't raise with their dad often. We went to this pub https://butterleighinn.co.uk/ out of town and shared a cheesey chips for lunch, for her washed down with a lemonade and me washed down with orange juice and soda. The waitress, from OME's neck of the woods (Warren, west of Gilgandra) was fantastic. My daughter and I found the pub a couple of weeks ago and the waitress remembered our orders, drinks (I had a beer last time) and even the condiments we preferred. How is that for service!! Great day in the end despite this knee

https://youtube.com/shorts/JGaHA2tO7f8?si=a_qSJVQNYbnvjOog

Rather than a cull, how about dingos (livestock farms will need better fencing, though)

If it weren't so serious it would be funny

I have never said there wasn't evil on either side.. In fact, I have said that Israel too has blood on its hands.. In every conflict, there is going to be evil on both sides. But, from what I can see, the evidence is that Hamas as an entity perpetuates evil and Israel as en entity tries to contain it - although admittedly in the current conflict, I expect more of it to surface. I mean in the Afghan war, therre was Aussie evilness, but that doesn't mean the ADF is evil, despite no one being held to account for what in public seems a fairly cut and dry case. On the first sentence, ditto... And believe it or not, I am really not biased one way or another. In fact, until these forums, I had no interest the area whatsoever (especially after 2 weeks working in Abh Dhabi). But the facts seem to spout a different story to what people are saying. On the second, the West Bank was lost from the Palewtinians after the 1967 war. In a war you wage, you may win, or you may lose.. .and that includes territory. In 2000, 96% of it was offered back. Arafat/PLO were showing their readiness to accept the deal until the last moment, when they pulled out wanting all of it. And I think that is the crux... The Israelis are (or were) happy to compromise all the way.. The chant, ,"From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." doesn't mean just the original partition plan. It means the lot. And, yes, the Palestinian territory has been getting smaller. But why is that? If you continually wage wars against your neighbour and you lose, chances are each time, your neighbour is likely to increase the buffer between you and them. I don't agree with Israel settling the West Bank; it is hotly disputed terriroty and the UN have, as mentioned before, in defiance with ways they have addressed other conflicts, stated it is Palestinian land. Maybe they were sick of being bombarded and decided it would be better in permanent hands? Again, the Palestininians were offered it back bar 4%, but didn't take it because it wasn't it all. I am also interested in why if Palestinians in the Hamas/PLO/PLA context keep waging wars and keep losing them, should Israel hand back the land to the 1947 delcaration? I don't see it as polarisation, but a chance to learn. However, at least until the current war, the facts again don't correlate to the assertion. 1.9m Palestinians in Israel will the same rights as anyone else (there goes the apartheid argument). Israel supplies electricity and water to Gaza and provided necessary medical services in Israel for those who could not be treated in Gaza. Does that sound like hate to you? Israel allowed Gazans to work freely in Israel and have lives with family in Israel before the war.. Does that sound like hate to you? In Israel, Arabs and Jews roam the streets together with little issues (outside of the West Bank); does that sound like hate to you? It may be, because It doesn't to me, at least institutionally or as an entity. At worst, they may hate the Palestinians, but are prepared to live with them. Yeah, there may be sectors of Israeli society that hated Palesitnians for a very long time... Now let's ask the question the other way? Any Jews freely going into Gaza (or any other Arabic nation ex Bahrain and Oman), the latter until very recently? Can't answer any of the other questions, because the opportunity to see has simply not been there. No doubt after tis war, the hate has increased. Sorry - out of sequence.. Inevitibale, or designed? We can only draw our own conclusions. Buit the interesting question is proprotionality? Is it of the objective or the outcome. The objective is to nuetralise Hamas - not necessarily elimiate all of Hamas members. Is that proprtional to the events on October 7 (and all events leading up to it)? Or is proportionality of consequences - in this case excessive civilian deaths? Which one overrides the other? And what is the threshold that say the pursuit of the objective is outweighed by the consequence? This is a messy conflict and utlimately will depend on one's viewpoint. For me, personally, it seems a toll too high, but it is in our faces. There have been many recent wars in the region that have taken c. 100,000 civilian lives per year - over 300% more than the current Israel Palestinian conflict, but as jounalists don't go there, no one talks about it. That doesn't mean we shouldn't also be concerned with the Israel/Palestine conflict, but, again, is Israel to stop at its objective purely because Hamas is using its population as a shield? Does that mean Hamas basically is given free reign to continue? This is the question.. which is the original question of what else is Israel supposed to do? I agree - these are violations of human rights, and constructively driving Palestinians from the land. Israel should be held accountable for it. In some cases - not all - Israel prosecutes such actions.. Not enouogh in my opinion, and maybe its an olvie brqansh to say, hey we do hold our people accountable. And yes, Palestinian kids will grow up hating Isarelis.. Just like now Israeli kids will grow up hating Palestinians.

Had been laid up in London with a jimmied leg. With a phone and tablet, I'm not going to respond to much, but from the conversation above, I am going to add by $0.02 worth, +, in terms of volume, another dollar. If you call guerilla warfare cops and robbers.. OK. I am not sure what Mossad being one of the best intelligence agencies on earth has got to do with the execution of the war. And they have had their problems in the recent past. Intelligence would be gathered by many points, yes. But, remember, your special forces are generally low in number compared to your military, and why you you offer your military (special forces or not) up to a much riskier operation than it needs to be? Just because they are willing to die for your country, doesn't mean they should be thrown the the lions. But, yeah, its an alternative. I am not sure I would be sending Aussie special forces in covert operations in a similar situation, though. I agree that the peace deal isn't really worth the paper it is written on (if it is on paper). Hamas do want to wipe out the other mob, but despite what has happend in this war, I am not sure it applies equally to the Israelis, at least where the facts are concerned. Yes, no doubt there are Israelis (and probably more than at any other time except before 1947 UN resolution) that do, but lets look at the facts, given that in wars, when you take territory, you usually keep it unless someone forcibly takes it off you: The UN passed a resolution dividing up the land.. you know in accordance with international law. Both sides wanted the lot, but one mob was willing to compromise and declared independence. The very next day, the other mob and 5 Arab nations piled in with a war against the ewly born Israel. OK, it was only a day old at that point. The Arabs lost and Israel ended up with more land. That sort of happens with war. In 1967, Israel takes the Sinai at the end of the 6 day war. This is now 20 years after the declaration of Israel. How many years after Christians were driven out by Muslims (mid 90's) did the fighting continue? Wasn't long. Anyway in 1973, Israel returns the Sinai in exchange for peace. How long did that peace last? Well, it didn't, but a full scale war was launched again in 1978. Some 30 years after the declaration of independence. Israel almost lost this one because (my recollection), like 1967, they were tipped off by Jordan and were going to do a pre-emptive strike, but the US told them to hold off, and if the invasion came, the US would help. Well, the invasion came and the US did not initially help. Israel were "on the ropes" and the PM at the time decided to threaten to use the worst kept secret, being nuclear weapons. At that point, the US decided to help by sendinf supplies.. note, up until that time, Israel had no help (yes, it purchased weapons from European states, but that was about it). Anwar Sadat is starting to make peace with Israel and is killed by Egyptian officers... Yes, there was an Itzak Rabin was killed by ISraeli far right for going with the Olso accords.. I think that was in the early 90s. Year 2000, Palestinians are offered Gaza and 96% of the West Bank.. Who rejected them to keep the fight? Yasar Arafat. The IDF still try and warn/give time for civilians to get out of the way.. Its practical help in this war is questionable, but what other miltiary does that? Yes, there are Israelies that want all of it... but not on a systematic basis. And yes, the hatred runs deep such that peace in the ME is a virtual impossibility. BTW, I have never said I wanted killing of any, let alone all Palestinians. My question was simply what would you (collectively) do that was different (that was practical, too). You country was attacked and they people attacked will continue. Sadly, this sort of thing has been happening with humanity from the dawn of time. Personally, if I could wave a wand and fix things, one of the first things I would do is rewire peoples' brains to not pay attention to religion. I don't think it has helped, but anti-semitism is one of the oldest hates; Remember, Hamas wasn't set up by Palestine; it was set up by Iran.. to kill Jews.. Palestinian security has very little to do with it. In answer to your first question, Hamas, really. That is a very sad video - just watched it. But tragically, this is a feature of any war. When you say this act of barbarity, exactly what you referring to? Purely, the killing of the family? Yes, thatis barbaric. But who, and how? There is nothing in the clip that that I can see that indicates the car was intentionally targetted, as opposed to being caught in the cross fire. I am not sure there were Israeli soldiers baying for blood, peering inside the car, seeing a little girl and shooting her. We know there was a tank next to them and there were shots being fired and the sound of projectiles being fired. It may have been intentional to kill who was in the car (it sounds like it was a war zone, so there could be many reasons - for example, suspicion of Hamas movements, etc). It could have been Hamas or Irraelis fire or both. We don't know. Don't get me wrong - it is horrendous and we should do anything we can to stop it, but simply forcing Israel to stop hunting Hamas will guarantee it will continue for ever and a day. Israel levelling Gaza, and Gaza still being run by Hamas will probably ensure it, too.. On the disposesson of Palestinians, a little bit of context has to be brought in. Yes, Palestinians were disposessed. Also, during the Nakbah, there is at least testimony (not in a court, of course) by Palestinians who said their grandparents were asked by the Palestinian militia to leave the land and it will be returned when the Jews were defeated. The Jews apparently offered Palestinians to stay on a lot of the land as long as they didn't fight.. Palestinians, probably justifiably, decided to fight. Except, the land was about 6% owned by Jews, 7% owned and leased by Palestinians, leaving 87% unowned or leased. Which is different to most wars, but: Are we prepared to give full ownership of the land we own in Australia back to the Aboriginals? Is anyone calling for Prussia to be returned to Germany? Until the Ukraine war, was anyone calling for Crimea to be returned to Ukraine? Is anyone fighting for Christian Kosovans to be returned to Kosov? Is anyone fighting for Califorinia to be returned to Mexico, or the whole of the Northeren Americas to be returned to the native Americans? Land for the Kurds displaced? the different African states, etc. No, after a while, people accept a new order (yes, in the case if Australia, there is land rights, but it ain't quite the same), and they adjust to it, Why, after nearly 80 years, is this different? At least the Jews owned almost equal to what was owned and leased. And at least they were willing to share it. If it were accepted even 30 years ago, and if Arafat had accepted the Camp David accords, imagine how much better Palestinian life would be? Or are we asserting that Israel would still be killing Palestinians? Except, since 1947, what War did Israel start? Because, for Hamas and the Muslim Bortherhood, it has nothing to do with Palestinians - they are the pawn in all of this. They just want the Jews out..and dead. I agree with most of this post, but not all (I am an argumentative SOB). Trump may give Netanyahu asylum, but that would be dangerous as he won;t be there forever, and it can be revoked by the democrats. He will apply pressure, and has already suggested to the Israelis that Netanyahu be pardoned for any corruption charges. You are right the Israelis have protested for negotiations for more than a year. However, Hamas and the Muslim brotherhood refuse to negotiate, so it is quite difficult. So, Netanyahu made it simple for them - return the hostages and Hamas to disarm. Then as the war progressed and the casualties mounted, Qatar and I think Saudi but may be wrong, got involved and tried to broker something with the yanks. What brought Hamas seriously to the table in the end? Hate to say this, Chump (maybe I will call him Trump this time). It wasn't any particularly great feat of negotiating.. it wasd threats - basically, come to the table and accept a ceasefire, or, the inference was America would get involved, and it won't end well. While the protests were calling for negotiations, they weren't against the war. That is a common misconception. Israel took the West Bank after the 67 war. One of the issues is that the West Bank is strategically advantageous militarily. They aren't going to give it up soon. Yes, the UN passed resolutions they should, but if someone wages war on you, and you win and with it the spoils of territory, expecially with a military advantage, why would you listen to anyone telling you to give it up. And, why were they? No other country that has had the same - Russia included - were asked to give up land they took, even when they started the war (Crimea). The UN usually bends over backwards to styop further bloodshed. Hamas came into existence, not because of the West Bank, but because the Palestinian Liberation Army couldn't get the job done. The PLA still exists, but like the PLO is pretty toothless, as Hamas has taken over both politically and militarily the Gaza strip, anyway. And, apparently, have been spotted in the West Bank, too. In fact, if Hamas was started because of the West Bank, surely they would be situated there? Anyway, it is clear why Hamas was started.. As the PLA couldn't get the job done, Iran needed another proxy to target Israel, and the Jews. Read the Hamas Charter.. it is pretty chilling reading. And this comes to my point earlier about why, after almost 80 years, people are still banging on about this and why the fighting is continuing. If this were any other people, it would have fizzled out long ago. But, Hamas, the Muslim Bortherhood, and Iran who funds them hates jews. It's aas simple as that. They do not care one iota for the Palestinian people.. if you believe they do, just look at the streets of Gaza now, and who is doing the killing of Palestinians. It aint the Israelis (yes, there was the one where people running to the IDF were ordered to stop and they didn't so they opened fire). And remember, there are c. 2m Palestinians in Gaza; there are also c. 1.9m Palestinians in Israel, so if Israel were about killing all the Palestinians, they would have a lot do to in their home patch. Oh, and the Palestinians living in Israel have all of the rights of Jews (and others); voting, they have had a deputy PM just in the last government, have held cheif justice of the Supreme court, etc. And Gaza was supplied water and electricity by Israel; Gazans were allowed to work and live their daily lives in Israel, receive medical care in Israel when require, etc until the . All tabled in these forums previously with all the evidence. Yet people seem to forget all of this. Why? You would be surprised at how many videos pop up where Paletinians in Gaza, at the end of their mental tether, are explosively screaming about how they hate Hamas, not the Israelis. Yes, this is small compared to the 60K killed, but the point is, I don't think we get to see the full story. I don't see the protesters now coming out and calling for Hamas to put in a ceasfire against the Palestinians? Why, if they are so worried about the Palestinian plight? As one US presenter put it, no Jews, no news. I think that says it all.

What on earth is that about? 😉 (no need to answer - I used to watch it)

Yeah.. but what would you do in that situation where you are responsible for protecting your population? We have no idea of the 60k Palestinians that we're really Hamas. Hamas ministry of health don't differentiate in their numbers.. And badies does play down the evil Hamas is... it isn't a game of cops and robbers BTW, looks like Hamas is not wasting time to reassert itself: https://www.theage.com.au/world/middle-east/grisly-video-shows-how-gaza-peace-can-fall-apart-20251015-p5n2kq.html No Israelis needed

Apols - easy to take things out of context in e-comms... As I have said before, he is in fine company, with a notable exception of the west, being Albo (and Trudeau/Carney). However, since others have made the assertion that Israel have gone OTT on this, I will leave the post, because it's a question I would like answered if someone cares to.

They may have been, but I am just interested in what anyone in the same position (ex. corruption charges) wold have actually done instead given: The Gazans were regularly attacking israel via suicide bombing and other terrorist activities until Israel put a stop to it by building a wall and having a check point. By the way, the check points are there only on the way into Gaza to esnure no bombs.. without killing people and still allowing Gazans to go about their working and daily lives inside Israel. Gazans were still attempting terrorist acts, but because it was largely contained, again without killing people, Israel didn't respond. Almost Daily, Hamas was firing rockets at Israel, which occasionally landed, but because Israel spent its money to protect its citizens rather than hide behind them, not too many casualites (but there was the odd one that got through and killed the odd one that didn't make it to a bunker). When Hamas did get through, there was a response, but it wasn't too deady, but a warning, keep stroking the cat, and it will pounce back.. When Hamas, the governing body of Gaza did finally get through, they targeted your citizens, and rather brutally (like burning people alive; raping family members in front of other family members, axes through heads, and of course, their signatue beheadings) at music fetivals, in citizens homes rather than going for the military, only to retreat cowardly behind their own citizens to avoid the war they had just started You know they will continue and not care for their own citizens until they are either wiped out or they have met their aim of wiping you out - not only in Israel, but across the world (read section 7 of the Hamas Charter, and how they famously don't negotiate with Israel).. What exactly would you do different? BTW, in the conduct oif their war: They waited 7 days before entering to give citizens enough time to move... although Hamas moves with them. Before striking, they give 10 minutes notice and exactly where they strike. Yes, there were occasions in a 2 year war where Israel got it wrong.. but on more than a couple of occasions, blasts that killed citiznes that were initially attributeed to Israel were found out to be Hamas. Isarael were accused of shooting innocent civilians during aid distribution which thet set up because the UN wouldn't enter through safe corridors set up by Israelis. What other combatant country distributes aid to its enemy citizens? But the corrections to the story of the IDF killing Gazans (which are never the same as the initial sensationalism) pointed out Palestinians were running towards Israeli forces, presumably for protection, as Hamas were shooting their own, and stealing the aid for themselves. Palestinians were hungry - yes, but the so-called famine was hard to believe.. How can starving people run like that? How come the parents of emanciated children were not even skinny? Did Israel act perfectly? No, of course not. War is not perfect.. Did we carpet bomb Europe and kill how many innocent Germans? Did we (as in the west) nuclear bomb two cities in Japan after the emporer signalled Japan's willingness to surrender and kill how many innocent civilians? When you people are under constant threat and have acted accordingly by someone else starting a war, and your enemy hide behind their civilians, I am interested - what would you have done differently? Honestly? As Netanyahu said very close to the beginning of the war.. It would be over the minute the hostages were returned and Hamas disarmed. Apart form what is effectively a peackeeping force, the peace plan of Chump is essentially the same. How many were calling/pressuring for the release of the hostages and disarmament of Hamas to end the war compared to Israel to stop and effective just allow Hamas to re-arm and try again?

He has joined virtually every world leader fearfull Chump will do something stoopid.. You should have the ship spew from Starmer's mouth at the Whitehouse. Albo deserves respect with how he has handled Chump

You are buying protection.. or risk mitigation. You are off your rocker if, you would not take up $360 (in QLD) to mitigate virtually unlimited financial losses should an event occur, which is easonably probable.