Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm totally fed up with the carry-on in the aftermath of that horrible event. I'm sick of hearing how the circumstances of the event have been used to advance the agendas of interest groups. It's worse than the thread drift in some of th threads here.

 

However, the thought of pulling down the bridges might be circumstantial to the shooting event. The article GON refers to contains this: The meeting’s agenda notes a structural report of the two footbridges at Bondi Beach which found them to be “nearing the end of their useful life and require replacement in the next few years”. That's a reference to material placed before the Council for its consideration for normal maintenance work. If a report had been prepared, it was most likely done earlier in the year, well befoe the shooting incident, and not related to it. 

 

What seems to be clear is that if the report found that the bridges were at the  end of their useful life, then they need to be replaced so that pedestrians can safely cross the busy Campbell Parade to get to teh park and beach.

  • Agree 1
Posted

Bridge at the end of its useful life? Now I have heard everything. Over here we have had bridges stand for many centuries. As they are of histortical importance (heritage listed for Aus), they are refurbished. Yes it is more expensive, but what is the point of heritage listing if you don't preserve it?

 

Anyway, Minns says he doesn't want it to be a ghoulish reminder of the massacre. Fair enough, but I say preserve it as a monument to those who died and acted out of bravery. Maybe add a plaue to it as a reminder. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Don't forget that the bridge is concrete structure, probably with steel reinforcing, and it is within a short distance from the sea. It could hace 'concrete cancer' which would reduce its load capacity. However, the loads on it only come from pedestrians, so they would be pretty insignificant. 

The heritage-listed footbridge at North Bondi.

These bridges form part of the historic architecture of the beach precinct. They go along with the equally historic Bondi Pavillion.

Bondi Pavilion

  • Informative 1
Posted

I think they should knock the bridge down, and replace it with a far bigger and more imposing one, and call it "The Bridge of Jewish-Muslim Reconciliation" - and see how long it lasts.  :evil grin:

Posted

The Council is going to consult with the Jews about the bridge. There's no need to do that, I'm sure the Jewish community only want reassurance that they won't be attacked again. Knocking down the bridge won't stop that, hot-headed muslims have demonstrated in the past that they will attack in a variety of locations, in CBDs, in homes, in side streets, in service stations, and now on a foot bridge in a sea-side park. We haven't demolished CBDs, nor the other locations, so why demolish the bridge just to put one ethnic group at ease emotionally? The muslims are winning if we do that, they are causing division, and we are unwittingly being drawn into their snare.

 

The fact is, the whole population needs to be reassured there'll be no more attacks, approximately 21 people of different ethnicities have been murdered by radical muslims in Australia so far, and over 40 injured. We should ask Israel for some tips on how to control a domestic muslim population given they have one themselves.

 

Gun control will do very little because radical muslims use other types of weapons, knives, cars, and intended pipe bombs. And shutting down antisemitism won't stop 60% of the muslims wanting to get rid of the Jews, it's in their genetic makeup.

 

If the bridge is reconstructed because of maintenance, fair enough, but it looks like a pretty strong concrete structure to me. Chances are the reinforcing was galvanized anyway, being by the sea, and it's only a foot bridge. Politics should not come into it at all. Any politics will only end up Islamic terrorists versus Western lifestyle and values, that's what it will boil down to, like the ruckus in Adelaide where a female muslim writer was banned from a writers guild meeting because of this sensitive time after Bondi, and her persistence of posting about Islam. The meeting was cancelled because the writers became divided, pros and cons to her being banned. Some wanted her reinstated, some not.

 

Can you see clearly how we are letting ourselves become divided? When all the calls are for cohesion and being united. It's not going to work the way we're going on. Normally.you'd get rid of the problem, like you'd get rid of termites in your house frame. At the moment we have termites and the politicians are divided on how to flush them out. Stronger action is needed to deal with the problem, much stronger than the weak response they're providing now. Nothing shorter than more vigorous and intense vetting of immigrants is what's needed. The Universe won't collapse in on us if that is done, it can only be beneficial for a peaceful society, if we can ever achieve that. But why make it worse by being reluctant to rid our house of termites? In the current state of affairs, radical Islamists are the damaging termites.   

  • Informative 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...