The Police Forward Commander is reported to have told the Lyndt Cafe Inquest,
"I can’t ignore Man Monis as an individual. He had the same rights as anyone else.”

With that, Mr Johnson’s mother Rosie Connellan shouted “you’re an absolute disgrace” and stormed out of the courtroom in tears with her son’s father, Ken Johnson."

Did Monis retain rights or did he forfet them when, armed, he took hostages.

Just read that one myself Is Mise.
I'll add the news article link.

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/lindt-cafe-inquest-dramatic-scenes-as-victim-tori-johnsons-mother-storms-out/news-story/c1031c5637555ee19a5e335cb074047e

Perhaps we need a return to the old 'shoot first, ask questions later' when it comes to any terrorist or hostage situation, because let's face it, the feather duster approach doesn't work.

There are laws that we in this country are all expected
to abide by. These are the laws enacted by the Parliament
under the Australian Constitution.

The right to live without being maimed, the right to live
without being bombed - held hostage, or killed , and so
on. Terrorists who do not acknowledge the rights and
liberties of others and choose to break our laws are
arrested and held to account under our judicial system.

They are judged within the legal framework of our system.
And that is as it should be.

We in this country subscribe to a legal framework that protects
the rights and liberties of all.

I wonder how many people will die as these terrorists are
let out of prison in 10years time. One fellow received a 10year sentence the other day.

He will be even more bitter and opposed to the society that imprisoned him when
he comes out,

These prisoners are just bombs waiting to go off when they are released.
I dont know what the answer is.

Dear Foxy,

It is a mistake to assume that we have some "right" to live without being maimed, bombed, taken hostage or killed.
Instead, the case is that we want the above very much and so we fight for it, regardless whether it's our right or otherwise.

Terrorists should not be judged, certainly not under a legal frame they never accepted. Instead they should be killed - and they should be killed as enemy combatants rather than as criminals, not because they break your laws, but because you strongly desire to live without being maimed, bombed, taken hostage or killed and killing them in turn is practically the only way you can have that.

The legal framework protects you from nothing - it's the police and other security forces which do.

I do agree that if a terrorist or anyone else is holding people hostage and there is no talking them out, and there is considerable belief that they aim to kill innocent people, then the police should try to kill them.

However, it appears that this guy Monis told the negotiators he was wearing a bomb, so that was a bit of a problem in that if they killed him, more hostages might die. In the end they had no choice of course, but it wasn't Monis's gun that killed the female lawyer, it was police bullets.
I am not sure any of us can really say what we would have done if we were police in that situation.

Dear Suse,

Of course, this is a difficult situation which requires difficult professional decisions, some of which we may never know whether they were right or wrong. However, the issue at hand is about "rights" rather than about technical/operational procedures.

So how exactly are the police supposed to tell if monis was a terrorist or just a madman? Its easy with hindsight to judge and criticise.

How many monis sieges have there been compared to your standard domestic or nutter sieges? Do crazy people or grief maddened family members deserve to die for their moment of madness? Did we secretly bring back capital punishment?

Are you people so scared by a few bombings/killings that you would have the police become executioners.
No trial. No Judge. No jury. No death penalty law. No check for mental illness. Just bang bang. Oops sorry about that.

One last thing.
If your rights are not for everyone then they are not rights they are just privileges!

Fox, "There are laws that we in this country are all expected
to abide by. These are the laws enacted by the Parliament
under the Australian Constitution"

Hot damn, but you might be onto something there.

That must be what is wrong with France, Germany and Sweden (now the rape capital of the world!). If only they had laws against raising mayhem, rape and murder they wouldn't be experiencing any problems, eh what?

Suseonline,

You are consistent in your 'open door' immigration that would allow anyone in and hope to address the problems and costs later.

The rapes of Sweden and the terrorism of France are minor prices to pay for that diversity, you'd say.

Of course your 'endless-diversity-that Australia-is-obliged-to-have' is driven by your hatred of 'whites' and the 'white' system of government and traditions inherited from the UK. The cultural cringe of leftists, but extreme in your case.

The wildly enthusiastic immigration policies of successive federal governments aimed at building a 'Big Australia' at a reckless speed have been challenged for years by the State Premiers, Labor Premiers especially and for good reasons. As well, the electorate has made it clear that the feds' mantra 'all growth is good' and the aim of a 'Big Australia, NOW!' are unacceptable.

There is no doubt that over-enthusiastic immigration numbers and the diversity that rules (and is not OK) are at odds with the wishes of the public, including many past migrants. Preferencing migrants from strongly fundamentalist countries and above migrants from other countries who bring useful skills and assimilate readily is a real deal breaker as far as the public are concerned.

If Labor, Greens and Turnbull's LNP don't realise they have all been put on notice, they can expect to be tipped out of Canberra in increasing numbers.

Suze, the only reason Man Manus was even there was due to systemic failures in our legal system. Once again, the feather duster approach saw him freed on several occasions to do more harm.

Foxy, we have a few rouge dog trainers, so the entire industry gets shut down in NSW. We saw footage of what turned out to be staged footage of cruelty to cattle, and the entire live export industry was shut down.

We know the more Muslims we let in the greater the risk of terrorism, so why are you defending their acceptance on a innocent until proven guilty basis. I'm sorry, but enough is enough, we must shut this whole thing down and clean up what's here first before we allow more potentials in. If ever.

Do you seriously believe that if the time comes where Muslims must choose between our laws and theirs, that they will ALL choose ours.

As a previous poster said, they are in jail now, and would be so as heroes to their cause, and there is little doubt that once they are let out they will reoffend, simply because of the religion/faith they follow. In fact, unless they withdraw their Muslim beliefs I don't think they should ever be released. Al least not to roam free in this country anyway.

As for sending them home, if they cant return home, tough!, they should have considered that before bringing their garbage here in the first place.

I see Donald Trump is gaining momentum. Big changes in the wind.

Mikk...So how exactly are the police supposed to tell if monis was a terrorist or just a madman? Its easy with hindsight to judge and criticise.

Both should be shot on sight because no one has the right to inflict that sort of suffering to others. Besides, the ISIS flag was a huge giveaway.

If we adopt a zero tolerance toward offenders taking hostages, sicko's of terrorists, things will change very quickly.

Rosie Connellan's reaction is understandable, and we should be sympathetic to her, and others who suffered grievously because of the actions pf Man Monis. What we must not loose sight of is we live in a civilized society governed by the rule of law. To do anything else is playing into the hands of terrorists, people who do not respect our civilized way of life or the rule of law.
As painful as it may be the words of the police officer are true "I can’t ignore Man Monis as an individual. He had the same rights as anyone else.” A knee jerk reaction of 'shoot first, ask questions later' may be satisfying for some, but in the long run it would be our undoing.

First, apologists for Islam would have terrorists like Monis to be seen as 'mad', or a 'lone wolf'.

Second, the evidence is mounting that where Monis was concerned, police command inexplicably hesitated in fulfilling their responsibilities to the hostages and the public.

Police command is NOT entirely separate from political consultation and direction. There are questions to be asked there too, 'Why put hostages at risk where a marksman's instantly paralysing deadly shot was possible?'.

Apparently, police command also refused the offer of support from the skilled SAS and Commandos who had practiced in a mock-up of the cafe and environs.

The public would be excused for wondering if the (multicultural) political correctness that for years prevented British police (and UK Labour) from taking immediate action on complaints against Kashmiri child molesters in centres like Rotherham was apparent and affected decision making and action on the Lindt Cafe terrorist.

It is interesting that one of the prime considerations of police command (politicians too?) was the terrorist's rights. Yet if some random offender confronts police with a knife there is no hindering, delaying consideration of the offender's 'rights'. The police act immediately to protect themselves and the public, and have previously said that such confrontations do not get any better through waiting and any delay could result in more casualties.

rehctub,

"Mikk...So how exactly are the police supposed to tell if monis was a terrorist or just a madman? Its easy with hindsight to judge and criticise."

Erm...

"Asio agents were at every court hearing of the Sydney siege gunman in the year leading up to him taking 18 hostages at the Lindt cafe, an inquest has heard.

Officers from Australia’s spy agency watched Man Haron Monis walk free on bail after being charged with being an accessory to murder in December 2013 and then again when he was charged with sex offences in May 2014. When 37 further sexual and indecent assault offences were brought against him in October 2014 neither police nor the director of public prosecutions applied to have his bail revoked.

Asio agents were at the hearings but police involved in the cases were not made aware at the time that they were there."

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/19/asio-agents-attended-all-court-dates-of-lindt-cafe-gunman-in-year-before-seige

He was well and truly on the radar.

The police are in a no win situation.
They do have to consider the rights of the offender.
Firstly it is not a situation that they can get experience with.
When they face the problem it will almost certainly their first time.
Lets hope they do not get experienced.
The opportunity to shoot Monis may have occurred but though layers of
glass, perhaps thick strong glass with parallax errors and the bullet
might hit the explosive that he might have in the backpack ?
Sounds a bit of a dodgey proposition to me.

The word game is perhaps valid to use.
There is a technique called "Games Theory" which is used to apply
to all sorts of situations. Military operations, business takeovers,
politics all sorts of things including I suspect police sieges.
When the officer used the word games it may have had his training in mind.

I say this with every bit of revulsion I can muster IS MISE !

Unfortunately, again I say, UNFORTUNATELY, in this day and age of high police accountability, he's right. Man MONIS does have the same rights as anyone else ! Certain members of the public have decried the 'apparent' lack of public accountability of police, to a point they're often damned if they do, and damned if they don't - political correctness remains healthy and brisk in it's ever widening coverage in our community.

In my view, the creature had no rights at all. The cop's remark was, indeed, disgraceful and he was not a fit person to be dealing with the situation.

Of course, any two people should have the same rights to be free from the threat of assault or murder. But if one person waves a gun at the other's head, their rights are somewhat diminished, and the more likely they are to use it, the more their rights diminish to zero.

Regardless of whether such a person is a terrorist, a madman, someone grief-stricken over losing custody of their children, or [insert your own excuse here], their hostage also has rights and her/his life matters, frankly, more than the perpetrator's, once he/she has taken that action - in a sense, an action against the world.

After all, even in the Koran, Surah 5: 32 (I think) declares that 'he who saves the life of one person, is as if he has saved all of humanity; but he who takes on innocent life, is as if he has murdered all of humanity.'

[Then it spoils it by going on in Surah 5: 33, about cutting off the right arm and left leg of unbelievers. You can't win them all.]

Joe

"What we must not loose sight of is we live in a civilized society governed by the rule of law. To do anything else is playing into the hands of terrorists, people who do not respect our civilized way of life or the rule of law.
He had the same rights as anyone else. A knee jerk reaction of 'shoot first, ask questions later' may be satisfying for some, but in the long run it would be our undoing". So says our bleeding heart, or is it terrorist sympathiser Paul. They always come up with this bit of garbage, don't they.

So lets make sure there is no knee jerk reaction. Lets decide the rights of anyone who is unlawfully taking the rights of others in an immediately dangerous way.

Great done. The decision, they have the right to a bullet between the eyes, & no other right shall supersede this.

Now Paul & other sympathisers, lets get on with making our country our safe country again.

Hi there TTBN...

I understand completely your sentiments concerning this vile creature, but the copper who made the statement, enunciating that Man MANIS also had rights, was in a very difficult position indeed. If you were to take him aside privately, and ask what he'd do if he could, he'd most likely respond by saying, take the slug around a corner and flog him 'til he bled, then shoot him !

It's so easy to come adrift, either in Court, in front of the media, or in the presence of the public, to make some unguarded, intemperate remark, and all hell breaks loose, requiring you to tap a typewriter forever and a day !

Fortunately in the Lindt Cafe hostage situation we had trained police officers in command of the situation. Not some presumptuous fool like Hasbeen.
Hasbeen given charge of the situation with your blind gung-ho ignorance would have ensured the deaths of all inside the cafe, and half of those on the outside. With your stupidity of knowing nothing, but believing you know it all, you are potentially a bigger terrorist than Man Monis himself. ISIS love people like you in the west, you act exactly how they would want you to... stupidly! Hasbeen with you in charge of a Sunday School picnic, it would be terrifying!

As a lay person, I would say there is a vast difference between the traditional siege (circle and negotiate) and a terrorist incident that necessitates a different response and different rules of engagement.

Weren't there contact rules stated simply and emphatically, in place and police trained in expectation?

The only correct action where a terrorist is concerned is to act immediately, which must allow for individual, subjective discretion and action where command is not in place and active.

FMD, how would the NSW police command and the political direction that must be interfering behind the scenes have responded to a truck mowing down pedestrians during the Gay Pride parade?

Would they gather and bite their nails hoping that someone might take the decision out of the hands, or the problem might go away? "This is so difficult, identified victim group gays being killed in dozens by identified multicult Islamists, also with certified PC victimhood (Ms Triggs is watching). Islamists who are due added, extreme sensitivity (easily offended). In accord with the prevailing political correctness affecting multiculturals groups, "Gosh sakes, this fellow is a 'discriminated against Muslim!' and the victims are?"...."Yeah disposable Skips, but fortunately gays, but even they don't have the victim cache of Muslims".

It is the deliberate greyness of the very deep and widespread, SYSTEMIC political correctness that renders even set contact drills vague and cause police and public officials to sit on their hands, as happened in the hundreds of reported cases of sex trafficking of schoolchildren in the UK.

There remains the question why the police command refused out of hand any support from the highly skilled military experts (SAS, Commandos) who train continuously for such events and allegedly immediately responded with plans and training once the Lindt terrorism was reported.

At some juncture the good men and women in politics, in the police FORCE, in government administration generally and in the community must take a helicopter view of what went wrong and have the courage to say so and propose change.

Dear Foxy,

It is a mistake to assume that we have some "right" to live without being maimed, bombed, taken hostage or killed.
Instead, the case is that we want the above very much and so we fight for it, regardless whether it's our right or otherwise.

Terrorists should not be judged, certainly not under a legal frame they never accepted. Instead they should be killed - and they should be killed as enemy combatants rather than as criminals, not because they break your laws, but because you strongly desire to live without being maimed, bombed, taken hostage or killed and killing them in turn is practically the only way you can have that.

The legal framework protects you from nothing - it's the police and other security forces which do.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 20 July 2016 12:57:57 AM

Amen to this post.......but add family law lawyers/solicitors/barristors as the money hungry soulless filth are guilty of terrorrism against kids & denying them their rights to grow up loving 2 parents......all in the name of "best interests of the child."
Bah...Humbug ! Wonder who'll be P.M saying sorry to the next lot of "stolen generations kids" ?

I would think that there are at least two major types of incidence.
The Static and the Active.
The Linde cafe was a static incidence.
The truck event in Nice was an active incidence.

They would be handled quite differently.
There may be other types of incidences.
A terrible job working in that field.

'...a terrible job working in that field...' says BAZZ !

You're so right my friend, it's very easy for people sitting comfortably in their home making statements - the cops should do this or do that, and I understand it fully. After all, when you watch a game of League and the Ref makes a bad decision or misses something we feel cheated consequently we give him a real 'serve' for doing so.

After all it's only human that we often like to second guess these things, including a critical incident, similar to the Man MONIS matter. Why wasn't the Army's SAS involved? Because it was a police matter, and the only time the military are involved is when police determine they're unable to resolve the incident. All the decisions made or not made, come within the exclusive purview of the Incident Commander. Whether his decisions are right or wrong, that's for a later inquiry to determine, in this case it is the Coroner.

As you quite rightly opine BAZZ, '...a terrible job working in that field...' ? As it happens it is, a terrible job indeed.

Dear Existmental,

The Attorney-General's Department has the primary
responsibility for supporting the Australian Government
in protecting and promoting the rule of law.

It's the rule of law that underpins the way Australian
Society is governed.

Everyone, people and Government are bound by, and are entitle4
to, the benefit of laws.

We have enforcement agencies, and organisations like the Attorney-
General's Department that help ensure adherance to the rule of law
and effective governance and stability in our region.

There is much on the web regarding this subject- including
national security matters.

We have a robust tolerance of difference in our society.
But to maintain this tolerance we have to have an agreed framework
which will protect the rights and liberties of all. Therefore
subscribing to this legal framework is not optional.

It is important that everyone living in this country knows that
there is only one rule of law and that it is going to be enforced
whether they acknowledge its legitimacy or not

o sung wu,

I just found this report, which you might find as interesting as I do.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/nsw-police-ordered-to-shoot-first-when-dealing-with-terrorists/news-story/0b983226bb212c2c57cfcccd97e34d18

Especially since the far Left militant Baader-Meinhof Group in Germany, specialist police and specialist military have been on a steep learning curve to handle terrorists - who bring an entirely different set of risks and accordingly, different protocols to handle them, especially since their assaults involve large numbers of ordinary people and in busy public places (where the public react like deer caught in the headlights).

Cooperation and coordination between all agencies and specialist units is crucial. It is not simply a police matter. That is not just enforcement, agencies such as DoFA (Foreign Affairs) may have intel and advice to take an example.

Just to say that the apparent delay, indecision and wavering of NSW police command needs to be looked into. Superficially at least, that doesn't auger well for the existence of protocols and effective training and readiness. To my knowledge the available protocols for terrorists have not been discussed in detail so far, but must be.

Continuous learning and improvement is one of the essential strategies of all successful organisations. Criticism is a gift, not unwelcome 'interference'.

BTW, that is NOT to suggest that security should be breached on operational details that should remain confidential, so as to not give intel to prospective terrorists and their organisations.

Foxy.

"It is important that everyone living in this country knows that
there is only one rule of law and that it is going to be enforced
whether they acknowledge its legitimacy or not"

Do you really believe that there is only one rule of law?

Read a bit about the application of tribal law in Australia.
http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/21.%20Aboriginal%20Customary%20Laws%20and%20Sentencing/aboriginal-customary-laws-and-sentencing-e

ABC news today. The police Foreward Commander admitted that he was responsible for the Lindt cafe deaths. Ex-policeman and their apologists can try to 'explain' away police incompetence as much as they wish. But the fool in charge in this instance, has a conscience of sorts, and has admitted that his faffing around and stupid thoughts about the 'rights' of a terrorist caused the murders of 3 innocent coffee-drinkers. There is simply no excuse for such stupidity and incompetence in someone supposed to be protecting the public. And, anyone attempting to excuse it including, including o sung woo, is a knob-headed idiot.

Dear Is Mise,

I had read the link that you provided earlier.
So I am familiar with cases of tribal law within
our legal system and the fact that some Aboriginal
people want to not only keep their culture, respect
their ancestors and their law.

This of course puts them into a dilemma. How do these
fit into a contemporary legal world and how can Aboriginal
people claim equality and human rights?

Alison Anderson an Aboriginal woman and former minister for
Aboriginal Affairs in the N.T. is one of many Indigenous
people who opposes the return to tribal law. Because, as
she explains:

"We have main stream laws and we all have to abide by them.
Our old laws were savage laws that existed at the time we ran
the desert. I speak my languages and keep my culture but that
does not stop me living in the other (Western) world.
What we want now is to move on."

Hi TTBN...

Thanks for implying I'm a 'knob-headed idiot' simply because I tried to (respectfully) explain; the likely reason(s) why, the Man MONIS incident ended as it did. I wouldn't be so insulting of you by suggesting you couldn't do any better, because I happen to agree with much of what you say on most Topics raised on 'The Forum'. And for your info. I've attended several very serious sieges involving heavily armed criminals.

Anyway as we're speaking particularly on this matter , it appears you have little confidence in anything I say, concerning policing protocols in high risk static situations ? Arguing as you did, somewhat absurdly and ludicrously, that I tried to 'excuse incompetence' of police command on this day ?

As you're such a facile, and in some measure, vacuous individual, with little or no appreciation of the substantial difficulties confronting police command in siege situations, it's best that I simply write you off !

I could just imagine seeing you, trying so hard to conceal yourself among the milling crowds, as just another peculiarly noisy bystander, bleating derision and expletives at police. Only he himself, an individual of ineffectual qualities, wouldn't have the courage, nor a scintilla of an idea, on how to 'safely' resolve the incident himself. You're a sad lad TTBN !

Foxy.

Tribal law is not part of our legal system, it is outside it, so your statement that there is one law in Australia is demonstrably wrong.

Hi (again) FOXY...

I'm so glad to see that your recent fall that landed you in hospital hasn't dented your enthusiasm to add your commentary to the Forum. I do hope you're feeling much better with your broken wrist. A difficult area of the anatomy to repair I believe, with the complex arrangement of small bones to contend with. It's really great to see you back once more!

o sung wu,

Unfortunately you are right, the man on he spot had it right too,
Monis did enjoy rights and the Commander on the spot was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

Monis had claimed to be wired to explosives and the Commander had to take the claim seriously, to do otherwise would be dereliction of duty.

Then he and his advisers had to consider just what type of detonating device was involved; impact sensitive on his chest or back (because a bullet from the sniper rifle could go straight through the upper torso).
Pressure sensitive ones in his ears or impact sensitive on his head or perhaps a mercury switch that set a detonator off when it passed,say 45 degrees from horizontal. The permutations are numerous.

There was a real possibility that a wrong decision could have initiated an explosion that could have killed everyone in the cafe.

With hindsight we can all see what should have been done, but I would have done the same as the Commander and waited as long as possible.
The only thing that I would have done differently was send in only three men armed with their pistols and with shotguns.

Dear Is Mise,

We have our mainstream laws and we all have to abide by them.

Tribal laws are not part of our legal system.

I am glad that you understand those facts.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank You for your kind words.

It was a complicated break of my wrist. I now have more screws
and another plate put in. I've got one good limb (leg) remaining,
Hopefully I shall not injury that one any time soon.

There is another factor which needs waiting a considerable time.
It is the Stockholm syndrome.
Named after a siege in Stockholm where it dragged on for a long time.
The criminal over that time got to know the hostages and gets to the
stage that he relates to them and does not want to hurt them.
From memory they all survived.

Dear Is Mise,

I forgot to add, for your information, the following link:

http://www.australianstogether.org.au/stories/detail/the-1967-referendum

Dear Foxy,

I'm glad you've still got your typing foot !

On that URL: the Citizenship Act 1948 conferred citizenship on Australians for the first time, including Indigenous people. 1948. Up until that time, all Australians were 'British subjects' and still were into the sixties.

That Section 51 (xxvi), as it now is, doesn't mention, or particularly discriminate against, Indigenous people. Since the State-Federal issues that gave rise to it in the original Constitution don't now apply, it should be removed.

I still love that Flag !

Best wishes,

Joe

o sung wu,

Well, I concede defeat. Your outburst against me certainly beats my three words. I wasn't aware that I was such a terrible person.

I can just see you 'interviewing' a helpless drunk in a back cell, in the middle of the night.

ttbn,

"...And, anyone attempting to excuse it including, including o sung woo, is a knob-headed idiot."

What did you expect?

Your rhetoric on this forum is notable for its consistent belligerence and rudeness. Most of your posts are in the same vein - although you really pulled out the stops in that one to o sung wu.

I mightn't always agree with o sung wu, but he's faultlessly courteous to other posters on this forum.

And I note after your: "Well, I concede defeat. Your outburst against me certainly beats my three words. I wasn't aware that I was such a terrible person."

You further put the boot in...

"I can just see you 'interviewing' a helpless drunk in a back cell, in the middle of the night."

You got the response you deserved.

Poirot,

Here! Here!

Returning to the OP, the Martin Place terrorist hostage taker planned and executed serious crimes and horrific threats that violated the rights of ordinary citizens and the community in multiple ways.

To a lesser extend because there are fewer innocent victims, the feral/s who coldly carry out home invasions do the same.

Before going any further, one should be very clear about the stance of the Australian Greens and the NSW 'Watermelon' faction in particular. Greens pay lip service to the right of defence, while compromising, hampering, penalising - re-victimising - the citizen who is forced to defend him-/herself. I covered that previously, in particular the reversed standard of proof against the hapless victim who defends him-/herself.

Of course those inconvenient facts were ducked by the leftists and Greens. No surprise either that the NSW Greens blocked more serious penalties for weapons crime that was moved by the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party. Or that in Qld, Labor and Greens are trashing the successful Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment Act 2013, enacted to "severely punish members of criminal organisations that commit serious offenses".

Leftists and Greens are always on the front foot to protect and extend the rights of offenders, but dismissive where the harm inflicted on the victims and society is concerned. Victim's rights are rarely if ever mentioned by leftists and Greens.

Martin Place Terrorism
The victims and their loved ones will bear the scars for life. Some loved ones will never get to fulfill the promise of their lives, for they are dead. The coldly calculated, planned actions of the Islamist terrorist led to that.

I wonder if those who are more concerned about the terrorist's rights and apologists for the medieval creed Islam and Islamofacism ever stop to think about how they might be revictimising the terrorist's victims and their families and friends. Shucks no, there are political points to be scored they would imagine. Useful idiots and enablers are not restricted to Marxism.

contd..

Hey onthebeach,
'Greens pay lip service to the right of defence, while compromising, hampering, penalising - re-victimising - the citizen who is forced to defend him-/herself.'

I read yesterday where one man with a knife fought off three home invaders with a gun, and got thrown in jail (sentenced to 4 years) and had to pay €21,000 restitution to the intruders for defending his home.
It's an upside-down world we live in.

http://www.infowars.com/finland-man-thrown-in-prison-for-using-excessive-self-defense-against-home-invaders/

Poirot,

I give it and I can take it. I'm not in the least fazed. You are a bit of a pig, yourself.

Ismise,

Surely you mean hear hear, if you are toadying to the above, not "here, here". The ignorance of you blokes about your own language is appalling.

continued..

The Terrorist's 'Rights'

Where political correctness is as deeply embedded as it is in Australia and there is a daily procession of sacrifices, the more trivial the offence against the prevailing PC of multiculturalism and the more severe the humiliation and penalty, the higher the strengthening of that political correctness and the abuse of freedom of speech and the ordinary citizen's rights associated with freedom of speech and living in a democracy.

From reports, the police command was highly sensitive to the 'rights' of the terrorist. Whereas the first and ONLY concern while the deadly threat existed should have been the lives, wellbeing and safety of the hostages, the public and police.

The public is not aware and in all likelihood will never be, of the politics that were being played in the background while threat continued - for hour after hour.

Where the political idealism and political correctness of Obama, President of the US, does not allow him to even mention the M(uslim), T(errorism) and I(slam) words together and despite the obviousness of a terrorist incident, there is reason to wonder if political correctness has gone too far and could be causing decision makers to hesitate, which is the purpose of PC and can only advantage terrorists and other criminals.

There are the many, many single serious incidents of child molestation, rape, sex trafficking that made up the wholesale sex abuses of Rotherham and others centres in the UK. Political correctness is very powerful and as proved by the UK examples, can make (psychological) hostages out of police and other public authorities (especially politicians and functionaries) who should one would imagine have a very clear view where the priorities and rights lie.

Hi there TTBN...

I don't believe you're a terrible person, rather you're simply rude. To call anyone on this Forum a Pig is insulting. To call POIROT, a mature lady a Pig...well I think you've finally 'outed' yourself as a callow and utterly puerile little 'punk' for saying such a disgusting and thoroughly loathsome thing about any women. Not to mention being downright unchivalrous as well. You'd best not repeat such a remark in mixed company ? I feel very sure, if you did, you'd be down on your face 'sucking concrete'.

FYI - It's not my place to enter a back cell in the middle of the night and interview a helpless drunk ? What a positively odd remark ?

ttbh,

You got that right, which shews that there is a first for everyone; keep up the good work!

O sung wu,

Poirot a female! Can this be true? You know full well what I mean by the drunk and you in a cell. Your face down on the concrete indicates that you were a nasty copper; if you were ever in job, that is. We unknown people can say what we like, and nobody knows the whether it's true on not. You could just a windbag, although your self-professed prefiliction for violence certainly has the smell of a nasty copper.

Ismise,

So witty. Pity about your lack of education.

ttfn,

"Poirot a female! Can this be true? You know full well what I mean by the drunk and you in a cell. Your face down on the concrete indicates that you were a nasty copper; if you were ever in [the] job, that is. We unknown people can say what we like, and nobody knows the [this use of 'the' is grammatically incorrect] whether it's true on not. You could just [be] a windbag, although your self-professed prefiliction [this is a non-word, you probably meant 'predilection' but could not spell it] for violence certainly has the smell of a nasty copper."

[....] brackets indicate corrections to the above text.

"Ismise,['Is Mise' is two words; you seem to have difficulty in copying]

So witty. Pity about your lack of education."

It is only my lack of education that allows me to see your mistakes; I don't usually correct mistakes on the Forum * but in your case I'll make an exception; for your own good of course.
I suggest that you download one of the free spell checking programmes.

* I get enough of it correcting undergraduate essays, as a small part time addition to my income.

Is Mise,

As it is your own creation, there are no rules, but I will do it your way and respect your wishes. I wonder how long it will take for you to realise that I'm 'ttbn', not 'ttfn' as you seem to think. Not that it matters, but - "can't copy", people in glass houses, etc?

I'm not sure that I am impressed by your marking activites. Qualified teachers are as bad as their pupils these days, thanks to the dumbing down of tertiary education and the disregard given to the English language these days. Anyway, we should stop swapping insults and stick to the subject. I admit that I am sometimes grumpier than is average for grumpy old men.

ttbn,

I realized that you are 'ttbn'

Wondered how long it would take you, ta ta for now.

Odd combination to respect the perp's rights and then go in with grenades and the US Marines' firepower blasting the concrete. In the old days the bobbies carried a truncheon. Is it too complex to use armour ( Middle Ages tech ) which can be made bomb-proof more or less and whack the looney with a 4x2 ? With hostages in a small room it's bleeding obvious that bullets will damage someone innocent. Ideally cops will learn boomerang or gladiator fish-net skills to catch attackers before acting as cowboys.

G'day NICKNAMENICK...

What you say is very true, there are a lot of things the coppers need to learn, particularly when dealing with belligerent hoodlums who set about trying to provoke an incident with the coppers.

Back to the Man MONIS incident where much has been made of the apparent indecision by police to end the siege far quicker then it did. There are a number of other non-lethal force options that may've assisted in a much quicker termination of the Man MONIS incident.

There is a chemical agent known as 'Adamcite' or the correct nomenclature is DM a 'sickening agent'. DM is only used by the military, because the effects of the agent are very severe (not fatal) nevertheless considered quite unsuitable for normal law-enforcement use. Moreover DM is far more effective than either CN, CS or the newer, Oleoresin Capsicum (Capsaicinoid) Agents.

In the Lindt Cafe situation, 'perhaps' DM could have been deployed through the medium of a 'pepper fog generator', which would thoroughly immerse (fog over) the entire Cafe and it's occupants, in a matter of a second or two. As a result, all occupants within the Cafe, including Mr MONIS, would immediately suffer from the Agents acute symptomatology (severe sickening), but there's a very good chance casualties would not occur arising out of the deployment of the Agent DM ?

Of course, it's only a personal thought, it would be up to others far better skilled, to determine if the suggestion had any merit or not ? However you can be assured, deployment of the Agent DM, in those circumstances would undoubtedly do the job very effectively.

o sung wu,

The deployment of any such agent, even one acting in seconds still leaves time for two or three shots, depending on the skill possessed and the type of weapon.

The best option, if it can be taken, is always a head shot that pulverizes the brain.

To cut to the chase, the men and women on the job deserve a whole lot better than the police ministers they have had and the upper layers of police leadership/management too.

It is not as though a terrorist incident was completely unexpected. Yet they seemed unprepared, couldn't plan and all over the place.

//I suggest that you download one of the free spell checking programmes.//

That spelling of 'programme' is incorrect when talking about software. You're thinking of computer 'programs'.

I should take up this essay correcting lark. Although I'm curious as to how the students get away with it - if they hand in an essay which is not entirely their own work because you've helped them with it, does't that constitute plagiarism?

such agent, even one acting in seconds still leaves time for two or three shots,.
OK he could empty his magazine at the armour and then be quietly handcuffed . The smart cop has a layer of rubber to prevent richochet, spelled ricochet from Fr ricocher as in 'faire des ricochets' which is either from Gaulish or Late Latin the authorities are uncertain but I tend to favour 'recoil' from OF 'reculer', Rom* 'reculare' which obviously is seen as L 'recul' "buttocks".

Hi O Sung Wu,

We need to always take into consideration a criminal's rights and feelings. As the song goes:

WHEN A FELON'S NOT ENGAGED IN HIS EMPLOYMENT (his employment)
OR MATURING HIS FELONIOUS LITTLE PLANS (little plans)
HIS CAPACITY FOR INNOCENT ENJOYMENT (-cent enjoyment)
IS JUST AS GREAT AS ANY HONEST MAN'S (honest mans)

OUR FEELINGS WE WITH DIFFICULTY SMOTHER (-culty smother)
WHEN CONSTABULARY DUTY'S TO BE DONE (to be done)
AH, TAKE ONE CONSIDERATION WITH ANOTHER (with another)
A POLICEMAN'S LOT IS NOT A HAPPY ONE

AHHH
WHEN CONSTABULARY DUTY'S TO BE DONE, TO BE DONE,
A POLICEMAN'S LOT IS NOT A HAPPY ONE.

WHEN THE ENTERPRISING BURGLARS NOT A'BURGLING (not a'burgling)
WHEN THE CUT THROAT ISN'T OCCUPIED IN CRIME (-pied in crime)
HE LOVES TO HEAR THE LITTLE BROOK A'GURGLING (brook a'gurgling)
AND LISTEN TO THE MERRY VILLAGE CHIME (village chime)

WHEN THE 'COSTER'S FINISHED JUMPING ON HIS MOTHER (on his mother)
HE LOVES TO LIE A'BASKING IN THE SUN (in the sun)
AH, TAKE ONE CONSIDERATION WITH ANOTHER (with another)
A POLICEMAN'S LOT IS NOT A HAPPY ONE

AHHH
WHEN CONSTABULARY DUTY'S TO BE DONE, TO BE DONE,
A POLICEMAN'S LOT IS NOT A HAPPY ONE (nappy one).

Cheers,

Joe

Aromatherapy uses plant materials and aromatic plant oils, including essential oils, and other aroma compounds for the purpose of altering one's mood, cognitive, psychological or physical well-being. It can be offered as a complementary therapy or, more controversially, as form of alternative medicine.

Loudmouth,

Why did you choose to write your last post in (nearly) all caps?

Forum Rule - 3:

"Do not "shout" (use capital letters excessively)."

.....

Regarding Monis, I still can't get over the fact this character was totally on the radar - and yet was still able, not only to get bail, but also to access a firearm, etc and carry out this atrocity.

"Asio agents were at every court hearing of the Sydney siege gunman in the year leading up to him taking 18 hostages at the Lindt cafe, an inquest has heard.

Officers from Australia’s spy agency watched Man Haron Monis walk free on bail after being charged with being an accessory to murder in December 2013 and then again when he was charged with sex offences in May 2014. When 37 further sexual and indecent assault offences were brought against him in October 2014 neither police nor the director of public prosecutions applied to have his bail revoked."

"Overseen by coroner Michael Barnes, the inquest heard from Detective Senior Constable Melanie Staples from the homicide squad on Wednesday. She said she was very upset when Monis was granted bail after being charged with being an accessory to murder.

She said she found out almost by accident before the siege that Asio agents had been at the hearings. A female officer from the agency mentioned it to Staples in an email."

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/19/asio-agents-attended-all-court-dates-of-lindt-cafe-gunman-in-year-before-seige

Toni,

"//I suggest that you download one of the free spell checking programmes.//

That spelling of 'programme' is incorrect when talking about software. You're thinking of computer 'programs'.'

that spelling of 'programme' is acceptable British English as is 'program', which whilst being looked upon as an Americanism, is the English word that was in common use before the French fashion crept into the language; hence 'labour' and 'labor', 'doctour' was fashionable for a while but 'doctor' now prevails.

"I should take up this essay correcting lark
[you can if you possess the necessary qualifications].

Although I'm curious as to how the students get away with it - if they hand in an essay which is not entirely their own work because you've helped them with it, does't that constitute plagiarism?"

you seem to have a bit of difficulty with the term 'correcting'
I correct essays whilst marking them, (on a contract basis with the University), such corrections are part of the process of marking.

Yes, I thought Toni's post was a little, shall we say, pedantic.

It was obvious to me that Is Mise was marking essays...who hasn't received a marked essay with corrections?

Same with "programme" - "program" is the Americanisation.

As is the English/French "cheque" and the Americanised "check".

Our evolving language....

The operatic lyrics are correctly capitalised. There are many explanations as to how the belting voice quality is produced. Under a scope, the vocal folds visibly shorten and thicken, and they undulate along more of their vertical surface area than in head register when a smaller segment of their edge must undulate to produce sound.

One researcher, Jo Estill, has conducted research on the belting voice, and describes the belting voice as an extremely muscular and physical way of singing. When observing the vocal tract and torso of singers, while belting, Estill observed:

Minimal airflow (longer closed phase (70% or greater) than in any other type of phonation)
Maximum muscular engagement of the torso (in Estill Voice Training terminology this is known as Torso Control or Anchoring)
Engagement of muscles in the head and neck in order to stabilize the larynx) (in Estill Voice Training terminology this is known as Head and Neck Control or Anchoring)
A downwards tilt of the cricoid cartilage (an alternative option would be the thyroid tilting backwards. Observations show a larger CT space)
High positioning of the larynx
Maximum muscular effort of the extrinsic laryngeal muscles, minimum effort at the level of the true vocal folds.
Narrowing of the aryepiglottic sphincter (the "twanger").
An orchestra is at 800hertz but opera singing can be 3000hertz and so capital letters are lawful and appropriate for police hit-squads at maximum volume.

Poirot,

There is nothing curious about Monis being able to access a firearm whilst on bail, he either had the illegally modified prohibited firearm hidden away or he got it from a criminal.

The big question is, rightly, why he was on bail.

nicknamenick,

When the gas is used the 'troops' don't rush in, they wait for the gas to take effect so they are not the targets of the few frantic shots possible, the hostages are.
Hence the brain destroying head shot being the best option.

You need to read up a bit on body armour as well.

We agree that gas is not the way. A head-shot is not good for the head and may not conform to H&S outcomes for the customer.
I have read up on bullet and explosive armour and can spell it in English and American "armor". An extending arm can jab a pistol to the perp's head with a recording of "surrender" in Arabic or the armour can carry inbuilt multiple machine guns for persuading the client to assist police.

'Programme' versus 'program' in Australian usage.

The spelling was changed to 'program' by Gough Whitlam. Gough interfered personally to have the (then) new federal government Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers being drafted by the AGPS in consultation with the Australian Government Printer introduce new, 'improved' spellings and programs was one such, because he and the Left elite believed that their voting demographic couldn't spell.

It is typical of the left elite that they patronise blue collar workers and what they perceive a s lower socio-economic groups, believing that they, the International Socialists (Gough converted to Fabianism soon after his election, but he always epitomised the urbane Chardonnay socialist) always knew what was best for the herd (sic) and secondly, that the aforementioned herd could NOT be trusted to exercise proper judgement even where their own good was concerned.

Gough and the left elite knew that the herd could never be trusted to learn to spell bid words. Likewise they would never understand the Latin and other roots to help their comprehension. So Gough wanted a simplified, bastardised phonetic spelling.

He did some good though with his quirky changes. For example, to the formal coat of arms that would horrify the ratbag ersatz 'Progressives' today. The red roo regained its missing scrotum and its chest acquired the red hue of a buck in full mating vigor (colour coat of arms). The roo also lost its dubious stance that Gough thought was effeminate (he was more direct), its arm was formerly limp wristed on the top of the shield.

The Leftists of today -who wouldn't recognise Left if there was a Dept of Roads neon sign pointing the way- re-write history and none of them would have stood for 5 minutes with Gough, who would have sacked them on the spot.

'big' not 'bid'

Gof not Gough

OTB,

Never the less 'program' is the earlier English spelling, the USA is a repository and a conserver of British language, spelling and customs.

Democracy was invented in America and taken to England in 1215 thru a program of regular networking .

Hi there IS MISE...

You're absolutely correct my friend ! A well placed head shot, which is calculated to achieve a 'non-reflex kill', is highly desirable, to ensure all hostages are protected therein, as you would know IS MISE. I'm sure during your long years of service, both as an Army and later, a civilain armourer, you would've prepared and bedded many military Sniper weapon systems, for the Oz Army.

For the readership to understand what a 'non-reflex kill' represents - when hostages are held, usually by someone armed with a F/A, it's vital the Sniper removes the 'immediate threat' by ensuring the 'Primary Hostage Taker'(PHT) is instantly neutralised. In order to achieve this outcome, the Sniper must try to sever/destroy the Medulla Oblongata (located at the base of the cerebral cortex).

Access to the Medulla O, may be accomplished by placing a round roughly through the mouth of the offender (PHT) when facing you, or at the base of the skull, when his back is showing. Any of these 'points of impact' will provide the same result.

A 'non-reflux' kill, is like switching off a light switch. Sometimes an offender may have a nervous reflex action when shot, even though he may be momentarily dead. Apparently it's been shown, an offender may still possess the presence of mind, to still squeeze the trigger, killing his hostage, albeit he's expired before he's even hit the ground. When the Medulla Oblongata is severed or destroyed, it amounts to a non-reflex kill and there's no danger of this occurring.

In 1987 I took part in the FBI Sniper's School, in the United States. An interesting statistic emerged, the average range where an offender has been taken, by a law-enforcement sniper, was about 72 yards ! I was absolutely stunned to hear that, considering the training, the cost and sophistication of a Sniper's Weapon System ? The size of the Medulla Oblongata in an adult, is about the size of a plum.

Hi to you too LOUDMOUTH...

Wow I'm impressed at your ability to produce such brilliant lyrics in your recent recitation, many thanks for that Joe !

Just a couple of things concerning Chemical Agents Vs Man MONIS. Traditional Agents are meant as dispersal tools for Law-enforcement. As such would be totally inappropriate for the Lindt Cafe situation.

With the agent DM, everyone hits the deck, whether they wish to or not. For this reason DM is 'generally' unavailable to police such as it's severity. That said, it may still prove a better option then people being killed with F/A's ?

Is it possible that in the heat of lethal danger a plum could be missed when both shooter and target are moving? The truck at Nice showed a splatter of shots over the windscreen. Wild West 6gun shots often missed unless the survivor took time to line up and aim properly. Snipers couldn't get a clear shot at Lindt cafe. Theory is good but needs a co-operative target.

The perp at the Lyndt Cafe was thought to be carrying explosives so there was no question of him being shot by a police marksman, not until it could be guaranteed that such was not the case.
The set up seen on TY, looking through the two windows, was just that, TV.

Hi O Sung Wu,

It's been nagging at me for hours, but I must confess that I didn't write those lyrics: a bloke named Bill Gilbert knocked them out in a saloon bar while his mate Art Sullivan banged out a tune on an old piano. It was basically a tribute to some of the lags they knew inside. They were putting it all together for a gig called "Pirates of Penzance".

But I suspect you already knew that :)

Cheers,

Joe

"explosive until guaranteed that such was not the case?"
Logic error detected .
With no bomb would he show the empty bag to police who are holding off for that reason? With a bomb ( or a pretend bomb) there is no proof until it goes off. So assume there is one and further delay after he stops talking to negotiators will only lead to hostages being shot. Then armour is compelled by this process.

//that spelling of 'programme' is acceptable British English as is 'program', which whilst being looked upon as an Americanism, is the English word that was in common use before the French fashion crept into the language; hence 'labour' and 'labor', 'doctour' was fashionable for a while but 'doctor' now prevails.//

Not when you are talking about computer programs. Even in British English, the 'American' spelling of program is the one that applies when talking about software. It's a jargon thing, the same reason that the correct spelling of the element with atomic number 16 is always 'sulfur', regardless of what you may have been taught at school way back when. Look it up if you don't believe me, or ask an English computer nerd. I did, and he assured me that there is no 'me' in computer program, even in Old Blighty.

//you seem to have a bit of difficulty with the term 'correcting'//

It means 'making correct', doesn't it?

//I correct essays whilst marking them, (on a contract basis with the University), such corrections are part of the process of marking.//

Ahh... well that's different. It's not so much 'making correct' as 'pointing out where they've been incorrect'. Which is suppose is another common usage of the term correcting, although not the one that immediately sprang to mind. My science and maths subjects didn't require essays, and my few philosophy subjects had small enough classes (and presumably, the philosophy staff had enough spare time) that the lecturers did their own marking rather than outsourcing it.

//Yes, I thought Toni's post was a little, shall we say, pedantic.//

You say that like it's a bad thing.

http://tinyurl.com/jmu7f7f

//who hasn't received a marked essay with corrections?//

People who never make mistakes?

Actually, the philosophy academics were an easy going bunch, and generally didn't get hung up much over minor typos. The bits in my essays that got the red circle and and comments in the margins were where I'd employed a weak argument, not where I'd used poor spelling in a good argument.

Toni,

".... It's a jargon thing,,,,"

Therefore if it's jargon it is
"jargon

noun
special words or expressions used by a profession or group that are difficult for others to understand.
synonyms: specialized language, technical language, slang, cant, idiom, argot, patter, patois, vernacular;
archaic
a form of language regarded as barbarous, debased, or hybrid."

and so not normal English that one would use on a forum such as OLO.

Some of the quotes that you've made and apparently attributed to me are beyond my ken.

PS,

Why the use of //s instead of quotation marks ""?

This guy would've had the Lindt Cafe siege all wrapped up before the police had the area cordoned off.
http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45
Probably not, be geez he's a good shot.
He can shoot out the eye of a needle.

I first came across his FN PS90 video, a gun used by the secret service apparently.
It's a bit of an eye-opener that anyone can have a gun like this but I guess thats how they do it in the US.
http://youtu.be/VRNK5DdI-w4

Combined with this it couldn't miss:
Australian Concrete X-Ray (ACX) is committed to remaining the leading specialists using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) with concrete. ACX specialises in non-destructive testing methods and structural investigations within the construction industry.

. With 8 technicians and 2 engineers we understand that ground penetrating radar has outstanding capabilities for assisting the construction industry, including safe penetrations and structural investigations.
In order to achieve our clients' goals in assessing concrete structures, ACX uses a variety of advanced NDT techniques such as x-ray, ground penetrating radar, compressive and tensile strength testing, carbonation, corrosion, chloride studies and other NDT tests to provide vital information for projects.

I must admit to a little bit of pleasure reading Bazz's posts here. They were carefully noncommittal probably because at one stage he was fiercely championing the rights of Monis.

Why do the right do this? Only back the rights that impinge on themselves? One of the bedrocks of any well developed society is the universality of rights. Erode it at your peril.

Hi Steele,

Yes ! "One of the bedrocks of any well developed society is the universality of rights"

I have to use that.

Of course, in every society, even that principle is a little flexible, for example in the case of criminals committing acts endangering life.

Otherwise, amongst people going about their business, everybody should have equal rights before the law, all men and women. The same man-made (oops - human) laws should apply to everybody. That Enlightenment principle has been hard-fought for, over a couple of thousand years, in the struggle against absolutism, religion and the abuse of power, so it is far too precious to give up, or ever compromise.

Thanks, Steele.

Cheers,

Joe