Meanwhile, down in Melbourne, there has been a terrorist incident involving a violent person who was out on parole.

Seems that he used firearms; are the gun laws must be working OK?

sorry for the typo, above.

This isn't a war. A war requires two sides to fight each other with all means at their disposal.

This is more in the nature of a protracted surrender negotiation.

The west (or at least western Europe) has already lost. The only question is the terms of the surrender.

The European politicians think they can get a negotiated peace. The Islamists and their supporters know that they can win it all by simply continuing to do what they do.

The question for Australia (and the US) is whether we want to go down the same path.

@ AJ Phillips.. " Wouldn’t you prefer a rational and well though-through response?"

We've been listening to these 'reational and well thought through responses since 9/11.

Well thought through responses = useless talk fests, usually in another country and costing millions..smiley politicians, big dinners, handshakes...Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Meanwhile in Melbourne today...

Enough.

That wouldn't be much of a response, moonshine.

<<Well thought through responses = useless talk fests, usually in another country and costing millions..smiley politicians, big dinners, handshakes...Wash. Rinse. Repeat.>>

But, okay then. What do you envision this knee-jerk reaction would look like, and how would it be more productive?

You seemed to approve of 'hatred' and 'anger' earlier. What else would a suitable knee-jerk reaction involve, do you think, and how would we determine whether it was an appropriate response if it's also a knee-jerk one?

This morning radio audiences of Leon Byner were subjected to an 'expert', Dr. John Bruni, mouthing off about how the media should stop talking about terrorism and describe terrorists as 'disturbed individuals', 'lunatics'.

Save us from 'experts'; they are as big a problem as Muslim terrorists!