What The F***

[CENTURION]

So was the 7 people arrested last night in Liverpool NSW connected to the weekend events?

Not much information has been released

"they MIGHT have been on their way to Bondi but no weapons were found in the car"
better to be safe than sorry I guess.

[dedja]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

[Jimmy_041]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

**** him & his mates - they have fuelled this hatred over the past 2 years
**** Bob Carr as well

(only my opinion of course)

[RB]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

**** him & his mates - they have fuelled this hatred over the past 2 years
**** Bob Carr as well

(only my opinion of course)

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

[Brodlach]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

**** him & his mates - they have fuelled this hatred over the past 2 years
**** Bob Carr as well

(only my opinion of course)

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

There will be no reply or some basic drivel. There has been none and I’m sick of people continually peddling this rubbish.

[whufc]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

**** him & his mates - they have fuelled this hatred over the past 2 years
**** Bob Carr as well

(only my opinion of course)

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

I don't think the pollies have fueled that hatred but what happens is in this day and age they obviously have to respond/comment/make decisions on world going ons.

This then goes on all the social media outlets. This is where the fuel is fired not the pollies. Once on social media its one side versus the other and it gets heated, things that would never be said to ones face get said and the hatred grows and moves to the next post on the subject.

[mighty_tiger_79]

Pollies not acting is fuelling hatred or whatever it may be at the time.
They need to be proactive and not reactive

[Trader]

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

There will be no reply or some basic drivel. There has been none and I’m sick of people continually peddling this rubbish.

I think providing any commentary provides opportunities for hatred.

The bottom line is people are polar on issues, especially individuals who are at either end of the 'extremes'.
Those that sit in the middle, can have a more open discourse on matters, but extremists hear what they want in comments.

By providing commentary on the Gaza conflict, he has created opportunities for extremists to cherry pick his comments and take it as support for their cause, further justifying their actions in their own minds.

Have his comments been relatively balanced? Yeah, I think so.
He's stated Israel has a right to protect itself following the Oct 7th attacks from Hamas.
He has also made several statements in support of Palestine and ensuring humanitarian rights are protected.
Both comments, on the surface appear fair to the neutral observer.

But this is the problem isn't it. By commenting, he's provided an opportunity for the mentally ill to take his comments as support of their stance and fuelled their fire before they go and shoot up a beach.

Getting into the specifics, when you look at the way Australia has voted recently at UN conventions, there has been a shift away from Israel towards Palestine, specifically with:
October 2023's Gaza humanitarian resolution. Historically Australia would have noted No, however, under Albo, we elected to abstain. Abstaining was seen as tacit support for a resolution that didn’t condemn Hamas.
December 2023, Humanitarian Ceasefire, we broke our previous alignment with Israel and the US and instead voted differently to them. This further shows our movement away from Israel (rightly or wrongly).

These items, also reflected in similar voting patterns on UNHRC and UNESCO votes, as well as Resolutions on Palestinian self-determination over the previous 3 years. Australia's position has moved from one supporting Israel, to one that Palestinian supporters are more in favour of.
This movement has seen pro-Palestine extremists feel vindicated to continue to fight for their cause, with some, overstepping the mark.

I would like to think one of the major benefits of being an island on the other side of the world is that we don't need to get involved in these matters. And that by taking a Pro-Palestine stance, he has possibly encouraged extremists to feel their actions are supported by the Australian Government.

Encouraged is probably too strong a word. And I don't think there is evidence that Australia’s UN votes or the PM’s statements encouraged, motivated, or triggered violent actions in Australia.
However, it is plausible that some extremists may misinterpret shifts in international rhetoric or UN voting as moral or political validation.

In highly polarized environments, symbolic shifts can be misread by fringe actors as moral momentum.

By commenting and getting involved in discussions on the matter, it causes people to take sides, thereby encouraging division.
At a time where there are countless issues at home, critics of the Albo government rightly point out that instead of driving division on a topic from the other side of the globe, he perhaps could focus more of his time on resolving local matters, like the cost-of-living crisis.

In short, While the Prime Minister’s comments and UN votes were balanced and lawful, they increased the volume of symbolic material available for misinterpretation in a polarized environment. In a country already under social strain (cost of living crisis, growing immigration concerns, etc), critics argue that restraint, rather than commentary, may have better served domestic cohesion, especially given Australia’s limited influence on the conflict itself. Reasonable people may still disagree, and that's fine, but the questioning of Albo's actions is well within the bounds of legitimate political critique, in my opinion.

[dedja]

The point I was making with my post is that there’s a time and place.

A vigil by mourners at the site of an atrocity isn’t the place to play politics, spread hate or show division. Booing the PM or indeed any MP there to show their respects is just falling into the hands of the terrorists and their supporters.

Everyone needs to be accountable, including governments and leaders, but there’s plenty of other times and places to do that.

[mighty_tiger_79]

The point I was making with my post is that there’s a time and place.

A vigil by mourners at the site of an atrocity isn’t the place to play politics, spread hate or show division. Booing the PM or indeed any MP there to show their respects is just falling into the hands of the terrorists and their supporters.

Everyone needs to be accountable, including governments and leaders, but there’s plenty of other times and places to do that.

I guess those that booed were maximising effect knowing media are around.

[dedja]

The point I was making with my post is that there’s a time and place.

A vigil by mourners at the site of an atrocity isn’t the place to play politics, spread hate or show division. Booing the PM or indeed any MP there to show their respects is just falling into the hands of the terrorists and their supporters.

Everyone needs to be accountable, including governments and leaders, but there’s plenty of other times and places to do that.

I guess those that booed were maximising effect knowing media are around.

Guaranteeing that terrorists around the world were shooting their loads with the public division they encouraged.

[gadj1976]

Pollies not acting is fuelling hatred or whatever it may be at the time.
They need to be proactive and not reactive

Is Albo Jewish?

[Jimmy_041]

With all the public displays of solidarity since the atrocity last week, despite what you may or may not personally think of politicians, particularly the PM, people can’t have both ways by booing the PM … only my opinion of course.

**** him & his mates - they have fuelled this hatred over the past 2 years
**** Bob Carr as well

(only my opinion of course)

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

There will be no reply or some basic drivel. There has been none and I’m sick of people continually peddling this rubbish.

Sorry; I've been out all day in cluding a long lunch

1. Here's your reply
2. Some basic drivel: My opinion must be wrong because you say so.

[Jimmy_041]

What actions in particular do you think have fuelled the hatred?

There will be no reply or some basic drivel. There has been none and I’m sick of people continually peddling this rubbish.

I think providing any commentary provides opportunities for hatred.

The bottom line is people are polar on issues, especially individuals who are at either end of the 'extremes'.
Those that sit in the middle, can have a more open discourse on matters, but extremists hear what they want in comments.

By providing commentary on the Gaza conflict, he has created opportunities for extremists to cherry pick his comments and take it as support for their cause, further justifying their actions in their own minds.

Have his comments been relatively balanced? Yeah, I think so.
He's stated Israel has a right to protect itself following the Oct 7th attacks from Hamas.
He has also made several statements in support of Palestine and ensuring humanitarian rights are protected.
Both comments, on the surface appear fair to the neutral observer.

But this is the problem isn't it. By commenting, he's provided an opportunity for the mentally ill to take his comments as support of their stance and fuelled their fire before they go and shoot up a beach.

Getting into the specifics, when you look at the way Australia has voted recently at UN conventions, there has been a shift away from Israel towards Palestine, specifically with:
October 2023's Gaza humanitarian resolution. Historically Australia would have noted No, however, under Albo, we elected to abstain. Abstaining was seen as tacit support for a resolution that didn’t condemn Hamas.
December 2023, Humanitarian Ceasefire, we broke our previous alignment with Israel and the US and instead voted differently to them. This further shows our movement away from Israel (rightly or wrongly).

These items, also reflected in similar voting patterns on UNHRC and UNESCO votes, as well as Resolutions on Palestinian self-determination over the previous 3 years. Australia's position has moved from one supporting Israel, to one that Palestinian supporters are more in favour of.
This movement has seen pro-Palestine extremists feel vindicated to continue to fight for their cause, with some, overstepping the mark.

I would like to think one of the major benefits of being an island on the other side of the world is that we don't need to get involved in these matters. And that by taking a Pro-Palestine stance, he has possibly encouraged extremists to feel their actions are supported by the Australian Government.

Encouraged is probably too strong a word. And I don't think there is evidence that Australia’s UN votes or the PM’s statements encouraged, motivated, or triggered violent actions in Australia.
However, it is plausible that some extremists may misinterpret shifts in international rhetoric or UN voting as moral or political validation.

In highly polarized environments, symbolic shifts can be misread by fringe actors as moral momentum.

By commenting and getting involved in discussions on the matter, it causes people to take sides, thereby encouraging division.
At a time where there are countless issues at home, critics of the Albo government rightly point out that instead of driving division on a topic from the other side of the globe, he perhaps could focus more of his time on resolving local matters, like the cost-of-living crisis.

In short, While the Prime Minister’s comments and UN votes were balanced and lawful, they increased the volume of symbolic material available for misinterpretation in a polarized environment. In a country already under social strain (cost of living crisis, growing immigration concerns, etc), critics argue that restraint, rather than commentary, may have better served domestic cohesion, especially given Australia’s limited influence on the conflict itself. Reasonable people may still disagree, and that's fine, but the questioning of Albo's actions is well within the bounds of legitimate political critique, in my opinion.

Thank you Trader. Summed up most of my views very well
Maybe "fuelled" was the wrong word but that is a matter of interpretation.
The standard you walk past is the standard you accept
One thing for sure though, Albanese and his mates have been totally shit at addressing antisemitism over the past two years
He has publically admitted it himself but that may just be his usual spineless self