Abbott can now focus on fixing Brookie Oval....

[Bearfax]

As a conservative, you say you're afraid of what is happening NOW in front of your eyes? e.g. the "rise" of Islam. A mere 2% of the Aust population are Muslims, 61% Christians. There's some loonies and fundamentalists in both groups. What are you afraid of? We had one unbalanced loony kill two Aussies this year due to stuff ups in not recognising he was simply mentally unstable. He gave plenty of indications. Meanwhile we've had 62 women (to Sep 10) killed in domestic violence incidents. Women screaming out for help and in genuine terror. I know one such woman who's gone through this. So what is "in front of your eyes" - 2 people or 62 people killed? The Minister for women, Tony Abbott, did nothing - zero - zip - about the 62, and ranted non-stop about the 2 to make you terrified. Is that balanced? Have you been duped?

Border "security" is so massively overstated it is a joke. People flee their country to escape persecution. Some end up here. Big deal. The numbers are minuscule. The Govt tried a different tactic and it has stopped the boats. Good. Move on.

You doubt climate change and rising sea levels. OK. I don't have expertise in this area, so I trust the experts in the field - the scientists who devote their lives to meticulously studying this. You think they're telling lies or are mistaken because ...?

Well said Rex.

The monsters are under the bed, the commies are coming, aliens are taking over the World. Most Muslims coming to this country are running scared from the craziness in the lands they were born in.

Do you really think they want that for Australia? The vast majority of Muslims who come here want nothing more than the average Australian citizen, to build a life here to raise a family. If we treat them with respect and friendship, they will respond in kind and value the positives of this country.

Discriminate against them and treat them like aliens and you push them increasingly into the them and us camp, which the few radicals in this country on both sides crave for. Be sensible about this. They are people just like you with the same general aspirations in life. They want peace and freedom just like you.

 

[Bearfax]

Ha ha, no, they make me laugh. Right wing nut jobs always come off as just crazy. The lefties always post these comments with this air of superiority, like every Lib voter is a moron. THAT gets my goat.

Perhaps Rex operates on a different level from you. He uses logic, you seem to use emotion. Somehow his comments are with an 'air of superiority' , just because he offers a logical explanation about what is happening. Putting down someone who is offering a sensible argument, suggests you cant respond appropriately and have lost the argument.

 

[Loobs]

Perhaps Rex operates on a different level from you. He uses logic, you seem to use emotion. Somehow his comments are with an 'air of superiority' , just because he offers a logical explanation about what is happening. Putting down someone who is offering a sensible argument, suggests you cant respond appropriately and have lost the argument.

lol - I think you missed the point there. The "air of superiority" remark was in regards to pro labor comments on the Guardian, not about anything Rex said. I have no issue with @Rex . He is free to speak his mind. We've been having a fairly tame back and fourth - I actually like hearing and respect a reasoned counterpoint.

 

[HoldenV8]

I'm a bit in shock, Peter Fitzsimons actually makes sense here.....

Sydney sports fans can be very fickle, so why are we building a big, new stadium?

"Take last Friday night for example. At the same time as the Storm were putting the Roosters to the sword at the Sydney Football Stadium , the West Coast Eagles were taking on Hawthorn in Perth. Both matches were finals – but what an extraordinary difference in ambience! For while at the SFS, the spectators were scattered around only "like confetti in a graveyard" – to use John Arlott's felicitous phrase of long ago – for a sum total of just 20,000, over in Perth the West Coast Eagles took on Hawthorn before 40,000!

On the Sunday, Richmond played North Melbourne before 90,000! And it is often like that. Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne often have AFL matches, where an errant ant could not fit. Sydney, rarely. Grand finals, yes, State of Origins, and very occasionally Bledisloes.

Why the difference? The first and most obvious reason is because in strong AFL cities they put something in the water that turns the people a tad whacko, from birth on, which just makes them attend Aussie rules matches, makes them define themselves by their football tribe. And in those other cities the focus is not fractured the way it is in our fair metropolis with so many other things calling on our attention. (Remember Paul Keating: "If you're not living in Sydney, you're really just camping out.")

But the upshot of the question is the same. Why are we in NSW considering spending squillions on knocking down a perfectly serviceable stadium, to build another extravaganza in much the same spot, when there seems to be so little need for more facilities than we have?"

He's right. When was the last time the 45,000 seat SFS was actually full? Why do they need to knock down a perfectly good 45k stadium to build one on just about the same spot that can hold about 60-65k? Is it needed?

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/the-fit...ilding-a-big-new-stadium-20150918-gjpptq.html

 

[Loobs]

I'm a bit in shock, Peter Fitzsimons actually makes sense here.....

Sydney sports fans can be very fickle, so why are we building a big, new stadium?

"Take last Friday night for example. At the same time as the Storm were putting the Roosters to the sword at the Sydney Football Stadium , the West Coast Eagles were taking on Hawthorn in Perth. Both matches were finals – but what an extraordinary difference in ambience! For while at the SFS, the spectators were scattered around only "like confetti in a graveyard" – to use John Arlott's felicitous phrase of long ago – for a sum total of just 20,000, over in Perth the West Coast Eagles took on Hawthorn before 40,000!

On the Sunday, Richmond played North Melbourne before 90,000! And it is often like that. Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne often have AFL matches, where an errant ant could not fit. Sydney, rarely. Grand finals, yes, State of Origins, and very occasionally Bledisloes.

Why the difference? The first and most obvious reason is because in strong AFL cities they put something in the water that turns the people a tad whacko, from birth on, which just makes them attend Aussie rules matches, makes them define themselves by their football tribe. And in those other cities the focus is not fractured the way it is in our fair metropolis with so many other things calling on our attention. (Remember Paul Keating: "If you're not living in Sydney, you're really just camping out.")

But the upshot of the question is the same. Why are we in NSW considering spending squillions on knocking down a perfectly serviceable stadium, to build another extravaganza in much the same spot, when there seems to be so little need for more facilities than we have?"

He's right. When was the last time the 45,000 seat SFS was actually full? Why do they need to knock down a perfectly good 45k stadium to build one on just about the same spot that can hold about 60-65k? Is it needed?

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/the-fit...ilding-a-big-new-stadium-20150918-gjpptq.html

I've said before - Dave Smith thinks the NRL can become like the NFL when really they should try and replicate the MLS stadium philosophy...

 

[Fluffy]

There are sheep within both spectrum. A true 'independent thinker' can assess any given subject on balance and respond without emotion, ie. just the facts.

As you have shown in your comment about Murdoch press and commercial tv being 'staunchly' conservative, I get the sense you feel that is what they are (with the use of gradient language for emphasis), as opposed to where they more likely sit.

The largest media group in this country is not Murdoch's handful of daily papers. It is our own national broadcaster, with 24hr news, 4 commercial stations, radio networks and a large digital footprint. Yet their coverage is rarely discussed critically amongst the most politically active in this country, with 'bias' and 'hate' media claims always directed against one side; the one that is often prepared to offer counter views. Why is that?

Why is the ABC not brought up as often?

Simple as the independent checks proved it is almost dead centre at 53% left stories VS 47% right.

you also forget the PM going hard for the ABC.

Turnbull is being called left wing even though he is right of center by Murdoch amongst others

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

... Sadly, the Left or self styled 'progressives', often turn a blind eye to what is happening NOW and focus their concerns on something that 'may' happen in the future. EG: Rising temps and sea levels.

'May' happen?
The temperature averaged worldwide for the last 2 months is the highest recorded in history.
Why do you think Dutton had to say sorry for a rising sea level comment, if it isn't happening?
Don't be sucked in by the fossil fuel industry, it's happening and it's happening fast.

 

[Hamster Huey]

Let me guess.

You think you are a true 'independent thinker' who can assess any given subject on balance and respond without emotion, ie. just the facts.

I do try my best to think critically and look behind the headline. I will call out falsehoods, misinformation and strawmen, presented from any direction. Often what it sprouted is barely the truth of the matter, but it works because it fits into the perception bias' and short attention spans.

My partner sits very much to the Left, politically speaking. But she has also learnt a lot about what she accepted as fact, was based on mis-information and presumption. She does hate me for it sometimes as I keep the debate focused on the point, but even she admits that it is the emotive side that she reacts with first.

 

[Hamster Huey]

Why is the ABC not brought up as often?

Simple as the independent checks proved it is almost dead centre at 53% left stories VS 47% right.

you also forget the PM going hard for the ABC.

Turnbull is being called left wing even though he is right of center by Murdoch amongst others

I have ABC News24 on 8 hours at day, at work. It regularly attacks Labor and the LNP from the Left, and shows a strong preference on mining, climate change, refugees, religion, workplace relations and renewables that sit on the progressive side, politically.

Malcolm clearly sits within the left of the LNP spectrum, but I have yet to see a single analyist or commentator from the 'Murdoch' press indicate his is actually Left wing. Feel free to correct me where one of their reporters/commentators has actually stated he sits politically with the ALP or Greens.

 

[Bearfax]

lol - I think you missed the point there. The "air of superiority" remark was in regards to pro labor comments on the Guardian, not about anything Rex said. I have no issue with @Rex . He is free to speak his mind. We've been having a fairly tame back and fourth - I actually like hearing and respect a reasoned counterpoint.

Fair enough Loobs. My apologies for misinterpreting your comments and intentions.

Thing is mate I have lived for over twenty years in a suburb between Auburn and Bankstown where I, as an Anglo-Australian, am very much in the minority as far as ethnic background. The vast majority living here are Asian, Middle Eastern and Pacific Islanders. In the stairwell of the block of units I live in, there are two young Nepalese couples, a Vietnamese family, a middle aged Chinese couple, An Afghani family, a Turkish family, a single Turkish woman and an older Anglo man. All have working family members (no one on benefits) Some are boat people. All live quiet respectful lives, converse amicably, even at times swap meals. I worked in the Bankstown area including Wiley Park and Punchbowl for years. I found middle Eastern people in the area on the whole friendly and very hospitable, often inviting you in to share coffee in their homes.

Now that doesnt mean there arent trouble makers and I have met the famous Sheikh from the Lakemba/ Punchbowl Mosque. I shared in a betrothal ceremony with him present. Yes he looked upon me with suspicion. But in all the time I have lived and worked in the area I have not once come across anyone trying to force their beliefs upon me. The trouble I've had has been on rare occasions personality disputes, and I have those with Anglo Australians just as often.

Radicalising often occurs with the young, especially those who feel discriminated against, just as the young Vietnamese youths felt hard done by in the 1980s , and Italian and Greeks in the 1950s. Think of the young Middle Eastern youths like the Italians and Irish in New York in the 20s and 30s. Isolating and demonising them pushes them into gang support groups and the negative influence of those who do want extreme Islamic changes here in Australia.

 

[Loobs]

'May' happen?
The temperature averaged worldwide for the last 2 months is the highest recorded in history.
Why do you think Dutton had to say sorry for a rising sea level comment, if it isn't happening?
Don't be sucked in by the fossil fuel industry, it's happening and it's happening fast.

When Jesus gets angry it gets hot. When he puts on shades and chills out it gets cold. Pretty simple...

 

[WAMF]

The vast majority of Muslims who come here want nothing more than the average Australian citizen, to build a life here to raise a family. If we treat them with respect and friendship, they will respond in kind and value the positives

They want all the trimmings that we provide + Sharia law. If those you refer to don't want to live under Sharia law, they cannot be considered Muslims because this in itself is diametrically opposed to the unanimous scholarly interpretation of Islamic scriptures. A world wide Caliphate is the end game.

Perhaps Rex operates on a different level from you. He uses logic, you seem to use emotion.

Compassion does not automatically equate to logic but thanks for the free display of your Left leaning moral superiority.

 

[Rex]

I do try my best to think critically and look behind the headline. I will call out falsehoods, misinformation and strawmen, presented from any direction. Often what it sprouted is barely the truth of the matter, but it works because it fits into the perception bias' and short attention spans.

My partner sits very much to the Left, politically speaking. But she has also learnt a lot about what she accepted as fact, was based on mis-information and presumption. She does hate me for it sometimes as I keep the debate focused on the point, but even she admits that it is the emotive side that she reacts with first.

Thanks for pointing out your Leftie wife's many flaws in reasoning (that she is easily misled, reacts emotively, and is not a true independent thinker), and that you try your best (I assume you mean that your Leftie wife doesn't try her best). But neither of those were my question.

I asked whether you think you are a true 'independent thinker' like the one you described. i.e. "who can assess any given subject on balance and respond without emotion, ie. just the facts".

And I'm curious whether you think all emotions are culprits in interfering with independent thought? eg Do you think non-self-centred emotions (eg love, compassion, empathy) disrupt independent thinking in the same way that self-centred emotions (eg fear, greed, anger) might?

 

[Rex]

They want all the trimmings that we provide + Sharia law. If those you refer to don't want to live under Sharia law, they cannot be considered Muslims because this in itself is diametrically opposed to the unanimous scholarly interpretation of Islamic scriptures. A world wide Caliphate is the end game.

You sound absolutely terrified WAMF. Must be very painful for you. And the "world wide Caliphate" hasn't even happened. I thought you said the Lefties were the ones who get fearful about things that may or may not happen, and that Right-wingers like yourself keep focused on the NOW.

Compassion does not automatically equate to logic but thanks for the free display of your Left leaning moral superiority.

lol. That is a wonderfully simple, yet cunningly ironic, display of moral superiority by you WAMF.

 

[Bearfax]

WAMF. I would be opposed to Shariah law being used in this country. I'd be opposed to Halakha Law, Hindu Law, Christian Canon Law, Baha'i Law being used in this country. Our laws are there to seek equality of judgement. Another religious legal system would take away that equity.

What you hear are a couple of radical religious teachers pushing for something because it gives them power over their people. You would find most muslims in this country do not want Shariah law introduced, especially the women.

Further you are just scaring yourself needlessly. Not only are both sides of parliament opposed to such a dual system, it is in fact constitutionally invalid. To have such a change would require a referendum under Sect 128 of the Act. It then requires approval by Federal parliament and then a referendum in which a majority of people in all states and a majority of people over all must agree before a change can occur.

Can you see that happening?

 

[Rex]

A couple of tributes to Abbott. How he is seen overseas:

 

[eagleron]

Doesn't Matter what side you are on. None of them can really be trusted they are all in it for themselves. Abbott is sitting pretty now, 300K a year, Free car, Free Travel for the rest of his life. Turnbull is worth 1.9 Billion as it is and when he is gone in 12 months he will be on 600K Plus a Year and all the freebies thrown in. Its like a Revolving Door. None of them keep their promises . They say what they have to say for us fools to believe them. You watch Julia Bishop will be the next to be PM. I wonder if she is Single

Yes she's single, when I first saw her sitting in parliament I remember remarking that she had the look of a mother in law, those eyes could cut through a steel door, so I was shocked to learn she's never been married.

 

[eagleron]

I read both sides as far as online content goes but I don't really watch news or current affairs. Personally I've found a big part is just knowing yourself and who you truly are. Even though I'm not a Christian (quite the opposite - for which I blame Catholic school - showed me what a crock of **** it all was) and back science and fact over myth and 2,000 year old fairy tales, my views on a lot of other matters skews conservative. That changed over time but the first thing I tend to tell people is you need to look at yourself - who are you - and be honest. If you are more conservative, go that way, or if you are a union stooge who loves welfare - go Labor very easy...

I don't see the need to turn this into a political forum, nothing good can come from throwing insults at one another, I thought this site was for those of us with passion for the Sea Eagles, I have personally felt a bond with all contributors here but reading some of the insulting rhetoric here is quite disappointing. How did we manage to get to this low place, let's get back to discussing the things of real importance such as who's going to be our 5/8 next year. Let's get back to what we all love and share together instead of sniping over this bullsh*t, I don't care who any of you support in Canberra all I care about is that we all support MANLY, that's why we're here. Save the political crap for another forum please. (Sorry I didn't mean to go on)

 

[Loobs]

I don't see the need to turn this into a political forum, nothing good can come from throwing insults at one another, I thought this site was for those of us with passion for the Sea Eagles, I have personally felt a bond with all contributors here but reading some of the insulting rhetoric here is quite disappointing. How did we manage to get to this low place, let's get back to discussing the things of real importance such as who's going to be our 5/8 next year. Let's get back to what we all love and share together instead of sniping over this bullsh*t, I don't care who any of you support in Canberra all I care about is that we all support MANLY, that's why we're here. Save the political crap for another forum please. (Sorry I didn't mean to go on)

This is what happens when we don't make the finals - we don't know what to do with ourselves!

 

[Hamster Huey]

Thanks for pointing out your Leftie wife's many flaws in reasoning (that she is easily misled, reacts emotively, and is not a true independent thinker), and that you try your best (I assume you mean that your Leftie wife doesn't try her best). But neither of those were my question.

I asked whether you think you are a true 'independent thinker' like the one you described. i.e. "who can assess any given subject on balance and respond without emotion, ie. just the facts".

And I'm curious whether you think all emotions are culprits in interfering with independent thought? eg Do you think non-self-centred emotions (eg love, compassion, empathy) disrupt independent thinking in the same way that self-centred emotions (eg fear, greed, anger) might?

I never indicated they were flaws in her. I like the passion she displays and it is another facet to consider when appreciating an opinion. But even she realises that to get to the core of a matter, you need to first remove the likes of love, empathy, greed, fear, etc. The core is the starting point.

There is no point argueing for/against boat policies if you don't get to the crux of the matter; painting them all as fleeing war or Muslim invaders is wrong. But that is where people plant their beliefs, often because it feels right.

Once you can see the gears, you can then consider outcomes and build an opinion or idea that deals with more than the emotive, and can even go so far as to consider consequences. Too often, emotion will fail to allow you to accept those and it has been unfortunate to see it even in our highest political office over the last decade.

So considering that point of view, perhaps I consider myself a more independent/critical thinker than most. I sense your assertion that I must think of myself as 'better' or 'all-knowing', but I would never consider my opinions to always be the right ones, nor would I suggest ever shutting down opposing views I don't agree with. My opinions change when the facts do, or I learn more.

That is why I like to consider my views as opinions or ideas, as opposed to a belief; the latter is far harder to change than the former.