on โ18-04-2015 11:58 AM
on โ22-04-2015 12:25 PM
@donnashuggy wrote:I didn't say that. I said it was not a large scale attack. There probably will be more attacks, you can thank our Government for that. These idiots are doing what they are instructed to do, the main reason for this is because of our involvement.
there was a discussion here recently about
some people justifying isis' actions by blaming
our government.
someone argued they had never seen anyone
making such claims on this board -
there it is - again.
on โ22-04-2015 12:28 PM
@*julia*2010 wrote:lets be realistic that there are larger threats to us.
the difference is - you can take measures
to minimise the risks.
what makes terrorist acts more dangerous is:
1 - the targets ie public places
2 - the methods - usually suicide attacts
designed to cause maximum casualties.
cant see how that can be compared to health
related risks which in most cases are preventable
or treatable.
So are you going to stop walking across the road? Given that it is more likely to be run over than be anywhere near a terrorist attack.
on โ22-04-2015 12:31 PM
@*julia*2010 wrote:
@donnashuggy wrote:I didn't say that. I said it was not a large scale attack. There probably will be more attacks, you can thank our Government for that. These idiots are doing what they are instructed to do, the main reason for this is because of our involvement.
there was a discussion here recently about
some people justifying isis' actions by blaming
our government.
someone argued they had never seen anyone
making such claims on this board -
there it is - again.
Didn't you realize that terrorist attacks are politically motivated?
on โ22-04-2015 12:44 PM
The only ones to blame are the ones who commit the acts of terrorism.......................... the reasons why are quite another matter.
I don't think the Lindt cafe seige was political, I think he was mentally deranged but still a terrorist attack.......... he terrorised people.
on โ22-04-2015 12:45 PM
terrorist attacks are motivated by
ideologies - not necessarily political.
did you not know that?
on โ22-04-2015 12:49 PM
on โ22-04-2015 12:54 PM
So are you going to stop walking across the road? Given that it is more likely to be run over than be anywhere near a terrorist attack.
of course not. what are the chances of being
run over if you:
1 cross at pedestrian crossings
2 look left right and then left again
3 don't use a smart phone while crossing
the road
4 don't have earphones in with loud music
5 be aware the whole time to make sure there
are no cars approaching at fast speed.
what else is there?
on โ22-04-2015 01:00 PM
@*julia*2010 wrote:So are you going to stop walking across the road? Given that it is more likely to be run over than be anywhere near a terrorist attack.
of course not. what are the chances of being
run over if you:
1 cross at pedestrian crossings
2 look left right and then left again
3 don't use a smart phone while crossing
the road
4 don't have earphones in with loud music
5 be aware the whole time to make sure there
are no cars approaching at fast speed.
what else is there?
The risk is higher than the risk of being anywhere near a terrorist attack.
on โ22-04-2015 01:24 PM
you'll be fine - as long as you understand road
safety and not take unnecessary risks.
on โ22-04-2015 01:36 PM
I'm still not getting your point about perspective. We all acknowledge there are bigger risks. I'm sure statistically I have a higher chance of falling off a roof than being in a terrorist attack, so I dont climb onto the roof.
Do you think I should have shopped at my usual shopping centre despite what I perceive to be a higher risk than normal? The risk is not just in the terrorist attacks, the risk is also in other incidents caused by higher tension in the community. The tension in the community would be pretty high at Narre Warren right now so I think it is a place better avoided. I did the same after the Numan Haider incident and once things had simmered down my shopping habits returned to normal. Its not like I'm being hysterical, I'm simply being cautious.