WTF! Is going on in Sydney?

[GalBrew]

Well it's always been easy to pontificate on all matters from the safety of your computer. If that was my wife that had been killed, I probably wouldn't be that receptive to play the whole incident down as the efforts of a deranged lunatic. Deranged he may be, but let's not lose sight of the context of this incident. He wasn't demanding $1,000,000 and a chopper to the airport so he could be flown to the nearest non-extradition country right (although the outcome probably would have been the same).

 

[manticle]

It wasn't linked with any known terrorist organisation - a fact people need to accept, whichever keyboard or touch pad they're behind. Of course it was a terrifying situation for all concerned. I don't think anyone would suggest it isn't.

Any siege/hostage type situation would be equally terrifying. Hell, being caught in a burning building without a gunman anywhere would make most people wish for brown underpants. Doesn't mean you can redefine terms to suit.

 

[GalBrew]

All true, except for the fact that you don't need to be a card carrying member of a terrorist organisation to commit an act of terrorism.

Sure it wasn't as organised or devastating as flying passenger jets into skyscrapers, but the intent was there and treating this incident as garden variety crime does not do it justice.

 

[pcmfisher]

Yep. Messy end to a messy situation.

I got the guy's age wrong and the fact that i thought he would be quiet...but will happily stand by the rest of my prediction. Especially the mental health part.

Violent offender out on bail for sex crimes takes hostages... Has more in common with that violent sociopath who took hostages in a Melbourne brothel a few months back than with a terrorist attack.

Any politician, "security expert" , journalist, shock jock or whoever who bangs on about "terrorist threats" today is full of shit and just trying jump on a bandwagon. That wasn't terorism... it was suicide by cop.

Legitimate questions to be asked about why he was out on bail... and how a known violent offender who was out on bail managed to get hold of guns. But terrorism. Nahhhh.

Cops handled it as well as could be expected. I'm guessing they knew from the outset who he was and that he had zero capacity to organise anything more serious. The commissioner in his press conferences was diplomatically trying to get people to calm the **** down and stop mouthing off. Didn't work though. Abbot needed a terrorism related boost to his popularity. I'm guessing a photo op in the lint cafe will be happening sometime today.

Yes, excellent question in need of answering.

Not terrorism? What is terrorism?

 

[pcmfisher]

Extremely sad outcome, from initial reports sounds like a botched police operation, given what was known why it was allowed to go on so long? Very sad.

I don't know about botched police operation, they can only do what they can, but I can't help but wonder if the outcome would have been different if the SAS were allowed to take over. They are the best of the best. By comparison the police groups look like the Keystone Cops.
Why do we not use the best resources we have available?

 

[Airgead]

On the up side #illridewithyou has become a global thing. And here's me thinking twatter would never be useful for anything.

But yeah... fox news... what do you expect. Surprised no one has sued them for false advertising... force them to change their name to fox rabid right wing opinion.

 

[Black Devil Dog]

I'm not the one redefining the term. Just because he wasn't linked to a particular terrorist organisation, doesn't mean it's not terrorism.

The bloke took innocent hostages, forced them to hold up a black banner with some Islamic verse written on it, also forced the hostages, at gunpoint to make and post video messages.

From what I understand, he was claiming to be a member of I.S. He probably wasn't, but his actions were certainly those of someone inspired by other radical Islamic terrorist groups.

 

[Airgead]

Its all about the connotations of the words. The key thing here is that if we say "terrorist" we get all scared, start hating on anyone with a beard and/or headscarf, ramp up security, sign away our freedoms, walk around looking over our shoulders all the time... all that sort of thing. All the publicity also inspires other nutters with an axe to grind and visions of 78 virgins in paradise.

If we say - lone nutter, we treat it as an isolated incident. We mourn for those lost. We ask sensible questions about how we treat violent offenders. And we move on.

If it is an organised terrorist network then by all means treat it as such. But if its a lone nutter, regardless of what he is forcing hostages to hold up - islamic verse, a nazi flag, the hammer and sickle, or a bunch of daises - we treat it as a lone nutter who should have been in jail or a psych ward if the system had been working properly. Don't give it connotations that it doesn't have.

 

[manticle]

Since there is no one actual accepted definition of terrorism, I guess we could argue that till kingdom come. If it's just instilling terror in people through violence, then I guess Ivan Milat is a terrorist. If it's instilling terror for political or religious motivations then I guess most governments could fit the bill(the word originally referred to the actions of the French state but somehow the state is now immune to such ephitets as everything it does is legitimate).

My point was that it is similar (not identical) to one of the many siege/hostage situations that have occurred in this and other countries at various points in the past. In some instances it might be family law that breaks the camels' back or sexual jealousy or even sometimes a completely unknown motivation. In this case it was religious fundamentalism.

What it was not though, was an orchestrated attack by a fundamentalist Islamic organisation. A reporter on one of the news channels last night suggested that Australians might feel like US citizens after 9-11 which I find not only stupidly dramatic and based on nothing but an affront to those who were involved in the twin towers incident.

None of that takes away from the trauma suffered by hostages, family and friends. I'm really just looking for some proper, well researched and well thought out journalism with integrity to ensue rather than the half baked, sensationalist crap that oozes from most sources (regardless of who owns the station or newspaper - I've seen garbage from ABC, Ten and 9 alike in the last few hours and none of the papers are much better).

 

[manticle]

All true, except for the fact that you don't need to be a card carrying member of a terrorist organisation to commit an act of terrorism.

Sure it wasn't as organised or devastating as flying passenger jets into skyscrapers, but the intent was there and treating this incident as garden variety crime does not do it justice.

I'd never suggest a siege/hostage situation is garden variety anything - far from my intent.

 

[Black Devil Dog]

I'm not sure anyone is saying that it was an orchestrated attack, by any group.

Why, if it's carried out by an organised terrorist network, it's called terrorism, but if it's a single person, acting in much the same way as IS have called on followers around the world to act, it's not?

 

[superstock]

And we let this wacko into the country as a refugee !!

 

[manticle]

I'm not sure anyone is saying that it was an orchestrated attack, by any group.

Why, if it's carried out by an organised terrorist network, it's called terrorism, but if it's a single person, acting in much the same way as IS have called on followers around the world to act, it's not?

Links have been made in the media (consistently) between this and events like 9/11, London bombings, Bali bombings, etc since the cafe was first held to ransom yesterday. There is no similarity between this and those orchestrated attacks yet the implication has been made and no doubt will continue to be.

Call it what you like. I agree with Airgead that it is unhelpful to be using such terms, using it as justification for military involvement in Syria, etc, but if you feel it's really important to distinguish this from a house siege or Julian Knight massacring passers by in Hoddle Street because of some foreign writing, then by all means do so.

 

[S.E]

I don't know about botched police operation, they can only do what they can, but I can't help but wonder if the outcome would have been different if the SAS were allowed to take over. They are the best of the best. By comparison the police groups look like the Keystone Cops.
Why do we not use the best resources we have available?

Well I don’t know, I don’t know the facts but would think the police had the capability of handling it themselves.

The botched bit was leaving it so late and not bringing the situation under control earlier. As he was alone it was never going to be a long siege.

Perhaps they had reason to believe he would start thinking rationally and give up as he became more tired and frustrated and realised his demands were being ignored and his hostages kept escaping.

He was well known to police. He was known to hold extremist views and had a history of violent crime.

He could be clearly seen during the siege and was filmed several times through the window presenting a full body target, so assuming there were snipers in place could have been stopped much earlier.

Just seems to me to be an odd decision to wait till there was gun fire before acting against a lone gunman. I hope I’m wrong and there was a bomb involved or other good reason.

It must be very reassuring to terrorists or anyone else planning something similar to know that they can parade about in front of a window and the police will hold back and hope to take them alive.

 

[Black Devil Dog]

Held to ransom.........really? Seriously mate.

 

[Weizguy]

Its apparent from the press conference held by the NSW premier and the NSW police chief that there is battle waging between the Commonwealth and the state of NSW for ownership of the incident and the spin being put on it.

NSW premier reiterated over and over again that NSW police had the matter in hand, and the police chief said there was no need for offered federal resources.

The take out, is that NSW govt doesn't want to fall prey to the Fed Govt's political agenda.

I'd bloody hope the NSW cops had a handle on it. Probably threw everyone in Sydney at it and probably called in a lot of surrounding command areas, and dragged people in for $$$ Overtime. Overkill is the right amount of kill.

Seems that this is the over-reaction they were hoping for, to distract the public from the upcoming NSW election and the disaster that is the Federal budget.
Both want to take credit for the win, but neither are admitting it was a massive beat-up. Why attract comments from other government leaders, and publicise them?

 

[Eagleburger]

re police action, damned if they did damned if they didnt. commiserations for all involved, even the lawyer.

 

[droid]

remember I.S. calling people to do whatever they could? they were telling people to kill the infidels, with their bare hands, a knife anything. I remember when that came out thinking "here we bloody go"

my point about things not being the same after 911 was in reference to how the police/defences react, how the media reacts and how the public react. we will never be the same again - the game has changed

if people wave a certain flag around make particular comments and usually after such waving/commenting we see people die, well then what? we will never be privy to what the police and defence forces know and from a hysteria point of view that's prolly a good thing, unfortunately we have the sensationalist media to carry that flag

as for taking him out in front of the window - maybe he had told them that he had a bomb in his backpack who knows, I am sure their reasons aren't just thought up on the spot for such things, there would be protocol

god speed and my heart goes out to the families left behind

 

[Feldon]

A lot of people here seem to read too many comics and watch too much TV.

Whenever military or para-military teams (eg NSW police tactical response) are sent into a siege situation there is a high risk of innocent people being killed or injured. That's why they stayed back while the trained negotiators worked to have the hostage-taker surrender. The effort of the police action was to bring the incident to a peaceful conclusion with safety for the hostages.

The police para-military team only went in after shots were fired inside. Information is sketchy on what actually happened, but there are reports that after the hostage-taker started nodding off to sleep one of the hostages tried to disarm him. He awoke and fired his gun. There are standing orders for the para-military outside to go in if the hostages are in immediate peril, and gun fire from within is more than enough to trigger such a response.

It is probable, as it always is in these situations, that hostages have been killed or injured by the para-military that went in to save them. Its impossible to discharge a weapon amongst a crowd of people inside a concrete box without the potential for innocent people to be hurt. There is simply no time to pause and think. That's exactly why armed intervention is and should always be your very, very last response, not your first.

As for those saying the SAS or other army unit be deployed, you need to understand they are the least capable force in this situation.

The police in all states have para-military units that, in big cities like Melbourne and Sydney, are frequently called out to potential siege/hostage situations. They happen all the time (but get less publicity than when Islam is involved, however loosely). As a result police para-military forces are the most experienced and best trained for this sort of situation. They know the lie of the land and are just part of a bigger (unseen) team of negotiators, electronic experts (eavesdropping on the building) and a command and control structure. They all train together and work together in real life situations on a regular basis. Their aim is to minimise bloodshed and arrest the offender and bring the person to justice. Not so the army.

The fed govt military units are, quite simply, very highly trained killers. Negotiation is not their strong point (witness the killing of bin Laden by US Seals - they did not go in to negotiate surrender). Army units have almost no experience in real, live fire urban sieges within Australia. They have experience overseas, buts its a lot different here than shooting up a village in Afghanistan where the media aren't filming.

For those who think maybe the police botched the raid, well, if hurting the innocent is a botch so be it. But innocents will always get hurt when police or army go in with guns. I fully endorse the main intent of the police to bring about a negotiated settlement.

Some people might also be disillusioned by the obviously nervy and jumpy behaviour of the police as they went in. But this real life, not Die Hard the movie. This is how real people, even highly trained police or army, act in real, life-threatening situations.

Reality is stranger than fiction.

 

[manticle]

Held to ransom.........really? Seriously mate.

That's your response to that entire paragraph? Good effort.