Bali Massacre

[Redbone]

Originally posted here by aut0psy
Perhaps negotiations to radical groups or should we develop systems and special task forces to deal with them?

I don't think that negotiations with terrorist groups is an option. If they cared what the other side had to say then they wouldn't be blowing people up.

I can't remember who said it, but I remember reading it years ago..."Sometimes peace can only be obtained through the absolute use of force." There are times when you just have to blow the bad guys away for there to be peace.

[Tedob1]

First off think I should say, what happened is not the fault of “Muslims” and Allah any more than the Jamestown Gahanna Massacre or the Branch Dividians are the fault of Christians and Christ. The Muslims that live in the material world with us are just as much the infidels as we are.

What happened in Bali was not aimed at the Australians or the British or even the citizens of Bali. It was aimed at the entire non-Muslim world in general by a group of twisted fanatics that want to force their beliefs on the whole world. They want a war with us. That’s obvious. They believe their version of Allah will make them victorious. This is no longer about Israel its just about maddness. There is going to be a showdown.

[Chuck56]

That's about right, Ted, and isn't it always the way? The ninety nine percent of decent people in the world pay for the sins of the one percent.

[Phat_Penguin]

Tedob1

I agree and somewhat disagree with what you say, as funny as that may say. In the broad sense of the attacks - yes, they are targetting the non-muslims of the world, the same could be said of Sept 11, but in more specific sense these people/groups are going to make a concerted effort to make examples of those they wish most harm against.

I believe this was a direct attack on Australia in an area the terrorist knew was going to be predominantly Australian, Bali has always been a mecca for young Australians who are looking for a cheap overseas holiday and many would have been from the West Coast where I live. The bar in question had a "no Indonesian" policy which meant as a target, the attackers knew local casualties would be minimal, if none at all and Australian casualties high.

Whether it turns out to be as C_K says, because of our involvement in East Timor and/or our clear alignment with the US, one may never know as confessing to these attacks is never one of their strong points. I tend to think it could be a combination of both.

Whatever the reason, these means will never justify the end.

I have seen four names so far from the survivors list that I know personally - some had just finished a tour as UN peacekeepers in East Timor - a postition I had nominated for in the past, but a serious car accident involving my wife left me unable to fulfill the role.

The names of those dead and missing are still unknown and the torment for these families must be the same as those who lost loved ones in the Sept 11 attacks.

While this is plain madness, the actions of these individuals are not going to impinge on my lifestyle and I see no reason to fear or despise the law abiding, peaceful people who follow the religion of Islam in this or any other country. I would hate to see radicals here target these people with the same blind hatred and bigotry displayed by the terrorists - two "wrongs" will never make a "right".

I would travel to Bali tomorrow if I had the opportunity if for no other reason but to support the Balinese and shove it up the noses of the bombers.

The letters from overseas writers to out local newspaper extending sympathy and condolences have been warmly received and should they ever get a chance to read this, I would like to thank them for taking the time to think of us "down under" and this is also extended to the writers in this forum.

[ntsa]

anger..frustration...desperate need to beat sh1t out of someone. I am still reeling from the this.

Chasing extremists through the swamps and jungles of 14,000 indonesian islands is both reactionary and pointless however. Maybe this further tradgedy will finally steel international reslove to go after state sponsosrs of terrorism, cutting off the terrorists sources of funding, intelligence and arms.

We in the Uk are now gearing up (in terms of vaccinated medical staff, and vaccine) for a terrorist launched biological attack of small-pox. (The announcement went along the lines of, "No-one panic, but we want to buy enough small-pox vaccine to innoculate every man woman and child in the country"). It would almost seem that this is a reaction to a specific, but as yet unrevealed, threat to the population. The UK CME descibed an outbreak as, "just a matter of time".

No-ones shores are safe, every westerner is a target, civilian or not. Because of the nature of the conflict we are unlikley to be able to engage the enemy in a stand up knock down fight. For dealing with the individual terrorist the approach of the Mossad (small groups of highly trained special forces operating in terrorist style cells, to find and inhume the terrorists) is the only logical approach. But in taking this war to the enemy on an appreciable scale we have to take a pro-active approach aginst the sponsors of world terrorism. We know who they are, the UN knows who they are. It's time we did something about it. Certainly this attrocity in Bali proves that inaction in this regard does not reduce the risk of a further attrocity.

[Conf1rm3d_K1ll]

ntsa, Phat Penguin- It's good to see such common sense posts (instead of the "kill 'em all" shite that usually goes with these posts) on such a difficult topic....


I had always believed in the saying "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter"...Perhaps I still do. I had always understood (and not always agreed with) the assassination of a political figure or the destroying of a Government building. It makes sense, in a macabre kind of way...


But to kill so many innocent, working class people is beyond me. Wether it be 9/11, Bali, or even infecting the UK (has ntsa suggested) with smallpox. What does it achieve? IMHO, all it does is turn what little support the terrorists had into total hatred...You aren't going to win the sympathy of the masses with such actions....


I'm a member of The Australian Socialist Party (who would've guessed!). Even these people are in total shock...It's just plain crazy. We all want change....but killing innocent people? It seems to me that it's just killing for the sake of killing. I see no political point whatsoever...

[Mahakaal]

I hate to bring this back to the front page, but I was curious after ConfirmedKill's post saying something about Australian involvement in East Timor. So here's an excerpt from an article about the Australian govt's relationship with the Indonesian govt...

Disclaimer: This is not to justify killing whatsover, but merely to shed some light on the background.

State terrorism, backed by America, Britain and Australia, has scarred Indonesia for the past 40 years. For example, the source of the worst violence is the Indonesian army, which the West has supported and armed. Today, troops continue to terrorise the provinces of Aceh and West Papua, where they are "protecting" the American Exxon oil company's holdings and the Freeport mine.

In West Papua, the army openly supports an Islamic group, Lashkar Jihad, which is linked to al-Qaeda.

THIS is the same army which the Australian government trained for decades and publicly defended when its terrorism became too blatant.

In 1999, when the people of Australia's closest northern neighbour, East Timor, which had been invaded and annexed by the Indonesia dictatorship of General Suharto, finally had an opportunity to vote for independence and freedom, it was the government of John Howard that betrayed them. Although warned by Australia's intelligence agencies that the Indonesian army was setting up militias to terrorise the population, Howard and his foreign minister, Alexander Downer, claimed they knew nothing; and the massacres went ahead. As leaked documents have since revealed, they did know.

This was only the latest in Australia's long complicity with state terrorism in Indonesia, which makes a mockery of the self-deluding declarations last week that Australia had "lost its innocence" in Bali. Certainly, few Australians are aware that not far from their holiday hotels are mass graves with the remains of some of more than 80,000 people murdered in Bali in 1965-66 with the connivance of the Australian government.

Recently-released files reveal that when the Indonesian tyrant General Suharto seized power in the 1960s, he did so with the secret backing of the American, British and Australian governments, which looked the other way or actively encouraged the slaughter of more than half a million "communists". This was later described by the CIA as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th Century".

The Australian Prime Minister at the time, Harold Holt, quipped: "With 500,000 to a million communist sympathisers knocked off, I think it's safe to assume a reorientation has taken place." Holt's remark accurately reflected the collaboration of the Australian foreign affairs and political establishment. The Australian embassy in Jakarta described the massacres as a "cleansing process". In Canberra, officals in the Prime Minister's department expressed support for "any measures to assist the Indonesian army cope with the internal situation".

Entire article can be found here

[Tedob1]

And once again big money plunders for more money and we have to pay the price.

This happened, i have no doubt. So why is the comman man targeted and not exxon and the rest, or even defense sites or government buildings. What are we supposed to say, ok you have a right to be angry, kill who you like. we understand?

[Spyder32]

Agreed, and to add, I only have to say this and it's simple: Why does it take a 9/11 or Bali in order for countries to see that terror exsists widely in today's world. I think we really need to combat terror with full force and that countries really need a wake-up call, just not a massacre to wake them up. They need to see it now, before it punches them in the face and then they respond. This is all strickly JMO, but I do think that countries need to find out what they call peace. If countries such as Iraq say they want peace, why do they invade other's countries for land, oil, etc. Again, I think they need to define for me their definition of peace.

[Mahakaal]

To Tedob1,

I was not justifying killing, and no, no one should take it laying down. But people also need to make their govts accountable. Transparency is key, no more black ops and the like. No more overthrowing democracies( Iran in '53 coz Mossadeq decided to nationalize the oil industry ), which lead people like Khomeini to power. No more Pinochet, Noriega Zia(who incidentally was....erhhmm..."liquidated " when he outgrew his usefulness), and a supporting cast of thousands.

End rant

To Spyder,

define peace for me will ya?