Fires

  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

All donations can be made to the Australian Red Cross http://www.redcross.org.au/vic/services ... l-2009.htm

It's nice to see people from other countries willing to give to these Aussies. I think I speak for every Aussie when I thank you from the bottom of my heart!
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Well on the bright side, with all these giant camp fires around you'll have plenty of opportunities to make tim-tam smores. :D
  • LAbrego
  • brego from LA
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2854

Post 3+ Months Ago

ATNO/TW wrote:
For Breeze, Divinyl, musik, jerrek, and so many other of our Aussie members I personally do have a great deal of concern for what you are all going through. I had family affected by the hurricane in New Orleans. I know what it's like for people to lose everything including their lives. I wish there was something I could personally do to help, but there is nothing except my prayers.


I cannot agree more with you ATNO, my prayers for all of you people. Image
  • LAbrego
  • brego from LA
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2854

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
Well on the bright side, with all these giant camp fires around you'll have plenty of opportunities to make tim-tam smores. :D


I had to search in google to see what a Tim-tam was Joe. Man, you're crazy :lol:
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Yeah... my prayers go out to everyone in Australia... if I had money I'd donate but I'm more than bankrupt right now :(
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Is there somewhere equally trustworthy as the Red Cross that Americans can donate using a Paypal button or something ?

I know a few people who shyed away once they saw all of the information being collected at the AU Red Cross site Divinyl linked to.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
Is there somewhere equally trustworthy as the Red Cross that Americans can donate using a Paypal button or something ?

I know a few people who shyed away once they saw all of the information being collected at the AU Red Cross site Divinyl linked to.

https://www.redcross.org.au/Donations/onlineDonations.asp This looks like a valid site with a valid purpose ;)
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

You're right Bogey it does, but some people don't want to jump through hoops to help out. :)
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

PayPal.com.au has a banner at the bottom for the fires - it redirects to the Red Cross, so they must accept PayPal ...
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Breeze wrote:
PayPal.com.au has a banner at the bottom for the fires - it redirects to the Red Cross, so they must accept PayPal ...

lol I just realized that the banner leads you to the page I linked above :D I like Google :P

joebert wrote:
You're right Bogey it does, but some people don't want to jump through hoops to help out. :)

:lol: I just realized that that is practically the same site that Divinyl posted ...
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

One guy was taken to a page looking for credit card details after filling out the form using "anonymous" for all the details.
Apparently they're going to try contacting someone they know in AU and just sending it to them via Paypal for them to do it from there.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Farcical ... they don't like making it easy, do they?
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

I guess some people just like to remain anonymous when making donations. It really doesn't make much sense to me, I'd think that even Paypal would blow anonymity out of the water.
People are strange.

And about these fires, some of the photos/video-clips I've seen it looks like the homes could have been in the middle of the desert with no trees and they still would have been burned. :shock:
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Yeah - I'm a bit surprised that there wasn't more loss of life or property with the conditions we've had ... the firies really did their job. The weather's done a full 180 here in Sydney ... we've had tops of 20 degrees Celsius for the last three or four days, which is really weird in February, and from what I hear it's cooling in Victoria too, although more hot weather is expected next week.

Gotta love Sam the koala.
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8742
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Sam the koala?
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

SB wrote:
Sam the koala?

I was thinking the same thing. link 2nd link
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/ ... 61,00.html

*/ Edit: didn't realised Bogey already posted the link - I was only looking at the third page */
  • musik
  • Legend
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 6893
  • Loc: up a tree

Post 3+ Months Ago

hi peoples, yes terrible whats happening the after effects of the fires and some still burning in areas of victoria.

our house is still standing. we were home when it hit but thankfully it didnt come up to the house.

we lost a number of people we know including one family with 3 kids.

its very sad.

i can understand how the people of hurrincane katrina felt, and those poor people got no immediate assistance and it was on a much bigger scale too, there is a lot we have learnt from the H.Katrina which have been avoided in our situation so we are getting the support we need to move on.

hope you and yours are all well,
love, Rose xxxx
  • musik
  • Legend
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 6893
  • Loc: up a tree

Post 3+ Months Ago

PS: yes in most country areas they fine you if you remove trees around your house my friend bought a bush block and they said she removed too many trees around her house site and she got fined $50,000

I think there will be a heck of a lot of law suits with local councils after this...
  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

Huge hugs Rose. I have been thinking about you alot lately and waiting for your post, cos I know you are in country Victoria. Good to hear your safe.
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

musik wrote:
PS: yes in most country areas they fine you if you remove trees around your house my friend bought a bush block and they said she removed too many trees around her house site and she got fined $50,000

I think there will be a heck of a lot of law suits with local councils after this...

It was the job of the head of state to arrest all those officials who were fining people for doing what they needed to do to make their homes safe - arrest officials fining people for doing the right thing and arrest their superior officials allowing inferior officials to fine the people doing the right thing.

The head of state, as commander in chief is responsible and is empowered to act for the defence of the people and has a duty to act, always.

A good head of state's reaction to local councils, the State of Victoria, other states and the Commonwealth of Australia endangering people (and it was the head of state's duty to know this) recklessly setting people up to be burned to death in their own homes, should have been to send the military in to arrest those bad officials, bad heads of councils and bad heads of state governments and bad prime minister.

Then the local authority and state officials would need lawyers to get themselves out of military detention. Obviously, elected parliamentarians should not be banned from parliament, even while under military arrest - they should be escorted to and from parliament under arrest as their duties in parliament require.
Democracy demands that the voice of the people's elected representatives be heard at all times.

A good head of state would not have released those bad officials until and unless he or she was getting cast-iron assurances that not only were those bad officials going to stop fining people for removing trees around their homes in bush-fire prone regions, that in addition those self-same officials were instead going to start fining people if they did NOT remove trees around their homes to make them safe.

When the government - local, state or commonwealth is so stupid, so reckless, so thoughtless as to the lethal consequences of their perverse actions or inaction - there is no time to waste.

A head of state must act decisively to save lives. If necessary, the head of state should declare a state of emergency and call on the military to impose martial law under the authority of the head of state and the constitution, to impose rational emergency government, to authorise bold, forceful actions to do what needs to be done to safe lives as a matter of urgency.

Nero fiddled while Rome burned - Nero was a bad head of state who should have been removed.

Queen Elizabeth did what she does while Australians burned in their homes - Queen Elizabeth is a bad head of state who should be removed.

Are the dangers of bush fires unheard of? No.
The Guardian wrote:
Australia's previous deadliest bushfires were the so-called Ash Wednesday fires in 1983 when 75 people were killed and more than 3,000 homes destroyed in the southern states of Victoria and South Australia.

Maybe someone sued the local councils after those deaths but it did not save people this time, did it?

Prime Ministers of Australia since 1983 have had no excuse that they had no way of knowing that lives were at risk. Of course lives have been at risk but Australians PMs ever since have done nothing except allow local councils to increase the danger by stopping people cutting down trees around their houses.

Every PM since then has failed to make Australia safe for Australians.

But above all of those failing Prime Ministers, the Queen as head of state has failed and will go on failing as head of state until she is removed by Australians calling on their own military to defend Australians from their enemy - the enemy of Australians is Queen Elizabeth - or at least with friends like her, Australians don't need any enemies.

So I advise Australians to ask your own military to ban all the royal family from Australia and arrest the Governor General, Quentin Bryce.

I assure you that the Australian military are brave soldiers and they will not lie skulking in their barracks like stinking cowards while the Queen allows Australians to burn. No, Australian officers and enlisted men and women are better and braver than that. They will fight for Australians to live safely and free of a rotten head of state like Queen Elizabeth.

Then Australian republicans should draft a republican constitution (although I suppose they may have one drafted already) which allows Australians to elect your own president as head of state.

Only when you have elected an Australian President should the matter of the release of Quentin Bryce from military arrest be considered by the president for his or her disposal. Until that time Bryce should remain in military detention.

Do this as soon as possible and save yourselves from future deaths caused by Queen Elizabeth or her idiot son Charles.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter Dow wrote:
It was the job of the head of state to arrest all those officials who were fining people for doing what they needed to do to make their homes safe.


No. The officials are following the law, and they can't be arrested for doing that. Arrests won't change much, what will is a change in law.

Peter Dow wrote:
The Guardian wrote:
Australia's previous deadliest bushfires were the so-called Ash Wednesday fires in 1983 when 75 people were killed and more than 3,000 homes destroyed in the southern states of Victoria and South Australia.


Maybe someone sued the local councils after those deaths but it did not save people this time, did it?


I think that's actually the first good point you've made. But you still go out of your way to blame the wrong people.
  • xcmonx
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • xcmonx
  • Posts: 13

Post 3+ Months Ago

It is not what is said but what is done. If you are being strangled what does it matter what the strangler says? It matters naught. What matters is that the strangler is obstructing the flow of air to your lungs and the flow of oxygenated blood to your brain. Should the strangler recite the Lord's Prayer while doing so it would make no difference.

The Queen by simply remaining as monarch of Australia is preventing Australians electing a good president of an Australian republic. It doesn't matter if she says nothing. By remaining she is preventing a president speaking as head of state of Australia - that is all the difference she needs to make to destroy Australian democracy and allow mass deaths in bush-fires and other disasters.

Breeze wrote:
That is what the Australian Government is for (if it works or not, and the Queen is not to blame if the Australian Government doesn't work, either). I for one happen to think that our election process successfully appoints the more favoured candidate, which for over a year has been Kevin Rudd. If we thought he was to blame you'd hear about it, because his head would be on a stick on Fort Denison.

Well I presume you Australians have heard the phrase "Her Majesty's Government'? The Queen appoints the Prime Minister, or perhaps she gets her Governor General to do it and she appoints the Governor General which amounts to the same thing.

Therefore the Queen is exactly to blame for the Australian Government. If the head of state appoints a poor Prime Minister then the head of state is to blame for the failures of the Prime Minister.

Why are poor candidates favoured by the population? Mainly because poor candidates are the ones promoted by the broadcasters, controlled by officials who have gained power thanks to the monarchy and who don't want politicians who are going to remove the monarchy and replace it with a proper republic.

Of course Rudd as Prime Minister is to blame. Don't tell me that trees and bushes and other tinder which could spread a fire to a wooden house could not have been cleared from the vicinity of houses in one year.

It takes more than embers floating on the wind to set alight a wooden house. Embers and sparks can only set alight tinder - dried leaves, grasses and twigs. It takes a lot of radiant heat from a neighbouring fire to set a solid house constructed from planks of wood on fire. If you have nothing but concrete or ploughed earth or sand or dirt or other incombustible surface material surrounding even a wooden house then it is highly unlikely to catch fire from sparks and embers floating in on the wind.

It could have been done easily in one year. Rudd did not order it. He did not push such legislation through the parliament. He did not declare a state of emergency. He did nothing.

Doing that alone would not save the bush from fires but it would have saved houses and towns from bush-fires.

The head of Rudd on a stick would do you no good if the next PM was also appointed by Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles or anyone except an elected president of a republic.

It is the Queen's head we need to put on a stick, or send her and her family into exile. Isn't there a small island that Napoleon was sent to - there will do. :lol:

Breeze wrote:
You also have very little understanding of how such fires work in Australia. Our land is very dry, and as such everything burns that much more easily than it would in most of Europe. We also have hot summers and winters that you'd probably call summers. Australia is meant to burn - it rejuvenates the land by opening and spreading seeds.

If we had all these fire safety standards that you're yapping on about it wouldn't matter. 750 homes would still be a pile of ash, twisted corrugated iron and a lone chimney, like my grandmother's was on Christmas Day in 2001, and 181 (possibly more) would still be dead.

Our fires, when the conditions for them are favourable, simply cannot be easily contained. They spread so fast - I've heard of some exceeding 130km/h - and they grow to phenomenal sizes.

On Christmas morning, 2001, my grandmother left home for her daughter's house ... there was a small bushfire many kilometres (and a gorge) away. By 2pm her house was burning (as well as half of the town), one of her cats was dead and the other was cowering in one of the only places to have survived, the neighbour's garage. The neighbour on the other side was a volunteer firefighter, who had made his home as fire-safe as possible. It burned, too.

The only bushfire safety regulation that would be effective would make it mandatory that all houses are built out of metre-thick concrete external walls and are built at least ten metres underground.

Drongo.

Complete rubbish. You are just being ridiculous.

I have seen on TV pictures of burnt out houses in Australia and they had burnt out trees right next to them.

So cut the trees and bushes down, cut the grass back or even plough it under. Apply herbicide to stop it growing back. If you want style, lay concrete or pebbles around the houses. Lots of options there.

Also having a sufficient supply of water and fire hoses (and pumps where the pressure is low or where water comes from a local tank) and such like to put out fires would be a good fire-safety measure too. Just in case all other measures don't work.

No doubt there are also expensive fire-retardant coverings to apply to the outside of wooden houses as well but removing things that burn from the vicinity would be the easiest and cheapest way to go I believe.

Brick or concrete houses don't catch fire from the outside. That is why they use brick to construct fire chimneys even in wooden houses.

The science of stopping things catching fire is understood (not by you obviously) but what is lacking is the political will to do what needs to be done - writing new regulations and fining or imprisoning reckless people who don't follow the new regulations.
Peter Dow's Scottish National Standard Bearer website

* Bogey
* Ounce of 'Zu'
* Genius
* User avatar
*
o Private message
o Website
* Joined: 14 Jul 2005
* Posts: 5958
* Loc: Ozzuland
* Status: Offline

* Reply with quote
* Mark post as unread
* Report this post

Post February 10th, 2009, 7:43 pm
I've got a few points to make here...

1) You're Scottish telling an Australian that the Australian doesn't know his country

2) Have you considered that for everything that goes wrong, it is easy to blame the government? Just think of all of the conspiracy theories for many deaths in America... the "truth" behind the Kennedy Assassination... the "truth" behind the 9-11 incident... whatever

3) Flaming other people and Australians about their "lack" of knowledge and their "perverse" way of concluding your rants here would accomplish nothing but more flaming and perverse way of concluding your ever continues rant of others being 50 times dumber than you...

4) Obviously, you are one of the conspiracy theorist and believers...

You are right at how to prevent fires and whatever :roll: anyone could do that... see a fire put some water no fire ta*da *applaud*

What to do to prevent fires from spreading... move anything flammable away from the source of fire... gosh Einstein, thanks for mentioning. I'll move that 50 tank of gasoline away from my house, because I totally expect an arsonist to come by anytime now!

I wonder which source is better... T.V. or seeing it first hand... whatever, you being the genius here and the smart conspiracy theorist would be able to figure that one out.


Anyway, why the hell, did this topic go way out of hand? All it started out as being is a simple statement of what was happening in Australia and not a political rant coming from people quarter of the world away.
Creed - One ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Metallica - Blackened
Sixx:AM - Life is Beautiful

* Breeze
* Professor
* Professor
* User avatar
*
o Private message
o Website
* Joined: 22 Apr 2007
* Posts: 903
* Loc: Australia
* Status: Offline

* Reply with quote
* Mark post as unread
* Report this post

Post February 11th, 2009, 1:18 am
Peter Dow wrote:
You don't know people like me. People like me are few and far between.


And there's a good reason for that.

Peter Dow wrote:
Complete rubbish. You are just being ridiculous.


Hypocritical. You can't detect sarcasm really easy can you, Drongo?

I suppose if I ever have the unpleasant experience of visiting your home I would see:
- All trees/bushes and vegetation cleared for at least 100m around
- Several lightning rods
- Bat-mobile-style armour to cover your house in case there is an explosion, nuclear warfare, or aircraft incident
- A bunker, just in case
- Retaining walls 100m high in case of land-slides/floods
- Super glue so you can glue the earth back together if there is an earthquake
- Bullet-proof glass (you should invest in this - there are likely some half-maniacs who will over-react to you senseless rants and try to assassinate you ... I say half-maniacs because at least they have decent common sense, you, however, seem to be a full maniac)
- Icebergs. What weapons they'll be - sinking the "unsinkable" and all. Well, you probably think the Titanic didn't actually sink and was stolen, stripped and sold for parts by the Royals, and that the titanic we see from "real" footage is actually a model in a dark, smoke filled room with blue lights.
-Spam filters. No wonder people spammed and prank called y
  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

Umm, the Australian Prime Minister is NOT elected by the Queen, they are elected by the Australian people. I wish people would get their facts right before mouthing off about something they know nothing about.

The Victorian fires were caused SOLELY by arsonists and weather conditions. I don't know how people are continuing to badger someone who has nothing to do with how much "fuel" there is on the ground. It has nothing to do with our federal government, nothing whatsoever.

Anyway, they have just released another weather warning for Victoria, http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/758 ... fire-fears so these people need lots more prays and thoughts right now.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

xcmonx wrote:
The Queen by simply remaining as monarch of Australia is preventing Australians electing a good president of an Australian republic. It doesn't matter if she says nothing. By remaining she is preventing a president speaking as head of state of Australia - that is all the difference she needs to make to destroy Australian democracy and allow mass deaths in bush-fires and other disasters.

Alright... let's say that before any of the bush fires happened the Queen stepped off her throne and created a true Democracy and the happy people of Australia elect themselves a good and honest president. When the fires happened in the term of the good and honest president... would you blame the president about it?

Just because Australia is not a God forsaken democracy, it doesn't mean that the Government is corrupt for Heaven's sake.

Or are you saying that the fires happened just because Australia is a monarchy?
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Bogey wrote:
xcmonx wrote:
The Queen by simply remaining as monarch of Australia is preventing Australians electing a good president of an Australian republic. It doesn't matter if she says nothing. By remaining she is preventing a president speaking as head of state of Australia - that is all the difference she needs to make to destroy Australian democracy and allow mass deaths in bush-fires and other disasters.

Alright... let's say that before any of the bush fires happened the Queen stepped off her throne and created a true Democracy and the happy people of Australia elect themselves a good and honest president. When the fires happened in the term of the good and honest president... would you blame the president about it?

Just because Australia is not a God forsaken democracy, it doesn't mean that the Government is corrupt for Heaven's sake.

Or are you saying that the fires happened just because Australia is a monarchy?

xcmonx is quoting me so I should answer.

The responsibility was not to prevent bush-fires but to prevent the deaths.

The deaths could have been prevented by creating effective fire breaks around properties and main roads.

Other measures such as fire-fighting equipment and a sufficient supply of water would supplement the essential fire-breaks.

The state should have INSISTED that such measures were taken. Instead the state INSISTED that fire-break measures were NOT taken - people being MOST PERVERSELY fined for clearing trees around their houses.

Now faced with a lethally stupid state which is risking people lives and getting people killed, the fault lies with the head of state.

It is an STATE OF EMERGENCY situation and the head of state needs to declare that and send in the military to kick the officials into doing the right thing to save lives.

The Queen didn't act so she failed yet again as head of state as she always does fail so no surprise there.

Now I am repeating myself, so please re-read MY posts.

Instead of learning that you needed a republic and a good president to save lives, Australians have been fooled into inviting Princess Anne to Australia to say how sorry the royals were WHEN IT WAS THE MONARCHY'S FAULT THAT 200+ PEOPLE DIED.

You are not learning your lesson and more people are going to die unnecessarily, not just in bush-fires but across the range of preventable disasters.

The disaster is the deaths. Bush-fires happen, big deal, no sweat for a good president.

With a stupid Queen, the least thing that happens - many deaths.

Learn it or condemn more innocents to die.
  • graphixboy
  • Control + Z
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1828
  • Loc: In the Great White North

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter Dow wrote:
The disaster is the deaths. Bush-fires happen, big deal, no sweat for a good president.

With a stupid Queen, the least thing that happens - many deaths.

Learn it or condemn more innocents to die.


I'm really confused about why you think that the type of rule and political reach are any different with a president lead democracy then a monarchy. I've heard a lot of suppositions and no facts to backup your assumption that a presidency would solve these problems.

I happen to live in a country with a president and, while I think the current one is doing a pretty good job, his hands are very tied in every matter. A president cannot create laws without getting a majority of the senate and house to agree with him. This is even more true in a regional or local setting where the president has NO direct influence on laws of the independent states (states are run by their own governors and state congress).

Now to site a recent example: The Gulf coast of the United States was hit by a large hurricane. Flood control systems and levies failed (in many cases due to poor up keep which could have been legislated) and people died. Now if its so easy for a president to prevent such a catastrophe then why did people die?

If anything your argument is backward. A monarch (at least in a true sense) has power to act without getting permission and would therefore be much better equipped to deal with a national disaster.

So out of curiosity when was the last time you lived, payed taxes and voted in a democratic country? The grass is always greener on the other side, but when your here you realize there are problems with this form of governance too. Sooner or later it becomes apparent that the greed and selfishness inherent in human nature (regardless of skin color or nationality) pose a bigger threat to anyone's ability to rule/make laws/prevent deaths/prevent recessions/etc than any governmental theory. I'd like to remind you that socialism works very well in theory, but has major problems as soon as human nature is involved.

It seems to me that if you would dedicate half as much effort to humanitarian efforts as have to monarchy rant in this forum alone you could probably save a few lives yourself. The people affected by fires, hunger, abuse, disease, homelessness etc the world over cannot be helped by placing blame. If you want to show up the Queen than go out and act the way a monarch should act. Go buy a plane ticket to Australia, pick up a hammer and help people start rebuilding their lives.
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13502
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

If it makes anyone feel better, I pruned the hell out of the mango tree outside my place before the weekend. :D
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8388
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter Dow wrote:
Other measures such as fire-fighting equipment and a sufficient supply of water would supplement the essential fire-breaks.

So... Democracy is magic... they create sufficient supply of water... something the Queen lacks... how did I ever have overseeing this? How did I not see that the Queen doesn't have magic powers to create sufficient water supply to put down the fires?

If they have voted for the type of government they wanted and they voted for the Queen, then what freaking more do you want? If they chose the Queen using Democratic technique... the freaking people chose the Queen over republic... if you don't think that's democratic, go take a poo.

If people chose the Queen over a republic, and you still argue that it is not democratic way to do it and that the people of Australia would be happier with a republic... then that means you know what they want better than they themselves.

Geeze... please tell me what I want right now. I keep telling myself that I want to get money right now... maybe I'm wrong... maybe that the least thing I want... maybe I really do want to stay in debt. Please enlighten me.



:lol: back to topic... I have no clue where that came from. Nothing personal... really.

Sorry to hear that the weather is coming back to being 'fire-friendly'. Hope that another fire doesn't start and fuel theory seekers with more extravagant theories.

:lol: @ joebert... Maybe those bushes 5 inches away from my house should be chopped of??? Why didn't the government gave us a big fat fine with a big pair of scissors about it? Don't they care about fires???
  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

Alright I am going to say this once more, cos no one seems to be listening. We elect our government, and IF ANYONE knew anything, our system for laws, politics, etc is ALMOST IDENTICAL to the USA, BECAUSE, they were once under the monarchy, its called the common law system, and variations of the same law are used in the US, Canada, New Zealand, India and the list goes, the only difference between Australia and the US is that we don't have a president. Look it up here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law

Our laws are passed the same way, but the federal government just as in the US doe not have power over state laws. The queen has no power in this country, she does not have the right to walk in here and tell us how to run the place, the ONLY thing she has the power to do is elect a governor general, WHO in reality is really the president, cos she signs and makes laws the law, just like the president does, and she can dismiss our prime minister if they give a legitimate reason to be dismissed (its only happened once in history that I know of). And really that's all she can do.

Now with the water thing, how do you propose a country like Australia have an unlimited water supply when our country has been in drought for over 10 years? How do you suppose we make it rain over the fires when we hardly ever get rain and when we do, its barely enough to put a dent in the drought. I don't see how you can blame the head of state for the lack of water in this country.

I don't understand how people are thinking, but anyway. Maybe you should visit Australia, or even talk to an Aussie person about how you think our country is retarded because we let the queen boss us around, you'll soon find out Aussie's don't take lightly to being told they are stupid enough to let the queen tell us what to do, when it isn't true. It just goes to show, not many people here know what we are like.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 60 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: spork and 56 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
cron
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.