Fires

  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

I'm really surprised and stunned at the current death count in the "Bush Fires" just north of Melbourne in Australia. Yesterday i checked out the news and it was at 108 people, at the moment the figures is as high as 170.

Sad thing is that arsonists might have added to the fires too which is not only disturbing but really frightening to think there are people that are out there that would do that for their own amusement.

As some of you probably know i spent most of my time in Melbourne when i was in Australia for 6 months, i've no doubt i drove through the area that the fires are burning north of the city. The thing that doesn't surprise me about the current situation is the weather, the temperatures were reaching 47C (116F) the other day and that the city itself hadn't had any rain for 8 weeks. As a result of the heatwave they are having (and have had for the last decade) the water reserves in the south east coast of the country is alarmingly low. I just wonder what water the firemen have been using to tackle the fires.

Hopefully the fires don't claim any more lives and they are put out very soon, i also hope that the area gets a crap load of rain over the coming days and weeks. I have my doubts about that though unfortunately.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 878106.stm
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Australia counts deadly fire toll, BBC News, Monday, 9 February 2009

Australian bush-fires: mass manslaughter by the Queen :x

Another royal disaster - this time in Australia - 170 deaths in bush fires which a good president of an Australian republic should have prevented.

This story merits attention because human lives have been lost which could have been saved and it is important to save lives wherever possible. There is an absolutely urgent need to explain to the world political community how the failure of Queen Elizabeth as head of state is leading to one disaster after another and this news story is simply the latest disaster for which she as head of state is responsible.

If people can be educated about the failure of the Queen, as I am trying to do here and in my website, then political action can be taken to have revolutions in countries like Australia (and Scotland where I stay) to change these Windsor realm countries into republics which can then elect a competent president as head of state who can then insist on action to save lives.

The Queen is to blame for these fire deaths. Why?

  • The Queen allowed a poor Australian Prime Minster - Rudd who did not prevent the bush-fire deaths.
  • The Queen allowed the usual suppression of Rudd's critics
  • The Queen allowed poor building regulations and/or poor enforcement of regulations which should be making houses and their immediate location fire-proof. Instead, trees and other tinder have been allowed too close to houses, houses built which burn too easily and so on
  • The Queen allowed arsonists to roam the country free the same as scum are allowed to roam free here in Scotland and other countries the Queen rules.
So people should fear that the Queen, Prince Charles and the royalists, until they are stopped, are going to cause many more deaths of innocent people.

The Australian armed forces shouldn't fear the Queen though - they should enforce a ban on the royal family visiting Australia and arrest the Queen's Governor General as a first step towards an Australian republic.
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Wow that whole shpeal almost makes me wonder if these arsonists started the fires in an attempt to make this queen look bad.

Quote:
The Queen allowed poor building regulations and/or poor enforcement of regulations which should be making houses and their immediate location fire-proof. Instead, trees and other tinder have been allowed too close to houses, houses built which burn too easily and so on


So the queen is responsible for home owners not being smart enough to take care of their property ?

That doesn't make any sense to me.
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
Wow that whole shpeal almost makes me wonder if these arsonists started the fires in an attempt to make this queen look bad.

I didn't suggest that and it is a perverse conclusion from my text.

joebert wrote:
Quote:
The Queen allowed poor building regulations and/or poor enforcement of regulations which should be making houses and their immediate location fire-proof. Instead, trees and other tinder have been allowed too close to houses, houses built which burn too easily and so on


So the queen is responsible for home owners not being smart enough to take care of their property ?

That doesn't make any sense to me.

Well some people have heard of building regulations - legal requirements which must be designed in to the design of a house by architects and properly implemented by builders.

Simple things mostly - requiring that the house is safe to live in, not built as fire-death-traps - that kind of thing. :roll:

Now obviously in a region where bush-fires occur building regulations should be appropriate for the region.

Now either the Australian regulations do not require the sort of measures I have outlined to make the buildings reasonably bush-fire proof or they do require such measures but they are not enforced.

Getting building regulations right and properly enforced is a matter of law and politics.

Now when politics is suppressed and made undemocratic, as it always is under the Queen ...

- members of parliament suppressed, threatened or actually excluded from parliament if they annoy the majority of MPs.

- the media strictly controlled so as to avoid embarrassment to politicians and state officials

- the right to protest on unusual single issues like building regulations suppressed - persons arrested, jailed or sectioned in mental hospitals ("must be mad" or whatever the officials say when someone really protests so loudly and in a high-profile way which is so embarrassing to the powers that be that he or she cannot simply be ignored)

... then when conditions like this apply then the state is acting undemocratically and the failure is a failure of the head of state who has failed to remove the ministers or judges or police chiefs or whoever is responsible for suppressing democracy.

In Australia, in this case, the Queen simply by remaining as head of state yet not doing the duty of head of state which was to remove Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister is to blame.

The main reason that a good president of an Australian republic did not remove Rudd for incompetence and suppressing democracy was that the Queen as monarch is in the way of a republic, as always.

Now I KNOW none of this makes any sense to you. It simply is the case that most people are brainwashed by the media into misunderstanding what is wrong with the monarchy - all Australians are usually told is that the problem with the Queen is said to be that she is "not Australian" and that, so you are told, is the problem. Not so.

I am sorry. You are ignorant and you have been deceived. There is a real job of president and head of state to be done and it involves sacking rotten politicians from being ministers and defending the right of the people to a proper democracy rather than an elected dictatorship.

The hatred of republicanism amongst the political elite in the Queen's realm countries like Australia and Britain is why many Australian politicians tried to fob Australians off with a bad system of a rotten so-called "republic" whereby the parliament would elect the president - so the parliament could stop a good president sacking a bad prime minister and insisting on free speech inside and outside parliament, even when that free speech is extremely offensive to the stupid majority of MPs.

The president needs to be elected independently of the parliament - the parliament's role is sometimes to impeach the president on a 2/3 or 3/4 vote, remove the president from office and have a new election for president.

A parliament which elects a president is still a majority dictatorship, not a democracy which means "government by all the people".

Gosh - a lot to explain! :D
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

The bottom line is if these people would have quit watching TV and worrying about what everyone else is doing, and took care of their houses and neighborhoods, their houses wouldn't be getting burned down now.

Yes there are people who do take care of their stuff and are getting the spitty end of the stick here, but it's not the queens fault.

If your neighbor is a jerkoff and doesn't take care of their property, ride their ass or move to a better kept area.

Blaming the queen is a cop out. Most likely a cop out by people who didn't take care of their home and want to point the finger somewhere, or people who have an agenda for overthrowing the queen.

If you want to blame someone, blame god, (s)he invented fire in the first place.
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
The bottom line is if these people would have quit watching TV and worrying about what everyone else is doing, and took care of their houses and neighborhoods, their houses wouldn't be getting burned down now.

Yes there are people who do take care of their stuff and are getting the spitty end of the stick here, but it's not the queens fault.

If your neighbor is a jerkoff and doesn't take care of their property, ride their ass or move to a better kept area.

Blaming the queen is a cop out. Most likely a cop out by people who didn't take care of their home and want to point the finger somewhere, or people who have an agenda for overthrowing the queen.

If you want to blame someone, blame god, (s)he invented fire in the first place.

Wrong. If your next-door neighbour is storing 100 tonnes of dynamite in his back-garden which is endangering your property as well as his own, it is a matter for law and regulation and enforcement and at the end of the day, the guy goes to jail for endangering the community.

The same should apply to neighbours who have trees too close to their house and yours which pose a fire risk to your property. Cut the trees down or go to jail.

Now where the Queen is to blame is royalists like to go with the flow of the lazy majority who don't always see the need for enforcing new legislation, unless there has just been a big disaster with lots of lives lost, then even the lazy majority sit up for a wee while.

So if a majority in parliament doesn't see the need for new regulations - like you don't - then the duty of the head of state is to allow sufficient freedom of speech to really speak out and protest and embarrass the lazy majority so that they have no option but to notice continuously that someone thinks there is a problem that they need to change their mind about.

With a Queen and a kingdom, that protestor goes to prison or mental hospital and the lazy majority go back to sleep and the houses burn down - by then of course, the outspoken person maybe has been killed in prison by a violent fellow prisoner or had his mind poisoned by compulsory drugs in a mental hospital.

Now in a democracy, that annoying person is there ALL THE TIME and stupid, lazy majority can't get rid of him because he is protected in his constitutional rights by a good president - and then eventually, the lazy majority start to think about the issue - they change the regulations - and the houses don't burn down any more.

Hence a democracy is a hell of lot more noisy and annoying for lazy people, but it works out safer in the end.
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter, i don't appreciate reading what you are typing as it is a rediculous opinion and one that i never even asked for.

The Australians got to vote on whether or not they should become a rebublic some years ago and as you can see they obviously voted against.

By no means am i fan of the royal family, however i just don't really see the link between them and the deaths of these people in Australia. Some of the things she's alleged to have done is actually pretty funny to read.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter, we have a name for people like you: a bloody drongo.

This should not be a political discussion, and although you are entitled to an opinion you cannot blame the Queen or anyone in a position of power for absolutely everything that goes wrong. You also seem to think that the Queen spends her time thinking of new ways to destroy that 'nasty fly-ridden country where we sent all the bad people' ... the truth of the matter is that the Queen actually says very little in regards to running Australia. 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.

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.
  • graphixboy
  • Control + Z
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1827
  • Loc: In the Great White North

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter thats quite a rant. I wonder where your getting your facts? In the United States we hear very little about how the United Kingdom/Commonwealth work, but even in this sheltered environment, I know that the Monarch reigns in title only and has very little to do with the day to day running of the UK let alone the Commonwealth states. In fact, last I checked, the Queen is not even allowed to enter the Parliament without an invitation and has very little political power outside of her ability to dissolve Parliament.

Your argument makes about as much sense as me complaining that a boulder fell out of the sky and crushed my house after you did nothing to restrict the rules of physics. Now you and I both know that you have no real power to change the affects of gravity so I can hardly blame you for not trying to stop the rock from crushing my house. Yet your making the same claim about the Queen. Your holding someone to account for not taking action when they have no real power to do so.
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Quote:
If your next-door neighbour is storing 100 tonnes of dynamite in his back-garden which is endangering your property as well as his own, it is a matter for law and regulation and enforcement and at the end of the day, the guy goes to jail for endangering the community.

The same should apply to neighbours who have trees too close to their house and yours which pose a fire risk to your property. Cut the trees down or go to jail.


There's a big difference between explosives and over-growth genius.

Law is designed to protect everyone from the malicious, not moronic.

Should we start jailing people who climb a tree to get a better look at the thunder clouds ?

Quote:
So if a majority in parliament doesn't see the need for new regulations - like you don't - then the duty of the head of state is to allow sufficient freedom of speech to really speak out and protest and embarrass the lazy majority so that they have no option but to notice continuously that someone thinks there is a problem that they need to change their mind about.

That's brilliant, start new regulations that everyone is just going to ignore, because they do so well with living with the current regulations. Because that always works.

Quote:
With a Queen and a kingdom, that protestor goes to prison or mental hospital and the lazy majority go back to sleep and the houses burn down - by then of course, the outspoken person maybe has been killed in prison by a violent fellow prisoner or had his mind poisoned by compulsory drugs in a mental hospital.

LOL you watch too much television.

It's the child molesters and women killers that get raped and killed in prison.

Quote:
Now in a democracy, that annoying person is there ALL THE TIME and stupid, lazy majority can't get rid of him because he is protected in his constitutional rights by a good president - and then eventually, the lazy majority start to think about the issue - they change the regulations - and the houses don't burn down any more.

Right, because the new regulations in California worked great for the wild fires that swept through recently.

Quote:
Hence a democracy is a hell of lot more noisy and annoying for lazy people, but it works out safer in the end.


Which comes down to if your neighbors house is a fire hazzard, get on his ass instead of crying to the queen.
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Hi SB. I just noticed your location - Edinburgh, Scotland. Hey we are practically neighbours - 170 miles at the crow flies, less than 200 miles by road! :D

Quote:
:band: Neighbours, should be there for one another. That's when good neighbours become good friends. :profileright: :profileleft:


SB wrote:
Peter, i don't appreciate reading what you are typing as it is a rediculous opinion and one that i never even asked for.


Well it is a public forum so my comments are not aimed at you particularly but for all Australians and anyone who wants to protect people from disasters allowed to happen by the Queen.

SB wrote:
The Australians got to vote on whether or not they should become a rebublic some years ago and as you can see they obviously voted against.

Well that vote is exactly what I am talking about above and I quote myself in the next quote below. You were not offered a proper republic in that vote. It was a rigged referendum and the Australian people were cheated. Here again is what I said above.

Peter Dow wrote:
I am sorry. You are ignorant and you have been deceived. There is a real job of president and head of state to be done and it involves sacking rotten politicians from being ministers and defending the right of the people to a proper democracy rather than an elected dictatorship.

The hatred of republicanism amongst the political elite in the Queen's realm countries like Australia and Britain is why many Australian politicians tried to fob Australians off with a bad system of a rotten so-called "republic" whereby the parliament would elect the president - so the parliament could stop a good president sacking a bad prime minister and insisting on free speech inside and outside parliament, even when that free speech is extremely offensive to the stupid majority of MPs.

The president needs to be elected independently of the parliament - the parliament's role is sometimes to impeach the president on a 2/3 or 3/4 vote, remove the president from office and have a new election for president.

A parliament which elects a president is still a majority dictatorship, not a democracy which means "government by all the people".


SB wrote:
By no means am i fan of the royal family, however i just don't really see the link between them and the deaths of these people in Australia. Some of the things she's alleged to have done is actually pretty funny to read.

Well I explained the link in my posts above. However because what I am saying is significantly different from what the people on your TV tell you about the monarchy you can't understand what I am saying.

I am sorry SB but you have been brainwashed by your education and TV you have watched. Even many Americans are to some extent brainwashed into thinking favourably about the Queen.

There is a global crisis in political education caused by decades of state control of education and broadcasting.

Only now with the advent of the internet can intelligent educators such as myself start explaining the truth. However, it is hard work and the chances are that only when what I am saying appears on TV will most people actually be able to understand.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8488
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

How could Goerge Bush cause the fires in California last Year? He should feel ashamed for that... stupid lightning... if only he regulated how closely the trees grew to each other, then maybe the trees wouldn't have passed on the fire. Stupid government... we don't need it anyway, only meddling with human affairs and trying to keep the suspicious crowd safe. stupid, stupid, stupid!

[/sarcasm]
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Breeze wrote:
Peter, we have a name for people like you: a bloody drongo.

You don't know people like me. People like me are few and far between.

Breeze wrote:
This should not be a political discussion, and although you are entitled to an opinion you cannot blame the Queen or anyone in a position of power for absolutely everything that goes wrong.

Deaths which could have been avoided had the state ruled competently should be blamed on the head of state.

Breeze wrote:
You also seem to think that the Queen spends her time thinking of new ways to destroy that 'nasty fly-ridden country where we sent all the bad people' ...

I did not suggest that. That is a perverse conclusion from what I have written.

Breeze wrote:
the truth of the matter is that the Queen actually says very little in regards to running Australia.

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.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8488
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

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.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

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 you.
  • LAbrego
  • brego from LA
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2856

Post 3+ Months Ago

I am going to invite you people not to make this argument
personal and suppress the insults or the thread will be
closed.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

lmao at this thread. This has got to be the funniest thing I've read at OZZU in five years.

Sorry, but it is. I hadn't read a word of it until now but now I'm practically in tears I'm laughing so hard.

Oh, btw Arnold Schwarzenegger is responsible for the annual California fires and landslides, too, but I suppose you already knew that.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8488
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

ATNO/TW wrote:
Oh, btw Arnold Schwarzenegger is responsible for the annual California fires and landslides, too, but I suppose you already knew that.

oh yeah... why did I say George Bush? :scratchhead:
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter, i am actually originally from Aberdeenshire and only really moved to Edinburgh a few months ago.

As mentioned before, i know the terrain pretty well around where the fires are as i was in the area a year ago so i completely agree with Breezes point regarding how easy it can spread.

Have you been there Peter? have you spent any time in Australia?
  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

For your information Peter, the laws of Victoria do not allow people to remove trees from around their country homes. ALOT of people have protested against this, without success. What is happening in Victoria has nothing to do with our federal government, nothing to do with the state government, it has to do with the local councils, that administer these areas, ignoring warnings, about fuels (IE: ground covers like leave, bark, etc anything that can catch fire) being to high and at risk of causing a massive fire storm like what is happening at the moment. Its got to do with the fact most of these places are so remote, that there is one road in and one road out, and once that fire crosses that road, you either stay and defend your home, or you die. Simple as that. I have friends who lived in country Victoria, not far from Yea, where one of the major fires is burning. Those fires are so fast, there is little to no warning that they are coming, until they are right on your door step. Hot embers fly through the air, catching houses alight, causing more smaller fires, burning people, cars animals, anything in their path. Bushfires are a natural part of Aussie life.

This is the biggest disaster that has ever happened to our country and what we need is empathy and perhaps for people like you who think they know the ins and outs of a country they have probably never been too, to HELP or send prayers to these poor people, not sit here and argue about our politics, and how the queen is killing us all. Kevin Rudd, is probably the best thing for this country right now, he has done nothing wrong.

I am really proud to be an aussie right now, we have all pulled together, and raised over $40million for these people to help rebuild their lives and communities. The onyl thing that should matter and be discussed in this post is the people who have lost their lives, and their homes, and everything they owned, and how us as human beings can offer support or help in someway no matter how little or insignificant it may seem, EVERYTHING helps.
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Without any shadow of a doubt the best reply to this thread yet. Thank you Divinyl.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

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.
  • Peter Dow
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • Peter Dow
  • Posts: 14
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Divinyl wrote:
For your information Peter, the laws of Victoria do not allow people to remove trees from around their country homes. ALOT of people have protested against this, without success.

Well there is your problem.

If you are right then here is a case when the actual law is the problem - bad laws.

Instead of insisting that trees are removed - instead the law insists that trees are NOT removed.

It is the most perverse law you could imagine but I believe you. The law and its enforcement under Queen Elizabeth can be completely the opposite of what the people need to stay safe.

Divinyl wrote:
What is happening in Victoria has nothing to do with our federal government, nothing to do with the state government, it has to do with the local councils, that administer these areas, ignoring warnings, about fuels (IE: ground covers like leave, bark, etc anything that can catch fire) being to high and at risk of causing a massive fire storm like what is happening at the moment.
...
This is the biggest disaster that has ever happened to our country and what we need is
...
not sit here and argue about our politics, and how the queen is killing us all. Kevin Rudd, is probably the best thing for this country right now, he has done nothing wrong.

No you have identified the problem of bad local laws but you are incorrect to put all the blame on local authorities.

The local authorities have or should have limits as to what laws they are allowed to pass or not allowed to pass which can be determined by the state of Victoria government being the superior authority.

Likewise, the state of Victoria government has limits as to what laws they are allowed to pass or not allowed to pass by the Federal government.

Also the Federal government has limits as to what laws it can and cannot pass by the constitution. In a Kingdom, such as the UK or Australia, the monarch as head of state is ultimately responsible for defending the constitution and when, invariably, a useless monarch fails to do so, in practical terms, constitutional monarchy amounts to a constitution from hell. :evil:

Now what we see here is a failure all the way along the line of command - from the local authority all the way up to the Queen. It was the job of every superior authority to tell every inferior authority that they were not allowed to pass laws to prevent people clearing trees around their houses - actually, the laws should have been either they were allowed to build a house somewhere and then they MUST clear the trees around the house - or they were not allowed to build a house and live there at all.

If the monarchy was to work at all (I am not defending monarchy) the Queen should have told the Governor General who should have told PM Rudd who should have told Victoria who should have told local authorities that people are not allowed to live in fire-death-traps - houses right next to trees and bush which would threaten their houses in the event of a bush fire.

Now I am a republican and so I would have expected the Queen to let Australians down and fail to do a good job and fail to tell the PM what he and the federal government had to do to keep people safe.

So I say instead what you need is a good president of republic of Australia who would defend a republican constitution which would say the Australian people had a right to life and a right to be protected and the law must defend them.

Using his or her powers under a republican constitution, a good Australian president would have told the PM and the federal, state and all the lower authorities what they had to do in this case - save lives as is their duty.

If they didn't do it right, the PM should have been sacked.

Rudd wasn't told by the Queen to do the right thing and he didn't do the right thing on his own initiative and he wasn't sacked for his failures by the Queen - both Queen and Rudd have failed - Australians need a new head of state and a new Prime Minister.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Peter can I ask what your agenda is? You seem bent out of shape on making this a personal vendetta, whereas people in need just need support. The reason I laughed so hard at you earlier (yes I was laughing at you) is your whole premise of blaming the Queen for this is inherently flawed. You defy logic with every post you make.
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8488
  • Loc: USA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Seeing as how you like quoting people and attacking their comments with your flawed reasoning, I will attempt the same.

In enforcing the points I have made in my previous post and a question set by SB... Have you actually being there or are you doing the conspiracy theory like many others?

According to your accusations to how easily it is for the fire to spread on the Queen, it must be her fault as well to the fact that Australia hadn't seeing any decent rain for a while (fact taken from news... haven't actually being there).

To tell you the truth, I am more ready to believe the citizen of Australia who is actually experiencing it first hand then a conspiracy theorist who is taking his information from theories and his flawed thinking of government.

Contrary to popular belief, governments aren't all flawed and constantly thinking of conspiracies against themselves... I have yet to see a government go and kill it's own people... it's own taxpayers... it's own source of revenue (I don't know if Australians are taxed or not... my guess is that they are).

Peter Dow wrote:
If you are right then here is a case when the actual law is the problem - bad laws.

Instead of insisting that trees are removed - instead the law insists that trees are NOT removed.

If he is right, the fault is within local authorities and not the Queen, and if he is right, blaming the Queen for their misfortune wouldn't put out the fires and make everyone happy... that just doesn't do that.

Also notice, that the bush fires there happen frequently... in fact, they are frequent enough to become common. I'm sure that they had reason for having it the way they had.

Considering the no-rain thing there, I would say the dry wood and the dry season with very hot temperatures there contributed to the spread of wildfire.
  • Divinyl
  • Student
  • Student
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 84
  • Loc: Sydney, Ozland.

Post 3+ Months Ago

Thank you SB and ATNO, your thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Again Peter you are completely missing the point. I for one couldn't careless who the head of the country (the queen) is right now. She has never have a great deal of input into this country, and she never will, she is just that a head of state, she has no bearing on our laws, no bearing on what I do day to day, no bearing on anyone's lives. She is just a figure and I could not careless, if she was there or not. The reason Aussie voted against becoming a republic was because the "president" was not able to be elected by the people, they were going to be chosen by the politics. One thing about Aussies, we don't like not having a say in how things happen in our country. Having the queen as a "symbol" and yes that is ALL she is, is not something many of us care about. We care about our prime minister, and the one we have at the moment, in my opinion is doing a GOOD job, he cares about our people, I think that was proven when he was in tears on TV over how many people have perished in the fires, I think that was proven when he pledged $15million to help them rebuild their lives, and I think that was proven when he announced his efforts with the Australian army, to have these people accommodated in army barracks, until they are able to go home. If anything in this country, America has a bigger bearing on us (in the sense that whatever happens to them, happens to us), then the queen EVER will again.

But again, you are completely missing the point. 181 Aussies have died in a senseless act of disregard for human life. Someone lit these fires on purpose, they have mass murdered families, mothers, fathers, children etc, and to be completely blunt, I could careless what you or anyone else thinks about our politics at the moment. All I care about is those people and their families. That is one thing about Aussies, we have a strong sense of mateship, which means, every single Aussie, is apart of my family so to speak. The only thing WE want from everyone around the world right now, is thoughts and prays that no one else dies in these horrific fires.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Kudos again to you Divinyl. God be with you and yours.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Well said, Divinyl ... Sorry for slightly insulting him guys, a bit of hot air (no pun intended).

I send my thoughts (and money) to those down south in Victoria.
  • graphixboy
  • Control + Z
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1827
  • Loc: In the Great White North

Post 3+ Months Ago

Does anyone know if there are any relief organizations taking donations toward this cause? I remember a lot of "donate" buttons on websites after hurricane Katrina and the Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004 that brought in a lot of international aid. Has anyone seen/started anything similar for this cause?
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

to be honest i am quite surprised this hasn't made more press around the world. It's quite a big and sad thing that is happening to ordinary people. I am beginning to wonder if it had happened in California we'd all be required to chip in and donate.
  • 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!
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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: 2856

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: 2856

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: 8488
  • 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
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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: 8488
  • 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
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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: 8488
  • 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
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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: 8749
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

Sam the koala?
  • Bogey
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • Bogey
  • Posts: 8488
  • 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: 6890
  • 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: 6890
  • 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: 8488
  • 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: 1827
  • 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
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • 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: 8488
  • 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.

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 60 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 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
 
 

© 1998-2016. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.