Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 
Send Topic Print
War Crimes Report (Read 15616 times)
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #240 - Nov 29th, 2020 at 5:41pm
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 3:56pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 3:52pm:
There are significant differences between civil and military law which I am sure you are well aware of, Graps.  Corby committed a civil offence outside of Australia, under Indonesian law.  Now if you want her tried under Australian law, she'd still have been found guilty.  She committed an offence.  QED.  Same for these fellows.  They committed an offence, under military law.  They may be found guilty, which I suspect is going to happen.  Personally, I think they'd prefer to be tried in Australia than Afghanistan law.


While totally agreeing, my point is simply whether or not there is a legal basis for trying these blokes in a civil court, and also what that implies for national sovereignty as embodied in a military presence in a foreign land... does this imply that OUR presence on foreign soil constitutes a tiny element of national sovereignty?  Forever Australia and all that....

I know that's a deep one, but it is of interest to a legal eagle.



not sure but I seem to remember  in the report it said  39 civilians were shot/killed.....but not due to the WAR...I also seem to have read about  them trying soldiers after last WW11 for killing civilians  I am almost sure it was
before a judge and jury.....

a lot of defence personnel killed under cover of the war.....it happens..

an awful lot get away with it too...

but to try them in a Military court for murder     wouldnt make sense.....if it was a bungled attack and people were accidently killed maybe....but otherwise  NO.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Moderator
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39593
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #241 - Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm
 
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 80331
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #242 - Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:48pm
 
Belgarion wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 3:59pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 2:03pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 1:57pm:
Murder is a crime under Australian law, both military and civil, Graps.  These blokes did a big, bad thing and nothing you say is going to spare them facing the music.   Roll Eyes


I'm looking for the legal justification to try them in Australia for a crime committed in a foreign country - sort of a Corby 'try her in Australia' instead.... it gets a bit murky when you consider that these blokes had no right to refuse extradition or to even choose where they could/would be tried.

Perhaps Corby could have opted for trial in Oz or have remained Offshore - these guys have no right to choose when they will 'come home'.

Just considering.............. you know I'm great on brains storming.... and nowhere did I say they should not face the music... I've always said a full and fair rendition of all the facts is what is required.... and you need to review carefully how the prosecution 'facts' as presented (not the Full Facts as required by Law - there is a world of difference between some REMF twerp trying to grab the high ground by a false use of terminology and the legal reality) are phrased.

Who will put together these briefs of 'fact'?  The Army or the DPP?  DPP are not particularly competent in such nuts and bolts of cases..... they try to establish either traps or loop-holes, and do not pursue reality quite often.


The DFDA applies to all defence members and defence civilians wherever they may be, not limited to any particular place:

Part 1 sect. 9. Extra‑territorial operation of Act

                   "The provisions of this Act apply, according to their tenor, both in and outside Australia but do not apply in relation to any person outside Australia unless that person is a defence member or a defence civilian."


Civvy law also applies, under the Commonwealth Criminal Code ACT 1995 Australians can be prosecuted for crimes committed overseas.

If this goes to a civvy court I imagine it will be the AFP / DPP who will produce the brief of evidence. If to Courts Martial it will be ADFIS / ADF lawyers.

Corby was caught overseas by the local police. Very little the Australian government can do for you in that situation, as the numerous Australians currently doing time overseas could attest.




That's why I posted the link - you read them!!
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #243 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 6:15am
 
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm:
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.



if a person committed MURDER on foreign soil   he would be charged there and sentenced   MURDER is still committed  during war time..its ridiculous to think otherwise.....of course things have changed  I would hope they have    but when something is referred to the POLICE... isnt that handing over the responsibility therefore the case! to the civilian courts.. at least I would have thought so...



are these men being charged with WAR CRIMES

or killing unarmed civilians?..
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Moderator
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39593
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #244 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 12:54pm
 
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 6:15am:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm:
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.



if a person committed MURDER on foreign soil   he would be charged there and sentenced   MURDER is still committed  during war time..its ridiculous to think otherwise.....of course things have changed  I would hope they have    but when something is referred to the POLICE... isnt that handing over the responsibility therefore the case! to the civilian courts.. at least I would have thought so...

are these men being charged with WAR CRIMES

or killing unarmed civilians?..


The killing of anybody, armed or unarmed without orders to do so, is invariably termed a "war crime".  Even if ordered to do so, it can be considered a war crime.  If you look at a history of the concept, it first developed in WWI and was further developed at Nuremberg and Tokyo after WWII.  Basically it covers all the acts that are considered abhorrent by the victors.  So, if your side wins, and the enemy conducts themselves in a way that results in a large number of civilians dead, it is considered a war crime. 

There are various treaties, conventions, legislation which specify what is or isn't a war crime.  These conventons/treaties/legislation form the basis of international law and "the laws of war". In Australia, no serviceman or woman who served during WWII, no matter what they did, can be accused of committing a war crime.  This was brought in under Hawke.  There was a fair amount of debate about it.  Personally, I felt it was wrong.  Australians, as we have seen, can commit war crimes, they aren't saints.

Under military discipline, soldiers are required to carry out all orders given to them.  If they believe the order is unlawful, they are required to disobey them and not carry them out.  However, this is where the situation can become a little bit sticky because it is up to the individual soldier to examine their moral compass and decide if obeying an order is lawful or not. 

Under military law, a soldier must carry out an order, even if he considers it unlawful and then complain.  Of course, their complaint can see them also get them charged with an unlawful act.   Soldiers/sailors/airmen and women can get it both ways.  If they fail to comply with an order they can be charged.  If they comply with an order they can be charged.  It is a difficult situation.   Which is what the defence forces try and prepare their members for.  To learn the differences between a lawful and an unlawful order.  This is completely different to the civil law.

Murder does happen but that is what a soldier is meant to do effectively.  They must kill their opponents before they kill them.  The problem is it seems that some SASR members haven't been good at telling who is their opponent and who isn't. 
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #245 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:20pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 12:54pm:
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 6:15am:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm:
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.



if a person committed MURDER on foreign soil   he would be charged there and sentenced   MURDER is still committed  during war time..its ridiculous to think otherwise.....of course things have changed  I would hope they have    but when something is referred to the POLICE... isnt that handing over the responsibility therefore the case! to the civilian courts.. at least I would have thought so...

are these men being charged with WAR CRIMES

or killing unarmed civilians?..


The killing of anybody, armed or unarmed without orders to do so, is invariably termed a "war crime".  Even if ordered to do so, it can be considered a war crime.  If you look at a history of the concept, it first developed in WWI and was further developed at Nuremberg and Tokyo after WWII.  Basically it covers all the acts that are considered abhorrent by the victors.  So, if your side wins, and the enemy conducts themselves in a way that results in a large number of civilians dead, it is considered a war crime. 

There are various treaties, conventions, legislation which specify what is or isn't a war crime.  These conventons/treaties/legislation form the basis of international law and "the laws of war". In Australia, no serviceman or woman who served during WWII, no matter what they did, can be accused of committing a war crime.  This was brought in under Hawke.  There was a fair amount of debate about it.  Personally, I felt it was wrong.  Australians, as we have seen, can commit war crimes, they aren't saints.

Under military discipline, soldiers are required to carry out all orders given to them.  If they believe the order is unlawful, they are required to disobey them and not carry them out.  However, this is where the situation can become a little bit sticky because it is up to the individual soldier to examine their moral compass and decide if obeying an order is lawful or not. 

Under military law, a soldier must carry out an order, even if he considers it unlawful and then complain.  Of course, their complaint can see them also get them charged with an unlawful act.   Soldiers/sailors/airmen and women can get it both ways.  If they fail to comply with an order they can be charged.  If they comply with an order they can be charged.  It is a difficult situation.   Which is what the defence forces try and prepare their members for.  To learn the differences between a lawful and an unlawful order.  This is completely different to the civil law.

Murder does happen but that is what a soldier is meant to do effectively.  They must kill their opponents before they kill them.  The problem is it seems that some SASR members haven't been good at telling who is their opponent and who isn't. 


I think you are being deliberately naive....I AM MAINLY THINKING ABOUT PASSION.....got nothing to do with WAR or bloody fighting a WAR....sheeeeze...

do you think they switch all that off when they put the uniform on?????? [/quote]

Never spent any time as anything than a civilian, have you Cods?  You views are the naive ones here, not mine.  Soldiers are meant to be professionals, well the Australian ones are and particularly the SASR is.  They are meant to leave their "passions" behind them and behave like professionals.  Run along dear, I'm sure there is a CWA meeting you can attend somewhere...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
« Last Edit: Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:56pm by Brian Ross »  
 
IP Logged
 
Sir Spot of Borg
Gold Member
*****
Offline


WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26460
Australia
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #246 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:31pm
 
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:20pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 12:54pm:
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 6:15am:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm:
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.



if a person committed MURDER on foreign soil   he would be charged there and sentenced   MURDER is still committed  during war time..its ridiculous to think otherwise.....of course things have changed  I would hope they have    but when something is referred to the POLICE... isnt that handing over the responsibility therefore the case! to the civilian courts.. at least I would have thought so...

are these men being charged with WAR CRIMES

or killing unarmed civilians?..


The killing of anybody, armed or unarmed without orders to do so, is invariably termed a "war crime".  Even if ordered to do so, it can be considered a war crime.  If you look at a history of the concept, it first developed in WWI and was further developed at Nuremberg and Tokyo after WWII.  Basically it covers all the acts that are considered abhorrent by the victors.  So, if your side wins, and the enemy conducts themselves in a way that results in a large number of civilians dead, it is considered a war crime. 

There are various treaties, conventions, legislation which specify what is or isn't a war crime.  These conventons/treaties/legislation form the basis of international law and "the laws of war". In Australia, no serviceman or woman who served during WWII, no matter what they did, can be accused of committing a war crime.  This was brought in under Hawke.  There was a fair amount of debate about it.  Personally, I felt it was wrong.  Australians, as we have seen, can commit war crimes, they aren't saints.

Under military discipline, soldiers are required to carry out all orders given to them.  If they believe the order is unlawful, they are required to disobey them and not carry them out.  However, this is where the situation can become a little bit sticky because it is up to the individual soldier to examine their moral compass and decide if obeying an order is lawful or not. 

Under military law, a soldier must carry out an order, even if he considers it unlawful and then complain.  Of course, their complaint can see them also get them charged with an unlawful act.   Soldiers/sailors/airmen and women can get it both ways.  If they fail to comply with an order they can be charged.  If they comply with an order they can be charged.  It is a difficult situation.   Which is what the defence forces try and prepare their members for.  To learn the differences between a lawful and an unlawful order.  This is completely different to the civil law.

Murder does happen but that is what a soldier is meant to do effectively.  They must kill their opponents before they kill them.  The problem is it seems that some SASR members haven't been good at telling who is their opponent and who isn't. 



I think you are being deliberately naive....I AM MAINLY THINKING ABOUT PASSION.....got nothing to do with WAR or bloody fighting a WAR....sheeeeze...

do you think they switch all that off when they put the uniform on??????


Where does whatever version of "passion" you are talking about belong in a war zone?

Spot
Back to top
 

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a 
Moron!
- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope
WWW PoliticsAneReligion  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Moderator
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39593
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #247 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:52pm
 
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 95521
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #248 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 3:19pm
 
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/china-s-shock-propaganda-inflames-tensions-...

China's shock propaganda inflames tensions



...



Andrew Tillett
Andrew TillettPolitical correspondent
Nov 30, 2020 – 1.22pm

Scott Morrison has accused China of posting a "repugnant" and fake image of an Australian soldier slitting the throat of an Afghan boy in a dramatic escalation of tensions with Australia.

Mr Morrison said the government has protested to the Chinese government over the Foreign Ministry's tweet, demanding it be taken down and an apology issued. The government has also contacted Twitter to have it removed.


"It's deeply offensive to every Australian, every Australian who has served in that uniform," Mr Morrison said.

"It is utterly outrageous and cannot be justified on any basis whatsoever.

"The only thing that has brought shame today is this appalling post by the Chinese government."

The government has protested to both the Chinese embassy in Australia and through the Australian embassy in Beijing.

Despite the sickening propaganda, Mr Morrison said the "awful incident" should prompt a reset in relations and new dialogue between Beijing and Canberra.

Emphasising Australia's democratic principles, Mr Morrison said few countries had been as willing as Australia had when faced with allegations of war crimes.

"The alleged actions of a few, do not define the tremendous service of a great many," he said.

Referring to the recent investigation into alleged war crimes committed by Australian special forces, the ministry’s chief mouthpiece Lijian Zhao posted on Twitter the doctored image.

"Shocked by murder of Afghan civilians & prisoners by Australian soldiers. We strongly condemn such acts, and call for holding them accountable," the tweet said.

The doctored photo shows a soldier crouching and clutching a bloodied knife against the throat of a young boy who is holding a lamb. The boy's face is shrouded by the edge of an Australian flag.

The photo is captioned "Don't be afraid, we are coming to bring you peace".

Mr Zhao, at the ministry's regular daily press conference on Friday, was asked about the Brereton report into war crimes and said there should be a thorough investigation to "bring the culprits to justice".

"Australia and some other western countries always portray themselves as human rights defenders and wantonly criticise other countries' human rights conditions," he said.

"The facts revealed by this report fully exposed the hypocrisy of the "human rights" and "freedom" these western countries are always chanting."

The report found Australian soldiers may have murdered 39 Afghan prisoners and civilians. In response, 19 soldiers have been referred to a new special investigator for war crimes.

Australia has been a strong critic on human rights violations committed by China's communist regime, including the mass detention of Uighurs in Xinjiang in what human rights campaigners have labelled genocide.

More to come.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #249 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 4:51pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:52pm:



you think WE should just ignore it    in case we upset the Chinese?.. Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #250 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 4:52pm
 
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:31pm:
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:20pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 12:54pm:
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 6:15am:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2020 at 10:33pm:
Cods, no Australians were charged with war crimes after the last big one. If they had, they would have been tried before a military court, in a courts martial.  In the old days that consisted of a Presiding officer and several officiating officers.  The defendant would have had a legal council - either military or civilian.  The court would have had a prosecuting officer - a military one.  There would be no jury as such.  It would be like being tried by Judge alone.  Since the early 1980s the Defence legal system has undergone quite a shake up.  It has been brought more in line with the civil system.  However, there is still no jury.  Just a Presiding Officer.



if a person committed MURDER on foreign soil   he would be charged there and sentenced   MURDER is still committed  during war time..its ridiculous to think otherwise.....of course things have changed  I would hope they have    but when something is referred to the POLICE... isnt that handing over the responsibility therefore the case! to the civilian courts.. at least I would have thought so...

are these men being charged with WAR CRIMES

or killing unarmed civilians?..


The killing of anybody, armed or unarmed without orders to do so, is invariably termed a "war crime".  Even if ordered to do so, it can be considered a war crime.  If you look at a history of the concept, it first developed in WWI and was further developed at Nuremberg and Tokyo after WWII.  Basically it covers all the acts that are considered abhorrent by the victors.  So, if your side wins, and the enemy conducts themselves in a way that results in a large number of civilians dead, it is considered a war crime. 

There are various treaties, conventions, legislation which specify what is or isn't a war crime.  These conventons/treaties/legislation form the basis of international law and "the laws of war". In Australia, no serviceman or woman who served during WWII, no matter what they did, can be accused of committing a war crime.  This was brought in under Hawke.  There was a fair amount of debate about it.  Personally, I felt it was wrong.  Australians, as we have seen, can commit war crimes, they aren't saints.

Under military discipline, soldiers are required to carry out all orders given to them.  If they believe the order is unlawful, they are required to disobey them and not carry them out.  However, this is where the situation can become a little bit sticky because it is up to the individual soldier to examine their moral compass and decide if obeying an order is lawful or not. 

Under military law, a soldier must carry out an order, even if he considers it unlawful and then complain.  Of course, their complaint can see them also get them charged with an unlawful act.   Soldiers/sailors/airmen and women can get it both ways.  If they fail to comply with an order they can be charged.  If they comply with an order they can be charged.  It is a difficult situation.   Which is what the defence forces try and prepare their members for.  To learn the differences between a lawful and an unlawful order.  This is completely different to the civil law.

Murder does happen but that is what a soldier is meant to do effectively.  They must kill their opponents before they kill them.  The problem is it seems that some SASR members haven't been good at telling who is their opponent and who isn't. 



I think you are being deliberately naive....I AM MAINLY THINKING ABOUT PASSION.....got nothing to do with WAR or bloody fighting a WAR....sheeeeze...

do you think they switch all that off when they put the uniform on??????


Where does whatever version of "passion" you are talking about belong in a war zone?

Spot



go away spot.......I was referring to MURDER   its bri bri who keeps talking about WAR CRIMES..

you are probably the same as him..

do not believe men still MURDER when a WAR is going on... Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jasin
Gold Member
*****
Online



Posts: 46612
Gender: male
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #251 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 5:29pm
 
ScoMo is going to tell China
"Stop! Or I'll say Stop again!"
Back to top
 

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.
 
IP Logged
 
Jasin
Gold Member
*****
Online



Posts: 46612
Gender: male
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #252 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 5:37pm
 
Face it. Political and Military action from an Australian point of view is too weak to beat China in any way.
If Australia thinks Britain will jump in... well, they've already 'exited' the EU and left France out in front to face Islam.
I don't think Britain or the USA will jump to the opportunity to fight 'for' Australia. I expect UK & USA to tell ScoMo to "take it up the arse for the Team"Tongue

Australia must find a better way to get ahead on China. Politics and Military won't be able to - they're 'shackled' by USA & UK for starters. One for Money, the other for Population growth.

Australia is going to take a hell of a beating during the soon World War, but it will be on the winning side.
Back to top
 

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Moderator
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39593
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #253 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 5:48pm
 
cods wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 4:51pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 1:52pm:


you think WE should just ignore it    in case we upset the Chinese?.. Roll Eyes


Ignoring them is like ignoring a troll on here, Cods.  I know you ignore several posters, such as Aussie, Monk and Greg.  Does that work for you?
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: War Crimes Report
Reply #254 - Nov 30th, 2020 at 5:49pm
 
Jasin wrote on Nov 30th, 2020 at 5:29pm:
ScoMo is going to tell China
"Stop! Or I'll say Stop again!"



should he throw boomerangs at them??

it might work?....maybe electric ones..

how would you deal with them jas?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 
Send Topic Print