Australian Politics Forum - Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 151830
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #45 - Dec 23^rd, 2025 at 5:52pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2025 at 1:27pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2025 at 1:03pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2025 at 9:14am:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 10:13pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 9:46pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 9:21pm:

Daves2017 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 8:29pm:

Tony Burqa will marry all the Isis brides and retirees happily on the Centrelink support for 50 partners and 70 children.

Why do keep repeating the same lies all the time, Daves? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Not a lie. Muslims and their multiple wives and kiddies are on welfare while brooding about islamophobia

They are here to invade and transform, not to contribute, assimilate and leave all that Islamic superstitious, fanatic shite behind.

How many Muslims do you know, Soren? Any at all? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

The majority of working-age Muslims, that is more than half of Muslims aged 15-64, are not working. The exact figure is 51.3 per cent.

Are they receiving unemployment benefits, Frank?

I'm curious.

Moreover, what year are those figures from?

Frank?

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Vic

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8588
Melbourne Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #46 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Back to top

“Fantastic. Great move. Well done Angus”

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33290
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #47 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:19am

Gordon wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 2:12pm:

Bobby. wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 1:42pm:

Daves2017 wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2025 at 1:40pm:

His great legacy written in history will be his failure to protect Australian citizens.
With a by-note regarding his never ending travels once in power.

He will be remembered for centuries in Australia history for his failures and weakness.

And that will hurt him far more than if he had of been shot at Bondi himself.

Will Albo go down like Howard - losing his own seat?

Only a Green could beat him. Look at the nutter who is the greens candidate.

Hi, my name is Hannah Thomas, and I’m a lawyer, activist and writer, currently renting on unceded Gadigal land in Newtown.

https://greens.org.au/nsw/person/hannah-thomas

Indian nutter. As bad a Mereen Faruqi although she's not a Muslim.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 151830 Gender:	Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi Reply #48 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:19am Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am: Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring Yep. Well said.
Back to top	GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33290
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #49 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Is that the same millisecond Labor took to come up with blaming guns & going after Australias law abiding gun owners?

Instead of dealing with the real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers?

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57732
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #50 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Including Bondi doesn't mean, as you twist it for some unknown reason, that it is solely about Bondi. I don't see how you can honestly say that it is just political point scoring. What would you EXCLUDE from the preview of such a Royal Commission?

It would be pretty strange if the very massacre that would trigger a Royal Commission was expressly excluded.

A Royal Commission cannot be controlled by a government, the public can make submissions and the RC can compell witnesses and documents to aper/be submitted.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

JC Denton Gold Member Offline Posts: 5514 Gender:	Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi Reply #51 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:29am because royal commissions are pointless and achieve absolutely nothing except tonnes of wasted money. how many more failed ones need to be done before people realise this? remember the 'banking royal commission' that everyone was taking about years ago? crickets
Back to top	IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57732
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #52 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:35am

JC Denton wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:29am:

because royal commissions are pointless and achieve absolutely nothing except tonnes of wasted money. how many more failed ones need to be done before people realise this? remember the 'banking royal commission' that everyone was taking about years ago? crickets

This is quite a different issue.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Vic

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8588
Melbourne Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #53 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 12:53pm

Frank wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am:

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Including Bondi doesn't mean, as you twist it for some unknown reason, that it is solely about Bondi. I don't see how you can honestly say that it is just political point scoring. What would you EXCLUDE from the preview of such a Royal Commission?

It would be pretty strange if the very massacre that would trigger a Royal Commission was expressly excluded.

A Royal Commission cannot be controlled by a government, the public can make submissions and the RC can compell witnesses and documents to aper/be submitted.

The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the

Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes

may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.
Circumstances leading up to and following the

Bondi Beach

attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.

Two of the Coalitions TOR specifically point to Bondi Beach. 1 of them infers Bondi Beach. The last one is hate speech etc.

If you are going to have a RC, then let's do it properly, with Terms of Reference that do what we want it to do.

Back to top

“Fantastic. Great move. Well done Angus”

IP Logged

Vic

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8588
Melbourne Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #54 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 12:56pm

Gnads wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am:

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Is that the same millisecond Labor took to come up with blaming guns & going after Australias law abiding gun owners?

ALA Howard

?

Instead of dealing with the real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers?

That is why we should have a RC with proper TOR that Aussie Citizens can have an input into. Do you think that the Coalition TOR would be adequate to "real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers”?

Back to top

“Fantastic. Great move. Well done Angus”

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57732
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #55 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 1:07pm

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 12:56pm:

Gnads wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am:

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Is that the same millisecond Labor took to come up with blaming guns & going after Australias law abiding gun owners?

ALA Howard

?

Instead of dealing with the real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers?

That is why we should have a RC with proper TOR that Aussie Citizens can have an input into. Do you think that the Coalition TOR would be adequate to "real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers”?

What would YOU change in their draft proposal?

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Vic

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8588
Melbourne Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #56 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 6:10pm

Frank wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 1:07pm:

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 12:56pm:

Gnads wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:21am:

Vic wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 10:32am:

So, here are the Coalition’s Terms of Referrence for a Royal Commission:

"The Coalition’s draft terms of reference propose a broad inquiry into:

The nature, prevalence, and drivers of antisemitism in Australia, including online, media, arts, education, and cultural sectors.
Commonwealth, state, and territory government, law enforcement, and intelligence responses to rising antisemitism and the Bondi attack.

Radical Islamic extremism and other extremist movements, including how immigration, visa, and citizenship processes may have contributed to threats.

The legal framework surrounding hate speech, vilification, and incitement, including the adequacy of current laws.

Circumstances leading up to and following the Bondi Beach attack, including coordination between agencies and victim support.”

Can most sane people see why Labor would not have an RC if it were solely based around Bondi? Can people see that this really focuses on one event with other issues circling around the key focus - being Bondi? Can people see this is just a lame attempt to score political points rather than a honest attempt to bring a cohesive quality to look at what happened?

I believe there should be a Royal Commission. But the TOR need to focus on far more wide ranging things than what the Coalition have pushed out in a millisecond of thought.

We want the heads of ASIS, ASIO, DSD and all Government Agencies involved in bringing people to Australia, checking their characters, and determining their likelihood of assimilating into our way of life bought to task.

We need the people of Australia to be able to put questions to their MPs about their concerns and we need those questions consolidated and grouped into whatever government “box” they fit in, so we can get an idea what the thought processes are/were for allowing people to settle here

I was never a fan of John Howard but to paraphrase him “ We decide who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come” may not have been appropriate at the time He stated them, but it seems they are now.

Until the Terms of Reference become a valid set of statements underpinning a wide ranging RC, then Albanese is correct in denying the Coalition request for one as merely political point scoring

Is that the same millisecond Labor took to come up with blaming guns & going after Australias law abiding gun owners?

ALA Howard

?

Instead of dealing with the real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers?

That is why we should have a RC with proper TOR that Aussie Citizens can have an input into. Do you think that the Coalition TOR would be adequate to "real issues of immigration & Islamic fundamentalism & hate preachers”?

What would YOU change in their draft proposal?

I would avoid shoe boxing and limiting investigations by having the end result as Bondi. By having the result linked to one event, anything that falls outside that can only be admitted by changing TOR. We both know how slippery Politicians can be, and it is quite possible that this event was caused by the failure of a lot of senior government and public service mandarins to follow up on advice by the people who gather the intel.

I believe there HAS been critical failures in the way we handle immigration, family reunion, refugee acceptance, assimilation, and a host of others. Bondi, as sad as it is, should be the impetus for a wide ranging and in depth look at how we handle these issues in a modern Australia and the threats and risks we must address. We will not get this by making what happened at Bondi the end result. We need to have much more than that now

Back to top

“Fantastic. Great move. Well done Angus”

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57732
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #57 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 7:50pm

[urlhttps://www.steynonline.com/15835/next-level-groomers]Next Level Groomers[/url]

This story caught my eye - initially because the craparse wanker bleepwits employed by Rupert Murdoch are no longer capable of writing a simple sub-headline:

The parents of an Australian boy with special needs who was allegedly groomed by undercover police and later charged with terrorism have spoken out.

God Almighty, Rupert. Can your DEI tosspots get nothing right? Your father, Sir Keith, would be ashamed of this bollocks. There's nothing "alleged" about it. A court has adjudicated the matter and rendered its verdict:

"The community would not expect law enforcement officers to encourage a 13-14 year old child towards racial hatred, distrust of police and violent extremism, encouraging the child's fixation on ISIS," magistrate Lesley Fleming said in the decision.

"The community would not expect law enforcement to use the guise of a rehabilitation service to entice the parents of a troubled child to engage in a process that results in potential harm to the child."

This is the story of "Thomas Carrick" - not his real name but the moniker assigned him by Australian authorities. He is, in fact, Muslim - so "Thomas Carrick" is what he'll be called in the award-winning Netflix adaptation, where he'll be played by Macaulay Culkin's grandson. The real Islamic "Thomas" is a low-IQ autistic boy in the state of Victoria, and his parents noticed that he'd begun taking an interest in Isis. So they went to the local police station and informed the Victorian constabulary to see if the coppers could do anything to help.

What they did to help was to pass on the info to the Australian Federal Police, which is the Lucky Country's equivalent of, broadly, the FBI. So, when the Murdoch bleepwits say "Thomas" was "allegedly groomed by undercover police", that means the AFP, like the South Yorkshire plods, enjoy having sex with children?

Apparently not. "Thomas" was contacted by two members of the "Overt-Covert" end of the Joint Counter Terrorism Team, one posing as an Oz-based Isis chappie, the other as a more hardcore member overseas - although possibly the same person, the Rich Little of the AFP. At any rate, one of them, "Khalid", suggests to "Thomas" that he would "make a good sniper or suicide bomber".

So that's the sense in which the Australian Federal Police were "grooming" young "Thomas" - they were grooming him to open fire on you. The kid liked these guys, and told his parents one of them was his "best friend".

The lads at Lotus Eaters have more on this - including, for the benefit of Murdoch's bleepwit editors, the head of the AFP acknowledging the allegedly alleged allegations. At the same time, he says he would do the same all over again. That is why "Khalid" - real name Blokey McFourX - has not been fired ...because the orders came from the very top.

Wherever you live, you will know there is a lot of this going on. On J6, for example, the feds were crawling all over DC in hopes of "grooming" the aimless, unarmed trespassers into something more useful to the Dems' political needs: "Hey, why don't you drag Nancy Pelosi out and hang her from the top of the Washington Monument?"

"Er, is that guy with you? Because I'm pretty sure he's not with my group."

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 118778
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi
Reply #58 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 8:08pm

JC Denton wrote on Dec 24^th, 2025 at 11:29am:

because royal commissions are pointless and achieve absolutely nothing except tonnes of wasted money. how many more failed ones need to be done before people realise this? remember the 'banking royal commission' that everyone was taking about years ago? crickets

Yeah - look at Robo debt?

How many Govt. criminals went to prison?

Answer - none.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 61480 Here Gender:	Re: Why is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi Reply #59 - Dec 24^th, 2025 at 8:29pm Quote: is Albo avoiding a Royal Commission into Bondi I am not aware of albo saying there won't be an rc ? Its only sensible to well consider the options.
Back to top	IP Logged

Poll
Question: How would you describe Albo response to terror in Bondi
Intelligent 2 (14.3%) Fair 3 (21.4%) Self serving 1 (7.1%) A failure 2 (14.3%) A cover up 1 (7.1%) Needing a Royal Commission 2 (14.3%) Out of his depth 1 (7.1%) Disdainful 2 (14.3%) Total votes: 14 « Created by: Daves2017 on: Jan 2^nd, 2026 at 12:26pm »