Thread: another london attack

Originally Posted by Eevo

even the coroner made mention of it. is the coroner silly too?

No, he thought things through.

Originally Posted by johntins

No, he thought things through.

and he's saying the same thing!

Originally Posted by johntins

Only two? Are you sure? Do you have definitive evidence?

Shooting from the hip. Add more if you like.

Originally Posted by manic

Shooting from the hip. Add more if you like.

No, one scattergun approach is sufficient.

Originally Posted by Eevo

and he's saying the same thing!

Eevo, the coroners report is 495 pages long. It makes many observations and recommendations - and the entirety of the document effectively contradict numerous points of your argument, especially in regards to laws and policing, and unequivocally in regards of where to lay 'blame.'

I suggest you read it. If nothing else, the coroners report dismantles your argument. Fascinating that you want to reply on the same document to support your argument.


http://www.lindtinquest.justice.nsw....mendations.pdf

try reading it again.
conclusion 97 is what i've been talking about.

so far only only read the conclusion, finding and recommendations section.

Originally Posted by Eevo

try reading it again.
conclusion 97 is what i've been talking about.

so far only only read the conclusion, finding and recommendations section.

I've read it mate, cover to cover. Takes a while.

1. The coroner does not say, as you do, that " NSW Police stuffed up" - the coroner says quite the opposite, from the guys on the ground, right up the chain of command,he does not lay blame at their feet.

2. The coroner makes several recommendations to change laws - from privacy laws to terrorism law ( you oppose law changes in your argument)

3. In regards to the house search, yes, he does say it could have been done earlier, but also acknowledges that whilst no bomb making material was found at the residence, that by itself is not proof Monis did not have one. This does not prove your arguement that the NSW police stuffed up" - and does not support an assumption that a search of the house earlier in the day would have changed the outcome of the siege.

4. The Coroner squarely lays the blame on Monis - he also says that more can be done to share information between departments and that the actions of the Police were appropriate. He does not say that laws and police are ineffective against lone actors - he talks to the point that lone actors are buy their nature, difficult to identify and manage.

Originally Posted by Andy130

I've read it mate, cover to cover. Takes a while.

1. The coroner does not say, as you do, that " NSW Police stuffed up" - the coroner says quite the opposite, from the guys on the ground, right up the chain of command,he does not lay blame at their feet.

2. The coroner makes several recommendations to change laws - from privacy laws to terrorism law ( you oppose law changes in your argument)

3. In regards to the house search, yes, he does say it could have been done earlier, but also acknowledges that whilst no bomb making material was found at the residence, that by itself is not proof Monis did not have one. This does not prove your arguement that the NSW police stuffed up" - and does not support an assumption that a search of the house earlier in the day would have changed the outcome of the siege.

4. The Coroner squarely lays the blame on Monis - he also says that more can be done to share information between departments and that the actions of the Police were appropriate. He does not say that laws and police are ineffective against lone actors - he talks to the point that lone actors are buy their nature, difficult to identify and manage.

1) yet several officers careers are over due to their failure to act
2) i can understand that.
3) 99% would of changed the outcome.
4) so there was nothing the police could do to stop two innocent dying...might as well disband the force.