Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Buying off the plan?
View our developments

Parliament House car bomb security paranoia reaches fever pitch.

By Jonathon Reynolds 9 December 2005 20

The ABC are reporting (here) and (here) that the bureaucrats at Parliament House have gone into frenzied paranoia overdrive ensuring that the driveways at the Ministerial, Senate and Representatives entrances will only be open to authorised vehicles.

I’m sure our politicians will now be breathing huge sighs of relief knowing that they will be able to enter and leave the building safely directly into the their (authorised) chauffeured government cars.

However somebody ought to explain to these turkeys that simply closing a driveway will make bugger all difference if a terrorist is hell bent intent on attacking Parliament House. In reality the only way to protect the House against terrorist car bomb attacks is (unfortunately) adopt draconian measures and totally shut down the entire Parliamentary precinct to vehicular traffic.

Though in all reality a terrorist attack on Parliament House is about as likely as finding WMD in Iraq… but we should not digress.

If you still have any doubts about how ineffective the blocking of the driveways will be – watch the footage of the blast that occurred at the Australian Embassy in Jakarta in 2004 (Video Windows Media Player WMV format). The mini-van in that attack was actually across the street from the Embassy compound nowhere near the embassy!

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
20 Responses to
Parliament House car bomb security paranoia reaches fever pitch.
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Maelinar 3:59 pm 12 Dec 05

There’s linkages between this and the current stuff I’m reading that says TT and the media beat the Sydney Riot drum to make it bigger than it should have been, mostly by putting up the text message saying where to be and when.

This is screaming out enough is enough.

colsim 10:43 am 12 Dec 05

Hey Slinky – sorry, I think I was unclear, the “terror menace” is what I think is hooey, I think you’re spot on.

The neo-cons of the world like a scared population, takes their minds of the real issues and tends to make people more scared, selfish and angry and less likely to question the status quo. (Look at the whole Cronulla thing)

simto 10:18 am 12 Dec 05

Hm, that sounds close to my “media don’t need to get quite so excited about crime reporting” arguement from a few weeks ago.

The problem with an awful lot of journalism now is that it seems to proceed from a theory that “we can do your job better than you”, whether it be politician, policeman, solider or whatever. Which means that journalists seem to believe that whoever’s tracking down the terrorists must be incompetent, therefore the public should be told everything so that we’re able to micromanage the entire investigatory process.

Maelinar 9:38 am 12 Dec 05

As I said, it was an idea.

What needs to occur is a paradigm shift within the press, perhaps initiated at a governmental level.

I’m not saying to not report about the obviously two missing buildings, but the entire focus of reporting needs to change.

Instead of saying “the two towers were destroyed by Al Quaeda who are a terrorist organisation that were blah de blah”, saying such things as the lives of the lost ones will be remembered (insert naomi campbell pussy bum mouth pose here), or congratulate the rescue workers on their job well done rescuing survivors from within the wreckage, with a sub text of “which was the result of a terrorist attack”.

What I’m saying is that we don’t need or want to know that the press are investigating the terrorist organisations. By doing this, they are putting these organisations on a pedestal, and continuing the recruitment/continuation process.

For example, all the footage of cars being blown up in iraq. If one terrorist organisation filmed the incident, that is material for them to use in recruiting. Since the press got hold of it, EVERY terrorist organisation who has access to public media now have access to the footage.

That’s a little more along the lines of what I’ve been getting at…

simto 9:14 am 12 Dec 05

Problem being, though, that it’s remarkably difficult to keep things secret in the way that Maelinar seems to be suggesting.

Thinking about this for, oh, about thirty seconds, the two most obvious examples of terrorist activity in the last couple of years (September 11th and the London bombings) pretty clearly can’t have gone uncovered by the media. Lots and lots of people were effected – you can’t just say “well, you’re giving publicity to terrorists, shut up about it”. In particular, with September 11th, it’s unlikely people wouldn’t notice – “hey, wasn’t there a building around here”?

And you do need to know, for example, that a certain number of suicide bombings are still happening in Iraq – not down to who did it and what their life story was (and I’m unaware of any cases where the media’s gone into that level of extent), but enough to know that this is still a problem here.

Still, if you want to explicate further your “don’t publicise the terrorists” theory, here’s your chance. It’s possible I’m getting it wrong…

Thumper 8:30 am 12 Dec 05

If any one in Australia actually admits that they are worried about terrorism and that they have changed their lifestyles due to this worry, then you have already let them, terrorists, win.

Terrorism isn’t so much about the bombings and the killings, its the fear that it may happen.

I think that extra security is a sensible thing, but the saying being alert and not alarmed is even more sensible.

Let’s just say it hasn’t changed my life one iota, except I have to take my boots off before boarding a plane, which is not to much of an inconvenience except to those around me, who drop dead at the slightest whiff of my socks….

bulldog 11:50 am 09 Dec 05

Not just the onituaries Mael, but every time some yahoo with a balaclava and an AK makes a statement about how scary they are, it’s on every TV station around the world within fifteen minutes. Govern this and you will control the primary contributor towards the spread of hysteria.

jr 11:29 am 09 Dec 05

bonfire – I beg to disagree. Watch the video link and check other on-line news sources…

Slinky the Shocker 11:11 am 09 Dec 05

I think some self control of the press might already help…Although I suppose I’m dreaming especially thinking about the News Ltd. dudes.

Maelinar 11:05 am 09 Dec 05

Personally I think they’d stop pretty soon after the government slapped a restriction on the media to not report on terrorists the way they do.

The only reason they are successful is by virtue of our own press causing such hysteria, that a governmental response is warranted.

I say this in the complete knowledge that it’s just an idea, and would need further thought on the matter. I certainly wouldn’t want grieving families not allowed to post an obituary for their deceased relative who was killed by a terrorist for example.

I would however, not care if an obituary for a suicide bomber was not printed.

Slinky the Shocker 10:59 am 09 Dec 05

Colsim? So you think that Canberra is a prime terrorist target and you might die any day? Well, I don’t, but that’s exactly what the little eyebrowed tosser wants to tell us. In my opinion the terrorists have won, by injecting so much fear into society that we give up our civil liberties, which is the best thing about a western democracy.
It’s time to look at the threat more realistically: You are so much more likely to be involved in a fatal car accident or develop cancer. Yes, we should investigate and arrest these killers, but don’t give them more credit than they deserve… My 5 cent…

Absent Diane 10:57 am 09 Dec 05

I for one am shit scared of a terrorist attack (read anxiety disorder – yay im dieing – again)… and would welcome any security increase at parly house

colsim 10:30 am 09 Dec 05

(D’oh, that’d be hear hear I guess)

colsim 10:29 am 09 Dec 05

Here here Slinky et al, what a bunch of hooey

Slinky the Shocker 10:23 am 09 Dec 05

How to turn a once proud country into a bunch of scared li’l chickens 101…

bonfire 10:14 am 09 Dec 05

jr you are wrong.

the minivan drove right up to the guard post at the entrance to the embassy grounds.

its been awhile, but i reckon the distance between the guard post and the front door of the embassy would be perhaps 20 metres.

yakz 9:33 am 09 Dec 05

if we secured the pollies in something like the supermax jail at Goulburn, then they would be safe. And we would be safe from them.

bulldog 8:40 am 09 Dec 05

They’re flattering themselves if they believe they will be attacked by terrorists. Any terrorist worth his salt would work out that bombing Carlton United Breweries would be the quickest way to bring Australia to a standstill. Personally, I would be devastated.

IMHO it’s far more likely that they are trying to protect themselves from the increasing number of Australians getting fuct over by any number of bullshit decision being made on the hill…

Maelinar 7:56 am 09 Dec 05

At risk of becoming seditious, I wouldn’t target parliament house anyway. Unless it’s a sitting week, it’s only filled with lackeys who are otherwise dispensable.

Although if you were after infrastructure, blowing up the staff canteen at lunchtime would reduce the number of fat cats who help the system run as *ahem* smoothly as it does.

johnboy 7:39 am 09 Dec 05

Hmm, go have a look at the bollards they’ve installed and the topography.

I think most of a blast would be spent on the hillsides.

People moaning about this are being asked to walk 20 metres to be picked up on parliament drive.

For once I think they’re doing something sensible.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site