Saturday, September 09, 2006

Control Orders thing

Oh by the way, I forgot to mention this. And it's a probably a given.

But the Control Orders. What a massive wank. Like Thomas is actually a threat. Of course ASIO and the feds will be watching him anyway. This is harassment pure and simple. It is double jeopardy applied the only way they can.

But with this government, I am so not surprised. Like the Republicans in the US they have shamefully trodden on the bodies of the burned and broken using the fear of terror to their base political purpose. Yes as governments of the day they have to do their best to protect the people. But there is protecting the people, then there is feeding off it in an orgiastic vote swelling delight.

Given Howard is doing his best to emulate Menzies, right down to the eyebrows, it should be no surprise. After-all Menzies had 'reds under the bed'. Howard has his 'Arabs in Boats'. And he's pushing it everyway he can. Fuck any idea of people getting along. Divide and Conquer is Dear Leader's mantra - and if that means continually stage whispering 'the Arabs, the Arabs' or 'the Muslims, the Muslims' for him to stay in power then he will do it.

Odious little creep.

By the way I am aware that Roche, Thomas, and Hicks are all white. But there are 200,000 Muslims in Australia that are not that are bearing the brunt of a shamefully race carded approach to the Laura Norder issue.

10 comments:

  1. Did you see the Chaser on Friday night? Chaz Licciardello dressed up as Osama and went around to Jack Thomas' house to find out why he 'never calls' any more... Thomas recognised him straight away: "Oh! It's the Chaser!". Sounded absolutely thrilled to bits, and gave 'Osama' a big hug, then apologised that he couldn't invite him in for a drink but he was about to take his wife to the doctor.

    Jack Thomas is alright, I reckon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. LOL!

    I'd taped it - hadn't seen it yet.

    In the righties defence, Thomas did train with AQ. And he did for a while embrace an ideology that was fanatic.

    But control orders are nothing short of a fascistic approach to getting around civil liberties. I'd rather we wear this risk of his walking around than have him not when he has not been found guilty of a crime.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I tend to agree that Thomas does not appear to be a threat, at present, but that is all part of being a sleeper agent also. Now as much as you may Poo Poo the threat were he to actually create some atrocity who would be jumping up and down saying why was nothing done to stop this?
    Lets be real here given this mans history I think it is only reasonable that his whereabouts be known, and that his phone and other communications be restricted. We impose restrictions upon other individuals (like pedophiles who have finished their sentences) because of their POTENTIAL to do harm why should individuals who have trained for mass killing escape scrutiny? Civil liberties are not absolute; they are a compromise between individual freedom and the need for our society to be safe.
    It is Ironic that Thomas will face the courts today, 11th of September don't you think ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't see the irony. Though I suspect it's something that some arms of the media will make a big deal out of. Fortunately I don't watch ACA or TT so I won't have to see it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I disagree Iain. If you lock someone up for a combination of their skills sets and what they believe then where do you stop Iain? 12% of the ADF separates a year. Some of them will undoubtedly have unusual views on things. Hell a number of East Timor vets ended up robbing banks?

    Control orders for some and not for others seems to be the over-riding view of this government.

    You guys on the right harp on about people 'hating our freedom and way of life'. But then you clap with glee when those very freedoms are eroded in a political response to a problem that requires a statesman to respond to.

    But we got Howard, master politician.

    More fool us.

    ReplyDelete
  6. BTW - I can't find any reports about Thomas being charged with additional crimes - or facing court today. Can you provide links?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The ABC's Four Corners program has been served with a subpoena to surrender its tapes and notes of interviews with Melbourne man Jack Thomas.

    Mr Thomas was convicted of terrorism-related offences but they were overturned earlier this month.

    He is under an interim control order and is expected to appear before a magistrate, who will decide whether the control order should remain in place.

    Mr Thomas appeared on the program earlier this yea


    You don't mean this do you? Thomas facing court in order to determine whether he should have his control orders confirmed by a magistrate?

    That's hardly being charged with a crime Iain. That's him entitled to the one small skerrick of oversight the Howard government built into the laws (from back bench pressure) so there would at least be one neutral party involved.

    Why do you place such faith in the Howard government when they use and abuse the misery of so many people to their political benefit?

    I don't understand it man. Maybe I never will.

    But you argue about civil liberties being traded off. But what you're trading off is fundamental rights like detention and being charged. We've had those I believe for near 800 years. Yet the right wing is all too willing to give that up because they use fear not hope to stay in power. Reaction against others not building a better world.

    Because it's so much easier to scare people than it is to convince them to pull together and achieve something.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm not a fan of control orders.

    It is possible that those who have applied for the control order have a reason to do so.

    Also, I don't see the massive erosion of civil liberties in this country that apparently some do. I don't see many people being misused and abused by the government. I admit that the confidentiality provisions of control orders mean that orders may have been issued that we don't know about, and that they may be numerous. We don't know. But, while conceding that point, I don't see that muslim Australians, or any other Oz minority, are being subjected as a group to unusual oppression by the government.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Define unusual oppression.

    Sure, we don't have people being forced into gulags. But we have a government that has attacked key principles of liberty such as to be charged with a crime if detained, and to have your detention known.

    And they did it with a political intent as much as any desire to protect its people.

    They feed off fear like a parasite. And I am disgusted by it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. OK, I put that badly. I meant that I don't see the government oppressing a minority of Australians, whether muslim or otherwise.

    Certainly I must concede your point about the law now permitting detention without charge, and without freedom to communicate, under very specific circumstances. If you recall I'm no fan of that law either. But at present those points of law, as you say, haven't resulted in people being forced into gulags.

    Yes, I will also concede that the government probably considered political issues as much as anything else when they were promoting that bill. Just like every other government. Political issues are always considered.

    ReplyDelete