All this tightening of laws seems overly popularist. That's my first thought.

But I don't know for sure. Maybe there are big gaps. There's so much printed material (no offence intended George) and do I really want to read it all? I'm tired at the end of the day. I have thousands of pages of other reading to do.

What I'd really like is a coloured chart in major papers. Showing current powers, and proposed powers. Side by side, state by state. We could call it a "legislation justification" document perhaps.

After reading the chart I'd be ready to participate in the debate, read the big articles and say yay or nay depending on how it looks.

Does anybody know if something like this has been published?

The Howard government points to the London bombings as justification for the new anti-terror laws. However, he has failed to demonstrate that the new laws would prevent such an event from occurring. You simply cannot prevent any given person carrying an explosive from boarding a bus or train. Ruddock & Howard have admitted this much with their ‘…These laws are required…..but I cannot guarantee anything..etc’ arguments. I find it ironic when our Government tells us after a terrorist atrocity that we must not let terrorists change our way of life. Otherwise ‘they win’. How is introducing these laws not ‘letting them win’? My view is that the proposed laws are not designed to deal with terrorism at all. They are designed to deal with threats to their domestic power. Terrorism provides a convenient pretext. The recent deportation of the American peace activist, Scott Parkin, provides a good example of how the extra powers will be used.

I don't accept the "Fortress Australia" concept, nor do I fear for my 'basic rights'. I do accept that some people do fear for their basic rights, for reasons best known to themselves. But do they really have anything to fear from a government under whose watch - and despite their stong border control policy - we have seen a 50% increase to 8,000 illegal Inonesian fishing boats in our waters over the past two years? According to today's Australian, these illegal fishermen are also camping on our beaches with their animals who could be carrying who-knows-what.

There is every chance that the terror legislation will be a dog's breakfast, harmful to noone, include terrorists.

Agreed. In addition the legislation to me simply reflects

- how simple it can be for a government to appear pro-active in the face of other governmental issues too complex to attract solutions
- the power of the media in infuencing governmental policy and popular opinion.
- how we subconciously may need to perceive adversaries with some to foment comradeship with others.
- how quickly we forget the amount of willpower it takes for one to annihilate oneself even with the propect of heaven.

"Driven by fear' I wonder if the fear is one engndered by the government?
Evidence; very little beyond circumstantial.
1 The revelation of the British cabinet document July 2002 shows the war to be a scam. Many guessed that, but this is a governement document and sure it confirms what many writers ahve claimed.That is the government went to war on a lie. A lie to the Australian people. Not just a dissembling but agreed to an already arranged war! So much for democracy, Herman Goering rolls in his grave for salutation!
2 The question of the UN two parts. a) allowed by resolution already ratified by Security Council? Choose your lawyers. The UN says illegal. b) The contravention of UNHCR indicates little faith in the UN anyway as Howard has said.
3 Taken together 1 and 2 indicate a Government intent on a return to big power solutions similar to that indicated by Bush's resolution on national security strategy to Congress 2002 Setember 18. In fact Australia will follow big brother. Big Brother already has more than adequate state control but now has more, the Patriot acts, prised by Cheney and wanting extension. The terrorists for the larger part aim to retaliate and rid theircountries of invaders. No Islamic plot extcept at the edges orchestrated by a few.See Dying to Win by Robert Pape and any reputable history of the Middle East and Afghanistan or go to www.tkb.org

The new laws may not prevent an attack,but they can sure slow the progress and perhaps prevent dirty bombs or nerve gas from killing thousands.

We are living in a bit of a fools paradise in this land of OZ.It only takes money from external sources such as Saudi Arabia and the intent and hate of a few within Australia to cause serious chaos and economic hardship for many.I can think of a dozen ways to cause such chaos with a minimum of effort.You don't have to be smart to be a terrorist,just have the cunning,the time,money,planning and patience.

In Russia hundreds of nuclear weapons are unaccounted for that can be easily sold to the highest bidder.We only check 5% of container shipping arriving here.

Isn't it ironic that the weak left are responsible for our lax immigration policies and resultant terrorist infiltration,are now wanting wanting to protect their rights.

The lunatic left see terrorism as a conduit for them to achieve their ideals through anarchy and chaos.