The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Haneef: another blow for civil liberties? > Comments

Haneef: another blow for civil liberties? : Comments

By Ellen Goodman, published 31/8/2007

The Haneef case was an unscrupulous use of a matter involving a person’s personal liberty for propaganda purposes.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Haneef became VERY widely known in India, and the majority there where NOT impressed by his treatment here. They were very vocal about it.

So which would you like Akers? That, as you state; the majority had never heard of Haneef, and would respect the sovereignty of Australia, OR;

They are a bunch of rabid fundamentalists who demonstrated very loudly in the streets in India; which they did.

My point being that you are remarkably tolerant when it suits your political purpose to be so.

Let us be frank and sincere (I shall be Frank and you can try sincere). You are on the Right, and I am on the Left. You will see it your way; I will see it mine.

I remain mystified by your blind following of all that is Government (until the ALP gets in;- then civil disobedience is on for one and all?); and you remain disgusted that I refuse to develop your paranoia. That I refuse to hate. Has it ever occurred to you Akers, that hate begets hate? It really is a dodgy philosophy you know.

Right. I'm off to see if the f..k is awake. (That really was rather impolite Akers).
Posted by Ginx, Monday, 3 September 2007 5:58:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In a nut shell; Dr Haneef was not the vote getter that JWH hoped.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 3 September 2007 10:12:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
aqvarivs, explain to me exactly how having Andrews cancel Haneef's visa has strenghtened our democracy or improved our safety and freedoms? Do you believe Haneef represented a threat, or not?
And if so, how is that threat reduced by ensuring he is kept out of the country, where we have no means of tracking his movements or conversations?
Posted by wizofaus, Tuesday, 4 September 2007 1:12:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There was enough evidence to if not to convict Haneef but at least detain him longer. But thanks to the pressure of good old civil libertarians and defence lawyers, the government had no choice but to let him slip out of Australia.

Haneef like most other terrorists living among us – some in jails – are becoming heroes and martyrs instead of being scrutinised and deported.

Civil liberties and our protection laws are seen as a joke and a sure sign of weakness in the eyes of Islamic terrorists whose only goal is to defeat the west.

Our anti-terror laws will continue to be proven ineffective unless we realises that we cannot afford to play softly and in a “civilized manner’ against a people group who is so determined to destroy us.

In have never voted for Howard – but for me he is the best we have who could deal we the mess we are in right now.
Posted by coach, Tuesday, 4 September 2007 1:15:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
coach,

Okay lets get this clear, there was not even enough evidence (including the so called secret evidence) to have a reasonable chance of convicting Haneef of the charge of "recklessly supply support", let alone connecting him in any meaningful way to the actual plot. As more information became available it became clear that what the AFP had proved that Haneef instead of being the evil terrrrrst(tm) he had originally been made out to be, but instead was an innocent who had tried time and time again to contact the British Police to help them.

Sheesh, talk about sour grapes.
Posted by James Purser, Tuesday, 4 September 2007 1:19:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
wizofaus,
The government is never going to get the role of anti-terrorism right because it is impossible to investigate individuals prior to their actions with out stepping on their liberties in some fashion. The best the policing units can accomplish is making life uncomfortable for those found to be connected to known terrorism and get them out of the country asap. Or would you prefer that they wait until after the bombs go off. I'd like it to be your choice as long as it is your family and loved ones that get butchered in the explosion and flying debris. Anyone not a citizen and found to be linked to or being of suspicious criminal behavior, whether that is in the nature of terrorism, our family laws, or our criminal laws, should face immediate deportation. We have a large enough number of the criminal and violent elements with out importing more of the same.
Posted by aqvarivs, Tuesday, 4 September 2007 3:06:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy