AARON

I will take your advice and open the link to Stanhope.
You can also go to my BLOG and see further readings about the threat of terrorism.

Blog Address on Google: http://congeorgekotzabasis.blogspot.com
click on URL LINKS to get in my Blog.

CON

Howard finds Fidel Castro an inspiration:

How it is
http://www.users.bigpond.com/burnside/dunstan.htm
In 1996, it all went wrong. In the time of Dickens, John Howard might have aspired to be the Parish beadle. He has all the right qualifications: limited horizons, antiquarian values, a narrow vision, and a taste for harsh rules rigidly enforced. He came to the Lodge with a vision which looked backwards to the time before Menzies gained power. In many ways, his world view makes Menzies seem progressive.

Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, and Exile

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-02.htm

Cuba frequently subjects nonviolent dissidents to arbitrary arrests and detentions. Human rights activists and independent journalists are among the government's most frequent targets, along with independent labor organizers, religious believers, members of independent political parties, organizations of independent academics and medical professionals, environmental activists, and others. These improper arrests and detentions, which serve as intimidating measures designed to silence dissent, violate Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Cuba often ratchets up pressure on government opponents by subjecting them to repeated arrests, short-or long-term detentions, or criminal prosecutions. In many cases, the government then presents activists with the "choice" to go to prison, or continue serving a prison term, or be exiled from their homeland. This practice violates the UDHR, which explicitly prohibits governments from exiling citizens from their own country.1

My pleasure, Con. After getting a lambasting from a couple of members of the loony left this morning it nice to read your message. Keep up the good work.

FELIX

What you seem to forget, is that Castro does those things to those who would threaten his totalitarian/dictatorial approach to government. i.e. he is ridding HIMself of those who threaten HIS power and the lack of freedom they have in Cuba.

Howard would be doing it to REMOVE those who want us to be LIKE Cuba or Saudi Arabia, and is thus protecting our freedom.

THUGS/EXTREMISTS
I still have etched into my mind the images of the young Muslim extremist thugs who battered and kicked the Chanel 7 cameraman half to death (I'm sure they would have killed him if not restrained or chased) and you can be SURE that they would be FIRST on my list of 'Deportees to Lebanon'.

DEPORTEES LIST
Those types represent the absolute worst in humanity, as we see clearly by the rage on their faces and the hate which permeated their grunts that they would think nothing of imposing their brute will on everyone else if they could see an Islamic replublic established here.

NEWSFLASH -THE U.N. DOESN'T WORK.
It is totally pointless to draw our attention to failed documents and failed bodies such as the UN who have nil effect in saving countries from Genocidal maniacs. It is up to sovereign states to do what is needed.

"RIGHTS" ARE FROM GOD.
There 'are' NO rights except those given by God, and they can be summarized in terms of 'The right to be treated by your neighbour as you would treat them'. This means that I should not seek to white-ant the freedom of another State for my own greedy ethnic advantage.

The status quo in Autralia is unquestionably 'white/caucasian/anglo/european/Judao-Christian.
This does not in anyway mean that those of other backgrounds cannot be welcomed, but it DOES MEAN that we welcome them in:

a) Numbers we feel are managable and non threatening
b) Based on selection criteria estalished by US in terms of our national/social interest.

We TOTALLY REJECT such things as the U.N. being able to tell us how many and of what cultural/religious/sexual orientation flavor should be allowed to come here.

These comments were made this May from Dennis Richardson, at the time head of ASIO, while discussing the efficacy of the then-existing terrorism laws...

"I would note [the legislation] has worked very smoothly so far. To be frank, there was a concern it would be unduly complex and difficult to administer. What was initially introduced into the Parliament, with our support and advice, was much simpler and, of course, tougher. We debated among ourselves whether the compromises [forced on the Government by a hostile Senate] would make it unduly complex. Our concerns were misplaced. We were wrong on worrying about it. The balance has so far been very workable …"

It is testimony to John Howard's political acumen he can manufacture a crisis out of thin air. Play the tune loud enough and often enough, and folks can't get it out of their head.

Con/Themistocles/Patriach

Its rather indulgent of you to describe those (who sincerely criticise your articles) as "chickens".

I happen to be a conservative generally but I believe the current anti terrorism laws are adequate and do not support a turn toward authoritarian laws that you see as saving us in your "war" against Islam.

OLO has been kind enough to give you two goes at publishing very similar articles in two weeks. Its not for me to criticise the wisdom of that.

Your views would probably gain much more acceptance (and I might even admit I agree with some of them) if your style was less impenetrable, uncompromising and grandiose.

Separately, I found it interesting on a different blog, how a non simple discussion of the sedition law rehash could put my mind, to some degree, at rest on that change. Legal protections include "certain acts done in good faith not unlawful". http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca191482/s24f.html

In

"CRIMES ACT 1914 - SECT 24F
Certain acts done in good faith not unlawful
(1)
Nothing in the preceding provisions of this Part makes it unlawful for a person:
(a) to endeavour in good faith to show that the Sovereign, the Governor-General, the Governor of a State, the Administrator of a Territory, or the advisers of any of them, or the persons responsible for the government of another country, has or have been, or is or are, mistaken in any of his or their counsels, policies or actions;"

Amazing (for me) what non dramatic discussion can do.