Pericles, -a balanced perspective I think.

Redneck,
you should have a read of Carniflex experience as a park ranger ....
look up his history. People who roll up with 'crippled' stickers on their car, but get out and play footy.... and 'pension' cards etc..

The information he gave, based on his actual experience, suggests either a deliberate attempt to portray a particular group as low life social parasites, (I didn't get that impression) or his attempt to wake us up to what is going on. (seems more likely from his tone).

The more we emphasise 'multi' culturalism, the more each sub culture will feel as a law unto itself, and less accountable to the 'outside' mob who don't share their language or customs or historical/ethnic background.

On the topic.....

Some of what I've heard (yes, its just hearsay at this point) is quite scary, "cannot create ill will"... "cannot negatively portray the government" ? Those kinds of things (if true) would be a very volatile tool in the hands of a Sargent Shultz.

You do have a point though Redneck, "reaping what we sow" is a very sound agricultural and Biblical concept.

I must confess, that the application of an 'ill feeling toward the PM' law applied to some of the more spoilt and rabid among the greeny/leftist rentacrowd "we stand for peace" (while attacking police or property) mob for a few years might be a good thing, but that would mean even the more genuine among us would be silenced.

Would we be able to speak our passions here if "creating ill will against the PM" is not allowed ? Well, I for one would quickly be in Jail if quoting from 'tell it like it is' Prophets like Isaiah happen to step on the ministrial toes. Hmm...I think I hear hungry Lions roaring under the MCG.....

I wonder if criticizing unjust policies could be construed as "fostering Ill will against the PM" ?

Neil James talks about checks and balances in the law. But he hasn't mentioned a single one. Why? Because they effectively don't exist.

Perhaps Mr James should get some legal advice before talking about legal issues.

And after his performance on the SBS Insight program, I find his claims to being concerned about the welfare of any person of Muslim background laughable.

The new laws will be implemented by the same "intelligence" department which told us about the weapons of mass destructtion in Iraq.
Our foreign policy has made us many enemies.
We have enforced sanctions against another country and thus caused the deaths of thousands.
We have taken part in the invasion of another country (based on false information)and thus caused the deaths of thousnands and continuing suffering for thousands more.
It is hard to feel any confidence that the new laws will make us safer in Australia when we continue to make more enemies around the world by always siding with the USA.
I wish that we could be protected by law against state sponsored terrorist acts.

A far more effective way of making us safer in Australia would be to start making more friends instead of more enemies.

I find the mindset displayed by Mr James in this article deeply disturbing.

We should remember that Mr James was heavily involved with the faulty intelligence that lead to the Iraq War. As a weapons inspector he knew the same facts that Scott Ritter has shared with the public, but still chose to peddle the propaganda.

Current estimates put the deaths of innocent Iraqi civilians at 30,000 with twice that many wounded and handicapped. Each month thousands more are dying. These are just the innocent families caught up in this horrible bloody mess

On whose authority does he make the following assurances?

-“A key point is that the new measures are specifically targeted only at terrorists and their committed and active sympathisers - a very small, distinct and readily distinguishable segment of the population.”

Could Mr James share the profile of this group with us so we can add it to the legislation.

I think it is important to remember that there has been no attacks on the Australian mainland, by Mr James target group, not a single incident.

We have a history of bombs let of by home grown criminals who Mr James assures us won’t be targeted by this legislation because they aren’t extremist muslims

-“Confused moderate Muslims need instead to be reassured that only Islamist extremism and its violent manifestations are being targeted.”

Could Mr James tell us how to tell the difference between a moderate muslim who is outraged by the senseless violence and says so and a dedicated jihadi intent on keeping a low profile.

"Could Mr James tell us how to tell the difference between a moderate muslim who is outraged by the senseless violence and says so and a dedicated jihadi intent on keeping a low profile. "

Good question gunerdo,

The answer he is unwilling to provide you is that he can't - and won't.

This leaves no option but to target any Muslim or supporter of a Muslim) who privately or publically expressed concern about senseless violence and anti-Muslim propoganda.

Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, who was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder, at Stockwell Tube station, south London, was not a moderate Muslim, just a passenger on a train.

Explain this Mr James?

The author writes that Australia has come under internal threat from Communists, fascists, etc. Where can he show this? By fascist, I suggest Neil means Nazi's which is an exageration.

I, Sir, am a fascist in the true sense of the term of fascism. I am no Nazi. If any threat to freedoms exist, it is at the hands of the opportunist major parties who crave more and more powers.

To make a political joke and to give military to act as police on civilians stinks of politicians in want of control of the people.

I Sir, do not want to control the freedom of thought. As a Fascist, I want Australian's supported, not prostituted off to foreigners so the pollies can be the peoples Pimps. I live to serve my brothers and sisters, not some greedy and heartless gang of politicians.