How nice. People in Australia connected to terrorism have the same rights as the rest of us to be heard, and the media should facilitate their rights. People in Australia already have the right to say what they think. Why should people with the tendency to express themselves by killing and maiming other Australians be treated differently? And what does the “foundation of humanity” have to do with these warped creatures?

We are not talking about what the author calls politics in relation to terrorists or would-be terrorists. And they will never be convinced that they are wrong as long as the Koran tells them they are right.

Who is going to see these poor souls, who might go underground because they can’t openly preach hate (although a couple of wacky imams seem to be getting away with it) as victims of the state? They might, and their quieter supporters might; but most people will not.

Having said that the media should provide them with a voice, he then says that people who wish to disrupt and wreak havoc on Australia are deranged and have ill-conceived ideas of their faith. But are they really deranged, and are their beliefs ill conceived? Does not the Koran incite them to their actions?

listen hassan i couldn't give a phat rat's hairy arse what people in other countries thought about us.......if your that worried about what's happening overseas then you could always pack up and move there.

anyhow this arguement that's constantly trotted out by jornos and pollies that 'we have a poor reputation overseas' is a furphy.

my challenge to hassan and his ilk is to give names and adresses......who exactly are these people who think so poorly about australia??......sure there might be a small group of like minded leftwing journos and social agitators who may think that way, but the vast bulk of humanity is oblivious to australia and any political issues here, their more interested in getting on with their lives, making money and enjoying themselves.

Jean Charles de Menezes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

This is a fine example of what erosion of rights can cause in countries like Australia. A slight change in emphasis on the handling of suspects opens the gate to terrible behaviour and violations of personal wellbeing. The officers involved walk away without repercussion, because even the slightest changes in the law allows them to.

On a side note (http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3964) this from the wikipedia entry also,

"Later, a security agency source said: “This take-out is the signature of a special forces operation. It is not the way the police usually do things. We know members of SO19 have been receiving training from the SAS, but even so, this has special forces written all over it.”

As you see, special operations forces will commit human rights violations as modus operandi, no matter what country, even in their own country.

Syed: Even with these new laws aimed solely at those who want to destroy us. Australia is still a lot freer then 99% of all moslem nations.
Moslems can set up mosques, schools etc in this country and these can be foreign funded. In how many islamic nations could Christians do the same, and if they could they would be heavily constrained.
In Australia my religion or lack off is none of any Government's business. In the majority of islamic nations if a citizen converted to Christianity, Hinduism or any other religion he/she is killed or jailed.
Moslems will use our laws & democracy to destroy us as one of your leaders stated in reference to America.
There seems to be many of you people sending in articles at present, is it the beginning of a media blitz? You know like "We moderates are misunderstood and deep down we are wonderful"
It was only last week that there was in every major Australian city 10,000 or more moderate moslems marching for peace, marching for tolerance and castigating the firebrand islamic preachers - err wasn't there? No sorry that is something I have never seen nor am I likely to do so eh mate? numbat

"the communities at risk from these sedition laws would be the Australian Muslim community, the anti-globalisation and anti-war protest movements, freelance journalists and ethnic media"

White supremacists and conspiracy theorists are also at risk, as are those in the republican movement who ridicule the British royal family.

Apparently a new law banning the publication of information on euthanasia also comes into effect today.

We're getting some very confused messages about who is allowed to say what. The who and what goalposts and the rules applying to them are moving in inconsistent directions.

Why must we respect Pauline Hanson's right to speak her mind, but deny the same right to someone who objects to Prince Charles and Camilla becoming the King and Queen of Australia?

I can't remember the name of that bloke who wasn't allowed here because he denies the holocaust. Was it someone Irving? Yet Geoffrey Blainey has been openly praised by our prime minister for doing exactly the same thing.

There are truths and untruths all over the place and varying shades of grey between them. If we're going to live the rhetoric of choice then surely we're entitled to choose from the entire range of opinion. How else are we to make educated judgements?

For a start , Australians were never asked if we wanted to drop the White Australia policy, we were never asked if we wanted Multi Culture.
The anwers to both would have been a loud,"NO!"
So do not give us the line that this country was founded on Multi Culture and do not give us the line that it is open to everyone.
Most Australians deplore the downhill ride our once good land is on.
Unsuitable migrants who will never adapt are not benefitting us,particularly those who come from countries that are in a constant state of war and chaos. Such people do not know how to live in peace.
As can be proved by the amount of crime generated by ethnic gangs.
That is Multi Culture and most of us reject it.