If you are wondering what Mr.Menzies might have written about freedom try this site: http://www.menziesvirtualmuseum.org.au/transcripts/ForgottenCont.html

People argue against Mr.Fraser as being unreliable, a Socialist, or somethingelse as silly; what can be said about the father of the Liberal Party I wonder. Mr.Menzies indicates the breadth of what was once the Liberal Party; it not being a Socialist Party.

Generally, the opinions expressed here are spot on. However, its quite painful to see a politician distrust the process of democracy in his own country.

The issue is more about protecting the rights of Terrorists not the average citizen who are unlikely to be caught up in such legal issues. However, many fail to acknowledge this.

The sad truth be known people on the Left would love to see the overthrow of their own democratically elected Government so have a need to support the "rights" of terrorists with whom they secretly sympathize.

They do this under the guise of "protecting the average citizen" and are actually dangerous.

People like Andrew Bartlett are the truly frightening ones. They hate Western culture and sympathize with those who would destroy it.

Gee Bushbred. Give us a break. "Rather than take up arms". So your hypothetical student did consider shooting people who didn't agree with him? Yes, very clever and very approppriate!!??. The mark of tolerance.

Lazy people see greed everywhere. Hard workers see opportunity. Remember what George Orwell said? The pigs were the leaders after the revolution.

Mao's soldiers' coats all looked the same from the outside ... but the Officers had fur lining which could not be seen.

The day of the pigs is over, socialism is dead. Make way for benevolent capitalism

The usual suspect(s) has forgotten that the corner stone of democracy is individual liberties.

Despite the predictable hissy fits from the 'Rabid RatPack' (most apposite, maracas!), Bartlett is actually quite correct to assert that Australia needs a Bill of Rights (or a Human Rights Act) to protect its citizens and others within its jurisdiction - particularly in the face of arguably the most authoritarian governments we've seen since World War 2. However, it's rather a shame that he chose to use refugees as his example, since it was bound to invite the kinds of tirade we see above (with the exception, of course, of the wonderful bushbred et al) from the 'usual suspects'.

Given the Howard government's shameful attempts to ram their draconian legislation through Parliament with minimal examination or debate, we need for a Human Rights Act and a Bill of Rights to protect such fundamental rights as habeas corpus, the presumption of innocence and freedom to criticise the government. I heard the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald on PM (I think) tonight talking about some of the implications that the proposed legislation may have for the practice of journalism in Australia - worrisome stuff indeed.

Fortunately, there's a well organised campaign under way for both a Human Rights Act and a Bill of Rights. Stacks of information and commentary at New Matilda http://www.newmatilda.com/home/default.asp .

I can just see all the litigation and human rights lawyers smacking their chops in delight at the prospect of a Human Rights Bill.

The legal system will be more able to play one side off against the other and we will be in more confusion than ever.

It is hard enough to convict a criminal now and giving them more rights will only see our society decay even faster.

As I've mentioned before Andrew,how about a Bill of Responsibilities?
You cannot have rights unless you have forfilled your responsibilities by being being a positive contributer to your society.

It would be better that one innocent person be gaoled for a while than thousands being murdered by a religious lunatic.These nutters can seriously impact on our economy.If they bring poverty to this country,it will end in civil war as often happens in The Middle East.

Is it possible for the Democrats to be less revelant that Labor is at this moment?