Bushbasher,
Are all those people who have ideas that don’t echo your own fascists or just plain thick? I’ll put my educational credentials up against yours any time you like. Although whatever education you do have hasn’t seemed to help you express yourself with any clarity or without resort to insult.

My support of the Federal Police seems to have perhaps been a little too fulsome. I note that many of those who wrote in defence of Haneefs legal team also have a little egg on their faces.

I do not condone the AFP making things up, if in fact that is what has happened, and would support their condemnation on this issue. I will say again that I am not a supporter of the liberal party on most issues, not that it should be relevant. However, I believe that on the whole the Federal Police are working for the safety of Australians and not for the reelection of the Howard Gov’t, as some of you suggest.

I think that canceling his visa may have been a bit premature. My faith was never in Ruddock or Andrews but in the hardworking and courageous people of the AFP and I sincerely believed that they must have had some extra evidence that was not made public. Whilst this is a setback for the AFP, I don’t think it is time to “throw the baby out with the bathwater”

As for Langmack, I think that the soft lefts infiltration of academia, arts and the so called helping professions means that it is you who are part of the chattering classes

Paul.L That was a long chat, mostly with the letter 'I' in it.

I agree with Paul L. that the AFP, including Keelty, should not be crucified for carrying out a duty under intense political pressure from Ruddock and Howard.

Howard, Uncle Phil and Formal Kev may soon have the knives out for Keelty as the scapegoat. Keelty has stood up to the Government in the past when he rightly identified Iraq as fuel on the terrorist fire http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/16/1079199194438.html

Keelty's made the AFP an effective counterterrorist intelligence and law enforcement body overseas particularly following the Bali I Bombings and (as far as I can see) here. If the AFP has been coerced into exaggerating the slim case against Haneef then the political lines of control should be obvious.

With the Federal Government behind in the polls the Government appears to be milking any matter, however serious, to gain votes. The AFP in terrorism matters is under the close supervision of the broader Federal Government.

Why is the Government hanging on to Haneef?

If the Government was serious in assisting the UK to resolve a UK terrorism matter it would facilitate the extradition of a suspect to the UK. Instead our Government has kept him here for increasingly apparent political reasons. A procession of UK Police and other security officials will be taking the LONG flight to Australia in August to handle what appears to be a UK matter.

Even if the scare campaign is fooling some voters http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22104675-601,00.html the Government should give us a hint about its coveted but "key" secret evidence or stop scaring voters.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Gee, Paul L. Please do wave your academic qualifications around like a penis. See if I'm impressed.

Do I regard people who disagree with me as fascist or thick? No, not normally. But, after Hicks and Habib, anyone who then treated Ruddock as an honest man of integrity, yes they must be one or the other. The Haneef business smelled from the very beginning.

And no, I'm not left. I'm just left of the fear-mongering hysteria which, for a while, took over this country.

As for those who want to defend Keelty and the AFP, forget it. This is the same AFP who knew for days about the SIM card error and said nothing? The same AFP who renigged on a deal with Lee Rush, ensuring his son ended up in Bali on death row? Whatever integrity Keelty once had, he long ago sold it for job security. He's a truly disgusting man.

The tinfoil hat brigade is out in full force on this article. No mention by the media of the other arrests made around the same time as Haneef. Based on my own experience with the forensics used to gather information regarding terrorist suspects it appears that the evidence gathering mechanisms for this case may be flawed, and so may be the legislation, but to suggest it is a political fear campaign is unbelievable. By far the biggest incident of fear mongering so far has been by Andrew Bartlett, who has implied to all muslim residents that the federal executive misrepresented the advice of the AFP when Haneefs visa was cancelled (subject to appeal).

First off I must apologise as I got you and Bushbred confused. Bushbred has waived his educational credentials around at the same time as making disparaging remarks about others intelligence. You have merely disparaged my and others intelligence. Looking at your comment history I can see that you don’t seem to support much. You seem to be content merely to criticise. I wonder if you would put your case as to what should be done with regards to Islamic Terrorism.

I further note that you believe that the left is not involved in ‘fear mongering’. It is clear that both sides of the political spectrum exaggerate about adverse consequences (what some call fear mongering) to justify their positions. To pretend that one side is guiltier is self serving.

As for Keelty and the AFP, it was public servant Peter White who prepared the inaccurate minute for Andrews.

Andrews still maintains that he had access to evidence not put before the magistrate when deciding Haneefs’ visa cancellation. Maybe he has nothing, in which case Haneef will be released, his visa reinstated and maybe he’ll get some monetary compensation. Certainly someone’s head, probably White’s, will roll. This demonstrates that our system is healthy and we are not in danger of becoming a fascist state