This suspicion and paranoia was applied to others, who were “by association” Jewish German and Austrians, ergo nazis.

Like many, I don’t want to see history repeated with asylum seekers; or, indeed anyone ...I only ask that bodies who investigate such issues be well informed, well trained, and meticulous. Is that too much?

Paul,L Why avoid this comment? I would expect so from Meg1, who damns Haneef on the contents in his fridge, and washing - “housewifely” excellence being the criterium of innocence ... (but, could also indicate intention to return)

I suspect that you are highly intelligent and well educated, unfortunately, by demonstrating arrogance you belie this. Until you can see the whole picture, devoid of your blinkered right/left prejudices, and without nit-picking at pointless minitutae, you are yet to obtain the most important quality - true insight.

I could well see Meg1, painting swastikas on our fence, as was done; but I hope you wouldn’t hold her tin for her.

I have clearly expressed my attitude to terrorists.

ASIO is an umbrella for different Commonwealth intelligence agencies
www.asio.gov.au/About/Content/History.aspx

Paul.L: “Similarly shoot- to-kill ... was the policy of the British forces to kill suspected IRA members on sight rather than try and arrest them”

“Shoot to kill” was not used to take out IRA terrorist suspects. The policy used by countries is “Targeted Killings,” and used to eliminate individuals they view as a threat. A nation's intelligence, security, or military forces identify the individual/s in question, and carry out an operation intended to kill them. For example, on March 6, 1988, Gibraltar, Spain, British intelligence officers shot and killed three members of the IRA they believed had planted a bomb outside the British Governor's residence.

“Shoot to kill” is the policy of taking out a person without first issuing a warning. The Operation Kratos “shoot-to-kill” policy was adopted to deal with suicide bombers ... and was first mentioned publicly by the British Government on July 15, 2005.

This power can also be used by British in domestic violence, kidnapping, and stalking.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article322021.ece

Clones:

NO DOUBT you've copped less than your fair share.

My 'only idea' is not to even attempt to discuss ANY matters that need thought, tolerance compassion.....; and intelligence with you.

'You' prove with every post that an idiot can indeed have an opinion!

Meggot Clone;-look back to mid/end August. Do I have to s-p-e-l-l out 'your' posting pattern/s?

............of course you can't read minds! You have never had any example to judge by....

Danielle,

Now we are getting somewhere.

First let me say that my discussion of Internment, Diplock Courts and Shoot-to-kill, was intended to directly refute your assertions that
1. Australia has overreacted to the terrorist threat and
2. that Britain never took such draconian steps.

I believe I have made my point in this regard.

I am well aware that Australia interned citizens during the world wars. Almost every combatant country did.
The suggestion that the Australian Gov’t was overreacting to a non existent threat is not credible.

I have a real problem with anyone judging the actions of those at the time by today’s standards. That is neither fair nor informative.

Were innocent people wrongly victimised, harassed or interned? Absolutely. Naivety is a description which may well be deserved, but ‘criminal’ is certainly not. To put things in context, during the early years of ww2 the British Empire was in dire peril from the German war machine. Hitler came very close to forcing Britain’s surrender, in which case we might have been speaking German today, instead of English. We were a country with a huge number of men away in uniform and the last thing people wanted to worry about was fifth columnists. Did they overreact? Probably. Should we blame them? NO.

There is no real parallel between this internment and Haneefs case, as you would have us believe. Haneef had a trial, was exonerated, and is home living with his family. His VISA, which was never HIS by right, but merely an extension of our hospitality, can go to someone who is above reproach. There are enough people who want to come to Australia that we don’t need to take a risk.

I honestly can’t see how you can consider the fact that you got the AFP confused with ASIO, minutiae. You were attempting to paint a history of malpractice in the organisation, but you had the wrong one.

As for shoot-to-kill, whilst the British Gov’t denied it, the SAS were no doubt working by this principle for years, especially after the Warrenpoint massacre. Gibraltar is merely one example

“I could well see Meg1, painting swastikas on our fence, as was done...”

Danielle, your ‘know-all’ attitude has your feet in your mouth up to your knees this time…I have had German friends who suffered in that way and were interned with other Italian and Greek men while their families struggled to run farms, bakeries and other businesses and in some cases while their sons fought and died in defense of this country. Extended family would have been on the receiving end of your prejudices not fence-painting with extremists of your ilk.

‘Targeted killings’ or ‘Shoot to kill’

If you are the ‘target’ in Britain or here…what is the difference? You’re going to end up dead Danielle…the aim is the same…for the target and the shooter.

Remember the young Brazilian who ran to catch a train and was shot dead because he had a backpack and looked foreign?

‘British intelligence officers shot and killed three members of the IRA they believed had planted a bomb outside the British Governor's residence.’

I hardly think they issued any ‘warnings’ their either Danielle…their targets were no different to the suicide bomber who is about to detonate a bomb and kill, maim or mutilate as many innocents as he-she can…and probably has assisted in the manufacture and planning of other bombs and bombings.

Every police force has the power to shoot when under attack or in self defence…you could hardly expect otherwise. Some domestic violence, etc. cases become extremely violent, even to the killing of partners and children…should the police allow this to happen? …ditto for the stalkers and kidnappers…they won’t necessarily take the peaceful options and may well become violent and risk or attempt to take the lives of others.

Luckily you don’t have either power as you think having the wrong suspect is ‘minutiae’…you’d kill the wrong target anyway…

(tbc...)

(Cont…)

Haneef’s suspect status had little to do with his washing on the line or his food in the fridge…but that and the myriad of other concerning behaviours, including the sim-card issue which you conveniently choose to ignore, the one way ticket, and his omission to advise his employer and his dubious e-mails…all gave the security forces more than enough cause for concern…his behaviour is the reason his visa has been cancelled, he has himself to blame, no-one else.

At least I’m talking about the right guy…you should try it sometime…minutiae indeed...not if you’re wrongly on the receiving end, Danielle.

(_?_) Ginx, ‘what the’? ? ?

…when I removed the diatribe, there wasn’t anything left to respond to…and I’d have to agree that you probably do only have ‘one idea’…(_?_)

: )

(_?_) Ginx, ‘what the’? ? ?

…when I removed the diatribe, there wasn’t anything left to respond to…and I’d have to agree that you probably do only have ‘one idea’…(_?_)

: )
Posted by Meg1, Tuesday, 11 September 2007 10:23:30 AM

The Meggot returns.

And you think I'M unclear??...eh?