When I came to Australia I was horrified from onset about how I perceived there was a lack of proper law and order and refused to naturalise for some 23 years as expression of a (peaceful protest). Then I naturalised and glad I did have my kind of protest.
Now, as a “CONSTITUTIONALIST”, with my INSPECTOR-RIKATI® books I continue my protest.
Firstly, few if any politicians (regardless if they are lawyers) have any real understanding let alone comprehension as to what the constitution stands for. As such, many laws are enacted that purportedly are for moral issues or politically suitable but which are really worthless as they are beyond constitutional powers.
Secondly, most laws (Bills) are voted upon by members of the political parties pending what their leader tells them to do. As was with the Federal Parliament, most didn’t even have a copy of bills they voted upon! This makes a mockery of having representatives in the Parliament as it is a mere dictatorship!
Most High Court judges have no concept of what the Constitution really stands for, and so also most lecturers in legal studies and as such teach law students their (mis)perception rather then what is constitutionally permissible.
International Law does not override constitutional provisions but pending if it suits the Federal-Government or not they argue against International law application if it goes against them, but they argue in favour of International law if it is to somehow justify to expand their legislative powers (such as in environment)
We had a REPUBLIC referendum where neither monarchist or republicans had a clue what is constitutionally applicable, as constitutionally there is no power to turn the Commonwealth of Australia in a REPUBLIC, as it is not a dominion, country, kingdom, empire but a “POLITICAL UNION”, as like the European-Union!
Politicians therefore seek to con the electors with all kind of stories about legislation but ultimately it is all about power! that is gaining more power for themselves, slowly turning every person into a criminal without that society is any better off, rather worse!
See also my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH

Well noted Pericles:

Post-war empires have tended to be heavily US-centric, which means that it is the sort of Empire you have when you don't have an Empire.

Do we blame the USA for taking this heavy handed approach?

Well..I tend to when they try to evergreen medical patents under the guise of free trade agreements, so we have to pay through the nose for medicines and prop up the 'lifestyle' to which Pharmeceutical bosses have become acustomed...

But the Barbary wars of North Africa must have taught the Yanks the lesson that if you are weak.. you will be trodden down, mashed up and filtered for a glass of wine of the next mini me tyrant who thinks he can get away with it. 25% of your gross national product is a hell of a lot to pay to some raghead numnut on the North African coast just to sail in the ocean within reach of his slave gallions.

No one treated the Americans with any particular 'justice' so.. we should not be surprised when they say "our turn"

I just re-iterate.. the whole discussion of 'more law..more order' is entirely relative. Ya caynt please alll the people, and there will be those who jump up and down at the slightest change in law which might or might not effect them.

Such is democracy....and people.

Boazy: "...and there will be those who jump up and down at the slightest change in law which might or might not effect them."

You mean like you do at the prospect of the legal recognition of same sex relationships?

"Raghead numnut" - sometimes, when his quasi-reasonable facade slips, we get a glimpse of the real Boazy. And it's far from a pretty sight.

Ginx,

You claim that Howard copped a fair bit of flak from his actions over Tampa.

As far as the overseas media establishment is concerned, you are absolutely correct. I was referring to the reaction from ordinary people, particularly in Europe, which is being overwhelmed by the flood of illegal immigrants it is receiving. The third world population explosion, is, of course, a taboo subject, and as far as I know, the only subject on which the US government, the Vatican and the muslim world agree is that nothing must be done to limit the increase in world population. Europe is in a even more tragic situation, as its birth rate is now so low that the establishment covertly supports the immigration of people from the third world to augment the labour supply. It is always dangerous to extrapolate trends, but if current trends continue Italy and France can expect to have muslim majorities in 50 years or so. Around 2075 you could expect St Peters in Rome to follow the fate of the Hagia Sophia church in Constantinople and be converted into a mosque.

As I thought, plerdsus, you haven't thought it through at all.

>>I fully recognise the import of my last post. That is why I believe we should consider arming ourselves with nuclear weapons<<

I presume from this throwaway remark that you are pretty happy that Iran should have nuclear weapons, and perhaps North Korea too? After all, what is our foreign policy about, if not to tell the world that it's ok to get down and dirty when it comes to defending your turf.

It is actually difficult to imagine an action more likely to destabilize the world's powers than Australia declaring itself to be a nuclear-armed nation. Little Australia, twenty million people on a massive, mineral-rich, totally indefensible island, taking the nuke'em option.

Would the US come out on our side? They'd be hard pressed to allow it, given the reaction from China and the rest of our northern neighbours. What would China do, if they suddenly found that they had a nuclear power to their south - would they be likely to sit on their hands and say "good for you, guys", or would they be likely to take a different approach. Like, stop buying raw materials from us. Like, refusing to send us any of their merchandise either.

Or maybe they'll take the easy option and stage a pre-emptive invasion. Then turn round to the US and say "what are you going to do about that, big boy?"

>>There have been other times when the world has faced seemingly insurmountable challenges, and has managed to survive.<<

True. But you might be testing the boundaries a little with this one.

plerdsus,

You make mention of condemnation over the Tampa incident being a media establishment thing. Not so.

I was in Europe for several months during that period, and I can assure you that I felt considerable discomfort at the way Australia was perceived; though it was clear that the blame was being leveled at the Government not the people.

Whether there is a global problem with illegal immigrants or not; it is hardly a mitigating factor in the disgraceful treatment the Tampa refugees received at the hands of our Government. It was a shameful incident, and did Australia no credit at all.

As to your predictions of a global shift of humanity and even belief. What's new?

Life is evolutionary. Countries will change, borders will shift, terrain will change (we hope for the better!), populace/belief system's etc.

Churches WILL be converted into mosques. Many will be converted into delightful dwellings as with a friend of mine. I'm not being facetious; things change; people change. But that change will come gradually, (YOU do not refer to a week Friday).

I did not miss the comment about the mosque. It will be so, IF and when people want it.

That IS life plerdsus.