The Guardian reports that Mark Dreyfus and Sussan Ley
have traded barbs over the release of convicted terrorist
Abdul Nacer Benbrika.

Mark Dreyfus has accused the Opposition of stoking fears in
the community and under mining the police in a fierce war
of words over the release of this man.

Benbrika has served nearly 20 years and was released from
prison on tuesday after the Supreme Court made the judgement
that he was no longer an unacceptable risk to the public.

Benbrika will be subjected to an extended supervision order,
which includes electronic monitoring along with
deradicalisation and psychological treatment and bans on who
he can associate with. Police can also come and search his
home at any time.

I don't understand with all these precautions being taken -
why release the man in the first place?

Your thoughts please?

There’ll be repercussions if he was guilty in the first place & if he was not ! Irresponsible amateurs is the only way the authorities involved can be described.

Thanks Indyvidual.

He was convicted as a terrorist.

I need to add that he was convicted over plots to attack
the MCG during the 2005 AFL Grand Final and Melbourne
Crown Casino.

He's been released from prison under more than 30 strict
conditions including supervision and a curfew after a push
to keep him behind bars due to community safety was
abandoned.

Mark Dreyfus said he had faith in our law enforcement agencies
to protect the community.

I am not sure if the risk is worth taking.

The Swans won the 2005 Grand Final. Had these towel-heads interrupted that, then death would have been too good for them.

OTOH, the man was convicted and served his time. So he should have been released when his sentence was finished in 2020. I'm not at all in favour of these extra-judicial sentences.

OTOH, he had had his citizenship revoked by the government. But the High Court had found that law unconstitutional. Perhaps instead of moronic Voice referenda, we should have a referendum to change the constitution to allow the government to revoke the citizenship of these types of people. It'd pass with flying colours.

"Mark Dreyfus said he had faith in our law enforcement agencies
to protect the community."

An entirely blameless young women was murdered in Adelaide a couple of days ago by someone who'd been released from a mental institution two days prior. Yeah, I'm sure we all have faith in the authorities to keep us safe.

Melbourne Cricket Ground has handed down a lifetime
ban to Benbrika - including being banned from the
Boxing Day Test Match when around 180,000 people
are expected to walk through the gates.

It follows that a lifetime ban has also been put in
place from Crown Casino, which has barred Benbrika from
all of its properties world-wide.

Has he shown any genuine change in his mental outlook?
If not, that is of extreme concern.
We need to accept this ruling, by those who are charged with making it.
However, if they are in error, innocents might suffer.
That is also of extreme concern.
We are watching with trepidation?

"However, if they are in error, innocents might suffer."

"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong."

Thomas Sowell

We don't know whether this man has changed or not.
His family says he has.

The Supreme Court has decided that
he's no longer a risk and has released him under severe
restrictions.

Frankly I personally don't understand
for what benefit?

Not his - because he certainly won't
have much freedom under all the restrictions. And for
the community, it's not good - constantly worrying
whether he's really
changed, and if and when he'll attempt to strike again?

It's not a win-win situation for either him or us.

Can anyone suggest what should have happened in his case?

He's an Australian citizen. So, he couldn't be deported.

He's served almost two decades in prison. Yet, is he still
a risk? So what should have happened? What's a better
alternative to releasing him with restrictions and monitoring?

The Supreme Court has decided that
he's no longer a risk and has released him under severe
restrictions.
Foxy,
I hope the Govt & the people of this Nation will make the Supreme Court responsible.

Indyvidual,

I'm not sure what the future holds for us in this case.

I'm usually positive. But in this case - I'm not waging
any bets. Just hoping for the best.

It is a bit ludicrous banning Brika from the MCG or elsewhere.
Those that organise these "events" do not expose themselves to risk.
They send some young man who has been religiously indoctrinated.
See the Manchester stadium attack.
The Brits thought they had deindoctrinated the terrorist who did the
London Bridge attacks.
From memory similar failures have occurred in France and Germany.
Iran also refuses entry to anyone who does not want to be returned.
The law should be changed to enable the cancellation of citizenship.
Then Brika could be taken to the airport and sent to Algeria.
If they refuse him entry, tell the airlines etc that he will not be
allowed back into Australia and airlines will have to leave him in the
transit lounge in Algeria.

There is no way around it, Islam is evil and must be treated as such.

Bezza,

Merry Christmas to you and yours and All
The Best for the New Year. May the true spirit
of this joyful season fill your heart with love
which will last all through the coming year.

Foxy,
Go to Youtube & type in ‘Why Muslims migrate to non Muslim countries’. It’ll make it abundantly clear how stupid the whole show is at our expense, courtesy of the intellectual advisors to Governments.

Indyvidual,

There's enough hatred in the world as it is.

We don't need to contribute to it.

Foxy,
You really should watch that youtube link to give you an idea what is really going on.

Indyvidual,

I did watch the uTube video that you recommended.

I learned a lot. Thank you.

Anyone else bothered to watch these videos ? If you have, has your attitude towards these
“Refugees” changed ?

Our legal system has always operated in a way that can not eliminate risk and rightfully so.

It delivers sentences which fit the crime and once served offenders are eligible to apply for release.

If the threat of reoffending were grounds for universally extending sentences not only would our prison system be unable to cope given our accepted recidivism rates, but giving the State that much power over our liberty would have serious moral implications.

It delivers sentences which fit the crime and once served offenders are eligible to apply for release.
SteeleRedux,
Not as simple as that when one considers that the crime is not yet realised & yet it is being committed for a few decades. Unless of course you don’t consider occupation & planned takeover by anti-Australian forces & various other stealth not a crime. You are in fact one of the more vehement critics of the colonisation of Australia by Europeans yet you do not criticise the new wave of so-called invaders who openly declare their agenda to be the elimination of all who are not of a particular faith. Will the new colonisers perpetuate the welfare & social policies in place for the indigenous here ? From what I see happening in Europe I fear that the invaders by stealth are the same mentality here as those in Europe.

SteeleRedux,
It really shouldn’t take you that long to find a suitable rebuttal in your archives of stock answers to my statement ?

Indyvidual,

Our legal systems have to go by the law as it exists.
And much as we may not like the release of Abdul
Nacer Benbrika - as the PM pointed out - we have to
abide by the law. At least we can take some consolation
that he shall be heavily monitored and have to obey the
restrictions placed on him. Hopefully, these safeguards
will protect our community.

Our legal systems have to go by the law as it exists.
Foxy,
Fine by me but why don’t these Laws apply to everyone ?

Indyvidual,

I think it depends which laws and the circumstances
involved. Laws vary - criminal, civil, et cetera.

Foxy,
All Laws ! Don’t you think that if Laws were to be thoroughly thought out by now, Lawyers should be on the brink of extinction ?

Individual,

Laws do change with time as needs change and pressure is
applied. At least we do have that option in this country.

Foxy,
I’m afraid my experiences force me to reply with No & another No !

Indyvidual,

I guess that's why the statue of Justice is depicted
wearing a blind-fold.

Foxy,
The blind fold is a smoke screen to make people believe Justice is not selective.