Thread: Presumption Of Innocence

Originally Posted by craigb

it was the Australian Minister for Immigration.

Who unfortunately is my local member. :

Ever since that person, acting on his religious beliefs, convinced the government to interfere and overturn NT legislation on euthenasia I have regretted to be in his electorate and voted against him.

Not surprising that he acted this way, same way as he acted against the interests of all Australians in forcing upon us the Workchoice legislation.


Peter.

Hey

Watched the paid interview on 60 minutes last night and thought he came across as credible and believable.

Only two issues that were a little "off" was when he was asked if he had ever supported terrorism or terrorist acts and there was a pause and a long winded answer. Would have expected an outright "no" similar to the initial answer of "are you a terrorist" at the opening.

Also the answers to the money transfers were vague.

Outside of those I think he is no terrorist nor had terrorist leanings.

If there is a link, I would put my money on a link between him and one of the radical mosques or clerics/leaders when he lived in the UK. Not that he was involved in anything other than being there at some stage.

Maybe Andrews will release the intel today. Lets see if dazzlers on the money. -------------

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

There should be a complete prohibition on reporting anything at all until after the result of the trial, when the "facts" won't impact on the world. There seems to be this holier than thou approach, that we have a right to be informed... well we do, after the event. In the meantime we have a right to be protected, and to the truth. The truth will never get to us while these dimwits continue to press for unrelated snippets of information.

I am not a fan of the Australian press but for all their faults I would sooner have them reporting what is happening no matter how one eyed than to have no reportage at all.

This is a democracy not a totalatarian state yet.

If we didn't have the press sticking their noses into this affair do you think he would of been release yet?
How is the public suppost to make judments about the effectiveness or integrity of their government without the press keeping them informed?

We do have a big problem with our press, two of which are (IMO)

1. Editorial style - everything has to be a big scandle or sensationalised.
2. Lack of independence - We have a system where the fortunes of a media outlet is dependant on the government giving them license's and changes of legislation regarding ownership rules - They're not exactly going to bite the hand that feeds them are they?

But to muzzle them... No way!

Trouble is, the media interferes with the legal process. How many times have you heard "my client will have trouble getting a fair trial in light of the attention his case has been given". It must be virtually impossible in some cases to find jurors who have not read about the case in the papers or heard about it on TV. I tend to agree that it would be better that nothing was reported until a case goes to trial. After that, it doesn't matter. If it doesn't go to trial, then we can hear all about it.

But, yes, the problem with that idea is that the press have also been instrumental in bringing our collective attention to situations that should be rectifed.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Glad it's not my decision to make.

this argument will go on forever. I doubt that at any time will everyone sit down and say; :... Hmmm... good outcome, nice bit of legislature that.."

However i feel what is more important is punishing the CORRECTLY CONVICTED terrorist. Here is what I propose :

Dependant on the religion of the terrorist substitute:

• Red Meat on Fridays,
• Pork,
• Shellfish,
• Misc,
• OR whatever is banned by the particular flavour of the religious nonsense of choice...

Completely drape your convicted in his/her (non)prefered foodstuff.
Empty a magazine of 7.62 into thier chest and head.
Send them to meet thier god in the forbidden foodstuff and collect thier reward.

Dont laugh, im serious. if they all knew this was thier earthly prize/punishment perhaps the religious/noncensical fevour would not be so pronounced....

has there ever been an atheist terrorist?

There may have been, but I bet there was never an agnostic terrorist...

absolutely there are/were athiest terrorists... think any of the communists inthe past or present (eg african communist terrorists) and political terrorists such as the old german (was it? ) red brigade?? or even the IRA who espouse loathe of the poms rather than cat/prot...

Originally Posted by Zed

absolutely there are/were athiest terrorists... think any of the communists inthe past or present (eg african communist terrorists) and political terrorists such as the old german (was it? ) red brigade?? or even the IRA who espouse loathe of the poms rather than cat/prot...

IRA don't count, they are still purporting to be doing it for the church, even if they are so far from the church it isn't funny .... I don't remember any communist terrorists, they tended to go for using the masses to subvert the govt, not small groups as terrorists do.

Though now I think about it, there may have been a hijacking somewhere, but cant really remember.. anyone??

Technically, terrorism has nothing to do with religion - it is a political 'strategy' used to attempt to reach some political goal. Religion is used as a justification for it, but I doubt that many terrorist acts have ever really had anything much to do with religion.

Also, by strict definition, the nuclear bombing of Japan was a terrorist act, because it was an attack launched against non-combatants in an effort to use fear to bring about the political aim of ending Japan's involvement in World War II.

Terrorism has become a pejorative term though and most people think of Arabs blowing themselves up with home-made bombs when it is used.

Im pretty sure in germany in the 70's was a group of terrorists who were commies.. reg flag, red hand, red banner or some such thing.. I think they had associations with the jackal...

what about drug cartels ? do they qualify as terrorists?

Originally Posted by Bleedin Thumb

If we didn't have the press sticking their noses into this affair do you think he would of been release yet?

Maybe, maybe not. That's one of my issues... what you are saying is that he's effectively been tried in the press! Wrong place to be tried! The public has no right to administer justice in this way!

What we would not have had, would be the AFP leaking the "evidence" so that public opinion would sway heavily against the nasty terrorist (as if that was necessary anyway ) nor would we have seen the guy's defence leaking the full text of his interrogation. That must have been pretty inane too, because we didn't see anyone crawling over themselves to publsh the contents.

Both were wrong, and we didn't need to know either.

How is the public suppost to make judments about the effectiveness or integrity of their government without the press keeping them informed?

I didn't say the press wasn't to keep they informed.

The press must do so, AFTER the event. Once that has happened they have the right to make truly in-depth analysis, and it won't have an impact on the outcome, but it will certainly show any chinks in government integrity.

One of the reason the press don't do that now, is they can use stuff completely out of context to pre-empt, or even influence a decision!

Think about it!

Cheers,

P

Originally Posted by Gra

Though now I think about it, there may have been a hijacking somewhere, but cant really remember.. anyone??

well there was that bloke going to Tasmania who used a pencil to hold up the plane....

P

Originally Posted by Zed

Im pretty sure in germany in the 70's was a group of terrorists who were commies.. reg flag, red hand, red banner or some such thing.. I think they had associations with the jackal...

what about drug cartels ? do they qualify as terrorists?

I cede to the ape, it was the Red Army faction, and they only got one of the in the last couple of years, they blew up one or two buildings and killed a number of business people

There was also the red brigade in Italy, that was funded by the Chec Stb, at about the same time...

As for drug cartels, they are more business/Criminal organizations than terrorist