catsidhe: (unhappy)
[personal profile] catsidhe
His ‘crime’, remember — the only thing they could hang on him after twelve hours of questioning and two weeks of turning his life over with a fine-tooth-comb — was that he gave a SIM card, worthless to him, to his cousin a year ago. And as Julian Burnside points out, there are several layers of the betrayal of the presumption of innocence. He is to be imprisoned under the severest of conditions for an otherwise innocent act in another country to a person whose own guilt has been presumed. (Remember, technically, he is not guilty until a judge has found him so.)



This is neither the action of a rational executive, nor a sign of a free country.

If you're not angry, you are part of the problem.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-18 10:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] enrobso.livejournal.com
I have no anger left for this government. They are villains to a man and they show no hint of resiling from their villainry.

I am angry at their enablers, those who they believe they are reaching with this stunt, the people more scared of their property value not increasing than their next-door-neighbor being hauled away in the dead of night for being an enemy of the state.

If I'm angry, it's not at the government, but at the fact that I feel ashamed at being Australian right now because of my fellow Australians.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 12:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cthulu-for-pm.livejournal.com
I have no anger left for this government.

Same here. Fuck 'em all with a rusty chainsaw, is what I say...

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-20 08:09 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Don't blame me, i didn't vote to put that bastard into power back in the 90s. Well, actually I couldn't vote back then, but I've been trying to get rid of him ever since.

We lost our freedom with the GST ... we no longer have the right to choose what we pay tax on and what we don't, we're taxed regardless (except for a few daily essentials like lollies and chocolates that the democrats begged them for... no wait, we pay tax on those too! oh, ffs!!).

And after all this, I hope he has learnt his lesson: next time buy an iphone. Those things don't come with simcards, and are so ridiculously expensive that he will think twice before aiding terrorism. Silly boy.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-24 02:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] last-servant.livejournal.com
Just because guilt is not presumed, it does not mean the accused has a right not to be held as a person of interest and potential terrorist. Being separated from other prisoners and denied access to a computer is not as harsh as, oh, I don't know, being executed by the government for a war crime.

And if you think any countries are as free as their rhetoric claims, then you must need your idealism-preventing Reality Booster, cause you just aren't cynical enough.

... and you accuse *me* of ignorance...

Date: 2007-07-25 05:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catsidhe.livejournal.com
Bail is already set down by law in cases like this as “only under the most extreme circumstances”.

The judge looked at what the federal police and the government were laying before her as a ‘case’, and said, ‘you don't have anything resembling a case, this man now has world-wide notoriety, and deserves bail.’ And she set bail.

The government then turned around and screamed blue murder, not only putting him in prison through what can only be termed a vindictive act of bastardry, but then having the Attorney General saying that not only would the laws be changed to prevent this sort of outrage (When we made it theoretically possible to get bail, we never meant for it to be actually possible...), but saying that any attempt to provide a defence for him, to provide evidence that the police or government or both were spreading lies about him and his motives, would result in his detention being delayed for a few years until any distant hope of public awareness had died away.

None of this was necessary, you know. The laws have been well and truly written that he could have been disappeared instantly, and any public coverage would have been itself illegal. They didn't. They could have convinced a magistrate that Haneef is a clear and present danger. They couldn't.

It hasn't helped that they have since been caught lying to providing incorrect information to the court, and actively interfering with the evidence.


oh, I don't know, being executed by the government for a war crime.
1) we don't do that here.
2) there wasn't even enough evidence to deny him bail, where the HOLY FUCK did the idea of executing him come from?
3) Just, generally, WTF?

Re: ... and you accuse *me* of ignorance...

Date: 2007-07-25 04:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] last-servant.livejournal.com
None of this was necessary, you know. The laws have been well and truly written that he could have been disappeared instantly, and any public coverage would have been itself illegal. They didn't. They could have convinced a magistrate that Haneef is a clear and present danger. They couldn't.

Point conceded.

1) Sorry, was stuck in US mindset. (I wonder if your government secretly executes people, though. Hmmmm.)

2) Must be my inherit "terrorist-KILL" reaction.

3)Rhetorical hyperbole, my good friend.

Re: ... and you accuse *me* of ignorance...

Date: 2007-07-26 08:30 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
I wonder if your government secretly executes people

If such people manage to get nearby they will exile them into desolate lands, or preferably onto tiny portions of sand girt by sea (and lots of it).

It's much easier, though, to let the US be the bully on their behalf *hick hick*

If the people are so removed on some foreign soil, they prefer to hide behind the ignorance of the Australian media. After all, who watches the news on SBS? (not that it matters, since they just give us US & UK stories that say nothing about Australia's involvement in foreign wars anyway).

- mpp

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-24 03:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jordan179.livejournal.com
I'm going to surprise you.

If all the evidence they had on him was that he gave the card to his cousin, then you are correct and he is being unjustly held.

Note the "if," though.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-25 05:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catsidhe.livejournal.com
Not only that, but the cousin involved was not in London or in Glasgow. He has been accused of, basically, not informing the authorities if he thought his cousins might be terrorists.

Not only that, but the police have been caught writing names in Haneef's diary, then coming back later and grilling him about these incriminating names they had found written in his diary.

This whole disgusting mess has gone well beyond farce.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-25 04:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] last-servant.livejournal.com
How the pressure from the Brits?

Profile

catsidhe: (Default)
catsidhe
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2025 05:58 pm

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags