GUilty till proven innocent...

[spilota_variegata]

I think you worded you post correctly. This thread is open to our opinions. I respect your opinion

 

[waruikazi]

Our coalition forces are killing lots of people fighting for the freedom of their country. Does that make the coalition terrorists?

 

[mrboajangles]

Our coalition forces are killing lots of people fighting for the freedom of their country. Does that make the coalition terrorists?

I have often tthink the same thing?? are we doing more bad then good???

 

[waruikazi]

I just wached the news, more Indian doctors houses have been raided and detained for questioning... My doctor is Indian and i have an Indian heritage, am i screwed?

 

[mrboajangles]

I just wached the news, more Indian doctors houses have been raided and detained for questioning... My doctor is Indian and i have an Indian heritage, am i screwed?

Yes, UNCLE HOWARD wants you out!!!
just kidding, I would say (and hope) they are only arresting people with some sort of link to him that may be a concern!!

 

[mrmikk]

Its a big call to say its purely in the name of religion.

Exactly right, although I am not the one using religion as an excuse to kill innocents.

 

[zobo]

I'm not sure which is the lesser of two evils, terrorism or drug trafficking. Both terrorists and drug traffickers kill with no regard to the victims. I think drugs kill many more people than acts of terrorism. I agree he should be investigated thoroughly and if he is found guilty, punished harshly.

Killing many innocent people and kids or selling drugs to halfwits dumb enough to take them.........mmmmm I think I know which one is the lesser of two evils!

 

[zobo]

I just wached the news, more Indian doctors houses have been raided and detained for questioning... My doctor is Indian and i have an Indian heritage, am i screwed?

I hope that is sarcasm as I am really over the whole racism thing.
I have family relatives from India, Bali, Germany and Australia and I have no fears at all of any of them being involved in the sort of crap this Doctor got himself into.
jas

 

[slim6y]

Didn't this doctor get himself involved by being a relative?

Wow, we're all criminals - My brother ran a red light once - I should be charged!

Recklesness *shakes head*

"Muhammad Haneef, 27, was charged Saturday with providing support to a terrorist organization by giving his mobile phone SIM card to British suspects Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed when he moved to Australia in July 2006. He faces a maximum of 15 years in prison if convicted."

"Haneef is a distant cousin of the Ahmed brothers, with whom he shared a house in Liverpool before moving to Australia for a job at a hospital on Queensland state's Gold Coast."

Now these two bits of editorial brilliance do not appear to label our Indian Doctor as a Doctor of Terror at all...

I really can't honestly say we've done the right thing here (yet) - I don't think we're preventing a terrorist attack or further terrorism by jailing this guy. If anything, we're just fueling the fires!

 

[mrmikk]

Didn't this doctor get himself involved by being a relative?

Wow, we're all criminals - My brother ran a red light once - I should be charged!

Recklesness *shakes head*

"Muhammad Haneef, 27, was charged Saturday with providing support to a terrorist organization by giving his mobile phone SIM card to British suspects Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed when he moved to Australia in July 2006. He faces a maximum of 15 years in prison if convicted."

"Haneef is a distant cousin of the Ahmed brothers, with whom he shared a house in Liverpool before moving to Australia for a job at a hospital on Queensland state's Gold Coast."

Now these two bits of editorial brilliance do not appear to label our Indian Doctor as a Doctor of Terror at all...

I really can't honestly say we've done the right thing here (yet) - I don't think we're preventing a terrorist attack or further terrorism by jailing this guy. If anything, we're just fueling the fires!

Slimy,
I appreciate where you are coming from, particulalry if you have no legal background, this may seem like a 'clutching at straws' type of exercise, and I don't mean that in a derogatory sense.

A lot of serious criminal offences in various Federal and State legislation have what are referred to as 'strict liability' clauses. In essence it removes the need for the prosecution to prove 'mens rea' or intent. Simply speaking it avoids someone recklessly doing an act or making an ommission without any thought what so ever for the consequences and later saying, "Really sorry, didn't mean (the mens rea/intention) for that to happy."

Ultimately it puts the onus on all of us to some extent to be responsible for our acts/ommissions, which is not a bad thing when the results can potentially be serious, which I am sure everyone labels terrorist related activityies to be, SERIOUS.

 

[waruikazi]

Exactly we are pouring petrol onto the flames of extremism. Extreme actions may be thwarted by some extreme laws but extremists will only be encouraged by them.

 

[mrmikk]

Exactly we are pouring petrol onto the flames of extremism. Extreme actions may be thwarted by some extreme laws but extremists will only be encouraged by them.

...and what is your alternative?

 

[waruikazi]

Diplomacy, not more extremism.

 

[mrmikk]

Diplomacy, not more extremism.

Do you really think someone who is so fanatical, who is willing to kill themselves and everyone else around them, regardless of their sex, age, religion, from babies to the elderly are wanting to sit at the negotiating table and 'talk' about issues with a view to reaching a mutually satisfying agreement? I don't thik so.

 

[waruikazi]

Do you really think someone who is so fanatical, who is willing to kill themselves and everyone else around them, regardless of their sex, age, religion, from babies to the elderly are wanting to sit at the negotiating table and 'talk' about issues with a view to reaching a mutually satisfying agreement? I don't thik so.

No not at all. And the fact that you think that is what i meant shows how badly your mind has been perforated by the propaganda forced upon you.

Terrorist cells/organisations are very well organised with a leadership hierarchy. The suicide bombers are no doubt too brain washed to listen to any kind of negotiations from the infidels. But the leaders of these organisations are far smarter than you think and imo would take a result that benefits them regardless wether it comes through an attack or diplomacy.

 

[mrmikk]

No not at all. And the fact that you think that is what i meant shows how badly your mind has been perforated by the propaganda forced upon you.

Terrorist cells/organisations are very well organised with a leadership hierarchy. The suicide bombers are no doubt too brain washed to listen to any kind of negotiations from the infidels. But the leaders of these organisations are far smarter than you think and imo would take a result that benefits them regardless wether it comes through an attack or diplomacy.

I am not interested in propaganda, and as I asked you, "...and what is your alternative?", you didn't exactly go into a detailed response in your reply, so how could I know what you meant?

I am glad you aren't responsible for developing and implementing policy relating to national security in this country.

 

[slim6y]

Slimy,
I appreciate where you are coming from, particulalry if you have no legal background, this may seem like a 'clutching at straws' type of exercise, and I don't mean that in a derogatory sense.

A lot of serious criminal offences in various Federal and State legislation have what are referred to as 'strict liability' clauses. In essence it removes the need for the prosecution to prove 'mens rea' or intent. Simply speaking it avoids someone recklessly doing an act or making an ommission without any thought what so ever for the consequences and later saying, "Really sorry, didn't mean (the mens rea/intention) for that to happy."

Ultimately it puts the onus on all of us to some extent to be responsible for our acts/ommissions, which is not a bad thing when the results can potentially be serious, which I am sure everyone labels terrorist related activityies to be, SERIOUS.

It may SEEM like clutching at straws??? HAHA! I don't think it seems like it at all!

Consider this scenario then... You sell your mobile phone on E-Bay to a guy named Mohammed - he in turn then uses it to blow up a bomb killing 200 people - who's guilty?

I sold my last car to an Arab fellow - he was a nice guy. I never onece thought he'd use my car for a car bomb. But how reckless of me to sell it to him - he may one day speed and kill someone... that's stupid of me wasn't it? I was reckless.

This isn't even as stupid as it sounds, it's WORSE!

 

[waruikazi]

I am not interested in propaganda, and as I asked you, "...and what is your alternative?", you didn't exactly go into a detailed response in your reply, so how could I know what you meant?

I am glad you aren't responsible for developing and implementing policy relating to national security in this country.

Is it me that makes you glad i am not a policy maker? Or is it the fact my idea involves tea tottling rather than gun tottling?

 

[Colhunter]

Many innocent people have died , been severly crippled, mentally unstable for the rest of their lives and the list goes on, all because someone wants the status of being a mater after they die, or they have a problem with who ever happens to run the country they hate because they dont like the way they do things.
They say we live in a free country, i dont think so. We all have rules and regulations we have to abide by only we get it a little easier than some other countries do.
We are lucky enough to live in a country where the law protects innocent people to the best of their abilities, and in this case thats exactly what they are doing.
A man was suspicious so they took him into custody to protect US, The citizens of Australia.
How would you have liked it if one of your family members were to be one of those innocent victims , all because the law let go a man who may have been suspicious and thought well we better let him go because he wasnt exactly the man who blew up the building.He may have supplied some stuff for the bombings but he wasnt the man who pulled the trigger. So lets let him go.
If he is innocent , he will be compinsated for being held.
The law have their reasons for doing things, it may not sit right with everyone but thats the way this country does things. And i for one think they do a fantastic job.
Its better to be safe than sorry.!!!!

 

[waruikazi]

Many innocent people have died , been severly crippled, mentally unstable for the rest of their lives and the list goes on, all because someone wants the status of being a mater after they die, or they have a problem with who ever happens to run the country they hate because they dont like the way they do things.

I absolutely agree with this statement. And i wholly think western forces are encompassed by this point aswell.