Illusive Mind

The Unquestionable should be questioned

Thursday, September 21, 2006

Police admit no terrorist evidence on Jack Thomas


No evidence on Thomas, police admit

"Is there any evidence at all that Mr Thomas, has, (at) any stage, planned any particular terrorist acts in Australia?" asked the federal magistrate Graham Mowbray.
Mr Jabbour: "No sir, there's no direct evidence of that."

So there we have it. We have interviews conducted without legal aid and with application of or the threat of torture, but nothing to actually suspect Thomas has any plans to conduct a terrorist act in Australia.

I'm not saying Thomas is innocent, there may be good reason to be very suspicious of someone who receives funds from Al Qaeda, however terrorists threats are not existential threats. They do not put the existence of civilization at risk, there is no great army who is going to occupy our country.

Automotive fatalities are more of an existential threat than terrorism. It is ideological warfare and by pandering to fear governments are playing the game by their rules. A game no-one wins, because having your fellow citizens blown up or your civil liberties stripped does not suddenly make you think how corrupt and sinful western liberal civilization is and gee, wouldn't it be better if we had an Islamic state.

Why do the governments do it then? I think it's because the government who plays down the terrorist threat and calls for reason looks weak on national security and is voted out of office. Circular, isn’t it?

In last month's control order proceedings, the court heard from the Federal Government's chief general counsel, Henry Burmester, QC, that the likelihood of Mr Thomas committing a terrorist act was irrelevant to the application for a control order.

The test for issuing the order, that it "substantially assist in preventing a terrorist act", should be interpreted broadly, Mr Burmester said.
"In our submission, something can substantially assist in preventing a terrorist act or something else without the need to show that the terrorist act or the particular conduct is likely to happen or not," he said.

"If I could give your Honour an example," he said. "If one is out in the country, and there's a quiet country road, clearly looking right and left will substantially assist in preventing being hit by a car, but there might be a reasonably small chance that this would occur."

May offer another example? Castrating School Teachers and priests will substantially assist in preventing children being abused even there is a reasonably small chance this would occur.
Hell why not castrate all men in general? The probability of abuse is very small in relation to the size of those affected but just think how substantially we are assisting in preventing child abuse. You are not for child abuse are you? If we don’t do this, the child abusers win.

Innocent until proven guilty means that in a fair and just society no one is subject to control orders or any violation of liberty without a public demonstration of the evidence that warrants it so as to protect the rest of society.

We talk about spreading democracy. If democracy means oppressing a minority to placate the unreasoned fears of a manipulated majority then they ought to send it back.



Post a Comment

<< Home