How do recent developments in anti-terrorism legislation in Australia undermine democratic rights ?
493029
I just got a email from a friend regarding Australia. They are having some immigrant Muslim problems. The radicals are getting out of hand. The government and citizen are dealing with it. One signs said" if you don't like our language, culture and laws get the hell out". \nA few years back they had a real Chinese illegal problem ships dumping of them. They dealt with it rather fast.They cut out chain immigration better now as family unification.\n\nThat is as much as I know on this new immigration anti terrorist issue, but I think that is about as much information that one will get. Most will probably be opinion depending on their side. I have no agenda.
65986
Of course our rights stem from the Bill of Rights which amended the Constitution.  However, and more importantly, our rights are preserved by the "Rule of Law" and that depends on our Court system being independent of Congress or the Whitehouse.  Many countries had constitutions, lawyers and elections but lost their freedom when they lost the rule of law.  Nazi Germany is a good example.  I know of investors who shy away from investments in Russia today because they doubt that the rule of law there will protect their rights.  perhaps things will change for the better.
898377
Democrats from the beginning have had problems with terrorism. For one thing they haven't produce a plan on terrorism. By the way there have been some rank and file Dems which have broken away from their party and have gone Republican. Why? the ranting far left and thier criticism of the President. The keep talking the talk but they haven't produce results. U see Democrats care about is power and high taxes.
972704
It worries me too.Such a move would almost certainly turn an,at least apparently,lawful,democratic country into an abusive Police State.\nIf you are still looking for a really Gestapo-like approach to law and order,police abuse and horrendous abuses of human rights,Vote Rudy Giuliani in 2008!\n\n\n"Freedom is about authority.Freedom is about the will of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do"\n                                                                    (Rudolph Giuliani)
105458
The only people who claim the Patriot Act is anti-foreigners are those who haven't read the law.\nTo sum it up, the Patriot Acts does the following:\n1. Removes obstacles in investigating terrorism and improves intelligence gathering capabilities.\n2. Deals with Immigration and Travel into the United States allowing for tighter restriction.\n3. Gives more tools to fight the funding of terrorists.\n4. Helps us in securing our borders.\n5. Preservation of Immigration Benefits for Victims of Terrorism (How is that anti-foreigner???)\n\nThe link given below is a summary of the bill with links to the actual text direct from the online archives of the US government. There is no commentary or opinion, just the law itself.
1119100
It is most gratifying to read such an eloquent discourse and I whole heartedly agree with the thrust of your most erudite question. The thing is, bless'em they're a bit brain washed you know and believe that there is a worldwide conspiracy against them. Paranoia indeed! The extreme right wing proclivities of this nation are a great concern to me and it is causing the polarising, divisive and skewed nature of US politics today. Of course, the really worrying trend, is that those that are hurt most by this type of hysterical, disabling, right wing thinking are the ones that rush to it's defence when it's under threat! Presumably out of some misguided sense of loyalty or patriotism. No, I'm afraid you're right, America needs to learn to play nicely and have a bit of humility. Terrorism is in large part a result of this rigid, militaristic, right wing foreign policy she has dished out over the last 5 or 6 decades and I can't see it stopping anytime soon. Jules, lecturer. Australia.
724368
No. The European Convention on Human Rights is just unfairly scapegoated by politicians for administrative failings in their own departments.\n\nTake the case of the 9 Afghans who hijacked a plane in May after it left Afghanistan, ordering pilots to fly to London. The courts subsequently ruled that the hijackers could not be deported because they would be at risk of ill treatment. That decision was nothing to do with the Human Rights Act.\n\nThe European Convention on Human Rights was signed into British Law voluntarily anyway. Why Government ministers feel the need to openly critisise a law that for the first time in UK history enshrined the rights to freedom of speech, thought and association into law, and has dramitically improved equality for many including disabled people is beyond me.
716932
It could get worse, you know - there is legislation before Parliament that really will open the way for the thought police!\n\nBlair himself seems oblivious to irony - probably had his head up Bush's arse for so long! I remember at one conference him saying to a heckler "Just be grateful you are living in a country where you are free to express your opinion!" and he was saying this AS the goons were arm-locking the guy and bustling him out!
84090
i do not think there is anything by that name in the US. There is a bill by that name currently in Parliament in the UK.\nit (a) creates offences involving stirring up hatred against persons on\nreligious grounds, and\n(b) amends provisions relating to offences involving stirring up hatred\nagainst persons on racial grounds.
1156421
Full quote:\n\n"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."\n\nFear is a very powerful weapon.  When the people of a community or nation are fearful of an outside force threatening their lives they will give up freedoms for the assurance of safety.  It's always easier to incite fear when the enemy is "not one of us."\n\nAs an example....\n\nSome say this is what George W. Bush did over four years ago after September 11, 2001.  The United States was in shock.  An enemy had entered our country, done great damage to property and killed thousands of people.  Nothing of this magnitude had happened like this since Pearl Harbor.\n\nIn an attempt to cut off any future terrorist attacks the President proposed and Congress passed new laws that made sweeping changes in privacy laws allowing oversight and intrusion hitherto not seen before in the U.S.\n\nGenerally a majority of the American public has supported these limitations.  The danger lies, as Madison pointed out, in making sure that these changes are kept in check.
277644
Our current form of Democracy is sometimes referred to as "tyranny of the masses".  In other words, the majority will constantly create and vote in laws which reduce freedoms of the minority.  And, since we all belong to some kind of minority, we will eventually create enough laws so that every-ones' freedoms are gone.  Every law passed restricts your freedom in some way and leads to harsher laws in the future.  So, in a way, you are right.  Think about that the next time you vote on a law banning something.  Just because it doesn't effect you at the time, you are giving up rights of others and your turn will come.  I also like what this Douglas guy below me has to say.  I am for less government, if it takes more political parties to do that, fine.
984334
Everything seems to be going that way. With every new law passed great strides are being made in that direction. Exactly the same in US and UK.\nBut what else can you expect when the same evil organisation owns the Federal Reserve, controls all political parties, manages the medical systems, organises all education, controls oil, controls food, controls water, is in charge of the military and secret services,  manipulates the value of the dollar, runs the drug cartels - both legal and illegal, etc etc.\nIt is already a police state - but done so subtly that nobody realises it. Its just a little extra each day, so gentle that it is all accepted.\nNow the situation is that absolutely anybody can be decalered an enemy combatant, arrested under laws of terrorism, imprisoned without charge for the rest of their lives, with no recourse to law. Isn't that  a fair definition of a police state!
1050493
Everyone is talking about it...democracy is ending.  No one seems to care enough to create the dissention it's going to take to get back the freedoms we've lost over this government's response to "terrorists".  In that vein, are the Democrats asleep in congress? It's obvious there is some kind of concerted effort here to change the constitution.  Bush is redefining his job description without regard for it.\n\n  When ANY city ends putting out news like New Orleans did in this mornings' newspaper-all American cities should take note.  When anyone is held against their will and denied representative council it happens to each one of us.  Corporations cooperating with and giving the government whatever they want and sneaking them privileged information about individuals is a giant red flag. \n\nThousands of our country's young men have sacrificed their lives in several wars so that we could keep the rights that are being taken away from us by this present administration...and that would be an abomination if we let it happen.
1046983
It was a stupid thing. Last year I did a report that showed it violated at least 3 amendments in the bill of rights. I think the only reason why it was passed was due to the paranoia to just kill all those terrorist. Some of the stuff that had "illegal" wiretaps were REPASSED this year. So yes, I do know the truth.
848239
According to HR 6166 EH, the torture bill, no, freedom of speech no longer exists in this country if you are in the U.S.\n\nThere are a lot of puppet identities and a few packs that attack together. You may note some questions are insult free and others will have the same group throwing mud (with atrocious grammar, worse spelling and no manners) en mas.
960870
It's gone for enemy combatants.  However the bill also expands the definition of an unlawful enemy combatant to cover anyone who “has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.” Quick, define “purposefully and materially.” One person has already been charged with aiding terrorists because he sold a satellite TV package that includes the Hezbollah network. \n\nThe bill simply removes a suspect’s right to challenge his detention in court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215. That pretty much leaves the barn door open.
238349
Ordinary, law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about with the Patriot Act... for example, if you don't make phone calls to Afghanistan to discuss ways to kill Americans from a US phone, you have nothing to worry about!  Who are the people complaining about this... are they criminals?  I don't understand the fear of those who say this is an attack on civil liberties... the opposite is true.  The ACLU defends terrorists in Guantanamo in the interest of civil liberties... so they can attack us again -and if they get their way, maybe we will all live under Sharia law in the US... with no civil liberties... don't people get it?  Freedom isn't free... it has to be guarded.  The Patriot Act GUARDS the freedom of regular, law-abiding citizens... if that scares some, I question what they are doing that they would worry that the government would actually stumble upon something dealing with them while tracking terrorist movements and conversations!!!!  I for one am not concerned as I am more interested in my children's future than that of the terrorists or criminals.\n\nLet me just ask one question of those who hate the Act... Have you in the last five years since it was passed, had your personal liberties directly threatened or negated by this Act?  Or is it just a fad to disagree?