Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org/ | Tue Sep 27 21:02:00 2005
It's not the "right" to call for assassinations I'm worried about; it's the right to peaceful protest and legitimate dissent. The government of the day and its bureaucracy have shown contempt for such liberal niceties, and, sadly, Australia (being a former penal colony and imperial military outpost) does not have a robust tradition of civil liberties (witness the way how many officials, from police officers on the ground to the highest levels of government, will quite happily twist the rules to harass or neutralise those they disapprove of).
Posted by: Tony | http://www.tamesapien.com/weblog/ | Fri Sep 30 04:38:49 2005
I couldn't agree more. Why should what anybody says be considered a threat? It's when an individual tries to DO what they say (ie. commit a violent act) that they're legitimately breaking the law. Pre-emption. It's the scourge of the beginning of the 21st century.
Want to say something? Do so here.
Note to spammers: This comment system applies the rel=nofollow attribute to the poster's URL and all links. Posting links to this page will not improve their search engine rankings.
Please keep comments on topic and to the point. Inappropriate comments may be deleted.
Note that markup is stripped from comments; URLs will be automatically converted into links.
Posted by: tony | http://www.tamesapien.com/weblog/ | Tue Sep 27 14:49:59 2005
Kill Howard. He is an infidel (That should test the new laws out).