AUSTRALIA: If we consider for a second Attorney General Ruddock’s failed logic, his peremptory pain-in-the-ass hogwash. Ruddocks conclusions from his tit tat with the ACT’s Jon Stanhope highlights a view that terrorists across this land hold a common thread? That common thread is a convergance of evil… a need to commit terror unleashed by annihilative minds only at sites where “weak” anti-terroism law enforcement exists?

Ruddock believes the ant-terrorist fun and games will be handicaped by dissimilar laws between Canberra and Bondi Junction. It might be a display of his paltry faith in law enforcement and the intelligence community? With different anti-terrorism thinking for officers to grapple with in the face of fighting the war on terror it could send some over the edge.

The Attorney General’s oddball sapience edifies an abstract, perhaps eerie rendition of anti-terrorism policing. Ruddock’s argument made in noisy leaps against the sovereignty of others judgments, especially officials such as the qualified Jon Stanhope - who don’t play the anti-terrorism card Ruddock’s way.

Ruddock operates a peculiar “doctrine of inference” - it’s folklore, but it fundamentally believes terrorists unleash horror and sabotage in territories and places where laws are pithy – [compared to Ruddock’s version of enforcement]. If it’s a frail anti-terrorist law it fails Ruddock's acid test, that is not being equal to his expert appraisal. The result is substitution of the whole ball of anti-terrorist wax for a resize to suit Ruddock. Canberra cogitates that conformity across Australia equals we’re all safer?

By extrapolation of Ruddock’s thesis… we can form a loose clarity able to breathe security from the threat of frightening [government inflamed?] terrorism. The many strategic cool targets across this real estate can take advantage of Ruddock’s thinking - we will detour terrorists to hit only designated sitting ducks by location.

The plan is renounce anti-terrorism laws in remote areas of Australia. In isolated pockets such as King Island in Bass Strait; we will abandon anti-terrorist laws for designated special low-law intensity sites. Any indecent terrorist stunt or planned terrorist event would be unleashed under this policy away from the rest of the country. Isolated places in Bass Strait are the perfect terrorist sitting duck. By preserving terrorists under the easy-go low-law anti-terrorist program we are miles safer in this war on terrorism game.

We’ll designate the site a low-law terrorist heaven, it will attract the menace, [terrorism I mean, not Ruddock]. It can work, install make believe cardboard fuel dumps, fake ammo dumps and a couple of military HQ like buildings with visiting politicians lolly gagging around, hands behind their backs! Erect mock cardboard cutouts of tourists for a full “bring em on” effect. [Don’t you just love these cool Bush team rallying slogans courtesy Ruddock and Howard’s administration’s White House pals]?

Its common knowledge terrorists make beelines at targets exposed inside territory with go-easy interrogation and special sentencing. If we erect signs in airports to inform visiting terrorists of where the pithy anti-terrorist enforcement exists, we’ll garner our fair share of terrorists like flies to a jam jar. A King Island terrorist jam jar. This measure could protect a terrified citizenry from the threat Ruddock stresses is ready to chew our asses to shreds.

A bold move would be to advertise our go-easy anti-terrorist law regions around the global - reflective of the globalisation policy adopted in Canberra. Signs for inbound terrorists at our gateway airports and in our neighbour’s airport terminals, sea-lanes and wherever entry points for terrorists to walk in exist will be integral to direct the traffic.

Identifying where terrorists enter Australia is simple… Ruddock is a freaking whiz bang on the terrorism argument. He’s the official to pinpoint terrorist gateways, wherever he says, that’s where we sit signs.

The signs advice would also tell terrorists if they are caught detonating a terrorist event on King Island - we’ll go easy on them. What’s the loss in a few milkers, windy fields and noisy sea birds in exchange for the nation’s security? Sacrifice King Island for the safety of the nation.

Any protest by King Island citizens? The Attorney General can introduce penalties against disruption. A five-year jail sentence for non-conformity with Canberra’s neo-con fascist kings sounds about right. Ruddocks “Across Oz Same Same Easy Grasp Terrorism Laws” are the way to fly if you want to stay out of harm. Ruddock will avoid disquiet by imposing a prison term on all citizens who talk about what’s happening to them at King Island. Blab and publicise what happened to you at Ruddock’s hands… you would be sentenced under anti-terrorism provisions. Although it won’t matter for heaven’s sake if apprehended citizens want to blab anyway. Who will know where King Island is? Ruddock and Howard can be matriarchs of Australia’s King Island Guantanamo. Such a turn-on, an oddball like Ruddock would wet his pants over such an idea? Troublemakers could be locked up Guantanamo style without explanation.

As for this nonsense with Jon Stanhope “stuffing up the Ruddock way.” Stanhope’s strife means his time to learn to fall in line with the other sheepish premiers and state chiefs? The time is ripe for Ruddock to adopt another Bushite rallying cry winner, ‘Your either with us or against us!” Runing with this biggie of the New World Order, he can shove it down the throats of tremulous Aussies, it might turn the people against tall poppies like Stanhope and any others thinking out of line.

All in the name of heading off danger the Oddball says is ahead!

comments:

Ruddock is a Terrorist

The cause of terror is illegal and degrading wars and crimes against humanity.

Eliminate that and you eliminate terrorism!

Wake up Australia!

================================

Evil-minded rulers

Brandies J of the Supreme Court of the United States,

Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Governments purposes are beneficent.

People born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers.

Related:

Standardising terrorism in the prison population?

Try giving us hope, access to our communities, a sense of caring by the outside community. And letting us out to make restitution instead of building festering anger.

 http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/117580.php

Scapegoats accused 'exploited' by guberment prostitutor

The rest of the prisoners had to stay in jail in AA maximum security segregted with no contact with human people in a box within a box with no fresh air or sunlight with the worst of the worst offenders.

 http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/117553.php

Jury indicated it could not reach a verdict, but was ordered to push on?

These charges were that he collected maps of the Australian electricity supply system in preparation of a terrorist act (15 years), BUT WITH NO DETAILS ABOUT THE PREPARATION ACCEPT MATERIAL TO SUPPORT THOUGHT CRIME? that he sought information on chemical prices for the use of explosives for a terrorist act (life), BUT NO SOUND EVIDENCE ABOUT WHETHER THE CHEMICALS WERE GOING TO BE PURCHASED OR USED FOR THE USE OF EXPLOSIVES OR A TERRORIST ACT and that he possessed a document with information on the manufacture of poisons and bombs in preparation for a terrorist act (15 years). THAT HE LIKE MANY OTHERS MAY HAVE DOWNLOADED FROM THE INTERNET WHICH IS NOT ILLEGAL USUALLY?

 http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/115129.php

A dangerous precedent: Australian man convicted of “preparing terrorism”

Since 2001, the government has seized upon the “war” declared by US President George Bush for both domestic and international purposes. Under the guise of combating terrorism it has participated in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, diverted attention from mounting economic and social problems at home and legitimised previously unthinkable police state-style measures, including semi-secret trials, “preventative” detention and the ability to impose life sentences without any evidence of an actual terrorist act.

 http://maritimes.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/12899.php

Secret evidence used in Australian “terrorist” trial

Lodhi was bundled into the court building in shackles, in full view of the media. The display was intended to convey the impression that he is a violent and highly dangerous individual. Like several other Muslim men charged with terrorist offences in Australia over the past year, Lodhi has been denied bail and held in virtual solitary confinement in a “super max” prison, cut off from family and friends. Under state and federal “counter-terrorism” laws, the traditional presumption in favour of bail has been scrapped. It will only be granted in “exceptional circumstances”. On receiving a confidential affidavit from the Commonwealth, Magistrate Michael Price imposed a number of secrecy orders despite vigorous objections by lawyers for Lodhi and by media organisations. The orders mean that the affidavit itself will remain suppressed, and the media is barred from disclosing even the general nature of the material relied upon in it.

 http://www.indymedia.org/en/2004/12/866066.shtml