So if the authorities believe someone you know poses a terrorist risk - then if they interview you in alleged connection to their belief - and if police believe that you lied about it - then you can follow old mate here and prove you didn't lie or go to jail? Or be refused bail anyway and go to jail until you prove otherwise - after being isolated in AAA maximum-security with no fresh air or sunlight 'indefinitely' and get drip-fed through the courts?
Because authorities 'believed'?
AUSTRALIA: NSW: A Sydney man has been committed to stand trial on charges of lying to ASIO.
It wouldn't matter what it was about would it? Okay I'll tell you then!
Because police said Abdul Rakid Hasan lied to them 'twice' and now he has to prove that he didn't lie to them 'twice' by facing two charges one for each alleged lie?
The man was one of eight arrested in last week's counter-terrorism raids.
Abdul Rakid Hasan is charged with two offences of giving false or misleading information, while being interviewed by ASIO, about his association with 'alleged security risk' Willie Brigitte.
The French man was deported from Australia in October 2003, because authorities 'believed' he posed a terrorist risk to Australia.
So if the authorities believe someone you know poses a terrorist risk - then if they interview you in alleged connection to their belief - and if police believe that you lied about it - then you can follow old mate here and prove you didn't lie or go to jail? Or be refused bail anyway and go to jail until you prove otherwise - after being isolated in AAA maximum-security with no fresh air or sunlight 'indefinitely' and get drip-fed through the courts?
This is the hoWARd government providing the war machine with the endless scapegoats for his war on terror (which is terror) not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but at home too.
With endless scapegoats for the war on terror the supreme dictator hoWARd, the coward, calls upon its 'citizenry' to be used as fodder for the war industry.
I think we need a union?
This is how it works now! You can go to jail on the belief of a cop that you lied about what they believed was a risk when they asked you a question or two and subsequently did not believe you?
Bad luck if they ask you ten questions and you get nine wrong in their belief.
Lord won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz?
In a statement of facts tendered to court, it is alleged Hasan made misleading statements about arranging accommodation for Brigitte in Sydney's south-west, and about the number of times the pair had spoken.
Most serious was that police only believe that Brigitte was a risk?
In Sydney's central local court today, Hasan was committed to stand trial in the District Court.
The 36-year-old is already in custody, having been arrested and charged during last week's counter-terrorism raids in Sydney.
Related:
Terrorist jihad propaganda
The media have a right hide to suggest in any way shape or form that these people went on anything but a holiday if they went there at all, a shooting trip or a country break and in no way should it be referred to as a 'jihad' in this country, even if police said so.
More:
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/99478.php
It wouldn't matter what it was about would it? Okay I'll tell you then!
Because police said Abdul Rakid Hasan lied to them 'twice' and now he has to prove that he didn't lie to them 'twice' by facing two charges one for each alleged lie?
The man was one of eight arrested in last week's counter-terrorism raids.
Abdul Rakid Hasan is charged with two offences of giving false or misleading information, while being interviewed by ASIO, about his association with 'alleged security risk' Willie Brigitte.
The French man was deported from Australia in October 2003, because authorities 'believed' he posed a terrorist risk to Australia.
So if the authorities believe someone you know poses a terrorist risk - then if they interview you in alleged connection to their belief - and if police believe that you lied about it - then you can follow old mate here and prove you didn't lie or go to jail? Or be refused bail anyway and go to jail until you prove otherwise - after being isolated in AAA maximum-security with no fresh air or sunlight 'indefinitely' and get drip-fed through the courts?
This is the hoWARd government providing the war machine with the endless scapegoats for his war on terror (which is terror) not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but at home too.
With endless scapegoats for the war on terror the supreme dictator hoWARd, the coward, calls upon its 'citizenry' to be used as fodder for the war industry.
I think we need a union?
This is how it works now! You can go to jail on the belief of a cop that you lied about what they believed was a risk when they asked you a question or two and subsequently did not believe you?
Bad luck if they ask you ten questions and you get nine wrong in their belief.
Lord won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz?
In a statement of facts tendered to court, it is alleged Hasan made misleading statements about arranging accommodation for Brigitte in Sydney's south-west, and about the number of times the pair had spoken.
Most serious was that police only believe that Brigitte was a risk?
In Sydney's central local court today, Hasan was committed to stand trial in the District Court.
The 36-year-old is already in custody, having been arrested and charged during last week's counter-terrorism raids in Sydney.
Related:
Terrorist jihad propaganda
The media have a right hide to suggest in any way shape or form that these people went on anything but a holiday if they went there at all, a shooting trip or a country break and in no way should it be referred to as a 'jihad' in this country, even if police said so.
More:
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/99478.php 
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following comment
comments
16.11.2005 16:01
This is a little more complicated than stated, though, because we are importing the strategy and mechanism, not the self same circumstances. Perjury under oath is the weapon in the US, BUT, and this is a very big BUT, in the US the government can put you under oath under vast numbers of circumstances beyond a formal court appearance.
In the UK/Australia, perjury is defined in a much more limited way, but this is dealt with by using the naive understanding that the public has of the law, and how it should operate. Simply put, the public is encouraged to think about legal procedure, come to the faulty conclusion that lying to the police seems like a crime in its own right, and agree to have criminal penalties applied to the act of "lying".
The irony of life is that the VERY BEST WAY for Blair and his goons in places like Australia to erode human rights is to get the soap-watching/murdoch-paper-reading masses to reach (carefully guided) conclusions on how rights should work, and then give them what they think they demand.
Put very simple, the masses are encouraged to become mindless vandals. They are told to pick up "sledgehammers" and smash to pieces all those delicate and beautiful things that they could never have built, and yet were put there solely for their benefit.
I doubted the usefulness of these Australian articles at first, but they do crystalise in the clearest way the methods and mechanisms by which Blair takes enough power to destroy the Earth.
twilight