7 January 2008

The Canberra times disappoints me again

| FC
Join the conversation
33

Is it just me or is anyone else disgusted by the picture on the front page of the Canberra Times yesterday.

I know that pretty much all other media had the picture splashing about, but it’s a breach of this guys basic human rights.

Its seems nowadays that if you are a suspected of terrorist related things, you are automatically guilty before you prove your innocence, and also you immediately have not rights that other accused criminals would have.

Join the conversation

33
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

I’d say most “softheads” would be happy to let the investigation run its course, bonfire. If the Feds find something, then throw the book at him.

However, assorted cops and pollies have done nothing to dispel the story that Haneef is some kind of right-hand man to Osama bin Laden. It looks a bit lame when the best they can come up with is giving SIM card to family 11 months before the event that wasn’t even found at the scene , he had some holiday snaps of big buildings and he was into some highly questionable politics (I don’t think thoughtcrime is on the books just yet). A decent barrister should have that chucked out in very short order – and the Feds may well be left with some pretty serious egg on their faces.

I guess they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If they go after him, they risk looking like they’re persecuting the innocent, they give masses of ammunition to those against the terrorism laws and risk making the risk of terrorism in Australia look even more overblown than it is. If they don’t, they look “soft on terror” (*gasp*).

Agree about using the crimes act. What’s wrong with charging someone with “Conspiracy to commit mass murder”?

BTW – just because both major parties agreed with it doesn’t make it good law, fair law, or inherently liberalist.

‘Since when does liberalism support detention without charge?’

both major parties supported it when they voted for it in both houses of parliament.

i wouldnt say theres an ‘unseemly scramble’ its just that the media need a story and the AFP need to conduct an investigation. most of the bizarre stuff seems to be unsubstantiated media allegations.

let the investigation run its course.

id prefer if the crimes act was used against ‘terrorists’ as they are criminals. however, the parliament has decided differently.

You neo-cons have it wrong anyway. Just declare a crusade and attempt genocide like you want to, don’t hide behind wankwords like ‘war on terror’ etc.

Since when does liberalism support detention without charge?

Anyway, the initial arrest, investigation and interrogation were probably fair and warranted, on the precautionary principle; but the subsequent unseemly scrabble to make something, anything, stick rather than simply admitting that he turned out not to be such a badass after all is what stinks.

i love softhead pigeonholing.

‘Where did all of these scary absent minded neo-conservative readers of this site come from? ‘

so…. unless youre in the anti-howard/bush right on climate change camp youre some sort of neo-con ?

do you even know the basis of neo-conservatism or is this just one of the glib cliches you parrot cos you read it in ‘green left’ ?

haneef is being investigated. let the investigation run its course.

id rather have a suspected terrorist behind bars while he’ being investigated, than loose in the streets. but gee im funny like that. i must be a neo-con.

dunno how to break this to the bleeding heart softheads out there – but there is a war on terror. we are targets of islamofascism.

the sep 11 and bali bombings PRECEDED the invasion of iraq, although the softheads now claim that has made us a target somehow.

why dont you just come clean and say your core values are anti-us and anti-liberal ? you would have more credibility.

in general i have found that whenever ‘resistance’ is opposing something – im happy to be pro, and when they support something/someone – id look at them very carefully.

neanderthalsis10:05 am 24 Jul 07

Lets face it, Australian print media is not exactly known for its quality reporting. So we get stories of the Dr planning to blow up buildings on the Gold Coast just because he had some holiday snaps. Editorial and journalistic autonomy does not really exsist when all the major papers are run by News LTD or Fairfax.

He may be a potential terrorist, or he may just be a bit of a numpty for giving a sim card to a cousin who had links to a terrorist act. I prefer to wait until the facts are known before passing judgement.

It’s India, mate. The son-in-law of your auntie is a cousin. Sushi Das in The Age is normally a bit of a loony, but she gets this right:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/police-dont-recognise-key-cultural-social-signposts/2007/07/22/1185042944420.html

The cousin, by the way, is accused of having “prior knowledge” of the attacks, rather than direct involvement. (Incidentally, the interviewing officer referred to him as Haneef’s second cousin, something that has been picked up in other media, but from the answers in the transcript he appears to be actually his first cousin, once removed).

Where did all of these scary absent minded neo-conservative readers of this site come from? Or is Ralph and the rest of the nemotodes breeding at such a rate that common sense is no longer that common?

If the community in charge of keeping australia safe have to rely on tactics that provoke quotes such as ‘keystone cops’ and even has Keelty acting out of character and speaking to the media about an on-going investigation, in my mind there is a drama.

J Dawg, as far as the poms are concerned Haneef gave his sim card to his cousin. I dont see that as a crime, foolish definately, considering what happened but a crime it is not. Remember you cant choose your family matey. Mind you if one of my cousins tried this prank the police would be the least of their problems.

Agree 100% J Dawg.

People need to let the courts decide his guilt or innocence, not trial by media and the civil libertarians.

what I meant to say is that Haneef is about as potentially a terrorist as I am, or my family is – that is to say not a terrorist at all.

Does your family have suspected links to Al Qaeda? Are you related to people responsible for the Glasgow attacks? Have you been named by the British Police as a person of interest in relation to the Glasgow attacks?

Haneef has.

Last time I checked, the AFP are trying to protect Australian citizens, and this is exactly what they are doing. There is a person who they think has the potential conduct a terrorist attack, and they are taking precautions to ensure this doesn’t happens. What if they never arrested him, and he was related to an attack on Australian soil? What would everyone say then? They would bitch about how the AFP never protect us, and there would be a scandal about how the British warned us, etc etc.

Have a bit of faith that there are some people trying to help and protect you. We all want to prevent crimes from occurring rather then having to play catch-up.

I’ll see your French and/or Canadian visa(maybe Sweden is an option?) and raise you a green card if KRudd gets up Ralphie.

Sorry to disappoint you jellen, but I’ll break the news to you now, Howard will win the election!

Better get your French/Canadian working visa organised.

Worst. Website. Ever.

and what we are dealing with here is a potential terrorist. – Comment by Ralph — 20 July, 2007 @ 3:31 pm

I see this as pretty meaningless. Anyone with opposable digits is “potentially” a terrorist, that means F@%# all.

I’m with jellen on the ‘going down in the history books’ and ’embarrassment to Australia’ statements.

I also find it amusing that Ralph denounces the “bleeding hearts” at the start of his paragraph, and follows it up with an emotive plea to “Ask families of the Bali bombing victims how they might feel about it”.

We all know whose side you’re on, Ralph!

I’m with what you call the “hand-wringers” Thumper. I prefer to call that crowd “believers in democracy”, “objectors to untrammelled executive power”, “upholders of the common law”, “yay for the separation of powers” – take your pick. Loved the comment by the letter writer today saying she didnt understand why this wasnt a bigger issue. I don’t understand either sister – this is an embarrassment to Australia.

Given the climate we live in, I ought to clarify my previous comment: what I meant to say is that Haneef is about as potentially a terrorist as I am, or my family is – that is to say not a terrorist at all.

Ralph, good to see those Treasury people values working! You know, the ones where you treat everyone with tolerance, respect and dignity. Or is that just the ones who reside at Langton Crescent?

He is about as potentially a terrorist as you are Ralph. Mark my words this Haneef incident will go down in the history books as the worst in a long line of abuses of the rule of law by this government. Justice Spender – who is hearing the immigration appeal – had it exactly right in the directions hearing – on Andrews interpretation anyone who has ever had an “association” with a criminal (i.e. has had a meal with, has been in the same social group with, or has gifted a sim card to) and happens to be applying for a visa can be locked up and throw away the key. If you don’t think that is outrageous I don’t know what to say.

Deadmandrinking5:41 pm 20 Jul 07

Yes Bonfire, the Socialist Alliance is really Al-Qaeda. Didn’t you pick up on the similarities in ideals?
Marx was really a Shiek in disguise. But shhhhh….

Haneef dossier ‘flawed’, says the conservative paper of record, The Australian. (Oh and remember that “major discrepancies” is newspaper speak for “pack of lies”).

Who has decided that this man is to be degraded to the point where he is not even entitled to wear shoes?

Terror suspect. Plain and simple.

You see bonfire’s comment above about him allegedly being linked to a student group associated with Al Qaeda.

All you bleeding hearts pining over his treatment ought to be ashmed of yourselves. He is being afforded due legal process, and what we are dealing with here is a potential terrorist. Ask families of the Bali bombing victims how they might feel about it. I feel better knowing there is one less potential militant islamic wandering our streets.

And no Shab, as outrageously right wing my comments may seem to you (which they aren’t), I am not trolling.

Who has decided that this man is to be degraded to the point where he is not even entitled to wear shoes? – airport security ?

It is pretty effing embarassing really. Have you read the leaked transcript of interview?

Who has decided that this man is to be degraded to the point where he is not even entitled to wear shoes?

Personally I would be in severe pain if required to do likewise.

Absolute bureaocratic barbarity!

barking toad12:21 pm 20 Jul 07

Haneef is being afforded all the correct treatment to which he is legally entitled. Magisterial review of his detention, subsequently granted bail, right of appeal aginst the revocation of his visa.

Where terrorism is concerned I’m happy to see some preference given to the rights of the community at large.

And the hypocrisy of bleeding heart media whore former politicians such as Fraser never ceases to amaze me. You never here him comment about his friend Mugabe and his interpretation of human rights in Zimbabwe.

It’s a perfectly legitimate photograph to run. I actually think it could work in his favour by allowing people to see how he’s being treated.

an indian news report has him as the former president of a student organisation banned for its support of al qaeeda.

i see on local news that socialist alliance have swung their support behind him.

I wonder if Able Locksmiths are complaining about the free advertising. Their phone number is clearly visible on the pad lock.

I also think it is a very disappointing photograph. The presumption of innocence has clearly been neglected in this case which is a serious travesty.

The CT is a dud newspaper and has been for some time. Similar to the Chronicle or the Gulargambone Gazette, but without as much of the thoughtful stuff. It could be so much better and changes to management may make it so.

neanderthalsis9:38 am 20 Jul 07

Making anyone wear an orange tracksuit is a breach of human rights. Infact anyone willingly wearing a tracksuit in public unless they are involved in some sporting activity should be charged with crimes against humanity.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.