Am NOT worried, and AM happy and NOT alarmed...

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:02:34 -0800 (PST)
theo wrote:
On Dec 17, 9:59Â*pm, jl wrote:

- right to Freedom of association

No. At one point in WA it was even illegal to say good morning and
talk about the weather to more than one other person whilst waiting
for a crosswalk sign to change.

I thought there had to be three people involved?

And that you could do it if you had written permission from the
commissioner of police.

ObBicycle: I wonder if this covered signalling chatter in peletons?
"I arrest you for calling 'pothole!"


- right to freedom of movement

Ask David Hicks.

Did they end up convicting him of anything in Oz?

- right to peaceful protest

Ask Queenslanders in Joh's time. Or Western Australians in Charlie's
time. Hmm... did they ever repeal section 54b?

I have this vague idea Labor never quite got around to it.

- right to liberty (ie not being arbitrarily held without charge, refer
habeas corpus)

Yup, the Feds can't hold you for more than 14 days before charging
you. If you're under 14 I think they have to tell your parents after
three or four days.

But they can re-arrest you I believe.

- right to freedom of religion (it's in the constitution)

-The right to be marginalised because of your religion.

Not quite. Because of any public display of same perhaps.

I think marginalising people who deliberately flaunt areo bars is
quite reasonable! If they want to be aero they should do it the
proper way, riding horizontally, not this half vertical method.


No we don't have the right to vote John. We used to but the Gov't
recently removed that right from people serving prison sentences of
longer than xx time. Just another stroke of the Gov't pen.
In the Land of the Free conviction of a crime involving prison removes
your right to vote for life.


Hang on, are you sure? My recollection is that they wanted to but it
didn't get up.

Zebee

On Dec 18, 11:49*am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:02:34 -0800 (PST)

theo wrote:
On Dec 17, 9:59*pm, jl wrote:

- right to Freedom of association

No. At one point in WA it was even illegal to say good morning and
talk about the weather to more than one other person whilst waiting
for a crosswalk sign to change.

I thought there had to be three people involved?

And that you could do it if you had written permission from the
commissioner of police.

ObBicycle: I wonder if this covered signalling chatter in peletons?
"I arrest you for calling 'pothole!"

chuckle The question is though, is it still illegal if they aren't
talking ?

- right to freedom of movement

Ask David Hicks.

Did they end up convicting him of anything in Oz?

I don't believe so - they held him for 12 months (I think under house
arrest I'm not sure, it was either that or an SA min security prison)
as the remainder of his American imposed sentence as part of the deal
that they released him on, and they've had a restraining order on him
under the terrorist act which expired the other week and wasn't
renewed.

He still doesn't have a right to free speech - if he sells his story
to No Idea or whatever then he gets done first for "benefitting from
the proceeds of terrorism" or words to that effect (afraid I couldn't
be arsed looking up the act)

JL

On Dec 18, 9:49*am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:02:34 -0800 (PST)

No. At one point in WA it was even illegal to say good morning and
talk about the weather to more than one other person whilst waiting
for a crosswalk sign to change.

I thought there had to be three people involved?

You and more than one other person. That's three.

And that you could do it if you had written permission from the
commissioner of police.

And he has to give it to you?

ObBicycle: I wonder if this covered signalling chatter in peletons?
"I arrest you for calling 'pothole!"

Certainly. Book em Danno.

- right to freedom of movement

Ask David Hicks.

Did they end up convicting him of anything in Oz?

No. But they removed his freedom of association, speech and movement.

- right to peaceful protest

Ask Queenslanders in Joh's time. *Or Western Australians in Charlie's
time. *Hmm... did they ever repeal section 54b?

I have this vague idea Labor never quite got around to it.

They did.

- right to liberty (ie not being arbitrarily held without charge, refer
habeas corpus)

Yup, the Feds can't hold you for more than 14 days before charging
you. If you're under 14 I think they have to tell your parents after
three or four days.

But they can re-arrest you I believe.

Bugger!

- right to freedom of religion (it's in the constitution)

-The right to be marginalised because of your religion.

Not quite. *Because of any public display of same perhaps.

The Swan Valley Association is trying to stop a Mosque being built on
the edge of the Swan Valley for cultural reasons. The Fundie churches
had no problems building several houses of prayer in there.

I think marginalising people who deliberately flaunt areo bars is
quite reasonable! *If they want to be aero they should do it the
proper way, riding horizontally, not this half vertical method.

Absolutely!

No we don't have the right to vote John. We used to but the Gov't
recently removed that right from people serving prison sentences of
longer than xx time. Just another stroke of the Gov't pen.

Hang on, are you sure? *My recollection is that they wanted to but it
didn't get up.

I'm not 100% certain but will look it up now you've questioned it.

Theo

On Dec 18, 9:49*am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:

Hang on, are you sure? *My recollection is that they wanted to but it
didn't get up.

We're both right. It got up but the High Court threw it out, partly.
If your sentence is more tha three years, you can't vote.

http://www.justiceaction.org.au/inde...6&Item id=110

Prisoner Voting Rights
Victory for Aust Prisoners


The line was drawn in the sand on this issue when the government said
it would remove the prisoners vote. On 30 Aug 2007, we won in the High
Court of Australia. This is a win for every person who wants to talk
and listen rather than to dominate and exclude others.
Thu, 30 Aug 2007.
AUSTRALIAN HIGH COURT UPHOLDS RIGHT TO VOTE IN LANDMARK CASE

In a landmark decision, the High Court has today upheld the
fundamental human right to vote, finding that the Howard Government
had acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally in imposing a blanket ban
denying prisoners the vote.

In 2006, the Howard Government passed legislation which denied all
prisoners the right to vote. This law was challenged in the High Court
by Vickie Roach, an Aboriginal woman who is a prisoner at the Dame
Phyllis Frost Prison in Melbourne. In orders made today, the High
Court struck down the blanket prohibition on prisoners voting. The
Court upheld the validity, however, of the law providing that
prisoners serving a sentence of three years or longer are not entitled
to vote.

Theo

JL wrote:

On Dec 18, 11:49 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:02:34 -0800 (PST)

theo wrote:
On Dec 17, 9:59 pm, jl wrote:

- right to Freedom of association

No. At one point in WA it was even illegal to say good morning and
talk about the weather to more than one other person whilst waiting
for a crosswalk sign to change.

I thought there had to be three people involved?

And that you could do it if you had written permission from the
commissioner of police.

ObBicycle: I wonder if this covered signalling chatter in peletons?
"I arrest you for calling 'pothole!"

chuckle The question is though, is it still illegal if they aren't
talking ?

- right to freedom of movement

Ask David Hicks.

Did they end up convicting him of anything in Oz?

I don't believe so - they held him for 12 months (I think under house
arrest I'm not sure, it was either that or an SA min security prison)
as the remainder of his American imposed sentence as part of the deal
that they released him on, and they've had a restraining order on him
under the terrorist act which expired the other week and wasn't
renewed.

He still doesn't have a right to free speech - if he sells his story
to No Idea or whatever then he gets done first for "benefitting from
the proceeds of terrorism" or words to that effect (afraid I couldn't
be arsed looking up the act)

JL

There have been quite a few letters to newspapers describing Hicks as a
very dangerous man.

A ****ing traitor, un-Australian, in short, a dead beat ****.

Some will say Hicks is a real hero, and a victim of the system.

I didn't like the way he got treated. He should have been given a fair
trial a lot sooner. And so should all the rest of those incarcerated
with Hicks. But then I agree with the guy who threw his shoes at G. Bush
and called him a dog.

But lotsa yanks thought we shoulda nuked the middle east and roasted all
the towel-heads.

Just over 50% of America voted for G.Bush and neo-cons. Bush was their
leading light, their hero.
And all these folks don't give much of a **** about Geneva conventions
and rights. They all think that if you do wrong, you pay for it big time
especially if you sympathise with Osama, the Islamic Hero.


There are estimated 27,000 people being detained in addition to the few
hundred left in Cuba. Amnesty International has some frightful figures.
There's a lotta **** happening courtesy of the USA, secret jails and
torture centres. Hicks is just one tiny little ******* among a big pile.
There is enormous injustice being done.
I can understand why a man would turn against the west, and join the
other side, and strike a blow for freedom but if a man does and he gets
caught, then he should know he'll get treated like ****. The whole
western democractic system isn't in any mood to administer justice as
soon as they can for guys like Hicks. The system is designed to let the
Hicks of this world rot in jail for a good while. An early trial and
resolution and closure are just luxuries you don't give to ****s.
Its not right of course. Once apprehended he should have been tried
within 3 mths and dealt with. Should. Pigs will fly too.
Along with thousands of other rounded up. I'd like to round up G. Bush
and try him for the way he's taken so long to get anywhere with fixing
Iraq. I'd like to see a People's court ask him why he shouldn't be
hanged for causing so many deaths in Iraq, and why millions have packed
their bags and move right out of the country because it became so bad
while being administered by the yanks.

Despite my ideas about the outcomes in the middle east, I am not going
to travel to the middle east and train with the 'freedom fighters' ie,
terrorists, ie, people who disagree with the US foreign policy, and I
won't be doing my bit for increased freedoms and justice for Islamic
peoples.

The Next Quagmire facing the west is Afghanistan, and it ain't over yet
not by a long shot.

We've just been dumped on by Krudd and his 5% CO2 solution. Expect more
dumps about the 'ghanistan war to be sure.

Just what our special forces get up to at night in secret and just who
they shoot and kill and maim and torture and just what is all being
covered up and concealed is anyone's guess and I don't have the right to
find out.

There is nothing I can do about it. And the Taliban might win. Sometime
in the next 50 years.

If I stay put in Oz I Am NOT worried, and AM happy and NOT alarmed...

A long time ago the Government of Oz wanted to send me to Vietnam to
perform special duties to prevent the Yellow Peril moving south towards
Oz.

I wasn't selected in the ballot for conscription but I would have
refused to go, and would have happily spent years in jail to uphold my
idea of giving other folks a fair go, ie, the vietnamese people. I
thought we had no right to invade a foreign country which hadn't fired a
shot in our direction, and that we had no right to takes sides with the
South Viet corrupt government.

While the Viet war proceeded, some ****s at Sydney University gathered
funds to send to the Viet-cong so they'd be able to buy bullets to shoot
at Aussies trying to do their work of winning hearts and minds for
democracy and in the Australian way which by all accounts was quite
benign it seemed to me, and very different to the gung-ho US way of
doing it.

I don't recall exactly what happened to those befriending and assisting
the viet-cong here. Giving them a decent hair cut and caning their bare
asses at Sydney Cricket Ground might have been rather stylish though.
Then making their parents pay compo to other parents who lost sons in
the war. That might have taught some duty of care to everyone involved.

Nobody won anything out of Vietnam. It shouldn't have happened IMHO. At
a party in 1988 in Sydney I heard an army guy say we should have nuked
them. But for what reason I asked? I don't recall exactly what he said.
Bull**** mainly.

I'm trying to work out what we'll win with Afghanistan. There is ****
all oil there. There are millions of very upset people. And mountains of
poppy farms and narco dollars. Huge problems. What would Hicksy have to
say about other folks problems? I guess we might find out in the
fullness of time, but a lotta folks want him shutted up for the
forseeable. His past prejudices his story.

Patrick Turner.