We have, in the past, raised concerns over the wider civil impact of anti-terrorism laws in Australia and elsewhere.
As usual, these draconian laws use a sledge to crack a walnut, more often than not. Although not meant to target innocent citizens, they invariably do. The laws are freely used in non-terrorism cases just as RICO has become a common standby in the US for non-mafia related cases.
The question must be, to those who vehemently support extreme laws; what happens when you are inadvertently caught up by these measures? Do you mind surrendering your civil liberties?
Well for Australian Lawmakers, the ones who allowed draconian measures through the legislation process, the chickens are coming home to roost:
MP’s were told they were under no obligation to submit to a personal search. "If you wish to do so, you may leave the building and return after you have removed items from your person that may activate the WTMD."
Personally I call it poetic justice, along with some other things. It is stupidity, paranoia gone crazy. But it couldn’t not have happened to a more deserving bunch of short sighted, self-serving nitwits.
Now I would like to see a list of provisions which require full cavity searches for the vocally homophobic among the lawmakers. Perhaps warrantless searchers for those MP’s who regularly make unfounded charges of peadophilia against other MP’s and judges. Forced assets ldisclosures on the lot of them, including wire-tap, internet traces and the old paperchase.
In fact, I think draconian prohibitions and restrictions should be road tested first on the very lawmakers who allow their passage. What is sauce for the goose, as they say.
8 comments:
I love it. I hope all future sessions are held with the MPs in their skivvies.
THe story made my day.
As long as they do not attempt to bitch-slap the individual that suggests a search or any other form of security measures ala Rep. McKinney here in the US...that got very nasty. Seems whats good for the goose isn't good for the gander here.
Don't let 'em go home.
Make 'em strip even if they don't set off the metal detectors, so we can check whether or not they're actually human.
Me, I think they should be subjected to full and public anal probes.
I know that sounds sexist, but as NYCE points out, they might not even be human.
Actually I do know several of them and sadly they are real.
Still, it might nudge them a bit to understanding the ramifications of their actions.
I saw a picture of a charred body on another blog that both sickened me and angered me as I thought about all the chickenhawk politicans and pundits sho talk tough from the safety of their offices. I agree - send 'em over or make 'em send their kids over.
When is Prince Harry going over to Iraq, btw? Unlike Jenna and Barbara, I heard sometime ago he was actually going to serve his country.
As a republican (as opposed top royalist) I generally avoid news and gossip of royals.
GP Daily, alas, pushes it in my face.
From what I've read Harry is raring to go, and has just taken over an armoured unit. Small fry, but he's trying.
The question is, will he be allowed to fulfill his personal wish. I expect he is trapped in the hypocrisy too.
That he's raring to go says something about him. Jenna and Barbara are raring to go party and put some blow up their noses. Which I think says something about them too.
Post a Comment