Sunday, March 13, 2011

“WHY DO AUSTRALIANS SEEM TO GET LOCKED UP OVERSEAS” – or - A tale of three Aussie ockers.

Australia pretends to be a democracy.
She pretends to be a Common-wealth but without common wealth except for the elite.

The populace believe we have a constitution – but most have never read it and would find it an imposition if they were asked to.

Most believe they are somehow protected at Common Law (British Law) by way of the principle of separation of powers vested under that constitution.
There is some strange belief that this can be maintained by an ‘independent judiciary’ which, paradoxically, is appointed by politicians.

Australia has no charter of rights.
Australians don’t seem to worry that they have no constitutional or statutory rights.

Australian state and federal legislatures have been busy the last several decades supplanting Common Law with Civil Code (statutory) procedures but without providing adequate statutes or implementing procedural correctness satisfactorily applicable within Civil Code juridictions.

But once again the man in the street (who’s used to Kangaroo courts anyway) never bothers to strain his brain trying to work out how his only recourse to justice (Common Law) is incrementally, systematically being denied him.

Governments tend to employ stacks of lawyers.
Our lawyers know what is happening in Australia as do lawyers employed by other nation states.
When foreign powers decide to initiate legal proceedings against Australian citizens on their soil a prime consideration in preparing a brief would be the lack of an Australian charter of rights.

Hence David Hicks could be locked up for years in Gitmo Bay since, after all, he wasn’t LEGALLY a human being according to Australian law.
In fact, a PET CHOOK has more rights under Australian law than does it’s owner.
In case anyone is in doubt of this they might read the account of Mr. Hick’s treatment during his detention and the furore that resulted when he claimed British citizenship.

A reasonable person could readily assume that Australian citizenship has less merit than some others – leastways  for Mr. Hicks during John Howard’s watch.

But the days roll on, regimes change and people expect a change for the better.
Along comes the lad from Townsville; another bit of a scallywag.
No-one could deny that a high profile bloke about to be nominated for the Nobel Peace prize should have read his official Swedish bonking manual before even considering chasing skirt in Sweden.

But Julian has been dumped in a British cooler and while being threatened with assassination from the good old USofA has been subject to a series of ultra vires attempts at his extradition without his being charged with an offence.
As for his treatment back home in Oz.– well, not even Howard would have been as publicly detrimental to Julian’s right to justice at Civil Code (see above) as Gillard’s condemnation.

Then there is the matter of Mr. Ross Dunkley, another expatriate Australian with media interests overseas.

At least in Ross’ situation he has some support from the mainstream press.
Yet this cuts no ice for the simple reason he has nothing much in the way of rights as a citizen of Australia.

Three Aussies mug enough to seek their destinies overseas.
Have they actually harmed anyone?

By harmed I mean like this –
Mr. Raymond Davis executes two Pakistani citizens and the USofA proceeds to move heaven and earth to spring him from the Pakistani caboose.

The old, jaded, ‘reasonable person’ could really get his knickers in a knot attempting to reason why the seppos would want to rescue a hired killer caught red-handed from the justice he evidently deserves.

It surely cannot be to preserve ‘national security’ ‘cos he blew the show out his arse by initiating a firefight in the middle of a city with enough espionage material in his car to cook the CIA goose five times over.

It cannot be for reasons of American justice – not after the way the victims of Gitmo have been treated.

So perhaps Mr. Davis was set up by his own nation in order to establish a fait accompli?

Maybe they want to claim that their own boys are prepared to sacrifice all in their eternal fight for freedom, democracy and the American way against the hairy barbarian.

But the American way no longer provides freedom and democracy.
Mr. David Hicks knows that from bitter experience and Mr. Julian Assange has ably demonstrated what Dave knows to the world.

So this reasonable person doesn’t need any conspiracy theories to see that the good ol’ USofA just might ‘expend’ one of their own citizens as a pawn in the ‘Great Game’.

If  Raymond Davis is found guilty of double murder in Pakistan, denied natural justice then executed – then Julian Assange’s life won’t be worth a brass razoo.

If the USofA declares a policy of tit for tat and our political masters keep crawling to them the way Madame Gillard has so ably demonstrated recently then we’ll all be available for exfiltration at their whim.

No comments:

Post a Comment