Kasey, I think I DID say: presumption of innocence and right to a
fair trial.
And, Graham: Police would be the first to say they are not social
workers. Social workers would be the first to say they are not
police. We encourage the muddying of those professional
boundaries at our own risk.
Sandy wrote:
"diverted" into various
>rehab programs BEFORE they are found guilty of anything. And
>who's to do the diverting? The police. Because they suspect
>someone of being up to something. Absolutely no presumption of
>innocence.
> "So in 2000 in this country the government is putting into place a
> mechanism to completely deny its citizens what we thought was a basic
> civil liberty."
Kasey asked:
> Exactly which civil liberty are you talking about here? You don't say.
But do we really have, as an email list, to go through this
"education" of an antagonistic newcomer once again? This will be
the third time, and no good ever comes of it.
(And it does indeed seem to happen when the gov't is up to
something horrible and dramatic: this time, they're rolling back
the influence of the UN in Australia while getting tough with
refugees. And Labor is softening up on indigenous land rights.
And we're supposed to try to explain ourselves to Kasey? Jeez.)
Sandy
------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
