Immigration minister "above the law"... supreme court not supreme

[gomaos]

Ruddock has done it again... to hell with democracy...

last week the supreme court ruled that at least the children of those poor people who are held in concentration camps by the government, for the sole reason of being illegal migrants, should be set free.

But Ruddock (one of the most arrogant politcians on tv) is more supreme than the supreme court:

"we have been advised that it is not the business of the supreme court to make this ruling..."

He has now moved his torture victims to undisclosed locations.

He probably gets in there himself, masked all in black, and has a go at them personally with the whip or worse...

Jeez, I really wish I'd meet him in a dark alley...

that would be one solution...

The ONLY REAL SOLUTION:

The Liberals MUST GO at the next election!

[ramon]

I don't dissagree the Libs must go in the next election. However I don't think it is likely.

It seems to me we are in for another term and in the end we will deserve what ever they do to the country because people seem to keep voting them back in.

Either that or their is some dark conspiracy afoot in this country and our elections are rigged even more then the American one's because in the last few years I have only found two people who admit to voting for the Liberals

[gomaos]

Well at least I think it's good that Beazley got rejected... he was right wing Labor Party, hardly any difference to Howard...

Simon Crean looks good to me, if Australians are too stupid to see that (and I think they are) then there's nothing we can do about it.

I don't think the people who don't vote for Howard deserve him, and as you said, I'm almost certain the elections are rigged in some places...

just like in USA....

[Ed Dunkel]

The anti-immigration minister.

[Torsten]

There are so many good people in the Labor party who could actually win the next election, but I am certain that Crean can't. With Beazley out of the way, the stage is now clear for a challenge from one of the younger, brighter stars in the party. They desperately need someone fresh, someone young, and someone a little gutsy. A Paul Keating type, but from the left side of the party. Sadly the structure and culture of the Labor Party won't allow such a change unless they get really desperate (which they are getting). The only way labor will win with Crean at the helm is if the Liberals fuck up in a big way somehow. Todays announcement about Telstra could pave the way, and so could next year's Budget. But I believe that we will probably go into double dissolution anyway.... that way Howard keeps his promise not to call an early election (as he is 'forced' into it by a hostile senate), but still gets to make use of the Crean wet blanket factor before the Labor party gets it together.

[ramon]

Simon Crean looks good to me, if Australians are too stupid to see that (and I think they are) then there's nothing we can do about it.

I don't think the people who don't vote for Howard deserve him, and as you said, I'm almost certain the elections are rigged in some places...

just like in USA....

I changed my mind about Simon Crean when he did a 180 regarding the war. He went on and on about the war being illegal and Immoral (which I completely agreed with ). But soon as the war started and public opinion started to swing he basically said now that we are in it we might as well win it.

This showed to me that his position was not based on principle which I would have greatly respected but on polls.

Individually the people that don't vote for Howard don't deserve what they get from him but as a country we do. He uses people's predujices and plays with them keep himself in power.

I am sure if people were to find alternate sources of information other then newspapers and TV news they would soon start to see through him.

[gomaos]

He (Howard) uses people's predujices and plays with them to keep himself in power.

Yes, too right... smart little c..t isn't he?

[Thelema]

i'd really like to see the leader of the greens in power: he seems to me to be the most upright, principled candidates for a super-leader. Hey, the guy actually comes across as having some form of intelligence! This can only happen once every 50 years or so...

I really dig his uncomprimising stand on the iraqi conflict, and his unhesitating disagreement with the proposed ASIO legislation.

Everyone should vote greens this year: I always vote greens for the senate, but i'll seriously consider voting for the lower house too.

[Gwydion]

Actually, the ruling was by the full court of the Family Court that the Family Court had jurisdiction in the matter of children (and, consequently, one would expect, families) held in detention centres in Australia (one judge in dissent). This was the outcome of an appeal against the judgement of a single justice on the Family Court who had ruled otherwise.

The appeal was not held in the Supreme Court, as this is a State Court, whereas the Family Court is a Federal Court. The Supreme Court is currently irrelevant to this process, having no jurisdiction in the matter.

As a Federal minister, Ruddock is responsible for federal policy and laws, and the family court (designed to maintain the same standard of law across the nation) is also.

In response to this ruling, the heartless bastard is appealing the the High Court (which is the highest court in Australia), to have the decision overturned. :mad:

While I agree with the emotion of your post, the details are a bit sketchy, leading you to the wrong conclusion.

[Gwydion]

Regards other political issues- labor sold it's soul years ago, but I won't be voting green either (those of you paying attention will have realised that I'm a bit red under the collar).

Bob Brown is emblematic of what is wrong with the Greens Party- it is split in two distinct camps that are wrangling for control. On the one hand you have the genuine activists, environmentalists and progressives who want to achieve a true and lasting change in australian policy and society that is both environmentally and socially sustainable. This is what Brown was.

On the other hand, you have the well-meaning, latte-supping inner city types who mean well, don't fully understand the issues, and are keen mostly on maintaining power by concentrating on solely local issues. This lot tend to control the party. (I believe it's called careerism, and takes place in all parties).

While I have long had a lot of respect for Bob, that has diminished after his proposal (retracted after the rank and file of the greens revolted) to sell off Telstra in exchange for the environment: EXACTLY the same as Coalition policy not so many years ago.

For these and other reasons, I'm sticking with the Socialist Alliance.

[gomaos]

Well I swear they said "Supreme Court " on tv, and Ruddock himself said that he was adviced that the supreme court cannot make this decision...

hence the title of my post

but I'll try and check it out tomorrow...

[waterdragon]

been enjoying much of what mark latham has to say lately(labour)- his "conga line of suckholes" comment will have upset our overlords so badly that labour is no chance for the next election. and costello watchers will have noticed that petey is reinventing himself as a caring/sharing/meet tha' people kinda bloke. my bet is that the liberal arm of the bipartisan party will take(see steal) the next election. that said, i do admire bob browns level headedness but he's not an openly procorporate whore so until he learns to sell out properly he'll be a political lightweight.