Terrorism charges

So you think the terrorism laws have been "misused" even though they weren't
actually used. Fantastic logic there.

 

Read slowly Clem: the laws were **not used**. How then exactly were they
"misused"?

 

Don't forget he wishes they actually were used so they could be tested in
court.

So presumably the contemplation of a charge under a specific law but not
actually charging the alleged offender under that law is misuse of that law,
presumably because of the implied 'threat' component.

P

 

Are you naturally stupid or just trying to be particularly obtuse Tex?
The national (and international) media broadcast the story that the police
released saying that they were considering charging the bogans under your
"Terrorism Laws".
They "used" mention of these laws to treaten and blacken the name of
ordinary Australian citizens.
Not only was that a contravention of the promise that it wouldn't ever
happen ("misuse" 1) but they then withdrew the threat after the damage had
been done and before the bogans had a chance to defend it in court ("misuse"
2).

But by all means keep up your childish semantics arguing; you're doing your
side the world of good!

 

Err yes [puzzled face]..... That's what I wrote "Terrorism legislation isn't
here to be actually USED. Only to be misused."

Are you not getting all of the posts or something?

 

[even more puzzled face]
Yes of course. How else can you challenge the validity or application of a
law?
Did you think you could just vote on it like Big Brother?

Of course it is.
If you make the threat in a press release but then don't back up your words
of course you've behaved unfairly. (And especially if you misused the
sledgehammer of the word "Terrorism" when doing it!)

 

Come on Clem, calm down, you know Tex isn't sharp enough to be obtuse. You,
on the other hand, can be blunt and sharp at the same time.

Theo

 

I'm not the one making an ass of himself yelling about the "misuse" of laws
when they weren't actually used

So, the media are sensationalist idiots. Now there's a shock

That's the media, not the law. Learn the difference

When did they ever "promise" that the media wouldn't *say* something. I
believe the promise had to do with the usage of the laws themselves, you
stupid clod.

ROFL. Yeah, I guess to charge someone with a crime and take them to trial on
a charge the police knew they weren't guilty of would somehow be a proper
use of the law, but not using the laws is "misuse". You really must be off
your meds

Semantics = pointing out that your "misused" laws weren't actually used.

 

Yes I am. Do you not understand that laws can't be "misused" when they
aren't in this case actually *used*? Or do you prefer people to be taken to
trial when the police and DPP thinks they aren't guilty of the offence
charged?

When I got caught speeding a few weeks ago, I wasn't charged with terrorism
either, and someone on usenet once called me a "terrorist", so I guess those
laws were "misused" against me as well.

 

Odd how sometimes someone says something that is quite correct, but you
just *know* they don't get it.......

Moike

 

Hah hah you're an idiot Tex!
It's OK for the government to break promises and it's fine for the police to
misuse laws but it's bad for the media to report it?!!?

 

Congratulations; that's even stupider than your previous post! (And THAT's
saying something!)
The copper who caught you issued a press release about the charges he wasn't
going to charge you with too did he?

 

You're the one who thinks not using a law against a person innocent of a
particular crime amounts to "misuse"

What are you on about now, dink?

Exactly what law was "misused"?

You seem to think the media reporting something somehow makes it a law.

Those voices in your head seem to be getting louder Clem.

 

You're the one equating a *press release* with the charging of someone under
a law. It takes a serious persecution complex or the IQ of a goldfish to
come up with that piece of equivalency.

ROFL, a "press release" is now a "law" is it? I thought you said a *law* was
being misused.

You seem pretty agitated, Clemmy.

 

Clem, he is more stupid than even you think.

Theo

 

Yet you can't refute the stated point either. How very telling.

 

Well; I wouldnt've thought it possible Theo, but it seems you are right.
A new minimum has been established.

 

Yep; TELLING the world you're incredibly stupid Texidus.

 

Ooh look everybody; Tex is being clever!

 

Hey, I'm not the one squealing about laws being "misused" and then
supporting that argument with a reference to a criminal case where they
*weren't* used