Thursday, 27 October 2005
terror laws
So the terror laws that Howard's pushing, with the decreasing support of the state premiers, are probably in violation of the constitution, and of international human rights laws. They seem to be coming along well, but we still need to make sure that they violate the Geneva Convention, the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, suburban zoning restrictions, the treaty of versailles, Moore's Law and the bible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
How about violating the Genocide Convention too? The last genocide in Australia was before the convention existed so it might not count ...
I think the bill should add an exception to the law of gravity stating that objects having terrorist intentions should be forbidden from attracting other objects.
Also, heat shan't pass from a colder to a hotter body, only from a hotter to a colder, and in the latter case never when one object or other has terrorist intentions. In this exceptional case, both objects may be held by federal authorities without cause or charge.
Further, surely one can't have effective anti-terror legislation if an action is permitted to prompt an equal and opposite reaction.
And neither should our gallant leaders neglect the perils associated with the inertia of the ignorant masses or the momentum that terrorists may build up by combining their substantial mass with the velocity of modern technology.
We must be constantly vigilant against fat and fast-moving terrorists.
I like watermelon, and also paw-paw.
Post a Comment