Quote:

Members of the NSW and Federal police acted unlawfully when they arrested and searched a Muslim-Australian woman during last year's pre-dawn counter terrorism raids, a magistrate has found.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/charges-dismissed-against-woman-arrested-during-terror-raids-after-magistrate-finds-police-acted-illegally-20150831-gjbkm1.html

Mates protecting mates? Okay then. International sanctions it is.

Ferk off Noddy.

Despite the Police overstepping their authority... what she said in reply should have put her straight on a terrorist suspect list .....

her verbal responses are typical of the mindset of radical Islamists.

Gnads wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:04pm:

Ferk off Noddy. Despite the Police overstepping their authority... what she said in reply should have put her straight on a terrorist suspect list ..... her verbal responses are typical of the mindset of radical Islamists.

You don't have the story!

What if, for example, she has been radicalised by the authorities, as has been happening in Australia for a long time, which is why the counter terrorism teams in Australia are under investigation for inciting terrorism?

She was not threatening a terrorist act, she was threatening corrupt police who were BREAKING THE LAW.

Due to her likely ongoing persecution, this is a psychological condition induced by illegal police tactics.

Gnads wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:04pm:

Ferk off Noddy. Despite the Police overstepping their authority... what she said in reply should have put her straight on a terrorist suspect list ..... her verbal responses are typical of the mindset of radical Islamists.

It is not against the law for people to have inappropriate thoughts. Owning a mindset is not against the law and the determination of what a mindset comprises is subjective and not able to be rationally or incontrovertibly determined by non-owners of the mindset.

Misanthrope Gnads is currently more out of it's tiny mind than ever.

You'll be interested to know that it was my humble self who introduced the concept that police cannot lay a charge for any offence when they themselves are not actually doing their job.

A roadside breath test stop of a totally sober man - a supervisor in a security company - lead to a charge of 'resisting arrest' , which was thrown out because the police had no arrest in action at the time, but were merely engaged in bullying an innocent person.  They could have been sued.

I thought that one had escaped the legal fraternity - certainly it never appeared in the Law Review or anything else.

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:18pm:

Gnads wrote on Aug 31st, 2015 at 3:04pm: Ferk off Noddy. Despite the Police overstepping their authority... what she said in reply should have put her straight on a terrorist suspect list ..... her verbal responses are typical of the mindset of radical Islamists. It is not against the law for people to have inappropriate thoughts. Owning a mindset is not against the law and the determination of what a mindset comprises is subjective and not able to be rationally or incontrovertibly determined by non-owners of the mindset. Misanthrope Gnads is currently more out of it's tiny mind than ever.

She was just being Muslim assertive....... we have various brands of Assertive these days - a discussion between an Italian and his wife sounds like WW III, but is only an assertive discussion.

A Muslim suggesting as person could have a throat cut for MIS-handling another, is assertive.... not a threat.

A threat such as hers could be an emotional reaction, and not an actual threat.

Whereas the boys club of corrupt Joint Counter Terrorism teams could easily misrepresent that and make it something it isn't.

And again be breaking the law.

easel wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:16pm:

What if, for example, she has been radicalised by the authorities, as has been happening in Australia for a long time

You should ask what radicalises muslims at this forum of ex muslims.
www.councilofexmuslims.com

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:36pm:

easel wrote on Aug 31st, 2015 at 3:16pm: What if, for example, she has been radicalised by the authorities, as has been happening in Australia for a long time You should ask what radicalises muslims at this forum of ex muslims. www.councilofexmuslims.com

The AFP? Victoria Police? NSW Police? QLD Police? SA Police? WA Police?

Do you know how to make a defector of a foreign government?

Persecute them relentlessly. And tell them if they defect and provide propaganda against their former country, that they will be rewarded with a comfortable life and monetary incentives.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/china-spy-reveals-beijings-tactics/story-fn59niix-1226425757679

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:39pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 31st, 2015 at 3:36pm: easel wrote on Aug 31st, 2015 at 3:16pm: What if, for example, she has been radicalised by the authorities, as has been happening in Australia for a long time You should ask what radicalises muslims at this forum of ex muslims. www.councilofexmuslims.com The AFP? Victoria Police? NSW Police? QLD Police? SA Police? WA Police?

Poor old Tasmanians...   :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D

easel wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 3:27pm:

A threat such as hers could be an emotional reaction, and not an actual threat. Whereas the boys club of corrupt Joint Counter Terrorism teams could easily misrepresent that and make it something it isn't. And again be breaking the law.

Care to reread the threats ...... "the first to have your throat slit".

The first of whom? obviously the threat wasn't just against a singular individual ......

there would be more to follow ...

that would have to involve more than just her to carry out such as threat..........

Sorry Grappler but comparing that to a sober bloke objecting to a road side breath test & police arresting him ....

is no comparison.

Whilst this woman may have been wrongfully detained & treated .....

they weren't in the house just for the hell of it.

Gnads wrote on Aug 31^st, 2015 at 9:48pm:

easel wrote on Aug 31st, 2015 at 3:27pm: A threat such as hers could be an emotional reaction, and not an actual threat. Whereas the boys club of corrupt Joint Counter Terrorism teams could easily misrepresent that and make it something it isn't. And again be breaking the law. Care to reread the threats ...... "the first to have your throat slit". The first of whom? obviously the threat wasn't just against a singular individual ...... there would be more to follow ... that would have to involve more than just her to carry out such as threat.......... Sorry Grappler but comparing that to a sober bloke objecting to a road side breath test & police arresting him .... is no comparison. Whilst this woman may have been wrongfully detained & treated ..... they weren't in the house just for the hell of it.

Must be the infamous Pussy Pass then - a bloke saying that would be Goulburntanamo Bay for the duration....

He wasn't objecting to the test - he was objecting to passing the test totally sober, then being dragged out of his car, shoved against a police vehicle and punched - all because some cop with a bad attitude asked for his licence and then - when he went to get it from the glove box - ordered him out of the car instead and tried to charge him with not producing it.

One reason I've recommended that RBT be dropped immediately - it has a low success rate, creates bored cops who may develop an attitude problem and try to create a criminal out of nothing just to fill in time and earn their keep, and is the root cause of many 'secondary' charges such as that - against non-criminal persons in the main.

It's called 'rousting - what the Old Southern Sheriff in the US used to do with Blacks.... and which can still lead to a scared Black kid being shot dead at a simple roadside stop, or shot dead for looking suspicious by walking home at night with a hoodie up.