Australia owns its citizens

[Frood]

In the news today, here.



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/epping-man-charged-over-alleged-plan-to-fight-against-islamic-state/story-fni0fee2-1227459634861">http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-or ... 7459634861">http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/epping-man-charged-over-alleged-plan-to-fight-against-islamic-state/story-fni0fee2-1227459634861



An Australian man who intended to fight against ISIS was stopped before he could board a flight to Qatar last December, yet only yesterday was he arrested and charged in a court. The wording of his single charged offence was, "engage in conduct which was prepatory to the commission of an offence ... namely entering a foreign country with the intention of engaging in a hostile activity".



I find this ironic since on the drive home, BBC was speaking with an ex American soldier who has been fighting alongside the Kurds and had recently married in Sweden and was briefly returning home to the US for the honeymoon and whatnot. Seems that their officials turn a blind eye or have no power when it comes to those who make a decision to fight their nation's stated enemies but off the military complex grid.



Nations like the USA and Australia (probably Canada too, I don't know for sure on that) both retain the legislative powers to commit involuntary manpower through drafts at times of war and through certain representational or parliamentarian measures based on classification of conflicts and more so, stop loss considerations.



So I arrive at this basic question: Do we own ourselves or do our governments own us by any decree?



If our intentions are parallel with our government intentions, we enlist domestically or go abroad and do the work they aren't willing or yet willing to do. If our intentions are not parallel with our government intentions, they create domestic laws about free will and international matters which they should have no authority over outside of their borders. If our governments actually and legitimately declare war on something abroad (which never happens anymore. No government seeks permission to wage war, they just do it.) we're for the most part unable to refuse to serve against their stated or unstated enemies unless we want to be incarcerated or hunted like fugitives because we have a difference of opinion or simply don't believe in killing or ultimately, the government rendition of why we should individually want to kill other individuals abroad.



It's like gambling house rules casinos. Is it our birth certificates, marriage licences, and the like which empowers them into thinking we're all puppies in their kennels?



That single offence they invoked on an Australian yesterday:

"engage in conduct which was prepatory to the commission of an offence ... namely entering a foreign country with the intention of engaging in a hostile activity"

More so applies to Western governments than it does to people meant to be their lords. Their contempt for the limits of their own borders and the consciences of people within and abroad is astounding.



I get why they're going through the motions. They want to appease the world and soft shelled Australians in general by demonstrating that they'll stop an outbound pro-Kurdish fighter the same as they've stopped numerous pro-ISIS conscripts (bar the huge elapse of time and the ever changing Australian political climate). It's a mismatched ratio and a losing battle though. They could have avoided most of it by not sucking American prawn in previous governments. People don't forget historical facts or slavery. They just remember the carefully considered headlines meant to invoke a knee jerk gut feeling and sense of safety in ignorance.

[J0E]

Canada, USA and other nations allow its citizens to go off and fight for and pledge allegiance to the State of Israel.

And yet, they don't allow the same courtesy for Russians to spy for the KGB or fight for the Islamic Republic of Iran.



Why should we allow a double standard like that to prevail? I say, take that right away from all of them.

[Frood]

So you're all for the government ownership of its people?



How does that work when governments inevitably go bad or in modern reality, really go bad? Should the people meant to be in control of their government await permission from said government to challenge it and go abroad and find allies to overthrow it? Or is that just a neat little historical narrative here or there written or rewritten by the victors? I'd really like to know how subservience equals patriotism for you. Don't you find it creepy? Maybe you follow soccer or baseball and have been hand reared to follow such things?

[Bricktop]

Would have been interesting during the Spanish Civil War, when thousands of people from all over the world joined the anti-fascist brigades.



This is less about controlling citizens, although I take your point, but about bad legislation.



As always, legislators in Australia try to avoid "discrimination", and so draft legislation to be applicable in all cases, and not create legal loopholes by citing specific circumstances. Legislators would never embrace a law which specifically cites an individual, group or nation; instead they make it ambivalent and vague in terms of exactly who or what they are trying to prevent.



So, instead of drafting a law which says "it is unlawful for an Australian citizen to travel to the middle east and fight for ISIS", it drafts laws which state "it is unlawful for Australians to go anywhere and fight for anyone".



This is because of our reluctance to legislate for Ministers of the crown to make arbitrary determinations on legal matters, such as declaring a specific nation or group the subject of legislation. This is deemed to be circumventing the Parliamentary process.



Thus, our own democratic system, based on stupidity and ignorance, is hard wired to make laws like this, instead of being clear and concise in exactly what it is they want us not to do.



I suspect this case will set a benchmark as to the legal principle involved. Courts can, and do, reject cases based on bad law, and this is one such situation where a judge might say "the law is not clear".



I certainly hope so.

[Anonymous]

Canada, USA and other nations allow its citizens to go off and fight for and pledge allegiance to the State of Israel.

And yet, they don't allow the same courtesy for Russians to spy for the KGB or fight for the Islamic Republic of Iran.



Why should we allow a double standard like that to prevail? I say, take that right away from all of them.

[the shark hunter]

... the government will say it owns everything, yes including people.  but they don't.  they own things and so do we.  but they don't own us or our children.  however, truth be told they've still got a very unreasonable grasp on so-called "private" property and that has got to change ...

[Anonymous]

... the government will say it owns everything, yes including people.  but they don't.  they own things and so do we.  but they don't own us or our children.  however, truth be told they've still got a very unreasonable grasp on so-called "private" property and that has got to change ...

Through taxation and legislation, the reach of the state is on the rise. Some people say they don't want either and others say we must have it. Must have seems to trump don't most times.

[the shark hunter]

... from what i've been hearing in the news over the past few years, the regime in australia is one of the absolute worst examples of government in the first world.  absolutely totalitarian.  i recently heard that they're now making it a crime for certain races to purchase property ...

[Bricktop]

... from what i've been hearing in the news over the past few years, the regime in australia is one of the absolute worst examples of government in the first world.  absolutely totalitarian.  i recently heard that they're now making it a crime for certain races to purchase property ...

I think its fair to say Australia is heavily regulated, but its not because of the "Government".



Its because the people constantly whine about things that go wrong and demand the Government deal with it. The idiot masses have imposed massive regulation upon themselves.



We have THREE layers of Government. Federal, State and Local. With 30M people. England has 2, with 80M people.



By the way, applying barriers to a course of conduct does not make it a crime. It makes it impossible.

[Anonymous]

... from what i've been hearing in the news over the past few years, the regime in australia is one of the absolute worst examples of government in the first world.  absolutely totalitarian.  i recently heard that they're now making it a crime for certain races to purchase property ...

I think its fair to say Australia is heavily regulated, but its not because of the "Government".



Its because the people constantly whine about things that go wrong and demand the Government deal with it. The idiot masses have imposed massive regulation upon themselves.



We have THREE layers of Government. Federal, State and Local. With 30M people. England has 2, with 80M people.



By the way, applying barriers to a course of conduct does not make it a crime. It makes it impossible.

We seem to be saying the same things. People expect those they elect to fix everything for them. Government regulation is not cheap.

[the shark hunter]

... any government that says it "owns" its residents is a government secretly yearning to implement slavery!

[Anonymous]

... any government that says it "owns" its residents is a government secretly yearning to implement slavery!

No government would openly say that.

[Bricktop]

... from what i've been hearing in the news over the past few years, the regime in australia is one of the absolute worst examples of government in the first world.  absolutely totalitarian.  i recently heard that they're now making it a crime for certain races to purchase property ...

I think its fair to say Australia is heavily regulated, but its not because of the "Government".



Its because the people constantly whine about things that go wrong and demand the Government deal with it. The idiot masses have imposed massive regulation upon themselves.



We have THREE layers of Government. Federal, State and Local. With 30M people. England has 2, with 80M people.



By the way, applying barriers to a course of conduct does not make it a crime. It makes it impossible.

We seem to be saying the same things. People expect those they elect to fix everything for them. Government regulationis not cheap.

We sheep constantly blame the government.



We elect them.



We allow them to do what they do.



We demand that they protect us, provide us with aid and welfare, maintain a fair and level justice system and every other need a modern community has.



How else can they do it but enforce more and more laws and regulations. They are just giving us what we cry for, and then we cry louder when we realise what they've done.

[Anonymous]

... from what i've been hearing in the news over the past few years, the regime in australia is one of the absolute worst examples of government in the first world.  absolutely totalitarian.  i recently heard that they're now making it a crime for certain races to purchase property ...

I think its fair to say Australia is heavily regulated, but its not because of the "Government".



Its because the people constantly whine about things that go wrong and demand the Government deal with it. The idiot masses have imposed massive regulation upon themselves.



We have THREE layers of Government. Federal, State and Local. With 30M people. England has 2, with 80M people.



By the way, applying barriers to a course of conduct does not make it a crime. It makes it impossible.

We seem to be saying the same things. People expect those they elect to fix everything for them. Government regulationis not cheap.

We sheep constantly blame the government.



We elect them.



We allow them to do what they do.



We demand that they protect us, provide us with aid and welfare, maintain a fair and level justice system and every other need a modern community has.



How else can they do it but enforce more and more laws and regulations. They are just giving us what we cry for, and then we cry louder when we realise what they've done.

And so the circle goes.

[Bricktop]

Moreso a spiral. Downwards.



Before the savage yaw...of 1984...