.............................................. ...............................................

Justice for Haneef blog



Dave Riley

I've created a blog: Justice for Haneef . It has links to campaign resources and the beginnings of an archive.

We have been approached by people requesting petitions, seeking ways they can express their support and other resources. This is an attempt to respond to those requests and signal to the Haneef family the sort of support that is out there.

6 Com:

Dave Bath | July 20, 2007

LC: Rather than the grainy B/W photo of Haneef, try using this color photo from an Indian newspaper. I looks like this could be the original of the b/w photo we see in Oz.

Hope it helps

Dave Riley | July 20, 2007

done. Thanks for the tip.

Anonymous | July 31, 2007

lets destroy another life for the sake of an election year i fell ashamed to be australian

Anonymous | July 31, 2007

I was sympathetic - not now. He has not told thewhole story - it is too suspicious and wher there is so much smoke there is fire. Guilty!

Dave Riley | July 31, 2007

ANION Write: I was sympathetic - not now. He has not told the whole story

DAVE RILEY: What a fool you are! There are two issues here. One that he has a right to due process which was absolutely denied him and two -- NOTHING has been found to implicate him in ANY WAY with these gross assertions engineered by the AFP.

And: how on earth do you KNOW that "He has not told the whole story"? What friggin story was he supposed to tell?

Red Wombat | August 03, 2007

anonymous,

we still (some of us, at least) subscribe to a little old theory called the presumption of innocence.

That is, innocent until PROVEN guilty. Not 'innocent until the minister says so', or 'innocent until the minister's lies are exposed so he concocts an even bigger one'.

And that is guilt as proven by a court - not by a media circus, or a ministerial operation in saving face, or the panic of a second-guessing public.

Where is this smoke you talk of? And where is it ACTUALLY coming from?

By deciding he is guilty now, with no more or less a shred of real evidence than was available the first time around, you are behaving no better than those who were willing to believe the witch-trial Mark 1.

Post a Comment