>It appears that the Australian Senate will also face draconian
>anti-terrorist ASIO legislation this week. However, the opposition
>politicians (and media) seem to be on the alert for government attempts
>to curtail Australian civil liberties:
>
>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/14/1034561097545.html
Yes, I read that. The government had to water down some of its recent legislation to get it through the Senate, where Labor, the Democrats, Greens and independents have the numbers to block government legislation. But some Government members are wary too and even speaking out. One senior government member was on the news tonight, warning that eroding civil liberties was giving in to terrorism.
We'll have to see, it depends on how the public react. But as yet the public is not giving much thought to the politics of it,
There are all sorts of dangers for the government too. If the public were to suspect that the government had an inkling that there was a danger, but failed to alert people for example. There was a news item today which hinted at this, a report that amongst all the warnings received from the US government was one about possible threats to tourists in SE Asia. The report noted that this warning wasn't posted on the Foreign Affairs web site until Sunday morning (after the bombing.)
To be fair, US terrorist warnings are two bob a dozen. They seem to issue millions of them every day, a bit like 'the little boy who cried wolf', with a word-processor and a media list. But politics isn't a fair game. I rather suspect that Howard might also be a little nervous about mentioning joining a war in Iraq for a while too. In the context of Australians being attacked on their doorstep. The Greens leader Bob Brown has already started pushing that line.
People might even wonder if the Government's bellicose 'all the way with the USA' rhetoric might not have been partly responsible for the attack. I don't think that is a line that would get wide sympathy, it certainly isn't a very principled basis for opposition to support for the US. But there are those who aren't very big on principles in politics...
The situation is is still very fluid, hard to tell which way things will jump.
The biggest worry is the implications for Indonesia and especially Bali. The people of Bali stand to lose the most from this, it is conceivable that the tourist industry there might be destroyed permanently. This would be a tragedy which has all sorts of possible ramifications for Bali, for Indonesia and for Australia. Or maybe Australians will obstinately decide to keep going to Bali, just to thumb their noses at Bin Laden. Especially given that the holiday packages are likely to become REAL cheap very soon.
Come to think of it, maybe Australia could suggest this as an alternative to sending troops to Iraq. "Hey George, we've got a better idea for Australia's contribution to the war on terror. Its bigger than you thought, but we're sending them to Bali instead of Baghdad and they'll be armed with surfboards rather than SLRs. We know the oil is important to you mate, but who's going to look after the beaches, we don't want them falling into the wrong hands."
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas