Of course not. That’s an outrageous question to even ask. I’m sure she doesn’t “love” them, in the sense of, you know, having fond feelings for them and doodling their names inside hearts with “+JA 4EVA” and asking them around to dinner.
But she mustn’t think they’re all that bad because, whilst she’s telling us that the rule of law is optional, and advocating it being withdrawn from people who commit serious crimes for political or religious reasons (“terrorists”) – she has noticeably not argued for the same to apply to serious domestic criminals, like serial killers and rapists. The people who attracted the toughest sentences in our domestic courts, for doing unimaginably horrible things. And it’s not clear why not.
If she’s calling for us to lock up overseas psychos indefinitely without charge, and try them (if we can be bothered) and convict them on hearsay or other flimsy evidence, if that’s now a legitimate tool in our arsenal according to Janet, then why hasn’t she called for the same for the murderers and rapists in our own society?
Is Martin Bryant less of a villain than David Hicks? Is a notorious paedophile less of a threat to our community than some guy the Americans picked up in Iraq being all suspiciously muslim without a good alibi?
I’m sure many would be sympathetic to Janet’s argument that it’s about time we stopped coddling people we reckon are probably villains with luxuries like “the right to a fair trial” – but why draw the line at terrorists? Why not extend it to Australians the police think have possibly done something wrong or might in the future? There are only two possibilities that I can see:
- Janet Albrechtsen doesn’t think violent psychopaths who kill for no reason are as bad as violent psychopaths who do it for a religious or political reason, and wants them protected with rights that she thinks are optional for the latter group; or
- She does in fact understand the importance of the rule of law, but realises that it would completely undermine her argument if what she’s happy to have us do to people in the Middle East suddenly started happening here, and her readers were in danger of being arrested and locked up on flimsy evidence by our own police.
I really hope Janet can think of a third.