If there’s any doubt remaining after the Haneef affair that what passes for justice in terrorism and law enforcement matters is nothing of the sort but a blatantly political bag of tricks, the comments from David Hicks’ prosecutor, Colonel Moe Davis, should lay it to rest.
The former chief prosecutor of the US military commissions at Guantanamo Bay said overnight he would not have pursued Hicks because the case against the Australian was not serious enough.
The ex-prosecutor, Air Force Colonel Moe Davis, told a pre-trial hearing for another Guantanamo Bay inmate he had “inherited” the Hicks case and wanted to focus on cases serious enough to merit 20-year jail sentences, with the Australian’s case not meeting that mark.
Davis also said the commissions were tainted by political influence and evidence obtained through prisoner abuse.
The mendacity of the Howard government - pushing for Hicks to be charged after he became a political problem, after letting him stew because doing so was a political advantage - stands exposed. There’s a significant “boy who cried wolf” issue here as well - how can anyone have any confidence that the terror threat has the dimensions teh authorities tell us it does when every time it’s put to the test, what we witness instead is Keystone cops bungling, gross abuses of justice and political crud?
Can we please have the rule of law and due process from now on, Mr Rudd?
Frankly it was always bleeding obvious that there was not much to charge him with. Obvious because while there were long queues lining up to proclaim his ‘guilt’ nobody could ever tell us what he was guilty of. Instead we were given lines such as ‘he certainly wasn’t there for a holiday’. Culminating of course in that ridiculously vague and retrospctive charge of ‘providing material support for terrorism’.
But I guess there’s good coming out of cases like Hick’s and Haneef’s with the War on Bullshit starting to make some serious headway.
Not a good look for Howard, Downer et al. But I suspect the debate has moved on. Tis a pity.
Kim and all:
I was one of the many Australians condemned for wanting to bring David Hicks back to Australia
David Hicks was and is an Australian. Every moment he was detained by that foreign power was an egregious insult to the sovereignty of Australia …. and an unforgivable insult - by a supposed ally - to every Australian risking their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I am delighted that Colonel Moe Davis has had the guts to speak the truth about this shameful part of Australia’s history.
Now, let us hope that first tomorrow morning, prosecution cases will be launched against the 8 formerly powerful and influential people in Australia who trampled all over hundreds of years of our legal tradition, who held the Geneva Conventions in utter contempt, who did not object to torture and all those other crimes so abhorrent to our whole way of life.
How much manilla rope should I buy to donate for public use? And is that 37mm or 52mm rope?
And so he got 5 years - mostly with time already served. Your point?
Everyone:
I had suggested elsewhere that Brendan Nelson would not be able to get on with the job of running an effective Opposition until all the Howard dead-wood had been purged from the Liberal Party.
This may now give him the justification to launch such a sweeping purge.
Surely this is Hicks chance to push for compensation - sue the former government. I’ll tip in a few bucks just for fun.
Hicks wasn’t on our side. Our troops are being killed in action by Hick’s team. I’m in favour of a firing squad for Hicks.
Good to see SATP putting the civilised case that justice flows from the barrel of a gun, unlike those barbarians on the side who believe that justice flows from the barrel of a gun.
Oh for crying out loud SATP. The issue is not whether he is the messiah or a very naughty boy, the issue is whether politicians interfered with the course of justice. When even the lawyers who argued the same side the pollies were pushing say that the answer is yes, there was political interference, then you’ve got a problem.
Unless you believe the proper role of the criminal justice system is to lock away arbitrary people if the government of the day finds it politically convenient. You might find that problematic results follow from this though.
I think Hicks is guilty of being an idiot with delusional militaristic fantasies. That’s my personality assessment. It might not be worth anything. But the point is that whatever he did should be tried in a court of law and not some ersatz tribunal without political interference and trumped up charges being brought.
Craig McC & STAP, did you read Col Davis’s comments? Or don’t you understand what it means when Col Davis said that the commissions against Hicks were “tainted by political influence and evidence gained through prisoner abuse”, or is it that you don’t want to understand what it means?
If the alleged evidence of his crimes was so strong, how come it took 5 years to charge him with anything but a hastily manufactured retrospective crime?
You can bet your bottom dollar that there was even the flimsiest shred of evidence against Hicks, the Rodent would have made sure that there was a very speedy trial and a conviction to be trumpeted from the rooftops confirming his credentials as the terrorists’ scourge.
I agree with Steve.A firing squad drawn from the family’s of K.I.A. soldiers.
“I agree with Steve.A firing squad drawn from the family’s of K.I.A. soldiers.”
You may be surprised to find out that it’s not that easy to get the mother of a son or daughter killed in a war zone to pull the trigger on the offspring of another mother offered up as a token sacrifice in a firing squad shooting range.
If you really want families to exact vengeance for their children fallen in foreign lands, then get your kids to join the artillery or a Navy missile ship. That way they can kill hundreds with only one strike well away from the actual killing zone and still be home for Xmas with some nice souvenirs from Qatar. Of course they may ask awkward questions about what exactly they are defending over there.Just tell ‘em to shut and keep carving the turkey.
Disclaimer: I’ve seen elements of the USN and the ADF in action (not in combat but dealing with serious and immediate emergencies, seriously and immediately) and they were fast, effective, very resourceful and a bloody good bunch of people to have a drink with after the work was done. Even my Dad who’s proudly ex-RN admits the USN really knows what it’s doing. So I’m not having a go at the US armed forces or any first world military - rather at the dickhead pollies who send them off on wild goose chases and the likes of Marlon and SATP who think they should be instruments to help satisfy the bloodlust of internet tough guys.
Spot on Nabakov…exactly my sentiments. My Dad was in the navy & he had great respect for their effectiveness & skills. As I do. He’s also very pissed w/ the way irresponsible pollies use the Navy to shore up their own “hard guy act”, & be sent to hype up “constructed” wars & contribute to BOGUS incidences. Nor should any Naval ship be used as a backdrop for TOP GUN wannabees & “mission accomplished” propaganda.
And yes, they can be a “bloody good bunch of people to drink with”…my experience was w/ Canadians on shore leave in early 80s Sydney.
Steve At The pub [7]:
You are probably a damned nice bloke and I’m sure that on many issues we would agree - but this time we do disagree.
I didn’t risk my life on counter-revolutionary operations, doing what I could to oppose tyranny and oppression and to uphold the those things we hold dear - the rule of law, human rights, parliamentary democracy, individual liberty - only to have a bunch of renegade political opportunists and gangplank-dodgers destroy all that in a grab for absolute power disguised as protecting us from a nebulous enemy.
Of course there are real terrorists!! They kill good and innocent people. When David Hicks was captured he appeared to have been in their company [that is a matter that could be determined, if necessary, by OUR courts].
Instead of allowing him to remain detained by a bunch of perverts and amateurs whose interrogation training seems to have come straight out of Hollywood movies …. he should have been sent straight back to Australia to be interrogated - properly and humanely - by very experienced, competent Australian professionals here and either charged or released.
In any case, he should have been given a strongly worded opportunity to become a civilian instructor for the Special Air Service Regiment [under supervision, of course!]. He had very recent and very very relevant experience. He was an asset worth his weight in gold.
Whether he was nice or not is completely irrelevant. After all, Australia encourages and rewards the redemption of all sorts of corporate scoundrels, ones who have ruined hundreds of families and businesses as well as causing many many deaths …. so why couldn’t David Hicks be allowed to redeem himself too - if redemption was necessary.
By the way, how about a Commander of the Order Of Australia for Mr Terry Hicks who is probably the best example we have of someone upholding Australian Values?
Its seems the more and more we find out about the doings of JWH, Dolly, Bumbles and God knows who else in that benighted, foul Government, the more they deem to have been men and women who breached international human rights and war crimes laws. Of course, they’ll never see the inside of a court, we know that, but t5hey should.And maybe Aussies should kick up enough of a stink that they do.
It is almost a shame Col. Moe Davis couldn’t have made his comments a bit earlier. I would have liked to have seen JWH embarrassed by this prior to the election. No doubt he would have done his best to weasel out of the implications. Maybe its just as well that we are hearing it now
Methinks SATP is just being provocative.
It’s been a bad six months for RWDBs.
Chins and dragging knuckles up, lads!
In a society that actually cared about the democratic principles that it professes to hold so dear, Davis’s evidence would cause a sensation and demands would follow for the punishment of the guilty.
In fact, of course, it will barely cause a ripple in the American republic.
In fairness to the Americans, 9/11 was an outrage of such immensity that it is understandable that some perspective has been lost in this area. I do see encouraging signs in recent debates over Guantanomo Bay and torture that some perspective is slowly starting to seep back into American attitudes.
Ken L @ 20,
Actually, Ken it might cause more than a repple in the US. While what Jenny says about the impact of 9/11 is spot on, there also appears to have been a great deal of concern in the US about how Bush’s Patriot Act infringes the US Bill of Rights. (See why the pollies here don’t want one?) This may play out further with this latest revelation.
Barely cause a ripple in the Australian constitutional monarchy, either.
‘I think Hicks is guilty of being an idiot with delusional militaristic fantasies.”
Keep that in mind when one of those regular thread opens up, here, on Defence spending priorities. I am always amazed at how common this Hicks’ disease is, amongst Australian adult males.
And, of course, SATP @7, never misses a beat, in showing how he never moved on from playing out, good guy and bad guy scenes, from b grade american movies.
Paul Burns [16]:
Why not?
If they have broken the law - they’ll swing.
If they haven’t broken any existing law, we can always use that use that good old Australian reliable: Retrospective Legislation …. as well as Howard-style security measures - and they’ll still swing.
Anyone for poetic justice?
David Hicks stars in “Breaker Morant redux”
Nabakov,The politics or otherwise of the David Hicks saga is irrelevant.
Hicks made a clear choice to side with the enemy, and got caught.You can waffle on all day every day about the rule of law,finding a firing squad to shoot him, or my children bringing back stuffed camels from Qatar.Carve it up how you like,Hicks is a wrongon and as far as I am concerned, should still be in Guantanamo Bay.
Graham Bell wrote:
“Of course there are real terrorists!! They kill good and innocent people. When David Hicks was captured he appeared to have been in their company [that is a matter that could be determined, if necessary, by OUR courts].”
Graham, I think that’s what (eventually) turned the tide of opinion here in Australia: Hicks was held for a very long time, and NEVER faced an Australian court.
The first thing that got up my nose was the demeanour of the PM and his Attorney General (FFS) saying in public that Hicks was guilty. No presumption of innocence. No concept of a fair trial. No explanation of the judicial basis [sic] of the prison in Cuba.
Incompetence mixed with malice.
Yet the same bunch of Ministers would loudly proclaim the right of G-G Hollingworth not to be cruelly pre-judged by public opinion, or would stand by and watch while Senator Heffernan besmirched Justice Kirby (FFS).
Incompetence and malice.
Ambigulous [26]:
Whether David Hicks was good or bad or otherwise …. it was the way in which Australia was treated in this matter - as a nation and, worse yet, as a loyal ally - that delivered the mortal blow to the United States-Australian alliance.
Nothing can repair that alliance now. It was killed off in this relatively insignificant affair - by Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeldt, Howard and their henchmen.
Any co-operation now between the United States and Australia is transient expediency, not alliance. Once trust has been smashed, it is impossible to repair.
You can waffle on all day every day about the rule of law,finding a firing squad to shoot him, or my children bringing back stuffed camels from Qatar.Carve it up how you like,Hicks is a wrongon and as far as I am concerned, should still be in Guantanamo Bay.
Marlon - I have a question for you. You seem to be concerned that David Hicks is walking free. Are you concerned about the competence (or lack of it) of the Bush government at all? After all, it took them six years to convict the man (by way of plea-bargain), “only” for him to serve a mere nine months more?
After all, if Hicks is a “wrongon” as you think he is, you have to think the Bush goverment very, very incompetent for letting him go free. Don’t you?
“Are you concerned about the competence (or lack of it) of the Bush government at all?”
George Bush and the imbeciles that parade themselves as a government is irrelevant.
The Iraq war will go down as the biggest foreign policy blunder since the bay of pigs, or any other U.S. policy fiasco you choose to mention, again irrelevant.
Hicks is a traitor from his own admission, relevant. if you want to argue the degree fine, I don’t. This whole saga was never about Hicks, they were out to show any other mis-guided Rambo’s this is what you can expect if you side with the enemy.
You really don’t get it do you?
Marlon [29];
You still don’t get it, do you? We are talking about a complex, multifaceted, unpredictable and often nebulous set of circumstances that we call by the simple name, War. We are talking about our survival or our annihilation. We are not talking about a thrilling shoot-’em-down computer game that you can walk away from afterwards nor about exciting political and corporate point-scoring.
When David Hicks, an Australian citizen with priceless experience, was captured we were so stupid and so gutless that we allowed the knucklewalkers, our supposed allies, to render him valueless. In doing so, we would have done far far less harm to our own cause if we had gift-wrapped a few million dollars and a few thousand rounds of ammunition for their crew-served weapons then presented them to the Taliban or to al-Qaeda.
Traitor? Then what do you call the prime minister who, against all intelligence advice, ordered strategic material be sent to our enemy? What do you call the minister who appeared in an enemy uniform on an enemy military parade? What do you call those greedy farmers who instigated “We-feed-them, you-fight-them” business? The list goes on and on.
You can call David Hicks a traitor if that makes you feel better …. but to me, that shows you don’t understand what war means.
Yes, there probably are some exservicemen around who might share your opinion of David Hicks - they are merely cannon-fodder who survived a war or two more by good luck than by skill and cunning. Their simple-minded opinions carry no real weight when it comes to winning ultimate Victory.
Graham just for you,I repeat you still don’t get it do you.
What does John Howard,farmers,AWB,ministers of the crown,or the price of bully beef, got to do with David Hicks?
I write three paragraphs explaining what is common knowledge and a factual event,and you presume to tell me I don’t know what war is! You know nothing about me and even less about my past,I can only assume you have a some what clouded,and faulty crystal ball.
You are correct in your statement we are fighting for our very life and existence, well like you, I have an opinion, and it is people like you, who will not help in the final victory.But I may be wrong, you probably advise ASIS or some other intelligence think tank.If not,I am sure they would like to use your service.
David Hicks is a traitor,and your last paragraph apart from being beneath contempt, is an insult to the servicemen and women past and present of this great country.
Ratty told us that Hicks could not be charged with any crime in Australia. That rules out Marlon’s contention that Hicks was guilty of treason. Ergo Hicks is not a traitor in the legal sense of the word.
We also know that the Americans couldn’t come up with anything more specific than the bullshit retrospective charge of providing material support for terrorism. I gather that refers to his attending a camp and performing some trivial tasks for his Taliban buddies who by the way were not then listed as a terrorist organiation.
There are also some indications of a willingness to fight on the Taliban side against the US led forces but no evidennce that he dd so. In any event that hardly constitutes material support for terrorism since the Taliban was not a terrorist organisation nor did he provide material support.
And of course he wrote some big noting letters back home no doubt intended to impress his dad with what a big dangerous man he had become.
Bottom line: despite reading hundreds of articles, letters and posts I still don’t know what his crime was. I’m beginning to suspect it was his becoming a muslim.
But perhaps it’s the lack of a legitimate legal charge that leads Marlon to label Hicks a ‘wrongun’. Just like that nasty Anna Coren or those turkey slappers on Big Brother.
” I gather that refers to his attending a camp and performing some trivial tasks for his Taliban buddies who by the way were not then listed as a terrorist organiation.”
Trivial tasks eh ? Letters big noting himself? Ergo Hicks is not a terrorist in the pure legal sense of the word. Now that is funny.
I wouldn’t normally respond to such arrant nonsense as yours Jenny,but like all the rest of the Hicks deniers, you just had to throw in “I’m beginning to suspect it was him becoming a Muslim” I rest my case.
Marlon [31 and 33]:
You repeated, without question, the slogan that Hicks was a traitor in a way usually associated with those whose own treason remains unpunished. Why then all the bluster and surprise when you were tarred with the same brush - by yourself?
Make no mistake, if David Hicks had appeared in my own sights: armed, in company with with baddies - AND if there was an operational necessity for me to do so ….I would have had no hesitation whatsoever in sending a few well-aimed rounds into him - and into as many of his companions as I could in the time.
But that’s not what happened. He was captured in reasonably good health and with a wealth of recent priceless experience inside his noggin. Whether he was also a cannibal, a cat-rooter, a waterer-down of good beer, a bicycle thief, a keen gardener, a clarinet player, a backstroke swimmer, a devil-worshipper or - to make you happy - a “traitor” had absolutely nothing to do with his military value at the time he was captured.
Throughout history, great generals have dreamed of capturing such a prisoner: one of your own who has had a wealth of recent experience among the enemy.
If David Hicks had attended enemy training camps then you may feel that is “bad” BUT in purely military terms, as a recently captured prisoner who is likely to talk under skilled and humane interrogation by experienced professionals, that isn’t just “very good” it is bloody marvellous!!!
Sorry if you are still troubled by a hard cruel world where nothing fits well into neat little boxes.
From what I understand the dude wasn’t exactly Ramzi Yousef jnr., he was a grunt who’d only fired in anger with LeT and when all hell broke loose was ordered to guard a tank before pissing off and getting nabbed by the Nothern Alliance; who were being paid bounties for every al Qaeda operative they could lay hands on including quite a few sheep farmers and other sods in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Shorter Marlon: “I dislike the cut of Hicks’ jib. Ergo, he must be a terrrrrrist!”
Graham Bell, thanks for your dignified, resolute and eminently sensible responses to Marlon’s provocations.
I have sometimes had problems with the views you express in this forum, but here I defer to your direct experience of such matters, about which you speak with alacrity.
Marlon [31 again]:
You said
Really?
Surely you are not talking about the moral cowards who said nothing when our traditional rights, priveleges and obligations were being smashed by evil power-hungry politicians, are you? Surely you are not trying to defend the gutless wonders who chose “not to rock the boat” when liberty and democracy were being destroyed from within? Regardless of what they might have done in previous wars, this time - when their country needed them to stand staunch against the arbitrary abuse of power - they deserted …. and for that cowardice, those who ran away from their clear duty to defend liberty and democracy and the rule of law will be forever despised and condemned.
Remember, “The Price of Liberty is Eternal Vigilance”.
“Surely you are not talking about the moral cowards who said nothing when our traditional rights, priveleges and obligations were being smashed by evil power-hungry politicians, are you?”
Graham you don’t have to try and change the context of your contemptible comments in your last post,ref x servicemen. I fully understand what you meant the first time, and any obsfucation by you to now withdraw those remarks, is really pathetic and very shallow.
“Throughout history, great generals have dreamed of capturing such a prisoner: one of your own who has had a wealth of recent experience among the enemy.”
What arrant nonsense,I nearly fell off my chair laughing.Are you serious? So Hicks is the first traitor captured with a wealth of invaluable knowledge, that is going to save the world and western culture? I think you have been reading to many combat magazines.Could I humbly suggest in your tea breaks, and when you are not advising governments or intelligence agencies, try reading a little poetry or something a little less taxing for you.
Marlon, Graham is himself an ex-serviceman. He is also making a strong argument. Do you think captured turncoats should be:
a) Rendered to the military command of their home country, and pumped for information about enemy ops (and perhaps even more crucially recruitment methods), or
b) Taken to Cuba and held for 5 years while the US tries to pin everything from 9/11 to Britney’s drug problem on him?
Moderated.
Was it Ms Spears? Sorry mister spambot if I spoiled your lunch.
Marlon [39]:
What change of context? What obfuscation? What withdrawal of comments? Wasn’t my contempt for the moral cowardice of some ex-service personnel clear enough for you? Shall I rephrase that disgust in far less polite terms so that you can understand my meaning?
Those renegade ex-service personnel CHOSE to give silent approval to torture, they CHOSE to give silent approval to ignoring the Geneva Conventions, they CHOSE to give silent approval to the abuse of power and the scorning of our laws - and in so doing they were no better than any Nazis or Communists. Nobody forced them to become passive collaborators when all their upbringing and training told them that what was happening was wrong; they CHOSE to support evil.
Another point: If David Hicks had been an American citizen and been captured by the ADF, he would have been handed over to the Americans immediately …. so there was absolutely no excuse whatsoever for David Hicks, an Australian, not to be handed over to OUR forces, to be questioned by OUR highly-trained professionals and then to be dealt with by OUR long-established and comprehensive system of justice. None!
Mercurious [37]:
Please continue disagreeing with me if you think I am wrong - that’s what democracy is all about.
“What change of context? What obfuscation? What withdrawal of comments? Wasn’t my contempt for the moral cowardice of some ex-service personnel clear enough for you? Shall I rephrase that disgust in far less polite terms so that you can understand my meaning?”
My spelling is a little under par,and my grammar could certainly do with some improvement,however Mr Bell, although I am moving into my twilight years, there is nothing wrong with my ability to comprehend your attempt to disguise your original comment.
“they are merely cannon-fodder who survived a war or two more by good luck than by skill and cunning. Their simple-minded opinions carry no real weight when it comes to winning ultimate Victory.” This I repeat is contemptible.
You do not reiterate your first point,but go off on a tangent with “those renegade servicemen yada yada yada.” I have not made any reference to, apart from replying to your contemptible comment, anything about our x serving or for that matter any member of our Army,Navey,Air Force, or for that matter, the scouting movement.I will leave that fixation to you.
I repeat David Hicks is a terrorist/traitor and the U.S.commission has confirmed that undeniable fact, your unsubstantiated retorts about x servicemen and what are experts would or wouldn’t do are meaningless..
Marlon, obviously he wasn’t and isn’t a traitor or Ratty would have had him in court so fast everyone would have been winded. Ratty himself said that Hicks had done nothing for which he could be charged under Australian law and that would include treason. No matter how you try to twist the facts they just won’t conform to your opinion.
The facts are that Hicks didn’t commit a crime for which he could be charged either here or in the US!!! Ergo he didn’t commit a crime. Or can you come up with any sensible explanation for why he was held in Gitmo for five years without charge?
Of course when he was finally charged, all they could come up with was a lame hastily manufactured retrospective “crime”. Not quite in sync with your well reasoned (lol) argument for treason.
He has never been accused of, charged with or convicted of treason except in the fevered imaginations of you, SATP and others with over-active imaginations!
I really think that you have been reading a few too many Bulldog Drummond stories and would be much better served actually finding out what the facts are in the Hicks’ case instead of inventing them. Then you could have a cup of tea, a bex and a good lie down which would obviously be much less taxing on you.
Marlon [43]:
You don’t like me? Bad luck …. but then, you’ve got plenty of company.
If David Hicks was a “traitor” then he was OUR G.-d. m.-f.ing “traitor” - to be dealt with by OUR people in OUR way according to OUR laws …. or do you feel more comfortable with the contrary view - that Australia is nothing but a colony and the private fiefdom of Mr G W Bush and his henchman and we that we should, like docile serfs, obey their every whim?
Ex-service personnel are no more exempt from criticism than any other group in the community. There has been, over the past four decades, a nasty and destructive tendency to slander and to stereotype all ex-service personnel for the misdeeds of a tiny unrepresentative handful. Even so, where many [but not all] ex-service personnel have CHOSEN to be unpatriotic and to side with nasty politicians against their own people and to collaborate in the destruction of our system of laws, our democracy and every other treasure we have inherited, then they deserve to be criticised.
And I still reckon Mr Terry Hicks deserves to be put up for an Order Of Australia for upholding the finest Australian Values.
“You don’t like me? Bad luck …. but then, you’ve got plenty of company.”
You are obviously suffering from some type of paranoia? I point out a few factual points from our exchange and - I don’t like you?
How does a debate about Hicks, turn into a tirade (yours not mine) about x or serving members of the Armed Forces?
“or do you feel more comfortable with the contrary view - that Australia is nothing but a colony and the private fiefdom of Mr G W Bush and his henchman and we that we should, like docile serfs, obey their every whim?”
At least with this question,and instead of accusing me of being a traitor with nonsensical rhetoric, you give me the opportunity of an answer-
“You repeated, without question, the slogan that Hicks was a traitor in a way usually associated with those whose own treason remains unpunished. Why then all the bluster and surprise when you were tarred with the same brush - by yourself?”
No I don’t believe we should be a colony of the U.S.and at the whim of Bush and his henchmen.However, Bush will soon be gone,and who ever the new POTUS is, the alliance will continue until Australia can adequately defend itself.
Moreover, when and If the U.S. attacks Iran? In my opinion, we are going to be right there along side them.I wont like it,but there you are.Rudd will already be practicing the script, of the most palatable bullshit he will heap on the Australian people.
Terry Hicks in my opinion, (take note in my opinion)deserves nothing.He has done nothing more than any parent would do that loves his child.
FDBNo Gravatar
May 1st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
So Graham was x military so what! So am I. Graham already worked that out for himself..
I reckon
b.You expected that right?
Why didn’t you make c.Because he became a Muslim you missed out there.
Okay, so what’s your argument about what’s wrong with a)?
I dunno, but I liked his work better in On The Waterfront.
“Okay, so what’s your argument about what’s wrong with a)?”
Am I missing something here? Is it me? Should I try my comments in Swahili,Greek maybe?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a. What is your point? What has any of what you and Graham said, got to do with David Hicks being a traitor or terrorist?
On the evidence I have seen,and read, it is my belief that Hicks fits the description,criteria,of a terrorist, and ergo being an Australian he is guilty and as I have stated, that is my opinion.
The only person in this little exchange who has even come close to a cogent point is Jenny(which I confess I was flippant with) is, Hicks only carried out trivial tasks for the Taliban which was not considered an illegal group at the time.The jury is still out on this point.
Is all I got in reply was a tirade about x servicemen,our own experts,the alliance,and the list goes on.If you are unhappy about the end game of Hicks write to the U.S. Military or the next POTUS they may give you a hearing.
“I dunno, but I liked his work better in On The Waterfront.”
Not bad Mowgli.Oh sorry I meant Kim.
Therefore, any failure to prosecute and to punish Hicks for his crimes would have to amount to a dereliction of legal duty on the part of the responsible authority.
The responsible authority who declared falsely that Hicks could not be prosecuted as a traitor and as a terrorist under Australian law was the Howard Government.
Ergo, the Howard Governemnt conspired to enable a terrorist and a traitor to evade justice.
Doesn’t this make the Howard Government accessories after the fact to treason?
Marlon, I hope you are campaigning hard to have members of the Howard Government charged with and convicted for treason.
“The horror, the horror”!
“The horror, the horror”!Hicks was heard to say after he found out he may be liable for execution.
“Therefore, any failure to prosecute and to punish Hicks for his crimes would have to amount to a dereliction of legal duty on the part of the responsible authority.”
Indeed that being the Americans at the time, what can I say ?
?
Hicks should be still there.
David Hicks became a political pawn in a rigged game.I may look like a cabbage,I am not green. All the points have been read and duly noted,it changes nothing.
At a different point in history this would have all been long forgotten by now,and Hicks would be long gone.He was lucky the good guys caught him.
He played at being Rambo and lost,end of.
“He was lucky the good guys caught him.”
Good point. But not quite in the way you think.
Yes if he was an apostate who fell into back into the hands of crazed and extreme Islamic fundie elements of his home culture, no doubt he would have been terminated with extreme and mediagenic prejudice.
But that’s the whole point. We’re not like them. Aren’t they supposed to hate our freedom stuff? And part of that involves some of the supreme glories of Western civilisation - like an independent judiciary, habeas corpus, the judgement of your peers and all that jazz.
And just as ignorance of the law is no defence, so being being a complete dickhead is no proof of guilt.
Few would disagree David Hicks was a complete dickhead - but our precious Western Civilization rule of law that we’re supposed to be defending above all has been unable to find him quilty of anything.
Face it Marlon, Hicks could only avoid the kind of retribution you think he deserves because he came from the kind of place with the values you think are worth preserving.
“to find him quilty of”
OK, I got that mixed up with common law proscriptions about doona coverage theft in a shared winter bed.
Obviously I meant “guilty”.
Quilting is a very important aspect of our civilisation, though. Think of all the grandmas!
Kim [59]:
Off-topic - but why the hell are sculpture, opera singing and the like applauded and funded as high art whilst quilting and other fabric arts belittled and demeaned by the arts establishment? Hey, what about all the young quilters?? [this comment was made freely and not under duress or coercion by any other inhabitant of this dwelling].
[and 54]:
Nah. Not a patch on ABC Radio National’s recent bookreading of “Heart Of Darkness”. The horror of it all came through long before Kurtz’ death scene.
Marlon [all comments]:
Spot on! When it comes to wanting my country to be prosperous and free from attack, I’m an absolute monomaniac! I go beserk when anyone arbitrarily abolishes rights, protections and obligations what were won with blood and suffering over the centuries. I go ape whenever crooks give my country away for the latter-day equivalent of blankets-and-axes or whenever they harm their own citizens by crawling to a foreign ruler.
My contempt remains unchanged for those ex-service personnel who disgraced themselves by failing to defend our traditional liberties when they were being smashed. My admiration for truly patriotic ex-servicemen, like Andrew Willkie, and for inspiring gentlemen, like Terry Hicks, remains undiminished.
Where you left yourself wide open is in chanting the “Hicks-is-a-traitor” mantra …. which translates into Australian English as “Don’t look at the real mischief being committed by scoundrels here. Look the other way! Look over there at that demon David Hicks! Look! Look! Look!” Only mugs are distracted by that sort of cheap political stunt.
#30: “Yes, there probably are some exservicemen around who might share your opinion of David Hicks - they are merely cannon-fodder who survived a war or two more by good luck than by skill and cunning. Their simple-minded opinions carry no real weight when it comes to winning ultimate Victory.”
Quick random sample of returned servicemen at a function yesterday reveals 100% possess a contrasting view, furthermore the opinion was voiced unchallenged that amongst returned servicemen the views of Graham Bell on this matter are …er… a minority view.
Nabakiv @ 58
Oh I think you made yourself perfectly clare the first time.
Boom tish.
Steve at The Pub [61]:
Hell, I’m glad to be in the minority.
It means that I’m DEFINITELY NOT part of the unthinking, blindly-obedient, undisciplined, mis-trained, group-think mentality that cost us victory in Viet-Nam, that cost us swift victory after the liberation of Kuwait, that cost us a quick and easy victory over Saddam Hussein in the Iraq War and that will cost us defeat at the hands of al-Qaeda.
Next time that bunch of ex-servicemen calls around, ask them what excuse they have for going AWOL when Habeus Corpus, the Geneva Conventions, the right to refute evidence and all the other traditional rights were chucked onto the garbage heap? Ask them too, what is so wonderful about torture, murder, double-jeopardy and all the other cruel-and-unusual punishments committed against prisoners or detainees that they didn’t dare speak out against their use. And don’t forget to ask them if they realize that their passive collaboration with evil-doing does tremendous harm to our own cause and, instead, legitimizes and strengthens al-Qaeda and all the other terrorist groups.
Anyway, how about a petition at your pub to get Terry Hicks an Order Of Australia?
He showed guts, tenacity, loyalty, toughness, determination, initiative, courage and all the other things we admire in the ANZAC Spirit. Go on, he deserves it.
Marlon (51):
Whoa! I got close to making a cogent point. My cup runneth over. My joy is unconstrained. Thankyou kind Marlon. Thankyou. Thankyou. I’m off to do the happy dance.
“The only person in this little exchange who has even come close to a cogent point is Jenny”
Nice to see you’re aware you shouldn’t be included in that observation.
“Where you left yourself wide open is in chanting the “Hicks-is-a-traitor” mantra …. which translates into Australian English as “Don’t look at the real mischief being committed by scoundrels here. Look the other way! Look over there at that demon David Hicks! Look! Look! Look!” Only mugs are distracted by that sort of cheap political stunt.”
Mr Bell, your rantings about Hicks are a case study of someone that is very bitter the world isn’t run the way you perceive it.Fortunately most of what you have said is patently untrue,and figments of your wild imagination.Your contention that Viet Nam and Kuwait were bungled because-
” of the unthinking, blindly-obedient, undisciplined, mis-trained, group-think mentality that cost us victory in Viet-Nam, that cost us swift victory after the liberation of Kuwait, that cost us a quick and easy victory over Saddam Hussein in the Iraq War and that will cost us defeat at the hands of al-Qaeda.”
borders on a statement made from someone that should be in a padded cell.
If you are indeed a Viet Nam vet,you would know as well as I do, WE the Australians served with honour and distinction in this conflict,and our so called loss was due to political interference and not by our service personnel.
If you came to my local R.S.L. and spruiked your mantra out loud you would be shown the door.Yes even a democracy has its limitations,and you have reached yours.
“I got close to making a cogent point. My cup runneth over. My joy is unconstrained. Thankyou kind Marlon. Thankyou. Thankyou. I’m off to do the happy dance.”
I’m sure you will find a partner,you have plenty to choose from here.
War is politics by other means. Western governments bent on perpetuating the State of South Vietnam demonstrated that they did not have the political will to compel the sacrifice necessary to impose their political solutions on Vietnam.
The less likely reason for this inability was a misuse of military resources.
The much more likely reason for this inability was that the military, industrial, psychic and financial resources required to impose their solution did not exist.
OT, I know. But I feel “our so called loss” in VN was really due to Nguyễn Văn Thiệu’s incompetence. At the end of the day, the buck stopped with the South Vietnamese government.
Marlon [66]:
You can sling all the insults you like at me, that won’t change history …. a history that, sadly, now includes the moral cowardice and dereliction of duty by many ex-service personnel who passively collaborated in the attacks on our democracy, our system of law and our way of life.
Merely saying something is
does not make it untrue at all. You could try proving it to be untrue; that would be a different matter - and the best of British luck to you.
Quite so. Although there is the little matter of overreliance on G.-d. firepower and a neglect and under-resourcing of the very effective “hearts-and-minds” actions that had the unrealized potential to make the use of G.-d. firepower far less necessary ….and win us victory. But that’s another issue.
RSL? Oh, I’ve heard of them. Aren’t they the ones who rubber-stamped the sell-off of war service homes land at a time when so many ex-diggers and their families were living in caravans and rented accommodation? Aren’t they the ones who did absolutely nothing at all about unfair discrimination against ex-diggers in employment and education opportunities? Aren’t they the ones who, instead, go absolutely bananas over changing the flag, over democratically changing our head-of-state, over whether little kids can march with their grand-dad on ANZAC Day or over any trivial issue that happens to pop up? No thanks, they’re a bunch of losers …. I prefer to keep company with people who managed to survive wars, are glad they did so and who look to a better future.
Kim:
Should have mentioned it earlier …. this topic has been running for slightly longer than the Crucible at the end of United States Marine Corps training. Whew!
Down And Out Of Sai Gon [68]:
True enough. But don’t forget that, despite all the corruption, there were many many unrecognized and unrewarded South Vietnamese civil and military personnel who did their duty to the best of their ability under appalling circumstances …. and the same would apply to locals in Iraq and Afghanistan today.
Jenny, Katz, Nabakov and all:
Have read you …. not ignoring you.
“The much more likely reason for this inability was that the military, industrial, psychic and financial resources required to impose their solution did not exist.’
In my opinion the turning point in the war came in the TET offensive,and the fact that it was evident the war was about “Nationalism” and the communist bogey man had been put to bed.This added to the unrest in American cities, and the deaths of students at demonstrations etc, etc,the war was abandoned.
But again what has all this got to do with Hicks? Nothing!
He is a terrorist/traitor,and no matter what red herrings you throw in the mix,this will not change the facts.At the end of the day you don’t have to convince me,my mind is made up.
Lets face it,this sooner or later will come down to being a drawn out legal battle with the bottom line “How much” to go away and get on with your life.
But that is never going to happen,so keep defending him if it makes you feel good.
True enough. But don’t forget that, despite all the corruption, there were many many unrecognized and unrewarded South Vietnamese civil and military personnel who did their duty to the best of their ability under appalling circumstances …. and the same would apply to locals in Iraq and Afghanistan today.
Graham: I don’t and I won’t. A lot of the poor buggers got put in camps after 1975, and then had their citizenship taken away afterwards - if they survived. Many of them ended up as Cyclo drivers. My Vietnamese teacher’s father was one of the luckier ones. A telecommunications engineer in the government - he had a family to come back to and take care of him. I’ve met him a few times - utter top bloke.
Marlon [71]:
What????
Who is defending him?? Not me, sonny!
What is being defended is our system of values, our rule of law, out long-standing traditions, our sovereignty, our strengths in the face of an implacable enemy, our hope of prevailing against a ruthless and determined enemy.
If, in the process of defending the things which we hold dear and defending the things which will help us survive present and future conflicts, an opportunity is given for one of our own who was with the enemy to redeem himself, then so be it …. and good luck to him in his new reformed life.
That’s just the way the world works. Not always nice, not always pretty …. and you had better get used to it.
What makes me feel good is our survival.
If what makes you feel good is hating David Hicks five years past whenever such hatred might have served any purpose then that’s your problem, or your obsession; take your pick. Just make sure that whatever you do doesn’t inadvertently assist the terrorists’ cause; you wouldn’t want to accidentally do that, would you?. Good night.
Please understand something Mr Bell 1. I am not your sonny. 2.I can only assume from all of the comments you have made you have not read any of them before posting.Is is quite clear your insinuation I was insulting you is rich indeed,you may want to read your own comments and reassess to whom was insulting whom.
You have done nothing except refer to Mr Hicks in any of your comments,so please don’t guild the lily now when it is clear to me, you like to change the tenor of your argument, to make a rebuttal of your own self inflicted insults…
Unlike you, I don’t have obsessions about David Hicks or otherwise, I care less what happens to him.I would rather have seen him shot, but I will concede that may have been a little hard on the man, as he is clearly an idiot.
Cemeteries are full of victims of people that were thought to have redeemed themselves.
Goodnight.