|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/5/2008 6:27:26 AM | well mark perth. i wasnt really saying that they were the terrorist directly. i just think that the US shouldnt be playing the righteous card sooo much. I mean i understand they're motives... or whatever but i think that in pointing the finger, there are three pointing right back at ya. I guess it all comes down to ones interpretation of the word. Me... well anyone who acts in a way that causes people to feel threatened or fearful is a terrorist. Claiming Saddam has WMD destined for our allies, whether it be true or not, is terrorising people. but thats just my pea brain interpretation. but im learning all the time. but i do appreciate ur correspondence. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/8/2008 3:00:10 AM | Rules of Engagement for kind, generous, beneficent civilized western societies when reluctantly forced to assist cut-throat, backward, comically stupid third world countries extricate themselves from the enormous piles of doo doo and inhuman depravity they've buried themselves in because they are sooooo dumb, dress funny and believe in a cartoon God. Unlike us.
First Rule: Identify the extremists.
Second Rule: Shoot them (and anyone standing nearby, just in case).
David Hicks was lucky. Not only did he get rescued from his own stupidity, they gave him a 5 year holiday in a Cuban resort. For free!!!
Cool!! I should be so lucky, lucky... lucky... lucky... | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/8/2008 4:55:52 AM | heh heh No one challenging my point of view means... There is no-one else here...? Or... I must be right!!! Yeah, that'd be it.
Q: David Hicks - terrorist supporter, terrorist or just misjudged aussie bloke ?
These are good questions... though are they the ones that should be being asked now?
Maybe five years ago.
Maybe he should have been charged with something that was actually punishable under the law, military or civil, at the time he was captured?
Maybe back then the charges could have been tested in a fair and open court, with appropriate suppressions where required, to see if they stood up?
That didn't happen though.
And because it didn't, the relevant questions now (IMHO) are about the way we know he was treated.
Not guessed answers to questions about his guilt or innocence, not about his commitment, or lack thereof, to any ideology.
I've seen a few suggestions in this thread that Hicks deserved what he got because he was foolish enough to write letters to his father about some of the implications of his new belief system.
No evidence that he'd done any of these things mind you, or would, or could... mmm... Commit The Thought Crime - Do The Time?
A few posts back someone suggested that we (in Australia) wouldn't subject animals to the kind of treatment dished out to David Hicks. I agree, the RSPCA would launch an investigation.
Imagine the outcry if it was found that an organization, named InternationalMilitaryIndustrial for instance, was holding 300 naughty horses, or dogs or cats or budgies, in total isolation, without any natural light, allowing them only half an hour of 'exercise' per day (wouldn't being hobbled with chains make it difficult to exercise?), and subjecting them to hours of loud Mariah Carey music at random intervals while capriciously manipulating their bodyclocks with bright artificial light for no particular reason other than to disorient them... and no-one comes to visit them and/or offer comfort.
Assuming those animals referred to also have a keen appreciation of one or two abstract concepts, like 'The Future' for instance.
Wouldn't it add to our horror if we knew InternationalMilitaryIndustrial had been holding these animals under these conditions for five years?
Without telling them clearly/fairly what they had done to deserve being there? Or being given an opportunity to challenge the reason, even if they ever were told clearly what it was?
Consequently, these intelligent animals have only a vague notion of why they are being held and no idea when, or if, they will ever be released.
That alone would be torture wouldn't it? Western Civilisation? Are we there yet?
Some famous ethicist once said that the measure of a civilisation is the extent to which it cares for it's most vulnerable members.
(Or words to that effect... I can't be bothered Googling it. Any pedants in the room?).
Animals are vulnerable members of society. David Hicks was too.
How would Australia rate, as a civilised society, using that measure to score our governments response to his plight?
I know I'm going on a bit, but I just got here... and diligently read the whole thread, so there's a couple of things I wanted to respond to.
Like the issue of Hicks being a potential danger to society. It seems to me the only appropriate response to this idea is - hahahaha!!!
But that isn't very helpful to those who believe he is.
Not that I care.
Because anyone that holds that belief, which must be at least 90% irrational, would be hard to reason with. An analogy that springs to mind is the difficulty one might have trying to convince a child, struck by night terrors, that the bogeyman really isn't in the cupboard.
Danger to society? No more than anyone that believes in a Big G up in the sky most likely, no matter what they call her/him/it, which is a bit alarming I suppose...
But I'm more worried about corruption in the police, the lack of competition in grocery retailing, immoral and/or criminal corporations, drunk drivers, catholic priests, left-handed people, etc etc
cheers | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/9/2008 1:56:52 AM | What do people think about the government restricting his ability to write that book because he would profit from the proceeds of crime?
Should he be quietened or should he be allowed to tell his story so we can get an insight into why he did what he did?
=========================
Mark
American AND Australian journalists have been paying CONVICTED AND JAILED terrorists for thier stories for years.
Not Al queda. a locally grown American red army terrorist brigade called The Weatherman. (A bit like the terrorist group that Patty Hearst took up with at one stage) These loonys went on a bombing rampage through much of Americal during the early seventies. They were eventually rounded up, or shot, or blew themselves up with their own bombs.
Recently, with jail time served, they have been released. And , with no superanuation pension to fall back on they are sellling their stories to the highers bidders. Those bid are going into the millions.
And these arent petty charges of association like the ones levelled agasnt Hicks. These are people who quite freely admit to making, and planing bombs. And talk about the numerosu people tha their bombs have killed. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/9/2008 4:01:34 AM | When he went over there the US was recieving Taliban in the US and hosting them and there was no problem with Australian or US citizens going to Afghanistan to train. He wasn't seen as a terrorist neither were the Taliban.
Once the US told the Taliban to hand over Bin Laden and they refused they were then "terrorists" and any citizens from other countries then became "terrorists".
He was never involved in any acts of "terror", he could be described as an "enemy combatant" and should not be treated as a terrorist. I have been to Afghanistan twice, if I came across him or someone like him I have no problem. He is a combatant, no big deal, I don't think he should have been held for the period of time he was. He was captured early on in the piece and the US tried to portray a lot of people they captured as evil.
When the US supported the Afghans against the Soviets, the Americans called them "Freedom Fighters" and the US supported and injected a lot of money to get people from other countries to travel to Afghanistan to fight the Russians. Alot of these people transited and trained in Pakistan, now it's come full circle and bitten them. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 2/9/2008 4:29:21 AM | crayon,
david hicks is a convicted terrorist and he shouldnt be making any money out of his terrorism stuff.... if we give money to terrorists it will only encourage them. ..and then guys who blow themselves up in american buildings will be encouraged to do it because then they can sell their stories it...
and you talk about other people being worse than hicks. ...well answer me this, would rather have a child molester living down the end of your street or a convicted murderer or would you rather have hicks living there?.... i know i would prefer to have anyone but a terrorist like hicks living anywhere near me... | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/1/2008 8:47:08 PM | | I think Hicks was definitely a terrorist supporter and a traitor to his country. However, I doubt he was ever bright enough to be a professional terrorist in the same league as say, Mohammed Atta. If he would have been a terrorist he would have been used as a footsoldier. Even so, his activities I think constitute grave treason against the state and at the very least ASIO should keep a close eye on him until he is too old and frail to do anyone any harm. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/1/2008 9:24:19 PM | David hicks is a traitor, guilty of acts of treason whether directly or indirectly.
With all the uproar over him being locked up people forget that australians were killed in 9 11.. the reason we are in afganistan in the first place.
i think he should still be locked up and be banned from selling anything. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/2/2008 2:41:07 AM | Ashman,
Even though I do not agree with what David Hicks did, for your information, he did not broke any laws that he could be punished for, not in Australia, not in the USA, not in Afghanistan. There was no treason as defined in a court of law. There was and there is no jurisdiction of Australian nor USA courts over his actions in Afghanistan. I do not like what he did. What the US government did by holding him in Guantanamo bay as an "unlawful combatant" is nothing but a gross miscarriage of justice and the lack of action of the Australian government was nothing but shameful.
The important point here to remember is that the governments are supposed to enforce the laws, not to break them. The Howard government, his ministers and officers that failed to act should be charged with negligence and Howard himself should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity for the part he took in the illegal invasion of Iraq, Governments are supposed to protect their citizens by enforcing the law. That is what we elected them for. Not to break the law when an uneducated imbecile that happens to be the president of the US tell them to do so.
As an Australian citizen, what has been done to David Hicks makes me feel embarrassed. I repeat. I do not like what he did, but I dislike what the Australian government did even more, because I believe in a democratic society. I believe in the rule of law and I hope that one day we will have an honest government. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/2/2008 4:30:00 AM |
david hicks is a convicted terrorist not exactly, he was convicted of providing material support for terrorism.
and then guys who blow themselves up in american buildings will be encouraged to do it because then they can sell their stories Huh? | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/2/2008 6:00:17 AM | I believe in the rule of law and I hope that one day we will have an honest government. -as above - quote
Tell him his dreaming !!!!
As for Hicks - naive pawn caught up in big boy games and not really fully understanding or comprehending what he was doing or the long term consequences of his actions.. It was wrong for the US to detain him for so long without being charged, but hey its the US, a law unto themselves and now his home and today we are informed that Mr Dick Smith is helping him to get his life back on track, career wise etc and appealing for Australians to give him a fair go. Reckon he will have a job by the end of the week ?
At the end of March his gag order will be lifted......and the media folks will be beside themselves, falling all over each other to get the "exclusive"...tipping he will talk to Ray, who is no longer at Channel 9 so the interview will go to highest bidder - although no money is to change hands, yeah rite...has this whole affair been a circus or what ?
And after we have all heard his story on 60 minutes or Sunday or wherever and every newspaper in the land has hailed him or persecuted him and dissected him as we will, as we are munching on our brekkie purusing our morning edition, then what ? Do you really think David Hicks is gonna tell us the truth about what he did, why he did it, how he did, what was his motivation was and what life was like in Guantanamo ?. You really think his gonna tell us anything, even though we shelled out 500 grand to bring him home ?
Meanwhile back in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, pretty much the whole Middle East etc etc , terrorism reigns.......just another news item filler on a slow news day. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/2/2008 8:11:52 AM |
At the end of March his gag order will be lifted..
The so-called "gag order" is a USA Military Commission order from Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp. It cannot be enforced outside of that camp. No State or Federal jurisdiction on mainland USA will enforce it either as there exists NO basis for it in US Law.
This is Australia and NO US Military Commission has any powers of jurisdiction or powers to enforce those orders here!
And I doubt very much that the present Federal Government would allow the enforcement of US Military Commission Orders on Australian soil! Nor would it allow for an extradition of Hicks as there is no basis under extradition laws.
The order only stood at the time because of John Howard's suck-holing to the USA. Thank God he's gone! Hick's can speak at anytime, no one (Aust State or Fed), can stop him as he has broken NO Australian Law nor can he, or has he, been tried and found guilty of anything in any Australian Court! The only reason that he is where he is, is because of a John Howard instruction to the AFP to put him on a Control Order. That order has as yet not been challenged fully in a court.
Let's stop all this obsequious suck holing of the USA"s GW Bush and whatever they want, instead show a little more e self respect for our own laws and our own ways! We are servile to no other country!
Meanwhile back in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, pretty much the whole Middle East etc etc , terrorism reigns.......just another news item filler on a slow news day
YEP! And each one of those countries is under either direct US occupation or threat of US occupation. So can you blame them? They don't have all the wizardry of an air force, nayy or armoured troops so they fight back with what they can muster and that includes sticks and stones. If we were invaded we would do much the same and yes, we too would be referred to as terrorist's/insurgents.
All for the sake of OIL, the US$, defending the European Enclave of Israel and the extremist fundamentalist Christian lobbyists in the USA. Blah.....!!!!!!
As Vladimir Putin said "There is a new force of diplomacy in the world today and that is US Military Might". This type of Military hegemony has never been seen on a such a large "global" scale. Never has any past country/empire dominated the planet to such an extent and one can only wonder who is going to attack it? Any attack on the USA can only come from outer space. Where else? | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 3/3/2008 1:21:32 AM | Pookie,
I prefer much more to be a dreamer than a supporter of an imbecile war criminal like W.
As for your comment "Meanwhile back in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, pretty much the whole Middle East etc etc , terrorism reigns......", I have no choice but to agree, thanks to that scum of W of course. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/9/2008 1:30:33 PM |
david hicks is a convicted terrorist and he shouldnt be making any money out of his terrorism stuff.... if we give money to terrorists it will only encourage them. ..and then guys who blow themselves up in american buildings will be encouraged to do it because then they can sell their stories it...
this is not true. david hicks was not a terrorist as such, but rather a victim of torture.
he was stripped of all civil and human rights.
he was incarcerated for 5 years without a single charge of anything or being able to have legal representation until years after being illegally detained.
he was tortured into a confession to an invented charge fictionally created by the american government.
used as political propagander to justify killing thousands of innocent people in afganistan and irak by the australian government. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/9/2008 1:35:27 PM | | I believe this man should have been sent back to Afghanistan. He should have his citizenship revoked and never be allowed to set foot in this country again. If he wanted to go over and fight against his country of birth he can stay there!! He may not be a terrorist but he is definately a traitor!! | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/9/2008 1:44:51 PM |
I believe this man should have been sent back to Afghanistan. He should have his citizenship revoked and never be allowed to set foot in this country again. If he wanted to go over and fight against his country of birth he can stay there!! He may not be a terrorist but he is definately a traitor!!
you are quite wrong and rather ignorant.
david hicks is no traitor as he was not in the australian army. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/9/2008 1:50:12 PM |
you are quite wrong and rather ignorant.
david hicks is no traitor as he was not in the australian army.
No I'm not ignorant, you do not have to be in the Army to be a traitor to your country. You may want to invest in a dictionary. But just in case you don't, the definition of a traitor is "a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country. " | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/9/2008 7:43:57 PM | What do you call a country that betrays its citizens?
Hicks wasn't fighting for any ideology, he just wanted to fight, shoot at people.
Some people like to abseil or sky dive to get their thrills Hicks liked guns. He would have been in the Australian army, if they would have accepted him.
Hick's is not a terrorist, he's a fool. A nasty piece of work but that does not justify the abandonment by the Australian Government or the torture inflicted upon him by the American Government | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/10/2008 1:38:26 AM |
No I'm not ignorant, you do not have to be in the Army to be a traitor to your country. You may want to invest in a dictionary. But just in case you don't, the definition of a traitor is "a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country. "
well i suggest, you take your gievances to the american and australian government then.
as they are the traitors of their countries and declared war on people.
war is no solution to anything | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/10/2008 1:43:04 AM |
I believe this man should have been sent back to Afghanistan. He should have his citizenship revoked and never be allowed to set foot in this country again. If he wanted to go over and fight against his country of birth he can stay there!! He may not be a terrorist but he is definately a traitor!
What a loada................!
When DH went to Afghanistan, the Taliban were Allies, not enemies and Australia wasn’t even involved in the training, arming and financing of them as the USA and the UK were. The UK even flew senior members of the Taliban to Scotland for training in similar territory to Afghanistan.
The Northern Alliance whom were financed and armed by Iran, a perpetual enemy of the USA, was engaged in an insurgency against the Taliban when DH joined on the side of the Taliban. Why do you think he joined the Taliban instead of the Northern Alliance?
In the end DH was captured by the Northern Alliance, unarmed and in full flight running away from them. He was then sold to US forces for US$1,000. Hardly a princely sum for the grandiose enemy that you make him out to be!
DH never fired a shot at any US or UK forces and I doubt that he would have if he had known the bigger picture of occurrences outside of Afghanistan. He certainly had no knowledge that Australia had joined the fray at the insistence of a very “puppy” sick PM who worshipped any and all things American.
As history unfolds the truth bears witness to the deceptions of our political leaders and their treachery!
Edit;
DH was held at Guantanamo for five years. Five years of torture and NO charges. That he was finally charged with something was only because the US passed a new law and then applied it retrospectively. That action alone lowered the high dignity that the US had held in the eyes of Jurists around the world. It alone showed that the US was bankrupt and corrupt/sullied and more than willing to go down that path.
DH pleaded guilty yes, but it was a Clayton's plea admitted to for the sole purpose of exit and had no moral tenure for any fair minded person. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/10/2008 1:45:31 AM |
Hicks wasn't fighting for any ideology, he just wanted to fight, shoot at people.
this posting is ridiculous, obviously by someone that has been programmed with
political propagander.
hicks was not convicted of anything other than a confession forcefully obtained by torture and human cruelty. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/10/2008 2:12:52 AM | Hmmmm, wondering if I want to buy in here...
I followed the Hicks trial closely. I'm not a fan by a long shot. Not even a little bit. Actually, I recieved some none to pleasant emails from organisations such as Get Up! for my thoughts on the subject.
My question, of course, is why would you not fight harder if your innocent??
If you followed the trial, you would know that when Hicks was given the option to testify he chose to plead guilty rather than risk cross examination. Why would you do that if you have nothing to hide??
Read the Jihad handbook?? I have. Interesting read that. If you compare Hicks allegations about torture, etc to the Jihad Handbook it reads almost word for word. I guess that's the reason they are all making the same allegations. Who the hell knows.
What I know is when Hicks pointed his weapon at Coalition Forces he didn't care that he was firing on the people that support our country. He may have only fought for 2-3 hrs before running like the chicken shit rat he is, but the point is he still did it. Someone once asked me what damage could be done in 2 hrs that he deserved to be locked up for 5 years...
How long did it take to kill 3000 people on 9/11?? Bali on Oct 12?? Think about these random acts of terrorism... Alot can be accomplished in that small amount of time.
I to, have friends in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, this does cloud my judgement on the topic, I'm the first to admit this. However we can't afford to dance around these issues anymore. In one breath we are asked to be vigilant, in the next we are asked to forgive someone who acted with those who oppose us. Well, which is it??
There is a hell of alot of literature online about this. If you really feel sorry for him, read it. | |
|
| Re: David Hicks - terrorism or just misunderstood ?
Posted: 6/10/2008 3:27:28 AM | | DH was being kept in very unsatisfactory conditions so he would rather say guilty to a minor charge and get out of there then not get charged with anything and be stuck there even though he did nothing illegal........It amazes me constantly that people in this country commit horrible crimes far worse then anything DH has done and they don't get incarcerated anywhere near as long as him and they don't get upset by it and yet DH is seen as so horrible. How many lives do drug dealers destroy? and yet they aren't seen as any where near as horrible as DH.............work that one out! | |
|
| |
|
| Page 11 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
