Major Mori is his name. I think he has been admirable. A real hero.
I only wish the Australian authorities had his guts and derring do!
I only wish the Australian authorities had his guts and derring do!
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
David Hicks [Split from Saddam thread]
- Thread starter Liverpool
- Start date
Its been an amazing case. All the old accepted Geneva Conventions thrown out the window. Personally, on a purely prima facea basis I think Hicks is guilty of hanging out with and helping the enemy and should serve time, decent time, but thats not the main point for me.
Our govts appraoch has been disgraceful and embarrassing, have an alliance is one thing, rolling over and being totally submissive on every single issue is quite another. Other allied countries got their citizens out and dealt with them, we didn't. They place rights of their citizens first, our government does not. message is, if you're an Aussie and get accussed of upsetting the US, you can rot whether guilty or not. Thankfully Aussie citizens have registered there disapproval and it doesn't happen again. Ruddock and Downer have been unbelievable in the kowtowing. Its been sickening
I thought the charge of helping terrorists was fair enough on the face of it, just took 4 and a half years too long to arrive at it. I don't really blame the Yanks, its completely understandable theyd be running around like chooks with their heads cut off after the surprise and devastattion of s11, I heard one prominent conservative say, 'we as a nation had a nervous breakdown', and he suggested they are finally coming out of it.
I blame our government for having no nuts or decency to stand up to the yanks on any issue, ever.
Our govts appraoch has been disgraceful and embarrassing, have an alliance is one thing, rolling over and being totally submissive on every single issue is quite another. Other allied countries got their citizens out and dealt with them, we didn't. They place rights of their citizens first, our government does not. message is, if you're an Aussie and get accussed of upsetting the US, you can rot whether guilty or not. Thankfully Aussie citizens have registered there disapproval and it doesn't happen again. Ruddock and Downer have been unbelievable in the kowtowing. Its been sickening
I thought the charge of helping terrorists was fair enough on the face of it, just took 4 and a half years too long to arrive at it. I don't really blame the Yanks, its completely understandable theyd be running around like chooks with their heads cut off after the surprise and devastattion of s11, I heard one prominent conservative say, 'we as a nation had a nervous breakdown', and he suggested they are finally coming out of it.
I blame our government for having no nuts or decency to stand up to the yanks on any issue, ever.
Mori has been very impressive. Put our government to shame, and shows that justice and freedom of speech will usually emerge somehow in the American system, even if some powerful players don't want it to.
Liverpool said:No, he wasn't "allegedly" engaging in terrorist activities.
He is guilty of that.
And again, I haven't heard anything about his 'torture'....what torture did he "allegedly" receive exactly, Curtis?
To me, the only torture Hicks received was that of no exercise, explaining Hicks' weight gain.. :
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-10-03-guantanamo-weight_x.htm
As for his human rights....again, I haven't heard much from yourself, Gypsy, or RemoteTiger about the human rights that were taken from innocent civilians, by people like Hicks....yet I am reading post after post from all three of you defending Hicks' human rights......the mind boggles!
Curtis...if Hicks wasn't captured in Afghanistan, and made it back here to Australia, and committed a terrorist act where yourself or your family members were killed/injured...what would your views on Hick's human rights be then?
And I haven't heard anything from either of you about the human rights of the British sailors, "kidnapped" and held in Iran....it seems the "human rights" bandwagon only rolls in one direction.... :
The torture of which I speak are the 'advanced interrogation techniques' implemented by the US. You know, water boarding, confining him to a tiny cell for 20 hours a day without the things we take for granted - like silence and darkness when we wish to sleep. Apparently he wasn't able to talk to Mori when the two had meetings due to the state he was in - I'm not sure if that state was physically or mentally unstable. One way or another, you'd have to have endured something pretty horrific to be unable to speak.
Also, it was five relentless years of inhumane treatment. Five, Puddles!
We're not talking about the treatment of anyone else here, Puddles. I wish everyone could have access to the very fundamental human rights that you and I enjoy, and the Hicks case represents the universality of our governments' treatment of the people. The moment that they begin to disregard the human rights they are supposedly defending is the moment that we, too, are at risk of receiving such treatment, and the premises of democracy are forgotten. We simply must hold the humanity of those with whom we have ideological differences in the esteem that we hold our own.
So how would you feel, deleted, if you were treated as Hicks has been? Or if you were accused of engaging in terrorist activities? ;D
Tygrys said:
Where's the other side of the debate... poor bloke was a mislead, ill informed young man.... Everyone is of the belief he should be punished for his wrongdoings... However no evil intended of course...
I just find it comical that one lad who is white is condoned for such actions, while 1000's of these people in the middle east are running a merry dance around the American Government with not a word to be heard about it...
tigersnake said:
And so it should be!
The Geneva Convention is there to protect POWs and non-combatants, not to protect official terrorist groups.
David Hicks was not fighting with a regular army and was not wearing any official uniform, and therefore the Geneva Convention should not apply.
You can read the official line here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030507-18.html
I'll even go one step further, and say that the Convention also says this:
The parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to spare the civilian population and civilian property. Neither the civilian population as whole nor individual civilians may be attacked. Attacks may be made solely against military objectives.
http://www.redcross.lv/en/conventions.htm
...and therefore, if anyone has thrown the Geneva Convention out the window, it is Hicksy, his mate Bin Laden, and their band of merry men.
Curtis E Bear said:
Gee...my heart just bleeds for him....
If that is "5 years of relentless inhumane treatment"...what do you call this torture then?:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/23/1034561533723.html
http://abc.net.au/news/indepth/bali/anniversary_survivors.htm
http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terror/woman-caught-in-bombing-loses-both-legs/2005/07/12/1120934241221.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-09-02-jumper_x.htm
Where were these people's "human rights"?
All the above caused by people like Hicks....the type of person you are now defending....and you want to cry about Hicks' 5 years of "inhumane treatment"?
Curtis E Bear said:
Ideological diferences? :rofl
They are simply murderers, terrorists, and mercenaries, who live off the suffering of others, under some deluded notion that their extreme Islam should rule the world.
Again, if this was your family:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/01/1064988253351.html
....I wonder if you would be so strong in your views towards the humanity of people like Hicks.
Curtis E Bear said:
Firstly, if I had 2 children....I wouldn't abandoning my kids and go off fighting in Bosnia in a war that didn't concern me, and I then wouldn't go to Afghanistan and link myself with a terrorist organisation.
So the likelihood of myself being treated like Hicks, or accused of engaging in terrorist activities, would be extremely remote, at best.
Having said that, let me entertain your questions.
No, I wouldn't like to be in a jail for 5 years if I believed I had done nothing untoward, and no I wouldn't like to be accused of engaging in terrorist activities if I wasn't.
That's because I know I am innocent and have not put myself in a position to be accused of such things.
However, David Hicks knows full well what he was getting himself into, what he has done, and therefore should take responsibility for his own actions.
If you put yourself in a position, where there is a chance that something like this might happen, then the only person you have to blame, is yourself.
That is why Hicks is in Cuba....and I'll be at the 'G today.
P.S: The name is "Liverpool"...lets keep it that way, eh?
Take a look at this
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21483300-2,00.html
It was also reported this morning that Harry M Miller (amongst others) are on the bid for the rights to his story. His media ban is for 1 year and he's agreed not to alledge any mistreatment. Neither of these conditions preclude a book deal or movie.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21483300-2,00.html
It was also reported this morning that Harry M Miller (amongst others) are on the bid for the rights to his story. His media ban is for 1 year and he's agreed not to alledge any mistreatment. Neither of these conditions preclude a book deal or movie.
It is reported that Ian Thorpe has a positive blood test for banned drugs. He hasn't been tried and found guilty, but the innuendo is there.
The PM comes out and defends Thorpe, says it can't be so. Ian Thorpe wouldn't do that.
Hicks is apprehended 5 years ago, no charges laid for yonks, no trial for five years, yet all this time Howard and cronies assume guilt.
One law for some, another for others.
The PM comes out and defends Thorpe, says it can't be so. Ian Thorpe wouldn't do that.
Hicks is apprehended 5 years ago, no charges laid for yonks, no trial for five years, yet all this time Howard and cronies assume guilt.
One law for some, another for others.
Similar to the British soldiers captured by the Iraquis. On TV saying they were guilty but of course they're not they're just saying that 'cause of the situation they're in.
But a man who pleads guilty after 5 years of incarceration and who knows what deprivation........
But a man who pleads guilty after 5 years of incarceration and who knows what deprivation........
It's not a stupid analogy. I didn't say Thorpe was a terrorist. My point was that in our country we agree that there is a presumption of innocence.
Hicks deserves that, Thorpe deserves that, we all deserve that.
Hicks deserves that, Thorpe deserves that, we all deserve that.
At this stage Thorpey's test isn't classified "positive" but the pics of David looked pretty damning...unless people think they were fabricated? Am dead against the way David was held for 5 years without charges, especially seeing his eventual charges were for things that weren't on the books when he was taken into custody, but if some of the pics I saw were genuine I'm not sad to read he might be kept under close surveilance once released.
rosy23 said:
Agree Rosy but also think that his sentence of 9 months(?) is a complete joke. He was held too long without charge but that doesn;t change the fact that he has been convicted of training with the most dispicable terrorist organisation in the world and will stand to profit enormously out of his ordeal. I shudder to think how some of his funds could be used.
