Why should David Hicks be stripped of royalties for his auto-biography ?

[CountryRace]

Hey hey - these days they like to be called 'private military contractors'...

If you get paid in tax dollars,

It's in fact very noble

 

[Schraderbrau]

Hicks (Mohammad Dagwood) was a mercenary. He left Australia and got involved in a forign war (Kozovo) without his governments sanction. He travelled to india and admitted to shooting at Indians in the Kashmir, (Letters to his father). He was training with Al Quaeda after 9/11, after Australia declared them a terrorist organization.

What Hicks did (or did not) do is beside the point. The only issue of major importance was that an Australian citizen was detained by an ally and kept in appalling conditions for over 5 years without a trial whilst our government watched and did nothing. What happened to him was scary.

 

[Docker Clint]

What Hicks did (or did not) do is beside the point. The only issue of major importance was that an Australian citizen was detained by an ally and kept in appalling conditions for over 5 years without a trial whilst our government watched and did nothing. What happened to him was scary.

What is also scary is that people are willing to support this. You're right, it's all that really mattered from the get go, if he was guilty put him to trial and present the evidence then lock him up. Throwing people in military prisons and torturing them without even charging them with an offence is not something I'd expect our government to support.

 

[AM]

I would take as a test of my resolve to maintain the faith in Allah. And if I were to die then as a martyr I would be.

Bit too testing a question for someone arguing from such a weak position I guess.

Or just dumb.

 

[Max zero]

What is also scary is that people are willing to support this. You're right, it's all that really mattered from the get go, if he was guilty put him to trial and present the evidence then lock him up. Throwing people in military prisons and torturing them without even charging them with an offence is not something I'd expect our government to support.

Your right it was terrible what happened to him.

Be nice if we could get cleared up on what Hicks actually did though. Hicks certainly has not helped in this regard.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

What Hicks did (or did not) do is beside the point. The only issue of major importance was that an Australian citizen was detained by an ally and kept in appalling conditions for over 5 years without a trial whilst our government watched and did nothing. What happened to him was scary.

It's the entire point.

He went of his own free will to Kosovo to fight. Once finished there, rather than thinking to himself, 'hmmm, that was pretty silly, I won't do that again' He heads off to Pakistan where he ends up taking pot shots at Indians over the line in Kashmir then just to consolidate the fact that he's a potential thrill killing grub, he doesn't head home, he actively seeks out another organisation to train and fight with.

What happened to him was entirely of his own making.

He had multiple opportunities to reflect on what he was doing and what decisions he was making. He stumbled from bad to worse.

 

[Qsaint]

What is also scary is that people are willing to support this. You're right, it's all that really mattered from the get go, if he was guilty put him to trial and present the evidence then lock him up. Throwing people in military prisons and torturing them without even charging them with an offence is not something I'd expect our government to support.

Under Geneva conventions he could be held for the entire conflict without trial as an enemy combatant

Under current Australian Law Hicks could of also been charged and held under criminal law as well

 

[AM]

It's the entire point.

He went of his own free will to Kosovo to fight. Once finished there, rather than thinking to himself, 'hmmm, that was pretty silly, I won't do that again' He heads off to Pakistan where he ends up taking pot shots at Indians over the line in Kashmir then just to consolidate the fact that he's a potential thrill killing grub, he doesn't head home, he actively seeks out another organisation to train and fight with.

What happened to him was entirely of his own making.

He had multiple opportunities to reflect on what he was doing and what decisions he was making. He stumbled from bad to worse.

You once again miss the entire point. It's the process after he was taken in on what many of us think was a bogus charge. Including the US Chief Prosecutor who was in possession of all the matters Hicks was to face and who has said it was political. Even if you are blind to that fact everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence. And everyone is entitled to be treated humanely and to a fair trial before an independent judiciary, in a system where the Rule of Law applies. Everyone.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

You once again miss the entire point. It's the process after he was taken in on what many of us think was a bogus charge. Including the US Chief Prosecutor who was in possession of all the matters Hicks was to face and who has said it was political. Even if you are blind to that fact everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence. And everyone is entitled to be treated humanely and to a fair trial before an independent judiciary, in a system where the Rule of Law applies. Everyone.

I'm not missing your point, I just don't think it's the most important one in this case.

You and the others can focus on what happened from a legal and human rights sense after the fact, I'm more interested in what happened beforehand.

This is one instance where not matter what someone argues, I have zero sympathy for this bloke and don't particularly care what happened to him.

 

[AM]

I'm not missing your point, I just don't think it's the most important one in this case.

You and the others can focus on what happened from a legal and human rights sense after the fact, I'm more interested in what happened beforehand.

This is one instance where not matter what someone argues, I have zero sympathy for this bloke and don't particularly care what happened to him.

And the way to ascertain that is.......... through a proper judicial process. Something the Hicks vilifiers have fought tooth and nail to resist. Wonder why.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

And the way to ascertain that is.......... through a proper judicial process. Something the Hicks vilifiers have fought tooth and nail to resist. Wonder why.

Who are they going to ask, him? He hasn't been too forthcoming to this point.

We have a timeline of where and with with what groups he was with and the conflicts he was trying to involve himself in and very little details to flesh out those periods.

He's the only one that knows all of it.

 

[AM]

Who are they going to ask, him? He hasn't been too forthcoming to this point.

We have a timeline of where and with with what groups he was with and the conflicts he was trying to involve himself in and very little details to flesh out those periods.

He's the only one that knows all of it.

It wasn't up to him to prove his innocence. It was up to his acquisers to prove his guilt.

If the information about his alleged activities is as sketchy as you say how come he was subjected to the inhumane treatment and absence of natural justice for so long?

The substantive allegation was his time in Afgahnistan and the association with the Taliban who the U.S. supported by word and deed not long before.

As for the time line, Hicks defence wanted a properly convened Court Martial not long after they became involved. It was steadfastly opposed by the U.S. A fair trial was out of the question.

As the man who is in the best position to know (the U.S Chief Prosecutor) has said it was a polical excercise - read set-up. And the Howard government, to its everlasting shame, sold out a citizen of this country. Unlike all other western countries who fought for their citizens and in the case of England and France had their Guantanamo inmates brought home.

 

[Todman]

It wasn't up to him to prove his innocence. It was up to his acquisers to prove his guilt.

If the information about his alleged activities is as sketchy as you say how come he was subjected to the inhumane treatment and absence of natural justice for so long?

The substantive allegation was his time in Afgahnistan and the association with the Taliban who the U.S. supported by word and deed not long before.

As for the time line, Hicks defence wanted a properly convened Court Martial not long after they became involved. It was steadfastly opposed by the U.S. A fair trial was out of the question.

As the man who is in the best position to know (the U.S Chief Prosecutor) has said it was a polical excercise - read set-up. And the Howard government, to its everlasting shame, sold out a citizen of this country. Unlike all other western countries who fought for their citizens and in the case of England and France had their Guantanamo inmates brought home.

Hicks' activities were in the letters he wrote to his father. Did he lie to his father? If he lied to his father then he could easily lie about his time in Gitmo.

Any evidence of the treatment from another source about what the US did to Hicks in Gitmo?

 

[Danny Cullen]

People still try to defend this scum. Unbelievable.

 

[sherb]

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-last-his-critics-should-recant-their-smears

 

[Danny Cullen]

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-last-his-critics-should-recant-their-smears

So he didn't engage in training overseas?

 

[Pie eyed]

Take it off him, give it to victims of crime and then do what they should have done with him in the first place. Put him up against a wall and shoot him.

ROFL.
With John Howard?

 

[AM]

Hicks' activities were in the letters he wrote to his father. Did he lie to his father? If he lied to his father then he could easily lie about his time in Gitmo.

Any evidence of the treatment from another source about what the US did to Hicks in Gitmo?

You keep referring to incriminating evidence in letters to his father. Please give me an authorative source rather than vague references.

With respect to evidence of Hicks mistreatment, a quote from an article by Penelope Debelle dated January 14, 2007 in The Age.

Melbourne psychiatrist Professor Paul Mullen, who visited Hicks at Guantanamo Bay 18 months ago and provided a mental health assessment for his legal team, called him the most radically isolated individual at Guantanamo Bay.

Michael Mori (ABC Enough Rope episode 116) has described the adverse psychological effect the deprivation of basic stimuli had on him.

Others, such as Prof Tim McCormack, the Australian Red Cross professor of international humanitarian law at Melbourne University Law School has also recounted first-hand details of the inhumane treatment Hicks - a person charged with no offence - was subjected too.

A book by bioethicist Dr Steven Miles described the interrogation methods at Guantanamo Bay as:

cruel , inhuman and degrading which, in some cases, rises to the level of torture

While our pathetic government turned its back on a citizen other countries acted in their detainees interests. Over 300 hundred were released without being prosecuted including the Taliban's ambassador to Pakistan and detainees who actually fought with Osama Bin Ladin.

 

[Danny Cullen]

You keep referring to incriminating evidence in letters to his father. Please give me an authorative source rather than vague references.

With respect to evidence of Hicks mistreatment, a quote from an article by Penelope Debelle dated January 14, 2007 in The Age.



Michael Mori (ABC Enough Rope episode 116) has described the adverse psychological effect the deprivation of basic stimuli had on him.

Others, such as Prof Tim McCormack, the Australian Red Cross professor of international humanitarian law at Melbourne University Law School has also recounted first-hand details of the inhumane treatment Hicks - a person charged with no offence - was subjected too.

A book by bioethicist Dr Steven Miles described the interrogation methods at Guantanamo Bay as:

While our pathetic government turned its back on a citizen other countries acted in their detainees interests. Over 300 hundred were released without being prosecuted including the Taliban's ambassador to Pakistan and detainees who actually fought with Osama Bin Ladin.

Didn't he come home fat??

 

[AM]

Didn't he come home fat??

Thanks for that illuminating contribution.

 

[Danny Cullen]

Thanks for that illuminating contribution.

Factual.

They obviously tortured him with Big Macs.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

You keep referring to incriminating evidence in letters to his father. Please give me an authorative source rather than vague references.

With respect to evidence of Hicks mistreatment, a quote from an article by Penelope Debelle dated January 14, 2007 in The Age.



Michael Mori (ABC Enough Rope episode 116) has described the adverse psychological effect the deprivation of basic stimuli had on him.

Others, such as Prof Tim McCormack, the Australian Red Cross professor of international humanitarian law at Melbourne University Law School has also recounted first-hand details of the inhumane treatment Hicks - a person charged with no offence - was subjected too.

A book by bioethicist Dr Steven Miles described the interrogation methods at Guantanamo Bay as:

While our pathetic government turned its back on a citizen other countries acted in their detainees interests. Over 300 hundred were released without being prosecuted including the Taliban's ambassador to Pakistan and detainees who actually fought with Osama Bin Ladin.

In all that you've provided there, were any of them actual eyewitnesses to this treatment. The isolation I'll accept what about the rest of it?

For all we know he could have just gleaned stories from other detainees and passed them off as his own experiences.

He wouldn't be the first person that has spun a yarn to garner sympathy.

 

[AM]

In all that you've provided there, were any of them actual eyewitnesses to this treatment. The isolation I'll accept what about the rest of it?

For all we know he could have just gleaned stories from other detainees and passed them off as his own experiences.

He wouldn't be the first person that has spun a yarn to garner sympathy.

So you're comfortable with someone not charged with any offence being kept in solitary confinement for years, are you? Some would say that's a form of torture. The medical specialist who visited Hicks for example.

Factual.

They obviously tortured him with Big Macs.

It's not only factually inaccurate, it's irrelevant.

His persecutors were hardly likely to bring an emaciated person into the kangaroo court they'd made many attempts to set-up. In defiance of legal opinion throughout the world.

Interesting how you guys skirt over such matters as a citizen kept in solitary confinement for years without charge and denied legal representation in the early years. How Hicks was denied the natural justice you would reasonably expect. Rather a "special" court was to be established in which the prosecution was to hand pick the Judge, the Jury, determine what evidence would be allowed, not allow the defence to cross examine prosecution witnesses, and allow matters that were not illegal at the time to be considered.

How we were the only western country not to come to the aid of a citizen and how others had got their inmates home - some of whom had actually committed illegal acts.

And how the man in charge of the U.S prosecution who would have had all the evidence had his disposal has subsequently said the case against Hicks was political.

I've asked the Hicks vilifiers on numerous occasions how they'd feel if they were taken into custody, held without charge in solitary confinement for years, without access to legal advice, and told they wouldn't be put through the existing court system with all its protections. In its place a kangaroo court like the one explained above would determine their fate - read convict them. And surprisingly not the trace of a serious answer. Funny that.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

So you're comfortable with someone not charged with any offence being kept in solitary confinement for years, are you? Some would say that's a form of torture. The medical specialist who visited Hicks for example.

It's not only factually inaccurate, it's irrelevant.

His persecutors were hardly likely to bring an emaciated person into the kangaroo court they'd made many attempts to set-up. In defiance of legal opinion throughout the world.

Interesting how you guys skirt over such matters as a citizen kept in solitary confinement for years without charge and denied legal representation in the early years. How Hicks was denied the natural justice you would reasonably expect. Rather a "special" court was to be established in which the prosecution was to hand pick the Judge, the Jury, determine what evidence would be allowed, not allow the defence to cross examine prosecution witnesses, and allow matters that were not illegal at the time to be considered.

How we were the only western country not to come to the aid of a citizen and how others had got their inmates home - some of whom had actually committed illegal acts.

And how the man in charge of the U.S prosecution who would have had all the evidence had his disposal has subsequently said the case against Hicks was political.

I've asked the Hicks vilifiers on numerous occasions how they'd feel if they were taken into custody, held without charge in solitary confinement for years, without access to legal advice, and told they wouldn't be put through the existing court system with all its protections. In its place a kangaroo court like the one explained above would determine their fate - read convict them. And surprisingly not the trace of a serious answer. Funny that.

In this particular case, I'm more than comfortable.

Natural justice in this instance should have been a bullet in the field of battle at any of the number that he was present in.

As far as the hypothetical if it happened to me? pffffft. I wouldn't be a big enough dickhead to do what he did on multiple occasions.

I've posted numerous times in this thread that I couldn't care less what happened to him after he was captured, why do you keep asking?

 

[AM]

In this particular case, I'm more than comfortable.

Natural justice in this instance should have been a bullet in the field of battle at any of the number that he was present in.

As far as the hypothetical if it happened to me? pffffft. I wouldn't be a big enough dickhead to do what he did on multiple occasions.

I've posted numerous times in this thread that I couldn't care less what happened to him after he was captured, why do you keep asking?

Your ignorance even astonishes me. It's pointless asking you for evidence of him being "in the field of battle" because you have failed to produce any evidence on the many inaccuracies that litter your posts so far. You just deflect and divert. Credit it to you there, you're excellent at that.

You continually post unsubstantiated drivel and when it's shot down you just divert and distract with more drivel. Probably gleaned from people like Bolt and Jones who make stuff up on a daily basis.

There are some gaps in what we know and the sure way to find out the truth is in a properly run court where the key players can be subpoenaed and directed to give evidence under oath. That's not something that would appeal to people like you. Let's not let the facts get in the way.

You make statements that show your opinion is formed because you don't like Hicks rather than any real interest finding the truth. You live in this parallel universe which believes there was no evidence of torture. Despite former US soldiers who witnessed it saying so. Even that wonderful human being Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged it occurred. At the same time saying he didn't consider water boarding torture. A nuffie you no doubt admire.

There is no evidence Hicks ever harmed anyone. His persecutors main issue was he associated himself with the Taliban, the same one the US supported in deed an cash not long before. If there was evidence of major criminal activity no one would know better than the Chief US Prosecutor who has said there was none. It was all political.

It's so revealing that you don't care that a fellow citizen was abandoned by his country and treated inhumanely for years. Kept in solitary confinement for all that time. And for what? Doing little more than making some bad decisions.

Furthermore, that you don't care one wit about a gross miscarriage of justice. And presumably you get to vote.