The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Australia v Hicks > Comments

Australia v Hicks : Comments

By Bruce Haigh and Kellie Tranter, published 1/6/2011

At the Sydney Writer's festival the audience found Hicks' account so compelling they gave him a standing ovation, all 900 of them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 9
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. All
You know, I am entirely convinced that the only reason Hicks gets support was because his circumstances made him anti-Howard material.

I personally (also a decent person, rexw), do not sympathize for someone who fights on behalf of the militant wings of nasty theocratic powers on the basis of expanding their dominion, regardless of if they are caught by one of the countries he was fighting against and mistreated- and I definitely have no problem with my government deciding not to rescue him from them.

What makes me sad is that Julian Assange is, right now being put to similarly bogus charges and there is hardly a peep for him in articles at the moment- especially considering that HE, on the other hand is actually fighting these governments to uphold OUR civil rights- as opposed to the right of some religious extremist to subjugate a nearby village.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 1:15:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Chris,

Laudable that 900 leftie 'intellectual' academic writers identified themselves as true 'sad sacks' so obviously hooked to the hate of everything western, liberal or democratic ... except their right to free speech.

I still don't understand why David Hicks won't talk about his training in Afghanistan?
Posted by imajulianutter, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 1:18:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
imajulianutter states "Laudable that 900 leftie 'intellectual' academic writers identified themselves as true 'sad sacks' so obviously hooked to the hate of everything western, liberal or democratic ... except their right to free speech."

Since when did torture and incarceration for nearly six years without charge or trial constitute anything "Western, Liberal or Democratic"?
I thought our liberal democratic system specifically condemned torture and arbitrary detention without trial. Obviously I was wrong.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 1:26:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
imajulianutter

I think that is the joke of many on the left who claim to know 'moral' correctness.

In the case of Hicks, they merely gravitate to the parts of the Hick experience that gives them some food for fodder: his treatment without formal charge.

In reality, Hicks was a misguided fool. He should have done more homework before joining extremists.

Yes, I too would also like to know what attracted Hicks to extremists.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 1:40:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A short while ago Bruce Haigh was sermonising about us having accepted the latest candidate for the position of Sri Lankan high commissioner. According to Bruce the candidate had been associated with (though never tried and found guilty of !) some aggressive actions against the Tamil minority.

Here’s a little snippet of what he said:
“ It is wrong for Sri Lanka to have put forward a senior naval officer intimately involved in the civil war as High Commissioner and wrong for Australia to have accepted Admiral Samarsinghe.”

And,Bruce even had some harsh criticism for the Aust govt for merely liaising with Sri Lankan govt agencies:
“It is a crying shame that the Australian Government has settled for lower standards. In the interests of fighting people smuggling, the AFP have posted officers to Colombo to liaise with their Sri Lankan counterparts. However the Sri Lankan police have blood on their hands, having engaged in the extra-judicial killing of Tamils for several decades. “

Anyone who read that article or earlier ones by Bruce might have seen him as a champion of justice & human rights.

So it is somewhat puzzling now to read Bruce, in this latest article, lionising David Hicks.

The same David Hicks who , if memory serves me right, allied himself with the Taliban. A group that among its other notable atrocities wanted to have Hindus wear a distinctive star which would set them apart & no doubt qualify them for special! treatment.

And the same David Hicks,who,allied himself with Muslim groups, fighting in Kashmir, who are less than kind in their treatment of non-Muslim minorities.

After reading this article I found myself asking : “What are the real core values of Bruce Haigh?”
Posted by SPQR, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 2:20:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yeah it's one thing to be against imprisonment without trial, no matter the charge. It's another to give a standing ovation to someone of such dubious moral character.

Either Hicks is an exceptional writer, and they were applauding his linguistic prowess, and put aside for the moment his character, or they really admire that he is fighting for the Taliban, and they identify with this belief system and see him as a freedom fighter.

Perhaps Hicks is a hero to them, as he is putting his life where their mouth is. Really, deep down, they want to wage war with the western world, but find it too hard because their existence is too cushy.

'Oh if only I could just get out of my arm chair, climb down this ivory tower, and breath pure desert dust and wield an AK47' seems to be the essence of the admiration. Aaah, what a man! Although I'd do it while not oppressing women and in an environmentally friendly way in an non-threatening, inclusive culture of sharing and caring, where minorities aren't socially excluded and with complete respect to cultural identity.
Posted by Houellebecq, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 2:37:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 9
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy