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. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. 11
  13. All
Habib & Hicks may not have committed crimes against Australia - so they should be taken back to where they were captured and turned over to the Northern Alliance. It is true, nobody had any right to short-circuit the Northern Alliances Justice System (and that is who they were working against). At least there are no complaints that there is any uncertainty or that justice is delayed, rather justice is certain, swift and incredibly merciful (nobody is held for a decade, that is for sure). It is also much more in line with their professed beliefs, getting captured in Afghanistan isn't the best of ideas for most, I don't see why these two should be treated any differently to anyone else.
Posted by Custard, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 4:48:25 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
I'm amazed at so many experts on the subject of David Hicks. I guess the Internet attracts so many experts on so many subjects - who feel compelled to express their knowledge and expertise on such a diverse range of topics behind anonymity. I personally will wait until I can read the book before judging anyone. There's always more than two sides to any given scenario - the more information you gather - the better you'll possibly understand what actually went down. As for a standing ovation - not sure about what prompted that - wasn't there.
Posted by Lexi, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 4:58:33 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
@pelican: The US was remiss in it's own judicial process that was and is the only point. ...

Wow. The lady nailed it.

I've never followed this Hick's thing very closely, but there is this one thing I just don't get. One side is claiming Hick's sided with our enemy and effectively help them fight a war against us and our allies. That sounds like a heinous crime to me. Yet he broke no law?!? How is this possible. It seems to me either the law is a complete ass, or Hick's exploits were so minor no one had thought it worth the effort to make a crime of them until now. Which is it?

@runner: What a self righteous bunch the left are.

Some of them are devoted Christians, just like you runner. Just like you they say they are meek, mild mannered and altogether really nice people. So I guess the righteous bit you hate comes from God, not them.
Posted by rstuart, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 5:04:02 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
Pelican, problem is these are still made irrelevant as;

1- Hicks WAS a combatant (tracing back his past campaigns), and was still credibly a great potential threat to Australia due to the proclaimed goals and actions of his letters and his previous employers all being fronts to fight for control of areas from non-Islamic countries/persons.

2- Australia wasn't handling him, the USA was. Meaning that Australia's only options were to go out and rescue him, or decline to do so in consideration of 1 when deciding if he would be a risk to the community he would be set free into.

So the bottom line is to what extent Australia is required to intervene on behalf of its expats, against factors of;
1- compromising the safety rights of domestic citizens
2- the expat was part of numerous unrecognized militant groups that would easily hold hostile views towards western societies.

Whether or not the country holding and mistreating him is an ally of ours, or if that ally pretends to be a Rule-of-Law country or not makes no difference.

IF it was Australia handling Hicks in this way I would see it differently- but for not stepping in and rescuing someone who is a high risk to others, I would say not.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 5:17:08 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 Rhys,

We westerners don't support torture or lenghty detention without trial. We specifically outlaw them.

When we discover such we condemn it, criticise those involved, lay charges where practical but most of all we put an end to it.

You weren't wrong. We do condemn such activities and treat those involved with the usual forgiving nature of our justice system if they 'fess up' or are found guilty at trial.

What we don't do is give the criminals or those suspected of such standing ovations when they write self-serving books that exclude their dark sides and only highlight why they are victms of the system.

aka John Howard ... you might suggest.

cheers
Posted by imajulianutter, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 5:50:13 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
I wonder why there is so much resistance to returning these characters to where they committed their crimes to be judged by those they committed them against (allegedly)? If they are innocent, they have nothing to fear, after all they are not frightened of Muslim law. What right do we have to help them to avoid the consequences of what they chose to do? They are not immune to the law of Afghanistan, where they chose to go, why on earth should they be allowed to benefit from being illegally extradited (as they claim)? We should help them out and return them to Afghanistan, after all they wanted to be there.
Posted by Custard, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 6:01:39 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. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. 11
  13. All

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