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 > No excuse for not bringing Hicks home > Comments

No excuse for not bringing Hicks home : Comments

By Edwina MacDonald and George Williams, published 8/3/2007

As David Hicks' trial approaches, there is not one charge left that could stand up in a court of law.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
SILLE I have looked at your post at least 5 times and I think you have missed the point.
Some who support Mr Hicks and some who oppose him do so for reasons that have nothing to do with fairness.
So on record I am opposed to his reasons for fighting in the place he was captured.
I oppose all Muslim fundamentalists, and terrorists, I have an understanding of the differences.
In fact I oppose all fundamentalist religion.
Far too much power is given to interfere with human beings in the name of a God.
How ever 5 years without trial? in a prison America holds in another country?
While Britain bought its home?
Do not mark me in the I hate America side, while I have the deepest dislike and distrust of the current government and its directions.
America remains the best hope for world protection if not peace.
America draft Al Gore please the world needs an end to a government that has no direction and no dignity.
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 11 March 2007 7:14:43 AM
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 fully agree Belly, especially with;

“America draft Al Gore please the world needs an end to a government that has no direction and no dignity.”
Posted by Ludwig, Sunday, 11 March 2007 8:26:25 AM
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
You are all missing the point.
If Hicks was a soldier he could be held until the cessation of hostilities.
If he is not a soldier he could have been shot as a spy.

He was not in uniform, as far as I have read, he did not have a paybook,
and he did not have a serial number.
If any one of those three conditions are true he is not a soldier.
Any one stupid enough to go armed into a theatre of war in that status
can be very happy that he is still alive, let alone how long he has been held.
BTW, the hostilities are not yet over. He has been held for a shorter
time than many POWs.
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 12 March 2007 1:03:26 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
Hicks must be a terrorist because he creates so much fear...if the evidence against him is so overwhelming and obvious, why are Numbat and his kind so afraid of this evidence being placed before a properly constituted legal proceeding?

Criminals and terrorist, especially those who take up arms against Australians and our allies, should be captured, tried and if convicted, sentenced to an appropriately lengthy and uncomfortable punishment.

What's more, this should be done with rigour and certainty to make sure:

a) the criminal can't win an appeal based on "unfair" treatment;
and
b) in the event the person is innocent, the real culprit doesn't get away.

The problem with justice as run in the Hicks case is that it is sloppy, lazy and dishonest. It fails to meet the standards need to obtain robust and certain convictions. In short, it lets criminals off.

And if it keeps one of them locked up for five years without doing its job properly, the only outcome is a short-lived bit of vengeance against one accused terrorist...and a long period now of loopholes and exceptions that more terrorists can rely on.

Numbat, by supporting these incompetents all you have done is turn your fear of one "not guilty" verdict into a climate where any guilty verdicts will be that much harder to achieve. You and those you support have made it harder to treat terrorists with the swift justice they deserve.

Thanks for nothing buddy.
Posted by Drew.QLD, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 3:04:07 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
Drew.Qld.: I recanted in my last post where I said that hicks was probably a member of the hairy legged frill knickered brownies.
Wake up! hicks trained as a bloody, gutless, pagan mindless terrorist, the sort of miserable craven animal that would wipe out unarmed men, women, children and babies including you Drew and that has been reported - YES! he was prepared to be a dribbling suicide bomber. He even changed his name to some stupid arabic name in fitting with his new "career" as a psychotic killer. Perhaps he could plead insanity - yet he has got the pathetic 'bleeding hearts' on his side hasn't he Drew all asking for a fair trial for a miserable slaughterhouse bastard? Regards, numbat
Posted by numbat, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 3:35:54 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
Makes you wonder how moot this conversation would be if the Americans had not offered $1,000 dollars to the Alliance soldiers who captured Hicks guarding his tank. Would the lefties be crying to have his body returned to Australia. I imagine in the future there will be a sharp down turn in the numbers of terrorist "captured".
Posted by aqvarivs, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 4:02:57 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. All

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