Re Kim Beazley’s Tampa

Who's David Hicks? & What’s a Tampa ?.......
………….only those who consciously or unconsciously support the objectives of David Hicks and the mass murdering savages he ran with, have the time to lose sleep over the fate of “our David” their romantic Che, their very own “Muslim freedom fighter”.

As for Tampa, as repugnant as the concept may be, to the various Australian based cheer squads for mass Islamic colonization under the guise of humanitarian refugee relocation, Australians see nothing wrong with deciding who will, and who wont, enter their country as opposed to been told who will, and by whatever means.

Weird isn’t it? but that’s the way the majority of Australians think, sick bastards, you see they are just not as educated or as intelligent or moral as “Our David” and his supporters and the castaways / Pirates of the Tampa.

RSole

tony kevin,

Haven't you got the gender wrong? What's this about burning witches? I thought we were talking abour wizards.

Pierdsus, obviously, the gender of the scapegoat is not important to my argument – David Hicks could be man, woman, or child (and he is a very young man still). What matters is the disregard for facts, the hysteria, and our government’s deliberate construction of a false reality around him. In three and a half years he has gone from being “a bit of a goose” (Downer) to someone now being presented as highly malevolent and dangerous – your letters on him offering good examples of how successful the process has been. This isn’t so different to the way alleged witches were demonised , tortured and killed in the Dark Ages.

It’s why the Hicks judicial process matters so much – we don’t want to go back to those days. (And it is why Arthur Miller had to write "The Crucible" as a warning against contemporary McCarthyism). A fair judicial process for Hicks really does matter to us all

Tony Kevin

You are completely correct. Whether Hicks is innocent or guilty is not the issue - the issue is that we supposedly have a system which enables anyone accused of a crime to a fair trial. If we lose this we lose a fundamental part of our democracy.

Unfortunately Beazley is just as confused about a fair and just society as is our little PM. And more importantly, for reasons I cannot fathom, much of Australia couldn't really give a rat's about Hicks. Even if Beazley did manage to find the 'ticker' the sad and awful truth is that the average aussie voter would not be at all impressed - they think that Hicks brought it on himself and they don't seem to realise the danger to their own little lives that this debacle represents.

Not that I'm cynical or anything......

I find it extremely disturbing that some people here are willing to assume Hicks' guilt (of precisely what charges I'm not sure), without so much as a skerrick of proof or transparently accountable process.

For all that any of us actually know, Hicks MAY be guilty. If so, then the evidence against him should be tested in a properly constituted court. In the USA if necessary.

Equally, for all that any of us actually know, maybe Hicks is NOT guilty and is merely being held in perpetuity on suspicion in the absence of evidence that would survive even ordinary standards of scrutiny.

The enthusiasm of some people to join in a baying chorus of condemnation, from a standpoint of complete ignorance - is incredible. I assume such people would be willing to submit themselves, or a beloved family member, to the same standard of justice and imprisonment - on the basis of mere allegation from a 'friendly' government that does not dare deal with its own citizens in the same way.