So ‘the only thing he [Hicks] has been charged with is guarding a tank’. Where was he guarding the tank, and for whom? If the tank had been attacked by Alliance soldiers, would Hicks have opened fire on them? According to his letters home, parts of which were read out by his father, Hicks says that his training in Pakistan and Afghanistan is designed to ensure "the Western-Jewish domination is finished, so we live under Muslim law again". He denounces the plots of ‘the Jews’ to divide Muslims and turn them against Osama bin Laden. He also warns his father to ignore "the Jews' propaganda war machine."

In November 2005, Four Corners broadcast a transcript of an interview with Hicks, conducted by the AFP in 2002. Hicks acknowledged that he had trained with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, learning guerilla tactics and urban warfare. He also acknowledged that he had met Osama bin Laden.

Four Corners confirmed, that in Guantanamo, Hicks signed a statement written by American military investigators that includes the following, "I believe that al-Qaeda camps provided a great opportunity for Muslims like myself from all over the world to train for military operations and jihad. I knew after six months that I was receiving training from al-Qaeda, who had declared war on numerous countries and peoples."

And in August 2000: "If I do meet fate this is called martyrdom . . . the highest position in heaven is to go fighting in the way of God against the friends of Satan."

Has Hicks changed those beliefs, as he changed his name back from Muhammed Dawood? According to a former Guantanamo Bay inmate, Hicks passes the time by catching mice and hanging them. Guess that's why he needed all that ‘urban guerilla’ training.

Dee, Hicks guarded a tank - the coalition of the killing has now murdered over 100,000 innocent Iraqis - hmmm.....wonder what the real crime is.

Having a thought that is revolting is not a crime you know.

Anyway, Australia locked up over 4,000 men, women and kids who had escaped the Taliban so who committed the crime? Someone who never fired anything in his life or the coalition of the killing?

Get some sense of perspective for heaven's sake.

Trevor Flugge and the AWB did worse carrying guns and money around Iraq and giving $300 million to Saddam surely.

Hicks says he's a UK citizen and he has been granted such citizenship. The Australian government need no longer be involved.

Wendy,

The point is not whether we agree with Hick's moral choices it is whether or not he has broken any laws. He hasn't, even Howard says so.

Politicians make laws that, presumably, reflect the moral values of the electorate. We have to live by it.

They can't go around making retroactive laws that punish past actions that were then legal. Imagine if we got an extreme green government who would fine everyone whose car had ever emitted polutants or an extreme Christian government that installed biblical law, just who would smite all the pork eaters and adulterers. It just isn't practical and it is ethically wrong.

So what if they hate us and the west. Should we hate them back? Surely that would just start an endless cycle of violence. We should either persuade them to the attractions of Western values. (Consumerism is a very powerful force provided everyone has some money to partake in it.) Or leave them alone to sort out their own mess. (unlikely as all the oil is in the middle east)

Terrorism works by provoking a disproportionate response, which in turn creates a wave of nationalism and hatred of the west. ie In response to the terrorists knocking down the WTC and Pentagon, we have taken out two countries and exposed ourself to the mess in Iraq. Every day the occupation continues the government looses credibility not just in the middle east but also at home. This plays straight into ObL's hands. We now have muslims hating the west and westerners being suspicous of everthing muslim.

The better approach would have been to root out AlQaida in Afghanistan. Operations in Iraq cost 1 billion dollars a day. Just a fraction of that money would have surely have captured bin Laden and been sufficient to rebuild Afghanistan.

Oh M.

The Dick was guarding the wrong tank!.

Thats the crime.

We do unto others before they can do to us.

Its called sercurity.

The poms can have him

Funny how when a group of Christians were arrested in Afghanistan just before the war for illegally trying to convert Muslims, there was a constant stream of Government representatives pleading their case and petitioning the Taliban.

These people were formally charged with blatantly and knowingly breaking the laws of a foreign country yet were given ample Government assistance.

Yet when another citizen is illegally detained - without charge - by the USA, we ask no questions and abandon him as a sort of token propaganda trophy to justify the war and curry favour in the lead-up to the Free Trade Agreement payoff.

Meanwhile we were paying back-handers to Iraq to secure wheat sales and taking the high moral ground.

Since then there have been government appeals to South-East Asian countries against the death penalty for convicted drug smugglers.

I wonder what Lindy Chamberlain thinks about this?