The Forum > Article Comments > David Hicks is luckier than some > Comments
David Hicks is luckier than some : Comments
By David Flint, published 2/2/2007There can be no doubt that under the laws of war, the US is entitled to keep Hicks until the end of hostilities.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Page 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
-
- All
Posted by HarryC, Monday, 5 February 2007 9:47:25 PM
| |
How did this thread get side tracked? start another one if you wish.
The fact is David Hicks is most likely a fool but he has recanted his Muslim conversion and does not call himself that. 5 years in a yank prison without charge? Heard about the Geneva convention have we? America is as always the best hope of the free world, AND THAT FILLS ME WITH FEAR! Send the silly bugger home far worse than him are free in Australia. Mr Ruddock Mr short on honesty Howard Australia awaits while you search for your Aussie fair go, its been lost some where. Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 6 February 2007 5:16:02 AM
| |
David Hicks has not been treated fairly or in accordance with Australian law.
Its still OK in law for Australians to fight in the Israeli Defense Forces despite the fact that the IDF sunk the an american military vessel in the last 20 years. Its still OK in law for men to wander around Australian towns bragging about the fun they had committing atrocities in the Serbian forces. Phillip Ruddock opens his mouth to further besmirch the office of Attorney General. The government's treatment of David Hicks is destroying the faith ordinary Australians have in the government. Posted by billie, Tuesday, 6 February 2007 7:51:03 AM
| |
Regarding someone's suggestion of a "control order" on this string at 2 February 2007 11:26:10 PM (originally posted 30 Jan 07 on Pete's Blog http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com)
ie: "...Hicks would very likely have a Control Order imposed on him on return to Australia - requiring him to be at home every night, only use certain telephones and report every few days to the police. In Hicks case it would be a form of political control (he would become a cause celebre of the lawyer/human rights and jihadist movements whether he wanted this or not). A Control Order would also be there for its officially intended function - security. All kinds of people would expect him to be a font of knowledge/natural leader on terrorist operations and perhaps approach him with their schemes..." I see that Neil James, Executive Director, Australian Defece Association may have used this Control Order idea the next day - in The Australian of 3 Feb 07, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21161972-5001561,00.html "Releasing the Adelaide man under a control order was the most practical solution, Mr James said. "It's a win-win situation. Hicks comes home, the Americans get off the hook, the (Australian) Government gets off the hook, the Opposition gets off the hook, the lawyers shut up. There are no losers in this option." I'm assuming Neil is reading OLO - if so I think this is a good result. If anyone has seen the control order for Hicks concept elsewhere, (pre 3 Feb 07 that is) please provide details. Pete http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/ Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 6 February 2007 3:00:41 PM
| |
Second thoughts I have now found references (last year after the Jack Thomas Control Order) discussing application of a Control Order to David Hicks on return eg. http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/put-hicks-under-control-order-worried-lawyers/2006/10/06/1159641533675.html . That idea was stated by Hicks' legal team no less.
If you want a new idea read an old book I suppose. Looks like Howard is under intense pressure to bring Hicks home - something Howard will need to do before the Federal Election - South Australia has several marginal seats... Not to mention 5 years neglect of Hicks' human rights in the name of Truth (not), Justice (not) and the Bush Alliance (Definitely - Hey Johnny?). Pete Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 6 February 2007 3:57:10 PM
| |
Hi there HarryC, and you said:
"Aussie Home Loans dude, they'll save ya. You should have joined the Navy " OK, I now have a few minutes to explain these things to you The War Service Home Scheme was set up to entice people to join the SERVICES [even the Navy buddy] - AND it worked well and come Vietnam we HAD enough forces but PigIron Bob needed votes and did same Howard suck @rse to USA and FORCED people like me AGAINST THEIR WILL to be conscripted. Are you with me so far? The Wog Simmons who heads Ozzie Home Loans is a shamster. But even so, if we are to believe the propoganda that FORCED me to kill nice Yellow Perils BY ORDER, had I NOT done so we were told Simmons would have been too scared Yellow Peril wise to COME here - still with me? But he came and the scam is this. As we know from NAB losses, mortgage reselling operates on very low margins. Simmons came up with a scheme which SUBSIDISES that by application fees. I did a sting on him to confirm the scam. A "consultant" comes to your home and paints a totally rosy picture where "you WILL get the loan, just sign here and pay $800 applic fee" The fraud is simply that 2 out of 3 applicants get a "Dear John" letter to say no, but John KEEPS the fee and thus transforming marginal profit into zillions - understand that Harry? even the lousy NAB refunds fee if not successful, but NOT our little Wog turned Aussie Posted by Divorce Doctor, Tuesday, 6 February 2007 9:45:14 PM
|
Aussie Home Loans dude, they'll save ya.
You should have joined the Navy if you didn't want to be taught to kill, or the Salvos maybe, what kind of training did you expect to receive as a (ASSUMED) ground soldier? You thought all that business with the guns and bombs was TV fiction? Hell you must have heard of WWII, you know, D-day and all that?
Rights that you and pal Hicksy were both denied - you were imprisoned for going AWOL? Pulled the old Klinger trick with the dress?
Not even sure if you're for real or just having a bad trip after an Apocalypse Now viewing.