Iluvatar, You'd think anyone with the slightest modicum of sense would
be able to judge after years of Liberal and labour government nothing
changes but the team jerseys and the bent of the rhetoric. Just because
one of your polli heros says all pows deserve a fair trial by their
peers does not make it so. If it was so how come the Australian POWs
didn't get trials. How come the regular German and Italian POWs in
Australia didn't get trials. That Hicks or any other combatant
(terrorist)is being tried before a court is down to irregular military
practice and the laws that govern nations in dealing with that element.
The Rules of War and Geneva Conventions have been reworked and amended
since their conception. Each war has led to either broadening particular
protocols or including brand new protocols to cover that concern
experienced during that particular war. These are military matters not
civil matters.

Hicks volunteered to become part of that new process of dealing effectively
with terrorism and irregular war against governments and nations in the 21st
century. He is getting justice. That it is not immediate or predefined for
your pretentious little mind does not mean it isn't being processed.

Violations and applicability; Parties are bound by the laws of war to the
extent that such compliance does not interfere with achieving legitimate
military goals. For example, they are obliged to make every effort to avoid
damaging people and property not involved in combat, but they are not guilty
of a war crime if a bomb mistakenly hits a residential area.

By the same token, combatants that use protected people or property as shields
or camouflage are guilty of violations of laws of war and are responsible for
damage to those that should be protected.

Yet you demand I think of the Shia/Sunni war going on
in Iraq as American or Australian responsibility. While you don't want to view
the terrorism and clan murders, kidnappings, rapes and executions as anything
but normal inter religious warfare as a result of being victimized by American
hegemony

If you think this was in any way a legitimate court process, you're smoking something even George Michael would pay a lot of money for.
It was a political deal, revealing the circus that the alleged Gitmo court system really is.
For good measure, Hicks has a gag-order imposed so that he will not be able to speak of his alleged torture and abuse until after Howard faces re-election.
Yes, we live in a banana republic. It certainly isn't a country ruled by law. It is ruled by one man and his accomplice.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/04/hicks_cheney_ho.html

post script for Iluvatar,

I'm exceptionally poor at spelling. Having been educated in Australia, the United States, and Canada and having had my spelling corrected three different times in three different places I'm resigned to depending on a spell checker. I use a little tool called webword. It's undoubtedly American and transposes z for s or vice versa. I could care less. As far as I'm aware the word retains it's value and meaning if used correctly.

I'm thrilled that you feel you have gotten some mileage out of highlighting this for me. It fits with the rest of your relativist deconstruction methodology. I must be wrong because I use a perfectly (legal) suitable z or s.

If you really pay close attention and are a person of detail you will notice I battle with this plurality of English by using the ou instead of the American o as in labour not labor.

It's a crazy mixed up world and I'm a victim too. Don't hurt me

“Do you know any other ‘fine print’ details of the Hicks judgment?”

Michael, I think it has all come out in the wash over the last few days.

The way this commission and indeed the whole Guantanamo caboodle have been conducted is very much within the realms of a banana republic. I could just never have imagined anything remotely like this happening in the US: the ‘pinnacle of democracy’ !

Thank goodness there is an extremely wide level of concern in Australia and around the world. There is huge concern about the veracity of Hicks’ uncoerced statement of no abuse in Guantanamo and the requirement for him to sign a media gag order and a non profit order or remain incarcerated for years longer. And for him to remain in prison until a short time after the next Australian federal election.

From your link, Andrew Sullivan says;

“It was a political deal, revealing the circus that the alleged Gitmo court system really is.”

The military tribunal is being viewed around the world as a gravely flawed and grossly undemocratic setup. And so it should be. And the Bush government along with it.
That is good. But unfortunately it extends in the mind of millions of people, to cover the US and its allies. This stigma will remain long after Bush has gone. This is the really disturbing thing.

Posted by aqvarivs:
"The Rules of War and Geneva Conventions "
The problem is aqvarivs that neither are being followed by Bush.

Nor the rules of Habeas Corpus or any other right for that matter.
He is making the rules up as he goes, and then backdating them.

Even his own staff and army/navy lawers admit this.

If the Geneva convention had been in place Hicks could have got 10,000 jars of Vegimite in care parcels.:)