I must admit that I was flippant in my previous post because I thought that Bill Muehlenberg's article was rubbish.

To respond to his support group (welcome to OLO). Bill has spent at least 15 years in his crusade, he is in the vanguard of the fundamentalist right wing Christian movement in Australia, he is entitled to his views, but so am I.

His Christian theocracy is not all that different from Hick's Muslim theocracy.

His culture wars and not dissimilar from bin ladens.

I find his ethics immoral, his views hurt others, and his methods deceitful.

Bill is the kind of person we need to worry about when the political pendulum swings back to the left, whenever that eventually happens.

Bill your regular blog readers have advised you to tone things down, you belatedly say you were being facetious. I find this about as objectionable as it can get. You have the intellegence and wit to portray your facetious intent in the original article, you did not. You respond to your blog comments, but do not have the testicles to respond here.

Even with a centre right federal govt. you have achieved nothing. 15 years of hot air, how demoralising.

Culturewatch? Sorry your benefactors are on the path to oblivion, so are you. :)

Hi to you Bill, and all the other Correspondents...

Wow, as usual you've certainly managed to stir up a hornet's nest !
However, I must confess that I totally agree with your sentiments though Bill, in principle at least. As you've stated herein, the David HICKS issue has certainly managed to be turned into a cause celebre, and possibly a major election topic too.

I'm not the sharpest knife in the draw, but my understanding is that - he is a confessed terrorist; and was caught in the company of terrorists, and when caught, was armed with an RPG with ordinance.

I guess if we'd apprehended Mr. Hicks, in South Vietnam, all those years ago, and in exactly the same circumstances, the issue of a trial, military commission, or whatever, wouldn't be an issue ?

From a purely personal perspective. I must say categorically - within the small group of Vets that I generally hang 'round with, Mr Hicks would not have received ANY compassion or appropbation from any of them, I would suggest.

I know that most contributors, would not share any of my views or opinions. And I've often been described as an ol' Dinosaur by my many critics. I can't help how I feel folks. Therefore I will not make, nor offer any apology. In my humble view, Mr Hicks is an absolute disgrace to his family and to his country (wherever it may be, Australia or England?). My heart goes out to Mr.Terry HICKS, his father. Imagine for a moment, the absolute shame he must feel, apropos his son. As I said, he was very lucky that he was caught in the Pakistan/Afghanistan region, in the years of the 'two thousands', and not in South Vietnam, in the mid sixties. Cheers...sungwu

Eyejaw, yes its nice that we still have the freedom to voice our opposition to the illegal treatment of Hicks, but its cold comfort when doing so rarely makes a difference.

Hundreds of thousands of Australians marched against the (most recent) invasion of Iraq, and still Howard went, the press and Labor backing him. 650,000+ dead Iraqi's later and our Prime Miniature still says an exit plan is 'letting the terrorists win'. And we let him.

I think Hicks is the red herring to keep our minds of the genocide being carried out in our names in Iraq. One good thing out of Saddams downfall: they hang war criminals, don't they Mr Howard? (even if they're just US puppets)

For God's sake, when will you guys accept it: this is not about Hicks and it is not the "left" who is concerned, unless you define the left in australia as 70% of the population. it is a concern for an open and honest and moral judicial process. it is a concern that just because some enemies of the west are barbarians, that we ourselves do not become barbaric. that's it.

stop it with this inane left-right labelling. and stop pretending anybody regards hicks as a hero or a saint or a sacred cow. it is patently absurd straw-man nonsense.

Ludwig, it is generally accepted that it is bad to be able to profit from your crimes (otherwise it's like having an incentive to commit crime). The Beaconsfield miners weren't guilty of crimes, Hicks is. That's the difference, and that's why the miners should be allowed to profit from their story, and not Hicks.

This was the worst article I have ever read on OLO.
Just rubbish.
Editors- what were you thinking?
Hicks is a very real and fertile subject at the moment. Eagerly have I been awaiting a professional and incisive article dealing with this... instead we get Muehlenberg's vacuous and base polemic (or if we are to believe him- facetious humour).

Some of his comments from his site
http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/04/01/how-to-make-millions-by-hating-the-west/

"Was I being facetious here? Did I exaggerate? Did I overstate the case? Were these rhetorical devices? Yes to all… Sometimes the silliness and moral vacuity of the other side’s arguments seem to warrant such polemics – but not always."

"Yes it is clearly risky business trying to use a bit of humour on sacred icons such as Saint Hicks: the peace-loving Left goes absolutely ballistic. Plenty of hatred and venom being poured out in these comments. The Left does seem to be a pretty humourless and sour bunch."

and finally

"I of course was being facetious, but the Left has little time for such things. Whether he makes a penny or not is not my main concern. My real concern is how so many on the Left are seeking to make him into a hero, while demonizing the American and Australian governments."

Muehlenberg's real concern (as stated above) may just (if he actually put in just a little scholarly effort and integrity) have made for base level tabloid opinion piece.
What he presented was a self-righteous troll and little more. A deliberately insulting attack at not only OLO and what it stands for, but specifically, genuine intellectual discourse on the Hicks matter itself.

OLO- please get your act together. There are plenty of other places on the net to wallow in this level of intellectual drivel. I, and I am sure many others, come here hoping and expecting so much more.

Hans.