What is with the media and their obsession with Hicks?...who REALLY cares?

It's one massive PR campaign and the one person I agree with is Hicks' old man when he said they just should've put him on a normal flight in economy where no one would've known.

Is the Australian media THAT bored?. You've just got to think about all the trivial topics that come through the box and how the media 'go it' like a jack russell on a beef flavoured chew toy...eventually someone has to take it off them and throw it out.

How do they decide that I'm really, really, really, really...and next week I'll STILL be really, really, really interested in Hicks and what he's wearing and eating and his haircut and what colour his poo is?.

What happened to real investigative journalism?, is it only the realm of 60 minutes and channel 79's (7 and 9) 30 minute trash shows at 1830?.

How about they chase a story on something like Howard lying for the last decade?...or how someone had some decent intel on the dodgy dealings of Peter Beattie but she's in prison and we'll NEVER hear what she was blackmailing him about...I'm interested in that...but Hicks?...wait till he 'gets out'...it'll be insanity.

Terry Hicks was being interviewed by Lee Lin Chin on the SBS last night (Saturday). His comments were disturbing. He is still trying to portray his son as nothing more than a misguided larrikin who has done noone any harm. This is so far from reality that he should not be given any more air time or print space.
David Hicks is responsible for his own situation. He went to Afghanistan and he was taken into custody because he was there. There has not been the same fuss about the other Guantanamo Bay inmates - why is their situation any different? Supporters of David Hicks would have us believe that their man is different and that the big bad US should never ever have "incarcerated" any Australian. One of the main players actually told me that "everyone else in GB is a terrorist".
One of the problems has been that some powerful people have been involved. They have seen it as a means of shifting public opinion against a government they do not like. They have done this either knowing that their stated view of international law is not actually the law at all or so much in ignorance of international law that they should not be members of the legal profession. David Hicks is being used and it is time the media refused to be used too.

It just shows up that the media are short on imagination and long on wind. It really isnt that big an ordeal. I couldnt give two hoots whether he serves his sentence in Oz or Cuba, particularly given that there is only 9 months left to serve.

The only real obsession the media has is to sell advertising space.
Hicks is just a way to achieve it.
Social issues are not really important. For example, one day they will tell us to immunise our children and the next day it will warn us about the potential dangers of immunisation.

Anyway, Hicks himself wasn't the real issue - it was the Government's attitude to the Rule of Law and how it is defined in relation to our international interests plus what degree of protection it offers it's citizens.

"the real issue was the Govts attitude to the rule of law and what degree of protection it offers its citizens."

Would people care about the rule of law and Australias protection of its citizens so much if the person in question was a serial killer who had killed a dozen women or so.

I doubt it. And if they only care about the rule of law in some cases and not others then they really dont care about the rule of law and protection of citizens in general like they say. No this is political point scoring against John Howard and America.

5 full pages in our state paper this morning suggests the obsession really has gone too far. Very little was said about the $520,000 to bring him home...and virtually nothing has been said all along about the cost to the taxpayers...he is still being treated by the media as if he is just an innocent larrikin. Almost nothing has been said about what international law really says about the issue either. If the media were to give an accurate representation of this story David Hicks would be seen for what he is - and that is definitely not harmless. He will be a danger to Australia for the rest of his life if for no other reason than he has the capacity to divide the community while he (and his father) are given so much media coverage.
The media has a lot to answer for here - their pursuit of the story has nothing to do with justice or human rights.

Hello to forum members,
I am very upset that the Australian Prime Minister, media corporates, and their loyal followers, have, play acted, judge and jury against David Hicks and his family.
It is ironic that over 600,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq, since the invasion by the coalition of the willing in 2003. David Hicks was being punished and tortured over about the same amount of time, and he did not kill one soldier or civilian.
David Hicks has suffered without any legal decision against him, except at the hands of the powerful American Military, at the behest of George Bush.
It is like we in Australia, are in an American back water, and being governed by the White House.

Communicat, I can think of something to say about the $520,000.

The total would be a lot more if you take all of the other security measures into account. What did it cost to get the entire South Australian police force out for the occasion?

The decision to spend all that money bringing Hicks back was not made by either taxpayers or Hicks. He could just as easily have been escorted on an ordinary flight by a handful of security people and whisked off in an ordinary paddy wagon.

Who released information of his arrival to the media? Who decided to stage an event bigger than a visit from the queen? And who decided it was worth all that tax money to stage such a grand media event?

On the subject of taxpayer money, I hope everyone enjoyed the deluge of government advertising over the same weekend. We paid for the Hicks spectacle on the news and the ads in between. Overall we've had a massive spend in the last couple of days. Was it worth it?

Sarah101,
I know that it rained recently so I will forgive you as you
must have come down in that shower.

He spent time in Kosovo with their moslem army then went to
the Afghan Al Quaida training camps. Just for a holiday and physical
excercise ? I can't see them allowing that.
Met up with Osama bin Laden, so it is said, but does not change anything
if he didn't meet him.

Was captured, not in uniform, no pay book, no serial number and was armed.

What do you think he was ? A tourist ?

The US should have given him a transit visa to get out through
Los Angeles airport and saved us a lot of money.
Perhaps the airlines refused to carry him.

Ah but no airline would have taken him on board. It is easy to blame the government. They were working behind the scenes before the whole thing blew up. If the idiots who made all the fuss in the media had kept their mouths shut he would have been back here far earlier and would not have been turned into some sort of hero. It would also have cost far less - as it is it has cost the taxpayer millions because individuals with no knowledge of international law became instant experts in the subject and the media printed their views rather than seek out the facts in an objective fashion. Of course the idiots were also street smart - they saw this as a potential media issue which might help bring down a democratically elected government.
Hicks human rights are the same as any other person - and those do not include being turned into some sort of hero for political purposes. His supporters should now at very least be asked to pay for his fare home.

I suppose people unable to get medical treatment that they need to stay alive will be pleased that we spent the money to save Hicks from a further period in US custody. Kids sweltering during summer in classrooms that are not air conditioned will be pleased that the money went to save Hicks from some more months over there.

People who's communities are running out of water will be pleased to see the money used on something so much more important. Somewhere one or two workers will be pleased to thing that their entire lifetimes income tax has gone on a flight to help Hicks.

Women slaughtered by the Talliban (that most perfect of Governments according to Hicks) would if they still lived be pleased that he has been saved further discomfort.

The USA did the wrong thing and so to did Hicks. I'd much rather have seen my tax dollars spent helping with real causes.

R0bert

SARAH 101-: "He did not kill one soldier or civilian"

Hicks wrote in his letters home how he and his muslim friends converted Cashmere a village in India over to the Muslim faith. This was done at the point of a gun and was reported on the news with villagers being killed in the process. Prove that Hicks wasnt there and killed civilians.

-: "Ironically there have been 600,000 killed in Iraq"

The largest percentage of them by the muslims who think nothing of driving a car with a loaded bomb in amongst 50 Arab children.

Sharkfin,

A confessed terrorist becoming a national hero and getting a wonderful expensive return to the country may grate on you but you should tone it down a little. I'm sure many innocent people who had no interest in car bombing would have been included in the war casualties.

All,

Hopefully, this will be an eye opener for everyone with any cognitive capacity revealing how the media pick a side and report accordingly and their hero becomes a hero for the less discerning masses even if that hero is a terrorist. The same is obviously true if they decide to make someone a villain. The old saying don't believe everything you read has application here.

So Hicks supporters should pay the cost of his elaborate transport requirements, which is not only the cost of the plane, but also the ridiculous motorcade.

Should they also stump up for the cost of renovating the prime minister's dining room?

Obviously the two issues are unrelated but the thing they have in common is the willingness of this government to spend vast sums of money indulging their own interests. At the same time they tell us it would be economically irresponsible to spend money indulging OUR interests like, geez, I dunno, Medicare? Public education?

chainsmoker, in the light of public disclosure (and an election year) they have stopped the upgrade of the dining room (although they have already spent a lot of hours of somebodies taxes on consultants).
They will be spending yet more again on advertising to promote the "bosses choices" changes. They have spent a fortune on advertising suggesting that DV is all mens fault.

I saw an old interview with Howard from the lead up to the last election of the Keating era where he was complaining about the likely spend by that government on advertising in the lead up to the election.

They are all tarred with the same brush and much more determined to spend money in places that help their supporters and their election chances than leaving it with those who earned it or spending it on actual services.

R0bert

same old story, should we vote for tweedledum, or dee? is dee a bigger thief, or dum? does it really make any difference? they have bipartisan policies on most issues, and when the words are different- can you be sure they're not lying?

can't you think of an alternative to pollie rule? have a look at 'direct democracy' in switzerland.

Sharkfin:
"Hicks wrote in his letters home how he and his muslim friends converted Cashmere a village in India over to the Muslim faith. This was done at the point of a gun and was reported on the news with villagers being killed in the process. Prove that Hicks wasnt there and killed civilians."

OUR legal system requires the burden of proof in a criminal matter to fall on the prosecution. Therefore under our system the Crown would have to prove (beyond reasonable doubt, not on the balance of probabilities) that he was there and took part in the killing (although letters home would no doubt weigh quite well as evidence).

However, despite maybe not being able to prove that he killed someone, can we not have laws in Australia that make it illegal to coerce someone on religious grounds? It might be a good safeguard for the future, even if too late to get Hicks on it.....

Why are we being "treated" to descriptions of what Hicks had for breakfast? Why are we being further "treated" to speculations about visiting arrangements? Is it really important to know how he is dressed or whether he has "settled in". Why are members of the media still camped outside Yatala? What do they hope to learn? (Or are they waiting for his father and his lawyer to give up more anti-government offerings? Note - not a word of thanks from his father for bringing him home at taxpayer expense...it is nothing more than what is due to his greviously misunderstood and wrongly treated son who has apparently done nothing wrong.)
The media could close the issue down but they won't. It suits their purposes (and that of the ALP and certain radical groups)to keep it going.

Sarah101 your credibility is in tatters after just one post.

"He did not"..... kill.. you know this for a fact ?

but guess what.. "HE WAS GUARDING THE TANK WHICH DID THE KILLING"

-which is equal.

But wait :) the Taliban...those luminaries of social justice and fair treatment of your gender.. were simply carrying water to underprivileged children on the TANK....right ? :)

You cannot presume to know the facts which were obtained on the battle field. We don't put every enemy soldier we capture on trial.. for goodness sake. there were HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Prisoners of war in WW2 no..they are in detention camps until the war ends.

Please announce when the war between Al Qaeda and the West ended ?

He is lucky to be even ALIVE let alone detained.

You appear to be rather naive about realities of war.

Mentioning the 600,000 killed in Iraq...good one.. why did you NOT mention that most of them were killed by Muslim on Muslim.. Al Qaeda trying to destabilize the country ? Why ? Well..I'm just guessing, that you are naive..... or.. are peddling a political agenda called "DAMAGE Howard at all costs" (one of those costs is balance and truth)

The whole media circus reminds me of the immoderate attention paid for a short while to Bindi Irwin.

Manufactured news.

We'll soon get tired of it.

We should be thankful that it is only the media that gives two hoots about the convicted terrorist aid and sub-human, Hicks.

After all, we are all capable of thinking for ourselves, are we not?

Terry Hicks

Should put a sock in it.
The Government cant win. Had they put Hicks on a normal flight and somebody or a mob were waiting at the other end to punch David on the nose it would have been their fault.

Had the media been waiting and tricked David into speaking it might have put David at risk of breaking his Gag. It would have been again their fault.
Had somebody picked him on the domestic flight and picked a fight again the Government would have got been accused of not protecting him.
So they brought him home safely for his own good and still his father isnt happy.

I might add he was probably wearing bangles and one can only imagine the complaints from his father if his son was humilitated.

So we paid and he is back in Australia.

The media`s job is to report the news.
He is big news which ever side of the fence your on.

I am just wondering what more you people want from the Government or the media for that matter.
Clearly this is a pro labour thread.
We have enough problems in the world without people looking for them.

Wonder who David takes after because Dad ought to consider threats to breal gags wont help his Son.

Really as they both dont like Australia or our Government its a big world.

It disturbs me that some people can't see past their own ignorance to understand the difference between someone who supports Hicks, the individual... and someone who fights for the civil rights of the nation and its citizens, either domestically or internationally.

Its disturbs me that people dont know the difference.
As I said its the job of the media to report the news.
Its the job of the Government to get him home without dramas.
They both seem to have done their job in this case.

No I dont think he should have been put on a domestic flight for his own saftey.
The reasonsible steps were taken
We get to pay the Bill ok. What bugs me is Terry Hicks is now complaing about the fact that his Son was brought home safely at the cost of the public.
Cant see much to complain about personally.
Regardless if its Hicks or anybody else.
Hes been kept safe. The Government have no way of guessing how public might act sitting on a plane with somebody who has caused a lot of drama.
So they looked after Terrys Son.
Whats his problem Now?

David wont stay in Australia either. Given a few years he will be off to do what he likes best.' We wont get into that ah'

I am personally pleased for Terry Hicks his sons home.
It would be awful to see your Son regardless of what he had got himself involved with treated like that and be powerless to help.

I hope David doesnt go off again in a few more years and cause his Dad more stress.
I hope he knows now Australia is the best country in the world to live in.
The media have done a wonderful job in the interests of this person.
They ought to receive a medal for following through on the story for years.
David and Terry ow them a great deal.
Maybe a free interview one day

If Hicks is serious about his muslim religion why did he fight to come back to a western country? He could have served his time out in some prison in a muslim country. I'm sure they would have been happy to take him if the government had offered them the $500,000 it took to bring him home, even Indonesia. Because he knows that Western prisons are quite clean and humane compared to prisons in the Muslim world. In other words he wants to be a muslim living under Western laws and conditions.

Like all these disgruntled Westerners who constantly scorn their own culture. If ever it really comes down to a serious choice which culture do they prefer to live under. I hope David has learnt this over the last five years and gained some wisdom this would be the best outcome from this whole scenario. The getting of wisdom.

The media is obsessed with rating, viewing and advertising revenue and hence the obsession with any contraversial topics and characters that sell": Hicks, Hilaly, Paris Hilton, Corby, Big brother.

I think its the commercialisation dilemma that tempts few to move away from socially responsible media.