Nah Wu, I didn't have to, my old man was a rich Liberal Party member, paid for me to go to Uni, got me a 'Student Deferment', until it was all over. As was common practice for us of the ruling elite at the time, fully support the war to the hilt, but keep your own kid out of the army. Nah, I actually refused to register for conscription, so was automatically conscripted for refusing. But since they only prosecuted about 1 in 20 who failed to register (better than the odds of the birthday ballot they ran, I think those odd were 1 in 14), both ways you would have to be unlucky.

'Truth' unfortunately, is another rectitude that you've clearly managed to evade --> PAUL1405 !

Dear o sung wu,

Please do not misunderstand my point. I do not really give two hoots how you want to address people on this forum. What I was objecting to, or perhaps more accurately what I was pointing out, was your hypocrisy.

As the bible extols us 'And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?'

My caring about civil discourse being trashed on this forum was beaten out of me quite a while ago when the 'new breed' elbowed their way in. It would be nice to have it back again because they were very engaging times but I'm no longer prepared to lose any sleep over it.

It should be noted however that there are those who do care, and the fact they are attempting to prompt a change in direction from you means that they care about you. They have not yet tossed you on the pile of incorrigibles for whom reason and civil discourse is an anathema.

But I literally don't care what you do.

You may highlight our differences but in some ways we are quite similar. We can both be irascible old pricks and don't mind taking a big swing every now and again without it always being justified.

My advice which you can take or leave is to try and take each thread as a fresh start. To attack Paul1405 when all he had done was to post a couple of quotes from you and a link to the Civil Liberties web site was always going to make you look like a tosser.

I fully admit there are blokes on here from your side whom I have deemed totally not worth the effort and there is no shame in having your own list. My default setting is to ignore.

Cont...

Cont...

You wrote;

“those who 'guild the lily' somewhat and who make all these outlandish accusations about the moral conduct of Oz troops over there, are 'way out of wack' I'm afraid.”

To me this 'lily guilding' is exactly what you have done. You directly made 'outlandish accusations about the moral conduct of Oz troops over there' namely that if they had found a David Hicks type over there they would have executed him out of hand. I don't believe that for a moment. This is what summary executions of those considered traitors or spies looks like http://youtu.be/jYj0cRSU-Fs?t=5m50s (not for the squeemish). As much as you might have an issue with the messenger Paul1405's comparison is a valid one.

I really do not have much time for David Hicks but it made me ashamed to be an Australian when the Poms went and got their lot out of the clutches of the US with single mindedness that should befit any government worth their salt (and Hicks was like a babe in the woods compared to some of their people). That there was only action on Hicks when he attempted to get an British passport was very telling.

However the bloke I did have a lot of time for was Hick's father, Terry. He was one hell of a determined man. I heard him speak in Ballarat while his son was still incarcerated. And who can forget him in an orange jumpsuit inside a cage on a New York street. His doggedness was to me pretty Australian.

Finally Paul1405 is certainly his own man with the only weakness I can see being an appreciation on the odd occasion of my rather warped humour.

So I leave you with the following;

o sung wu finally got the courage to tell his wife he thought she had been painting her eyebrows on too high.

She looked surprised.

Wu, 40 odd years is a long time, I'm over 60 now, but in many respects it seems like yesterday. Correct me if I'm wrong in what I say, time can cloud the memory. A bit more than a simple one liner <<'Truth' unfortunately, is another rectitude that you've clearly managed to evade --> PAUL1405!>>. I stand by what I posted above about student deferments and lotteries, as I do about the coppers actions and the protesters. Kids, and I'll call them kids, as 20 years old's were naive about Vietnam and most other things in life as well. I have never condemned those conscripted and sent to that crazy Asian war, they had no real choice. The fact Australia disowned them on their return is forever to our nations shame.
Its interesting about student protests of the 1960's, many were from middle and upper class families and had rejected their parents conservative view of the world, and protested the fact in a variety of ways from drug taking to civil disobedience A time of great social and moral change in Australia and most of the western world, not seen before or since. Maybe we should thank The Vietnam War for that.

STEELEREDUX...

Your last sentence completely escapes me ? I imagine the father of David HICKS did as any reasonable father would do, he 'defended' his son. I do wonder though, whenever Mr HICKS Snr. places his head upon his pillow at night, whether he 'really' feels proud of David, his son ?

This peculiar notion that you've adopted, concerning summary justice for Mr HICKS ? STEELEREDUX you've NEVER served, pity really. The only satisfactory answer for you, may be found in your latest copy of 'Boys Own' Annual ?

You've had the temerity to say that I've made these 'outlandish' comments about the moral conduct of OZ troops while in Vietnam, by inferring Mr HICK'S would be summarily dealt with ? As I recall some time back, your impassioned and fervent defence of your ISLAMIC brothers was palpable, when you're questioned ? That makes you a collaborator with ISAL, does it ? A simile I believe ? I recall another comment, your reply was like a burr in your jocks, I suggested you never wore a police uniform in Bankstown (an Islamic conclave) so you wouldn't know - your 'pained' retort, '...and neither had you...' ? Knowing full well I was plain clothes copper when I worked the region ?

Your problem STEELEREDUX, you cautiously 'cheery pick' - a bit here, a bit there, rather than engaging in a full and candid discussion asserting your position and while others argue theirs ?

When someone 'ticks' you off, your 'bleat' out '...well, bring it on...' You throw down the gauntlet, or 'mutter' some other inane diatribe. I realise you'd like to fashion yourself as the self-appointed Forum Guardian, the 'Defender of the Faith' - Problem is, to do so, you first should shed your feelings of vulnerability and being 'precious'. Otherwise your sensibilities may well get bruised !

You see STEELEREDUX you're an easy mark, and quite readable, if I can see it, and I'm a 'mug' so can most others ! Any time my 'insecure' friend, any time you choose !