This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Confessed Terrorist Hicks

Should Hicks now prove his innocence in Australian courts...

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 28.6%

  • No

    Votes: 20 35.7%

  • Why???

    Votes: 20 35.7%
  • Total voters
    56
Jump to new
You must have been with him during the genocide in Kosova when he was on the side the coalition (belatedly) backed... Was it you who took the pictures of Hicks with the RPG there that ended up all over the news in Australia as proof by media?

Double jeopardy?
 
Superfly said:
False confession... prove it ....

Never a Terrorist ..... prove it ..
Click to expand...
Hello Superfly.
In another thread I challenged you to outline the charges an Australian court could level at Hicks.

Are you up to that challenge or not?

For the record, and you could always go to the plea bargain agreement signed by Hicks, or the charge sheet (Hicks was never formally charged in the legal sense) Hicks admitted to providing material support for terrorism. In fact, by sheer association it was impossible for Hicks to defend his innocence against this charge. Alternatively, Hicks would have had to prove he was never where he was, rather than anything he actually did.

So, in law, Hicks is not a terrorist, was never charged with committing an act of terrorism, and never pleaded guilty to "being a terrorist".
qed
 
Tell you what Rob - There's a book I'd love to read..
when/if it comes out in ? maybe five or ten years.

"The career of Major / (Field Marshall?) Michael Mori"
or will that be
Corporal Mori? "

Given that other (successful) defense (oops) lawyers have had their careers severly thwarted.
 
I think you got it the wrong way around. No Australian has to prove his or her innocence in an Australian court.
 
We should have a poll

Should Michael Mori be given the OAM Order of Aust Medal? yes / no
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Australia


:topic Needless to say, the OAM was introduced during Gough Whitlam's reign (before that we used British honours )

Likewise as per that recent show "The Adventure of English" - the Macquarie Dictionary - the first Aussie dictionary - only came out with the encouragement of Whitlam's govt .

Relevance? - a bit obtuse - but you could argue that - just as Menzies etc were too close to UK, Howard had gone too far towards USA could you not? - and the Hicks case was in large part about that USA/AUS relationship yes?
 
http://www.nswbar.asn.au/docs/resources/publications/bb/bb134.pdf

mori gets record audience with NSW bar association

PS happytown - you're gonna have to help us with that one lol

Mind you, you can find any number of "bush lawyer" skills on google and/or wiki lol.

Furthermore, I found this comment there lol.. (heck - gotta go from memory - can't find the original)

"I have found that wikipedia has cleared up a lot of legal questions for me ... and I'm a lawyer!"
Click to expand...

and what the heck does this mean ? - I'm guessing it's another compliement to wiki
"Pour une encyclopedie si utile." ”” Gabriel D. Matthews
 

Attachments

  • mori in nsw.jpg
    46.8 KB · Views: 263
happytown said:
thread non conveniens

cheers
Click to expand...
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f091.htm

it's more than inconvient ht, I'd guess .... Plurium Interrogationum

A loaded question
A question - in this case a thread title - with "a false, disputed, or question-begging presupposition"

If you are saying that the entire thread title illustrates a lack of understanding by the thread starter -
and probably reflects badly on the integrity of ASF - then I'd be the first to agree with you.
then again - I suppose it can put with the (many other) provocative thread titles (here and on any other healthy discussion website)

Other examples of Plurium Interrogationum ...
Why are we so hated in the Muslim world?
Click to expand...

Trouble is that one has more truth in it.
 
ht - thanks - ahh "inappropriate" - so since when have there been forums other than chat rooms?
 
Superfly said:
False confession... prove it ....

Never a Terrorist ..... prove it ..
Click to expand...

I'm sure that if he had a case to answer in an Australian court then he would have been charged. Hasn't he served enough time for being an idiot? Forget him and move on. Leave it to ASIO to see that he behaves himself in future, there are better things to occupy our time.
 
2020hindsight said:
and probably reflects badly on the integrity of ASF - then I'd be the first to agree with you.
Click to expand...
Without wanting to put too many words in Joe's mouth, I'd say that within reason, ASF is happy to facilitate just about any rational, mature, intellectual debate as long as it remains so.

In this age of a highly centralised traditional media it's up to new forms, such as the internet, to address these social and moral issues - even if it comes under a deliberately provactive banner.
 
doctorj said:
In this age of a highly centralised traditional media it's up to new forms, such as the internet, to address these social and moral issues - even if it comes under a deliberately provactive banner.
Click to expand...
Not so much "provocative", but irrational.
The "poll" seeks views on Hicks needing to prove his innocence in an Australian court of law.
I would agree with the poll if there was a case against Hicks that could be made.
If there is not, then this is just another example of the ignorance that is peddled by the media (John Laws being at the top of the tree) and proliferated by foolish followers.
So far the thread starter is conspicuous by his inability to justify the thread.
Perhaps a case of put up or shut up?
 
Americas latest (next) ambassador to Australia ? - this from 23aug2006, Adelaide.


yep mate - we did that .... last December.

David Hicks - Major Mori's address


Note that there were police in the background

superfly
My guess is that you would have told him to move on - he couldn't speak on this !

especially when he says that the Australian govt agreed all along that David never violated Aus law.
 

Attachments

  • mori3.jpg
    11.3 KB · Views: 200
  • mori1.jpg
    6.3 KB · Views: 212
  • mori2.jpg
    5 KB · Views: 207
I vote why.

However, he is still possibly a very dangerous person to the Australian people and should be (and of course is) being watched VERY closely by ASIO/FP. The reasons why he went to the Stans in the first place are more than likely still in his illadjusted blood.

 
just a point, but "why" = "no" yes?

(in the final washup)

I mean - I know why we have yes, and yes we need no
but I'd love to know why we have why yes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

British Post Office scandal
Replies
5
Views
474
basilio
Australian of The Year 2025
Replies
0
Views
193
farmerge
Vale Clive Robertson
Replies
2
Views
438
SirRumpole
  • Poll
Financial Independence (Home Ownership, Super, Long Retirement) not possible for wage earners: What do we need and how do we get it?
11 12 13
Replies
258
Views
20K
Smurf1976
Raver Dogs party with cane toads
Replies
0
Views
362
basilio
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...