David Hicks protests

Don't worry, we have an election coming up and The Right Honourable John Howard is at last getting a bit of a challenge from the opposition. Whilst not in the same league as Children Overboard, he will make the right indignant noises on Australia's behalf soon.

Kauri said:

Don't worry, we have an election coming up and The Right Honourable John Howard is at last getting a bit of a challenge from the opposition. .. he will make the right indignant noises on Australia's behalf soon.

Click to expand...

Yep, after 5 years of total moral vacuum. justice delayed is justice denied.

"You got to accept the repercussions of your own actions." as Trade It so elequently summarised it. No doubt Johnny will simply say - "I made a mistake". wonder if that defense is available to Hicks?

on the "repercussions of actions" matter - gotta feeling that US Congress are saying similar things to GWB at this very moment.

robert toms said:

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Who defines who is a terrorist?

Click to expand...

It depends what side of the fence you sit on, I guess!

The sad part is that a small group can destroy the image and lives of so many.

The man was a merc. He basically chose the life of killing for pay. In certain parts of Africa when you are caught they stick rubber tyres over you and set you on fire. In Afghanistan they semi gut you and leave you for the wildlife to finish off. He was lucky to be caught by Americans and at least have body parts intact.

In this game you pick the dollar over your country. Cant say Im a supporter of bringing him back.

He attended certain training sessions at a time when it was not illegal. He was picked up on the politically wrong side of the fence and is being crucified for that. He is being charged under retrospective law changes which suited the politics of the time. The Australian government allowed it just wanted to show everyone how they work. I hope they are proud of themselves I am ashamed of the PM and everyone who supported it. He has been brutally punished and has been incarcerated in terrible conditions for more than long enough for his mistake and should be set free.

The first problem to me is that the trial system is biased for conviction.

The US citizen caught with him is not being tried by this system.
The British saw how unfair the trial system was and so removed their citizens.
Howard said he didn't want to bring Hicks here as he would have had to write new laws and backdate them. The US have rewritten the laws and backdated recently anyway.

The second problem is that they are keeping him in solitary as well as committing torture against the Geneva convention. The US can't let him go now as it will become major news and the Liberals and the Republicans will then lose the next election.

If you support Hicks treatment despite the fact that many of the prisoners released were proven innocent and removed after torture (at the beginning)and 2 years (I know Hicks most probably isn't) then you should consider if you were in that position due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Australian Government is meant to protect you.

Knobby22 said:

The first problem to me is that the trial system is biased for conviction.

The US citizen caught with him is not being tried by this system.
The British saw how unfair the trial system was and so removed their citizens.
Howard said he didn't want to bring Hicks here as he would have had to write new laws and backdate them. The US have rewritten the laws and backdated recently anyway.

The second problem is that they are keeping him in solitary as well as committing torture against the Geneva convention. The US can't let him go now as it will become major news and the Liberals and the Republicans will then lose the next election.

If you support Hicks treatment despite the fact that many of the prisoners released were proven innocent and removed after torture (at the beginning)and 2 years (I know Hicks most probably isn't) then you should consider if you were in that position due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Australian Government is meant to protect you.

Click to expand...

Very good post,

It is easy to condemn and say to bad mate face the music!

But If was in his shoes I would want all the help I could get from my Government. But if David gets all the special help what about the idiots that smuggle drugs from Indonesia they will put there hands up higher as well.

Trade_It said:

Very good post,

It is easy to condemn and say to bad mate face the music!

But If was in his shoes I would want all the help I could get from my Government. But if David gets all the special help what about the idiots that smuggle drugs from Indonesia they will put there hands up higher as well.

Click to expand...

If you are caught within a country you deserve to be tried under that countries laws.
This is a war situation and different rules apply. The US should comply with the Geneva convention and not treat its own citizens any differently to foreign citizens. Australia should have followed Britains lead.

If our leaders see nothing wrong in writing new laws and applying them retrospectively then will they revisit the new laws they wrote ( had forced on them by Latham) on Government Super dooper Superannuation and apply them retrospectively, not just from the date they grudginly approved them. .. I guess not.... snort snort, squeal squeal, plenty in the trough. The justice system may be impartial, but those who control it aren't.

Knobby22 said:

If you are caught within a country you deserve to be tried under that countries laws.
This is a war situation and different rules apply. The US should comply with the Geneva convention and not treat its own citizens any differently to foreign citizens. Australia should have followed Britains lead.

Click to expand...

Plus they've had a trial

Trade_It said:

Very good post,

But if David gets all the special help what about the idiots that smuggle drugs from Indonesia they will put there hands up higher as well.

Click to expand...

They were caught, tried, and sentenced under laws that already existed, and had plenty of warnings that they existed.

In the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions (GC) of 12 August 1949 and the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 it is stated:

Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:
(a) is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

he was being trained by the same people who justify its their right to fly planes into buildings. poeple who kill you because of your religious views differing from theirs.

so they invaded afghanistan, he couldnt fight against the professional soldiers of the australian british and US special forces, he was a true coward, and they crippled the taliban and went after bin laden,, he fled accross the country by bus to the border, special units were there to detect any fleeing terrorists trying to escape, he was caught..

so what if he didnt get caught, do you believe he was coming back to australia with all his knowlege to fight for the freedoms of the australian people? it was only his cowardice that prevented him from killing australian troops in afghanistan. If he made it back, he would have had become what they trained him for, a highly educated white australian trained terrorist sleeper, able to build up a cell and devistate innocent lives. undetectable..

man i am so happy he was caught.. and who cares about 5 years, imagine how many years of lives this clown was going wipe off the planet here in australia.

remember he chose to become a terrorist, he chose to train with the religious people he cared most about, the taliban, and he would have chosen to continue to be that way if it wasnt for the fact he was caught. suddenly we have to feel for this fanatic. apparently he is depressed and sad. imagine how sad and depressed he was going to make your lives if he could have!!

stuff this planets need to politicise the whole deal, and stuff this propaganda about hicks innocent child photo being posted up to convince people he was harmless.. he is harmless today because of the fact he has no means available to him today to kill you, but remember that if he wasnt caught, we would have had him on our streets and what would have stopped him from planning how to kill you! if you showed child photos of suicide bombers to their victims families they wouldnt feel for that person, they would still feel their loss just as much.

i detest cowards and most of all detest coward terrorists!!!

we have declared war on terrorists and yet we embrace the david hicks, but when an middle eastern cleric says something about his beliefs he is basically austricised from the community. but if your name is david hicks, come from non arabic background, and train to become a terrorist, then your suddenly a victim?? so what message are we giving? we support and cry for people who train to become terrorists? i cant believe politicians are backing terrorists.. the taliban would use that to show their new recruits how an aussie taliban trained terrorist is now a true blue aussie hero.. and thats exactly how they work..

talk about getting it wrong guys!! your batting for the wrong team!!

inter arma silent leges

cheers

Kauri said:

They were caught, tried, and sentenced under laws that already existed, and had plenty of warnings that they existed.

Click to expand...

totally understand good reply.

moXJO said:

In the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions (GC) of 12 August 1949 and the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 it is stated:

Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:
(a) is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

Click to expand...

But can you really call David a mercenary?

That's a blurred line as one one can say he was there to fight.

Trade_It said:

But can you really call David a mercenary?

That's a blurred line as one one can say he was there to fight.

Click to expand...

It should be noted that many countries, including the United States, are not signatories to the Protocol Additional GC 1977 (APGC77). So although it is the most widely accepted international definition of a mercenary, it is not definitive.

So U.S definition are different, in saying that I don’t think he had a 'free hugs' sign on him.And he did train to fight with the KLA also.So he actively went looking for hotspots

firstly,

international conventions or treaties;

thence

practice of states;

thence

general principles of domestic law;

thence

judicial decisions;

thence

teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations;

thence

...

commonsensical opinions of the ASF community

cheers

Well said.

Maj Mori made the point that (some of) the early charges, since abandoned, revolved around him being out of uniform. - But Mori pointed out that the CIA were there in exactly that predicament as well.

moXJO, not sure how relevant your definition of a mercanary is, but in any case he's entitled to be tried, and that hasn't happened because, in short, they are winging it and/or resorting to twisting the rules. If the case against him is as cut and dried as you imply, then it would all be over years ago.

In WWII, if you were out of uniform you were in big trouble - in uniform entitled to fair rules - except that the Japenese didn't respect Geneva Convention , and didn't matter if you were in or out of uniform (bit like USA now really).