David Hicks protests

[bel532]

well m8, nor did DH. Only difference between you and him on that score is that he acted, and you talked. (not that I'm suggesting we should all go off sorting out the world's problems. )

by the way I meant to post link to Wikipedia back there ...(re Ronald Regan championing the Mujahadeen / infant Taliban) . Taliban went to Washington and were welcomed - ? - did you know that ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahadeen

Dont' give me that old turkey about the USA helping the Taliban, that's a lie that has been totally descredited

The USA helped the Mujahadeen in fighting the Soviets and, as far as I am aware, the Taliban (as an extremist religious cult) did not, at a that time, exist. They came into power AFTER the overthrow of the Soviets and, of course, some of the Mujahadeen (probably partly for their own self preservation) 'converted' to the extreme form of Islam espoused by the Taliban.

The USA never directly helped the Taliban but it certainly helped the Mujahadeen in their fight against the Soviets aspart of the Cold War.

 

[bel532]

The Americans sort out the Serbs......where from? their planes?!

Well the Americans certainly did a lot more than the Euros who coudn't clean up the mess in their own back yard without the help of the Yanks.

Remember the Kosovars who were slaughtered whilst the Dutch looked the other way?

 

[Happy]

Like in cold war there are those who fight and those who make it possible, like supplies, monies.

By now Iraq would run out of stash of weapons, but with helping hand from neighbours, things will go on forever.

One of the conspiracy theories is that WMD were not found because were moved, sudden reactivation of enrichment could be a ploy to be able to declare legitimate scientific or weapon grade nuclear material, kind of dirty nuclear material washing.

Little Hicksups, are just pawns insignificant peanuts, but for some, even on this forum constant supply of excitement and desire to fight for every human right.

Now when GUILTY plea was entered, could we look at the person as declared terrorist aide?

 

[robert toms]

Now that the British naval people have admitted that they entered Iranian waters,perhaps this should stop all of this media speculation....and an apology etc from Britain should help defuse the situation?
We should stop treating them as misguided and innocent pawns in the big game ?
Have they too admitted their guilt?

 

[happytown]

Remember the Kosovars who were slaughtered whilst the Dutch looked the other way?

No, perhaps you could remind us

I do, however, remember the dutch peacekeepers in Srebrenica (note that's srebrenica in bosnia, not kosovo), that were literally left to their own devices by NATO (whose primary partner is the US) and the UN whilst thousands of bosnians were slaughtered

Far from looking the other way, they were taken hostage and requests for NATO close air support (and remembering who NATO's primary partner is) went mostly unfulfilled

However, I stray, please elighten us as to when the kosovars were slaughtered as the dutch looked the other way (for it may have indeed happened, I just don't remember it)

And yes, I recognise that the more bellicose the argument the further we all stray from the core principles being discussed in this thread that may or may not be too sophisticated for some

cheers

 

[Happy]

Now that the British naval people have admitted that they entered Iranian waters,perhaps this should stop all of this media speculation....and an apology etc from Britain should help defuse the situation?
We should stop treating them as misguided and innocent pawns in the big game ?
Have they too admitted their guilt?

From ABC, March 28, 2007

GPS EVIDENCE CLEARS BRITISH SAILORS OF WRONGDOING, VICE-ADMIRAL SAYS


The British Navy has produced evidence to show that 15 of its sailors being held in Iran were in Iraqi waters at the time of their capture.
GPS evidence shows the HMS Cornwall was 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when the Britons were seized.
The Navy has also pointed out that the first set of coordinates cited by the Iranian government placed the sailors in Iraqi waters.
Vice-Admiral Charles Style says the action taken by Iran's forces cannot be justified.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my primary message is clear," Vice-Admiral Style said.
"HMS Cornwall with her boarding party was going about her legal business in Iraqi territorial waters, under a United Nations Security Council resolution and with the explicit approval of the Iraqi government."
-CNN

Probably plot thickens a bit, could be desperate attempt to save face, or attempt to get legitimate reason to extend their military activities to rescue sailors.

 

[bel532]

No, perhaps you could remind us

I do, however, remember the dutch peacekeepers in Srebrenica (note that's srebrenica in bosnia, not kosovo), that were literally left to their own devices by NATO (whose primary partner is the US) and the UN whilst thousands of bosnians were slaughtered

Far from looking the other way, they were taken hostage and requests for NATO close air support (and remembering who NATO's primary partner is) went mostly unfulfilled

However, I stray, please elighten us as to when the kosovars were slaughtered as the dutch looked the other way (for it may have indeed happened, I just don't remember it)

And yes, I recognise that the more bellicose the argument the further we all stray from the core principles being discussed in this thread that may or may not be too sophisticated for some

cheers

It's a pity the Euros can't fix up the mess 'in their own backyard' instead of constantly relying on the USA.

When will the Euros grow up and stop relying on the USA to sort out their problems? The Cold War has been dead and buried for some time now.

You comment still does not explain why the Dutch 'looked the the other way' whilst the massacre was taking place.

Here is the info re the massacre at Sebrenica from Wilkependia(I am surprised you are unaware of this horrendous event):

"By seeking to eliminate a part of the Bosnian Muslims [Bosniaks], the Bosnian Serb forces committed genocide. They targeted for extinction the forty thousand Bosnian Muslims living in Srebrenica, a group which was emblematic of the Bosnian Muslims in general. They stripped all the male Muslim prisoners, military and civilian, elderly and young, of their personal belongings and identification, and deliberately and methodically killed them solely on the basis of their identity."[6]

The United Nations had previously declared Srebrenica a UN protected "safe area", but they did not prevent the massacre, even though 400 armed Dutch peacekeepers were present at the time.[7] The massacre included several instances where preteen children and women were also killed.[8] The list of people missing or killed in Srebrenica compiled by the Federal Commission of Missing Persons so far includes 8,373 names.[9]

 

[happytown]

It's a pity the Euros can't fix up the mess 'in their own backyard' instead of constantly relying on the USA.

When will the Euros grow up and stop relying on the USA to sort out their problems? The Cold War has been dead and buried for some time now.

You comment still does not explain why the Dutch 'looked the the other way' whilst the massacre was taking place.

Here is the info re the massacre at Sebrenica from Wilkependia(I am surprised you are unaware of this horrendous event):

"By seeking to eliminate a part of the Bosnian Muslims [Bosniaks], the Bosnian Serb forces committed genocide. They targeted for extinction the forty thousand Bosnian Muslims living in Srebrenica, a group which was emblematic of the Bosnian Muslims in general. They stripped all the male Muslim prisoners, military and civilian, elderly and young, of their personal belongings and identification, and deliberately and methodically killed them solely on the basis of their identity."[6]

The United Nations had previously declared Srebrenica a UN protected "safe area", but they did not prevent the massacre, even though 400 armed Dutch peacekeepers were present at the time.[7] The massacre included several instances where preteen children and women were also killed.[8] The list of people missing or killed in Srebrenica compiled by the Federal Commission of Missing Persons so far includes 8,373 names.[9]

read my post again

cheers

 

[2020hindsight]

Dont' give me that old turkey about the USA helping the Taliban, that's a lie that has been totally descredited.

bel, suppose I said there was plenty of evidence on the web that in mid May 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Taliban for poppy crop removal.- in addition to the humanitarian moneys. (Chances are it was all "poppy-crop " )

Now there is every chance that one of my posts back there was wrong in part - makes no difference to the point however. (my quote back there that the Taliban had actually achieved 99.8% reduction in opium poppy, as I found on Wikipedia - I put a question mark against that point of the post when I posted it) - turns out that this could well be wrong, and that the Taliban "possibly only reduced production to drive up the price".

The point I was trying to make or rather emphasise was more that there had been dealings between Washington and Taliban. The fact that the money changed hands is enough. Back in those days, the Taliban weren't the bogey men they now are. Slowly but surely they have become demons. Now that the battle lines are drawn , I agree entirely with chasing down AQ. But Hicks has found himself on the wrong team - and I'm confident he regrets it. I'm also confident that USA feels that way too, otherwise they wouldn't be talking down the severity of his crime so much. (although again time will tell on that score too - praps I'm misinterpreting Moe Davis. Maybe he is saying Hicks will spent his life in an Adelaide jail ? It's all timing - before or after the election in Nov ? lol).

http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-02-02.html How Washington Funded the Taliban, by Ted Galen Carpenter

Ted Galen Carpenter is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and is the author or editor of 14 books on international affairs including the forthcoming "Bad Neighbor Policy: Washington's Futile War on Drugs in Latin America" (Palgrave/ St. Martin's).

The United States has made common cause with an assortment of dubious regimes around the world to wage the war on drugs. Perhaps the most shocking example was Washington's decision in May 2001 to financially reward Afghanistan's infamous Taliban government for its edict ordering a halt to the cultivation of opium poppies.

When the Taliban implemented a ban on opium cultivation in early 2001, U.S. officials were most complimentary... (reality??)
Yet the Bush administration did more than praise the Taliban's proclaimed ban of opium cultivation. In mid-May, 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Afghanistan ...
To make matters worse, U.S. officials were naive to take the Taliban edict at face value. The much-touted crackdown on opium poppy cultivation appears to have been little more than an illusion. Despite U.S. and UN reports that the Taliban had virtually wiped out the poppy crop in 2000-2001, authorities in neighboring Tajikistan reported that the amounts coming across the border were actually increasing. In reality, the Taliban gave its order to halt cultivation merely to drive up the price of opium the regime had already stockpiled.

Even if the Taliban had tried to stem cultivation for honest reasons, U.S. cooperation with that regime should have been morally repugnant. Among other outrages, the Taliban government prohibited the education of girls, tortured and executed political critics, and required non-Muslims to wear distinctive clothing--a practice eerily reminiscent of Nazi Germany's requirement that Jews display the Star of David on their clothing. Yet U.S. officials deemed none of that to be a bar to cooperation with the Taliban on drug policy.

Even if the Bush administration had not been dissuaded by moral considerations, it should have been by purely pragmatic concerns. There was already ample evidence in the spring of 2001 that the Taliban was giving sanctuary to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network that had bombed two U.S. embassies in East Africa. For the State Department to ignore that connection and agree to subsidize the Taliban was inexcusably obtuse. Scheer was on the mark when he concluded, "The war on drugs has become our own fanatics' obsession and easily trumps all other concerns."

Washington's approach came to an especially calamitous end in September 2001 when the Taliban regime was linked to bin Laden's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that killed some 3,000 people. Moreover, evidence quickly emerged that the Taliban all along had been collecting millions of dollars in profits from the illicit drug trade, with much of that money going into the coffers of the terrorists. Rarely is there such graphic evidence of the bankruptcy of U.S. drug policy.

 

[2020hindsight]

further to previous, here's an article by Jared Israel - allegedly posted 5 June 2001 (= prior to 9/11), titled "Washington: Parent of the Taliban and Colombian Death Squads"
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/mis.htm

IS WASHINGTON 'AIDING' COLOMBIA AND THE TALIBAN?
OR IS IT IN FACT SUPPORTING ITS OWN CREATIONS?

The "Does the drug war justify us giving aid to monsters?" argument confuses the real relationship between Washington and said monsters, such as the Colombian military/death squads, and the Taliban authorities in Afghanistan.

This confusion is expressed eloquently by Robert Scheer, who once edited "Ramparts," the late great antiwar magazine. A recent article by Mr. Scheer is entitled, "Bush's Faustian Deal with the Taliban." If you remember your Goethe, this would cast Junior as a lowly mortal who makes a deal with the devil, a much more powerful figure. Here's Mr. Scheer:

"Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists and destroy every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this nation still takes seriously.

"That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the United States the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention."

Bob Scheer thinks the Taliban are a monstrosity of indigenous origin. In his view, it is outrageous for Americans to let themselves be duped into helping these beasts simply because the beasts have (supposedly) banned drugs. If America does this it will become the Taliban's main sponsor. And so on.

The problem is, it is too late for Washington to become the Taliban's sponsor because Washington gave birth to the Taliban in the first place. (2) ...........

To preserve the mental equilibrium of Americans, the mass media tries to avoid publishing evidence of Washington's Taliban patrimony. Nevertheless, sometimes some of the truth slips out. Take for example a 'NY Times' article published three days after the U.S. bombed some facilities in Afghanistan: (when?? - must be before 24Aug98??)

"The Afghan resistance [sic!] was backed by the intelligence services of the United States and Saudi Arabia with nearly $6 billion worth of weapons. And the territory targeted last week, a set of six encampments around Khost, where the Saudi exile Osama bin Laden has financed a kind of 'terrorist university,' in the words of a senior United States intelligence official, is well known to the Central Intelligence Agency.'
"The C.I.A.'s military and financial support for the Afghan rebels indirectly helped build the camps that the United States attacked. And some of the same warriors who fought the Soviets with the C.I.A.'s help are now fighting under Mr. bin Laden's banner. (From 'New York Times,' August 24, 1998.

On the subject of drugs and (it seems) a link between Afghanistan's Taliban and KLA, they also say this...

Washington pretends to oppose drugs. But its favorite Balkans terrorist group relies on the drug business for cash. Washington could devastate the drug trade by simply arresting this organization. That would easy to do because the organization is the KLA. It was set up by Germany and the U.S. and it is trained by "Western special forces," that is, by the U.S. and Britain). ...

..Interpol estimates that Kosovo Albanians may control 40 percent of the European heroin trade. In Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic, they may have as much as 70 percent of the market, according to the estimates.

....Opium from Afghanistan and Pakistan is exported to Turkey, where it is refined into heroin, and then moved by Turkish gangs to the Balkans. There, lieutenants of the Fifteen Families, operating from anarchic border towns around ill-defined Balkan borders, take over and administer the drugs' movement across the continent. In cities across Europe, smaller Kosovo Albanian gangs oversee storage, sale and distribution... etc (this is in para 4 of "further reading")

all interesting stuff, messy whichever way you look at it).

 

[bel532]

bel, suppose I said there was plenty of evidence on the web that in mid May 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Taliban for poppy crop removal.- in addition to the humanitarian moneys. (Chances are it was all "poppy-crop " )

Now there is every chance that one of my posts back there was wrong in part - makes no difference to the point however. (my quote back there that the Taliban had actually achieved 99.8% reduction in opium poppy, as I found on Wikipedia - I put a question mark against that point of the post when I posted it) - turns out that this could well be wrong, and that the Taliban "possibly only reduced production to drive up the price".

The point I was trying to make or rather emphasise was more that there had been dealings between Washington and Taliban. The fact that the money changed hands is enough. Back in those days, the Taliban weren't the bogey men they now are. Slowly but surely they have become demons. Now that the battle lines are drawn , I agree entirely with chasing down AQ. But Hicks has found himself on the wrong team - and I'm confident he regrets it. I'm also confident that USA feels that way too, otherwise they wouldn't be talking down the severity of his crime so much. (although again time will tell on that score too - praps I'm misinterpreting Moe Davis. Maybe he is saying Hicks will spent his life in an Adelaide jail ? It's all timing - before or after the election in Nov ? lol).

You are obviously very confused.

The USA helped the Taliban on this issue and this issue only -the removal of poppy crops was a very worthwile issue, as it was creating such havoc amongst people around the world and especially in the USA.

That does not mean that the USA supported the Taliban in all their demonic thrusts to impose their fundamentalist point of view on all their citiizens especially their women.Surely you don't support that?

If the Taliban did not utilise all that money for the purpose of removing the poppy crops, that is another issue. Unfortunately history is full of examples of aid money not being used for the purpose for which it was intended

I think you are still confusing the Taliban with the Mujahdeen, which the USA did support as a means of thwarting the expansionist of the Soviets in the Cold War period.

 

[2020hindsight]

bel , I know the Mujahadeen, and I know the Taliban. I helped a young Mujahadeen settle into Aus - had a Russian bullet near his spine - inoperable. He was considered a hero of course , a la Rambo III movie, and Reagan superlatives etc .

But lol, why do you think that in July 2001, that Colin Powelll was talking to Mujahadeen ? - Afghanistan by then was run by the Taliban ? They gave em $43 million ?? USD ?? dont you see ??

Anyway, you have replied to one of my posts, but I think Ive already answered in my second . The $43 million was strongly criticised by the likes of Scheer. - and as I say in previous post , this was prior to 9/11.

Maybe you should read some more about "How the USA financed the Taliban" (note not the Mujahadeen) :- plenty more here
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=...s=OOO&q=washington+funded+taliban&btnG=Search

PS you obviously didn't watch the SBS Insight program on this. Michael Mori said it on ABC TV that the Taliban had been welcomed in Washington/ supported by Washington. I take it you disagree?? you are on shakey ground with your arguments. Or is it , dare I say , that you "refuse to see". (as per another post back there somewhere)

PS The Taliban went way off the rails. Lunatic fringe - no argument from me there.
I posted a poem back there .. #23 on poetry thread (strictly the poem is about mother nature, but anyway)

If I were the God of Love..as the Islamic followers say,
And men draped in BLACK!! said that wives should be stoned, if suspected of going astray,
And just on the word of some madman..and quoting My name all the way,
To kill her by pellets from rampaging zealots, - I’d probably lean towards “nay”... etc

 

[2020hindsight]

heck, given that you could probably find someone in the US administration and/or CIA to say that they had a pretty good idea that the money going to Taliban was getting to AQ (mid late 2001), and that US embassies in Africa were being blown up, maybe there's a case that someone else is arguably vulnerable to a possible charge (retrospective) of "providing material support for terrorists".

 

[robert toms]

I hear that Blair suggest that the British sailors were tortured or coerced into making confessions.Interesting that this took a few days ,whereas Hicks held out for years before making any confessions.
There are some logical observations in there somewhere,but when the politicians get involved everything goes to excrement.

 

[2020hindsight]

I agree Robert, - I think we discussed that way back there in this thread. Guantanamo is a terrible precedent.

A couple of articles about things going "wrong" in Afghanistan. Also a photo of the crowd .. (these are the people we are trying to win over )... they don't look too "won over" to me. When the Aussies went into East Timor, they won over the people. When the USA goes into a country with their bombers (and the inevitable excuses about "collateral" or "peripheral" damage), they simply make things worse.

Then they leave an ambush and shoot at vehicles for the next 10 km ??? They obviously hate the place -no chance that they'll achieve a damned thing.
You'd have to wonder if they're helping or hindering - with them on your side, you're on a hiding to nothing.

And of course the Afghan President Karzai is being hailed as a US puppet - and these people don't hold back when they suspect they are being manipulated.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-07-afghan-bombing_x.htm
The U.S. bombing has sparked opposition from Afghans angered at the rising death toll of civilians. Afghan lawmakers blame the rising civilian toll for a surge in support for the Taliban.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai took the unusual step last month of summoning the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Karl W. Eikenberry, and telling him "every effort" should be made to ensure civilians' safety.

Karzai has often called for investigations into civilian deaths and has repeatedly asked the coalition to take care in their bombing targets. Last September, before the recent surge in rebel attacks, he said airstrikes were no longer effective. In 2004, the U.S. military modified its rules of engagement after Karzai expressed outrage over the deaths of 15 children in two airstrikes in late 2003.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-03-04-afghanistan-attack_N.htm Wounded Afghans say U.S. forces fired on civilians after suicide bomb.
JALALABAD, Afghanistan (AP) — U.S. Marines fleeing a militant ambush Sunday opened fire on civilian cars and pedestrians on a busy highway in eastern Afghanistan, wounded Afghans said. Up to 16 people were killed and 34 wounded in the violence, officials said.
A suicide attacker detonated an explosives-filled minivan as the American convoy approached, then militant gunmen fired on the troops inside the vehicles, who returned fire, the U.S. military said.

As the Americans sped away, they treated every car and person along the highway as a potential attacker, said Mohammad Khan Katawazi, the district chief of Shinwar. But Maj. William Mitchell, a U.S. military spokesman, said those killed and injured may have been shot by the militants.

More than a half dozen Afghans recuperating from bullet wounds told The Associated Press that the U.S. forces fired indiscriminately along at least a 10-kilometer (six-mile) stretch of one of eastern Afghanistan's busiest highways — a route often filled not only with cars and trucks but Afghans on foot and bicycles.

"They were firing everywhere, and they even opened fire on 14 to 15 vehicles passing on the highway," said Tur Gul, 38, who was standing on the roadside by a gas station and was shot twice in his right hand. "They opened fire on everybody, the ones inside the vehicles and the ones on foot."

caption with the photo reads :- After violence along a busy highway that left 16 Afghans dead, hundreds of people blocked the road and threw rocks at police, with some demonstrators shouting "Death to America! Death to Karzai," a reference to President Hamid Karzai.

 

[happytown]

... Also a photo of the crowd .. (these are the people we are trying to win over )... they don't look too "won over" to me.
...

2020,

m8, they're not afghanis, they're pakistanis after their world cup effort

Of more interest, however, have a read of the attached pdf file

It is a sate dept, released through foi, official notes on telephone conversation between mullah omar (yes the supreme taliban leader) and a state dept official in 1998, makes for extremely interesting reading

Enjoy

cheers

N.B. Some of it has been redacted, obviously to hide intel sources.

 

[bel532]

bel, suppose I said there was plenty of evidence on the web that in mid May 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Taliban for poppy crop removal.- in addition to the humanitarian moneys. (Chances are it was all "poppy-crop " )

Now there is every chance that one of my posts back there was wrong in part - makes no difference to the point however. (my quote back there that the Taliban had actually achieved 99.8% reduction in opium poppy, as I found on Wikipedia - I put a question mark against that point of the post when I posted it) - turns out that this could well be wrong, and that the Taliban "possibly only reduced production to drive up the price".

The point I was trying to make or rather emphasise was more that there had been dealings between Washington and Taliban. The fact that the money changed hands is enough. Back in those days, the Taliban weren't the bogey men they now are. Slowly but surely they have become demons. Now that the battle lines are drawn , I agree entirely with chasing down AQ. But Hicks has found himself on the wrong team - and I'm confident he regrets it. I'm also confident that USA feels that way too, otherwise they wouldn't be talking down the severity of his crime so much. (although again time will tell on that score too - praps I'm misinterpreting Moe Davis. Maybe he is saying Hicks will spent his life in an Adelaide jail ? It's all timing - before or after the election in Nov ? lol).

To simply take one instance where the USA gave money to the Taliban SPECIFICALLY to remove the poppy crop is certainly 'gilding the lily'. You just can't take ONE instance where the USA provided the funds to the Taliban for a very SPECIFIC purpose and then conclude that the USA was a supporter of the Taliban, very strange logic indeed! It is still obvious that you are still confuised bewteen the Mujahadeen and the Taliban. I have heard this argument from other people and I am not sure if this a deliberate attempt to confuse these two organisations to place the USA in a bad lght in its fight (which is also our fight) against fanatical Muslim terrorists and their supporters. I find this very scary!

How do you know that Hicks regrets his actions, and if he does, is it just because he has been caught? Is he really sorry that he has taken up arms with a fundamentalist organisation that wants to FORCIBLY take civilisation back to the Middle Ages? I have not heard or seen anything to indicate that he has any regrets whatsoever..

 

[wayneL]

To simply take one instance where the USA gave money to the Taliban SPECIFICALLY to remove the poppy crop is certainly 'gilding the lily'. You just can't take ONE instance where the USA provided the funds to the Taliban for a very SPECIFIC purpose and then conclude that the USA was a supporter of the Taliban, very strange logic indeed! It is still obvious that you are still confuised bewteen the Mujahadeen and the Taliban. I have heard this argument from other people and I am not sure if this a deliberate attempt to confuse these two organisations to place the USA in a bad lght in its fight (which is also our fight) against fanatical Muslim terrorists and their supporters. I find this very scary!

How do you know that Hicks regrets his actions, and if he does, is it just because he has been caught? Is he really sorry that he has taken up arms with a fundamentalist organisation that wants to FORCIBLY take civilisation back to the Middle Ages? I have not heard or seen anything to indicate that he has any regrets whatsoever..

Bel

You haven't read your history yet have you?

 

[Kauri]

How do you know that Hicks regrets his actions, and if he does, is it just because he has been caught? Is he really sorry that he has taken up arms with a fundamentalist organisation that wants to FORCIBLY take civilisation back to the Middle Ages? I have not heard or seen anything to indicate that he has any regrets whatsoever..

How can anyone know what he feels, he has been held incomunicado in conditions that rival those of the Middle Ages,

 

[bel532]

How can anyone know what he feels, he has been held incomunicado in conditions that rival those of the Middle Ages,

You evidently know very lttle, if anything, of the history of the Middle Ages! I am sure if was held in prison in the Middle Ages he would not have looked as healthy as he did when in made his appearance in court.