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

David Hicks protests



You would need to be deaf in both ears and blind in both eyes not to be aware that Lebanon, at that time, was NOT A War/Danger zone. I repeat: Why were so many (in proportion to the total lebanese population) Aussie/Lebanese doing there for all that time? Weren't they lucky they had an easy escape route, courtesy of the Aussie Government. Sorry, I meant the Aussie tax payer!
 
You would need to be deaf in both ears and blind in both eyes not to be aware that Lebanon, at that time, was NOT A War/Danger zone.
bel532 said:
Are you seriously suggesting that the 'Aussies 'who went to Lebanon did not know it was a war zone?
You wouldn't happen to be a major shareholder in MPD would you?
 
Remember Powell? he's the one who was given the job of selling the WMD to the UN - with limited success. Well if he's convinced they should close Guantanamo, who are we to argue?

well done all who voiced "concerns" - not only were you eventually heard in Canberra (election year and all that), but sounds like you are now being heard in Washington.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s1948163.htm
Powell urges Bush to close Guantanamo Bay

Interesting that Albania / Kosova gets special mention - but Hick's contribution doesn't get a mention .
 
2020hindsight ,did you see 4 corners last night. I watched the last 20 minutes and similar to Hicks the goverment put up the sgt. Schultz defence . Will be interesting to see what they say about Habib now a paper trail leads to the goverment showing them clearly lying.Notice no reporting in the murdoch press about the goverment lying .
 
.. throughout history the dogooders have undone stable societies due to there nancy ways.

Do you all know more thatn the government?
 
Which stable societies have been undone by people telling the truth and doing good. None come to mind
 
Which stable societies have been undone by people telling the truth and doing good. None come to mind

"truth" and "good" aren't absolutes.

as for guantanamo bay, it is yet another example of how bad american foreign policy is. they were much better off outsourcing the torture camps to pakistan where the media doesn't have access and things like "the rule of law" and "geneva convention" tend not to apply.

as for WMD, the allies knew saddam had them because they sold them to him. saddam just moved them across the border into syria when the allies came knocking.
 
- did you see 4 corners last night.
Peter, nope - but will do so Thursday night when repeated - thanks!!

(The ladies of the household usually watch some damned soapie on Monday nights, so if I want to watch, i have to use the TV in the garage - and last night it was just too bludy cold lol.)

The show that I wish everyone saw was last week's Cutting Edge on SBS - 2 hours of it - it was a fantastic review of how Osama BL has emerged. Anyone else see it ?

Firstly (and we're only talking 20 years ago) one of a handful of Arabs in Afghanistan - seriously just a few dozen or so, - who went to help fight the Russians. Seriously rich of course - his father had 50 odd kids with 20 odd wives.

Made a reputation (fighting hard - tunnel complex as base - which would assist his subsequent escapes), used the press to advantage , photograhed in a cave ( living as Mohammed did) eating the scraps others left etc. Suddenly 100s of Arabs flock to Afghanistan.

Then ... he gambled that he could beat USA in "his briar patch" - the mountains that had been so helpful in beating the Russians - then African Embassy attacks, and or course 9/11 - basically he totally miscalculated - when US / AUS etc attacked and whipped his forces and the Taliban, we was virtually wiped out - no longer a force to be reckoned with - a spent force - and then...

da da ...

We go and attack Iraq, and sheesh - it was the greatest gift he could have asked for !! - You had to see the full documentary - such a mistake to go into Iraq sheesh !!!
 
.. throughout history the dogooders have undone stable societies due to there nancy ways.

Greetings Snake,

Done little posts in the last few months, but I'm back to stick up the dopes
Infact I'm considering placing a couple of posters into Bobbys wobble jar, that hindsite been in it for some time now.

Bobby.
 
america went into iraq because saddam was moving towards using the euro as his defacto oil currency. america wields an enormous amount of power because they essentially get their oil for free (trading oil for $US). a country with the reserves of iraq changing the global defacto oil currency to the euro would mean the US would actually have to start paying real money for oil instead of just printing paper so they invaded. its really not much more complicated than that. the invasion of kuwait, WMD or whatever were just justifications for the pursuit of their "free energy for me" policy.

iraq did have a reasonable justification to invade kuwait. the kuwaitis were drilling close to the iraqi border at an angle and tapping iraqi oil fields which saddam used as justification to invade kuwait.

iraq also did definately 100% for sure possess WMD's, supplied by the americans and the french, and used against northern kurds and southern shia arabs. he just moved them all into syria (which now possesses a reasonable WMD stockpile) to keep the allied forces from finding them.

as for david hicks - he was a muslim jihadi who killed (or attempted to kill) indian, serbian and american soldiers while serving in various conflict zones. he can rot in hell for all i care.
 
disarray
I repeat (what SBS said at least ) ...
If you know different to them, then ... so be it I guess.
 
yeah i know the taliban got pasted, but afghanistan was largely irrelevant to the overall american strategy. iraq was going to be invaded no matter what because saddam was going to move the oil standard from $US to euros. saddam was a threat to americas voracious appetite for energy so the path was set.

to be totally honest osama is a nobody. the taliban are nobodies. all the US cares about is its energy supply. islamists make convenient boogeymen, but they aren't much of a threat outside that (spectacularly audacious stunts like 9/11 notwithstanding).

in fact iraq is quite the godsend in a way. jihadis from all over the muslim world are coming to iraq to take a shot at americans and are being slaughtered in record numbers. its like iraq is a big barrel and all those psycho muslims are the fish. the bodycount on the islamist side is horrendous.
 
There are some background videos on noiruas post (as follows) but not the safe study of the relative strength of Al-Qaida before and after Iraq - it's dramatic. After 9/11, US had world sympathy (and arguably the moral high ground) - now to thousands - no millions - somehow he does (and we are going backwards bigtime) :-

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=130198&highlight=leaders#post130198

I extracted this from the Wikipedia that noirua mentioned . - a long read, but a few interesting facts there ... for instance
"Al-Qaida" means "database", i.e. the original list of names that Bin Laden had collected after Russia was kicked out of Afghanistan.

If anyone doesn't have time to watch all 5 of those 5 videos ( each about 8.5 minutes = 43 minutes) - then I'll mention that #5 starts with 9/11, that's if you don'e have time to watch how to got to be what he is.
But in the end it's no where near as good as that Cutting Edge program was last week (hopefully it will be replayed)


On that last point, the Cutting Edge program interviewed a military officer whose men could actually see Bin Laden and could have picked him off, but they checked and , as the officer says "typical we were told not to go there to risky etc". The Taliban / AQ sent a manout under white flag to negotiate - this officer simply said " we're not interested in any negotiation except full surrender" (or blow them out of the water implied). And by the time they did attack, and there were a lot of AQ/Taliban casualities that day, - Bin Laden had fled.

But really weakened him "politically".
then Iraq as I mentioned
and the rest is history.

Needless to say, they conclude that he has been playing the US (and by association the coalition of the willing ) like a puppeteer
 
jeez disarray...
sometimes I wonder what you're smoking

does anyone else here think that AQ are "no bodies" - ? convenient boogeymen? ignore em ?
that their numbers have decreased since Iraq?

so what's the fuss been about Hicks then ?

The yanks are so bludy terrified that (old Texas saying) "they don't know whether to sh*t or go blind".

And any sensible Australian is also (rightfully) extremely worried
 

well yeah. the power of nightmares points to the neo-con dominated, zionist sympathetic US using islamic jihadis as the new boogeymen since the fall of the soviet union.

militarily speaking AQ are armed only with AK's, rpg's and some explosives and stand no chance against the technological might of the US army. they have no force projection capability and rely on local cells to organise small scale terror attacks. they are hardly any threat to the global dominance of the west, and the yanks are hardly terrified. sure they ramp up the fear and uncertainty but that is a political tactic as old as time itself to ensure the continued acquiesence of the sheeple, it doesn't mean they are worried.

after afghanistan AQ were hammered yes, and american screwups in iraq have swelled their numbers again. not disagreeing with you there. my point is that an invasion of iraq was a foregone conclusion, however america has botched it so badly the islamists have garnered a lot of sympathy from the muslim world and have come back stronger. had american policy not been so blatantly greedy and short sighted then things would have turned out much differently.

as for david hicks, i don't what all the fuss is about either. the leftists were just making their usual bleating noises to get some attention (as they always do) but the main point is, once again, american policy with regards to gitmo was so flawed the camp became more of a hindrance to their policy than help.

2020hindsight said:
jeez disarray...
sometimes I wonder what you're smoking

you talk a lot without knowing very much don't you?
 
So I take it you don't disagree with the point that I've now tried to make 3 times?

And btw, this is pretty much identical to what I posted on "videos with a message" thread a coupe of weeks back ...
quoting Richard Dawkins incidentally ( or do think he's an idiot as well)
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=163446&highlight=dawkins#post163446

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-1018.html
This is only a fraction of it - if you want the book (with about double that article in the Guardian) you might have to go to the Uni of Sydney library.
And btw, note the date -
"I wrote this article on March 18 2003, two days before Iraq was invaded." - so he had pretty good foresight - as did Nelson Mandela and other people who you'll find quoted here in the ASF archives.
 
Greetings Snake,

Done little posts in the last few months, but I'm back to stick up the dopes
Infact I'm considering placing a couple of posters into Bobbys wobble jar, that hindsite been in it for some time now.

Bobby.

Hello Bobby,

Good to see you posting again.
Yes, why do some only post garbage on general chat? Some agenda they have me thinks. Reality will bite them in the ****.

Snake
 
not disagreeing with your main points at all. just pointing out that

a) america was going to invade iraq because iraq was going to sell oil in euros, not $US. an invasion was going to happen no matter what, the war on terror just provided a convenient justification.

b) al-quada aren't a threat to us in any traditional sense (ie. invasion, coup d'etat etc.). the "terror" they inspire is out of all proportion to their actual capabilities, it is just the government and media using AQ as a boogeyman to frighten the populace into behaving. proper governments should inspire the populace into behaving but we don't really see much inspiration these days so terror will have to do.
 
and then we get to the question of how much will be spent on security 8- 9 September during 19th APEC meeting in Sydney etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia-Pacific_Economic_Cooperation
including cell phones being out of action for some of it etc.

To say nothing of the amended travel plans of people who used to go to nice quiet Bali for a break

Likewise, I'm not saying we should overreact - but cripes, the current coalition of the willing will leave the world 1000 times more dangerous than when they came in.
 
the current coalition of the willing will leave the world 1000 times more dangerous than when they came in.
Yep, and more afraid, and considerably more inconvenienced with all the added security which makes travel a nightmare.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...