Hicks on Channel Nine

[2020hindsight]

he was certainly after an adventure? lol

I'm waiting till I hear him interviewed before commenting on his motives -
then again , if Channel Nine withdraw the interview because of GG's threat of Townsville boycotting them - then I guess we may never know the facts

 

[wayneL]

when we have soldiers dying - was he on our side? helping us? our fighting against us?

if you are not with us, you are against us! he ought to be shot in my books

Soooo... all POWs should be shot? We should go to war with all countries who disagree with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq?

I consider it very fortunate that our society is not run by your "book".

BTW, when you invade countries, you tend to get shot at.

 

[agro]

Soooo... all POWs should be shot? We should go to war with all countries who disagree with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq?

I consider it very fortunate that our society is not run by your "book".

BTW, when you invade countries, you tend to get shot at.

we are democratic country

we elect a government

the elected government decided to send troops in our best interest

as such we follow as law abiding citizens

was hicks a law abiding citizen? and he should have known better - he was in the army. he knew exactly what he was doing and not an adventure

 

[explod]

I'm waiting till I hear him interviewed before commenting on his motives -
then again , if Channel Nine withdraw the interview because of GG's threat of Townsville boycotting them - then I guess we may never know the facts

Yeh, fair enough. A close friend did Sociology (Phd) at Melbourne on the exploratory ways of young adults and found that it is fairly normal for them to push the frontiers so to speak. A bit like a baby touching fire, part of growing up it is a rebellion just to test or to observe the effect.

There are too many unknowns to make conclusions. I am not doing that, but those who condemn Hicks out of hand are, IMHO.

 

[explod]

we are democratic country

we elect a government

the elected government decided to send troops in our best interest

as such we follow as law abiding citizens

was hicks a law abiding citizen? and he should have known better - he was in the army. he knew exactly what he was doing and not an adventure

Yeh and that elected government have been tossed out, and the one that we blindly followed have been tossed out of the Congress and look like losing the Presidency.

Our troops were not where Hicks was rounded up either. In fact everyone was focused on Iraq which had nothing to do with Aphganastan.

Just a lot of blind sheep dribble. No one can say till the full story comes out and my musings are just that also.

 

[Stan 101]

was he on our side? helping us? our fighting against us?

Agro, Of course I have no idea if the guy was innocent or guilty or his motives for allegedly being in Afghanistan. I do know this, though.

My neice did go to Afghanistan in 2006 for an adventure trip. She went there for almost a month. Are her and her friends also terrorists?




Also, here's a hypothetical for you. You are travelling to the US with your family for a holiday. You are stopped at the airport by US customs and led away from tyour family to "answer some questions." They assume you have been a part of nefarious deeds against the state and are NOT charged though you are sent to G Bay.

At G Bay you are interrogated weekly and are deprived of sensory stimulus and general human rights. You lose track of time. You have had limited contact with any neutral party to put your case across to let alone able to ask the question of why you are being detained.

After aproximately 5 years you are offered a 1 off, non negotiable deal. The deal is to admit your guilt of _____________(insert crime here). For this crime your current time of incarceration + 12 months jail back in Australia will be your punishment and you will be officially silenced from talking of your experience. If you refuse to accept guilt, you will stay in G Bay. The officals refuse to let you know if or when you will ever get your time in a court of law to prove your innocence.

You miss your family. You are a shell of your former self. You are a mentally spent after your time in this living hell having to go through day to day not understanding what is happening to you. Your country has made no attempts that you know of to demand your fundamental human rights of being innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Do you accept the plea and therefore your freedom and family knowing you will never be able to speak out about your mistreatment or do you decline the plea and take the moral high ground knowing you are innocent but you may rot in G bay for the rest of your life without ever being put on trial.


Agro, I'd be interested to hear your response on this hypothetical scenario after you have given it some real thought. Please don't think I'm singling you out. I understand your view on Hicks and am genuinely interested in hearing your response.

cheers,

 

[wayneL]

we are democratic country

we elect a government

the elected government decided to send troops in our best interest

as such we follow as law abiding citizens

was hicks a law abiding citizen? and he should have known better - he was in the army. he knew exactly what he was doing and not an adventure

I am struggling with your logic here. Why does that mean he should be shot?

Could Hicks have known that the US + sycophants were going to invade? No!

He chose his allegiance and suffered the consequences of being on the losing side by being imprisoned. That should be the end of it, unless he has further hostile intentions. That is the rule of war, even some of the more hideous belligerents have honoured that. But you suggest we cast aside the Geneva convention?

Hmmmm You talk about democracy, but I think you would feel more at home in a totalitarian autocracy.

 

[agro]

Agro, Of course I have no idea if the guy was innocent or guilty or his motives for allegedly being in Afghanistan. I do know this, though.

My neice did go to Afghanistan in 2006 for an adventure trip. She went there for almost a month. Are her and her friends also terrorists?




Also, here's a hypothetical for you. You are travelling to the US with your family for a holiday. You are stopped at the airport by US customs and led away from tyour family to "answer some questions." They assume you have been a part of nefarious deeds against the state and are NOT charged though you are sent to G Bay.

At G Bay you are interrogated weekly and are deprived of sensory stimulus and general human rights. You lose track of time. You have had limited contact with any neutral party to put your case across to let alone able to ask the question of why you are being detained.

After aproximately 5 years you are offered a 1 off, non negotiable deal. The deal is to admit your guilt of _____________(insert crime here). For this crime your current time of incarceration + 12 months jail back in Australia will be your punishment and you will be officially silenced from talking of your experience. If you refuse to accept guilt, you will stay in G Bay. The officals refuse to let you know if or when you will ever get your time in a court of law to prove your innocence.

You miss your family. You are a shell of your former self. You are a mentally spent after your time in this living hell having to go through day to day not understanding what is happening to you. Your country has made no attempts that you know of to demand your fundamental human rights of being innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Do you accept the plea and therefore your freedom and family knowing you will never be able to speak out about your mistreatment or do you decline the plea and take the moral high ground knowing you are innocent but you may rot in G bay for the rest of your life without ever being put on trial.


Agro, I'd be interested to hear your response on this hypothetical scenario after you have given it some real thought. Please don't think I'm singling you out. I understand your view on Hicks and am genuinely interested in hearing your response.

cheers,

i like your example

now

did they pull david hicks away from his two children who were being cared for by their mother while he is busy adventuring???

so, can you see a difference between an adventurer a terrorist and a tourist?

if you cannot - neither can i

 

[agro]

I am struggling with your logic here. Why does that mean he should be shot?

Could Hicks have known that the US + sycophants were going to invade? No!

He chose his allegiance and suffered the consequences of being on the losing side by being imprisoned. That should be the end of it, unless he has further hostile intentions. That is the rule of war, even some of the more hideous belligerents have honoured that. But you suggest we cast aside the Geneva convention?

Hmmmm You talk about democracy, but I think you would feel more at home in a totalitarian autocracy.

i wonder how you would have been treated if you are an afghanistani doing the same thing in australia?

how would you have been treated if you returned home?

would you have lived 5 years, 5 hours or 5 seconds?

david hicks was paid by the government to train as a solider , so after he trains he goes and works with someone else?!! was he aware that australia was at war with them? if he was why was he there?

all in all, people take advantage of us because of our beleives

there are too many "do-gooders" and your own of them

/ i end my point here

 

[Stan 101]

Agro, my question is not about David Hicks. It is about a hypothetical situation I am putting you into. And again, in a democracy, one is innocent until proven guilty.



cheers,

 

[wayneL]

i wonder how you would have been treated if you are an afghanistani doing the same thing in australia?

how would you have been treated if you returned home?

would you have lived 5 years, 5 hours or 5 seconds?

david hicks was paid by the government to train as a solider , so after he trains he goes and works with someone else?!! was he aware that australia was at war with them? if he was why was he there?

all in all, people take advantage of us because of our beleives

there are too many "do-gooders" and your own of them

/ i end my point here

You are dodging the point. Are you suggesting that we set our standards by the Afghani's standards. On the one hand you appeal to western ideals, on the other you appeal to foreign ideals.

I don't think you really have a point outside of that implanted by the US gu'mint, in which to end.

Do-gooder! lol So you're a do-badder?

 

[Julia]

i
david hicks was paid by the government to train as a solider , so after he trains he goes and works with someone else?!!

Just a correction here. Hicks did apply to join the army but was rejected.
Those sympathetic to Mr Hicks might well conjecture that this rejection was what drove his interest to a different arena of battle.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

none at all - he was just in Afghanistan for a holiday

You are probably close to the mark. He was certainly after adventure and got more than he bargained for. But to brand him a terrorist without all the facts?

Just because the press and some heads of state say so. Be an individual and not a sheep.

Please please, it is well documented that he was indoctrinated with a fascist form of Islamism and was bearing arms in Afghanistan, had previously served as a jihadist in Kosova and was far from being the casual Aussie tourist in Afghanistan as you portray him.

He's served his time. Lets forget him.

gg

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

This is probably how the interview would go on Channel 9

A preview for those for and against in this thread who all value free speech and freedom (you too explod and agro)





Raaaaaay: Welcome David Hicks, and now we break for an ad for VB and a preview of Channel 9's newest show...World's biggest Cheerleaders.

Raaaaaay: Welcome back viewers, tonight we speak to David Hicks, famously described by Garpal Gumnut from that haven for right wing zealots Townsville as an Islamo-Fascist. David what is your reaction to this.

David: Well um eh oh all all um oh duh

Raaaaaay: How does it feel to be called a traitor

David: Well um eh oh all all um oh duh

Raaaaaay: And now we break for an ad for VB and a preview of Channel 9's newest show...World's biggest Cheerleaders.


And thus it would go.

 

[Dukey]

Hey! settle down GG....
I'm from townsville (brownsville, clownsville???) and I'm a 'broken left-wing zen pantheist' .

You could probably insert a few more ad breaks though... and don't forget those annoying 9 promos screaming at us to SMILE... you better SMILE!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mofra]

david hicks was paid by the government to train as a solider , so after he trains he goes and works with someone else?!! was he aware that australia was at war with them? if he was why was he there?

a. He didn't train with the Australian Army.
b. He was overseas fighting well before the invasion of Afganistan.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Hey! settle down GG....
I'm from townsville (brownsville, clownsville???) and I'm a 'broken left-wing zen pantheist' .

You could probably insert a few more ad breaks though... and don't forget those annoying 9 promos screaming at us to SMILE... you better SMILE!!!!!!!!!!!

Just as well you're not still living in Townsville mate, that broken left wing panwhatsit sounds bad, you can't get to see a doctor anymore unless you're really crook.

Channel 9 is on the nose up here, nobody watches it since Fatty Vautin on the Footy Show insulted the Cowboys a few years back.

Apart from Underbelly its been watched as much as the ABC, that is not much.

gg

 

[cuttlefish]

American troops are guilty of war crimes (Abu Graib). America invaded a sovereign nation (Iraq) based on "evidence" that was subsequently shown to be misleading. America detained an Australian citizen without charge for several years (David Hicks). These are facts.

It is naive to think that we know all the facts of the David Hicks case.

 

[explod]

American troops are guilty of war crimes (Abu Graib). America invaded a sovereign nation (Iraq) based on "evidence" that was subsequently shown to be misleading. America detained an Australian citizen without charge for several years (David Hicks). These are facts.

It is naive to think that we know all the facts of the David Hicks case.

Well put and as I also stated earlier in this thread, bigger issues will unfold in this case and many others from the unlawful detentions by the US.

No one, even politicians may bend the rule of law and be immune to eventual accountability. And repealed legislation found wanting will provide little retrospective protection.

The issues (principals of human rights) go far beyond David Hicks and those not able to grasp that would be best served to hold thier peace and wait for the full story.

 

[Superfly]

I think he has a right to profit from it, i would want to.

So if one of the 9/11 hijackers had survived, you would think the same... because we are talking about the same with Hicks...

He was detained illegally for years on end with total disregard for the Geneva convention. I hope he makes a motza out of it.

The same disregard that Hicks and co in Afganistan had with the Geneva convention...

PS - This is not endorsing whatever he did or did not do, just highlighting the fact that the powers above get away with breaking the law all the time so why shouldnt others...

Yeh.. why not fly planes into buildings and blow up cafes full of westerners.. why not...if the government breaks the law then it's ok... hmmm