Free David Hicks

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by Iron Greasel: But if he had actually done something, why would they not do it the right way and actually accuse him of something and give him a trial?

Originally posted by johnny: If he had actually done something, why not let him sweat for a while, or rot until hell freezes over for all i care ? If he was on Al Qaeda's, or the Taliban's payrole, do you actually care if he gets a trial or not ?

We seem to be having some communication difficulties. Let me try to rephrase.

If he has done something that humans generally deserve to be captured and tortured for years, those who gain something from keeping him would lose absolutely nothing by giving him a trial and then continuing the torture.

Ergo, those who gain something from keeping him would only want to not give him a trial if he is, in fact, innocent and would be found as such and released if they gave him a trial.

And as he has not been given a trial, one can only assume that he is innocent.

[robertthebard]

Just a curiosity type question here, as I'm really not old enough to know, but how many enemy combatants that were captured in WW2 got a trial? Most, if not all of them were held until the end of the conflict, by both sides, without a trial, until the war was over. That is allowed by the Geneva Conventions. Not only that, it makes perfect sense. Both in WW2, and in the current situation. Why would you release someone that you know is a supporter of your enemy?
Where were his kids when he up and went to join the Taliban? Did he give them any consideration then? Like I already said, his situation sucks, but he created it. It's not like the US went to Australia and tore him away from his family and job. Although, I have to admit that now that the President here has the authority to do just that, it's really scary. However, he was caught fighting with, or armed to fight with the enemy, in a time of war, and that makes him an enemy combatant, and subject to be held as a POW, instead of a criminal. POW's are not subject to the same rules as War Criminals, unless it's your position that he was a war criminal, as Saddam was, and should be charged with similar atrocities, which would more than likely result with his execution, instead of eventual release.

[johnny]

originally posted by Iron greasel And as he has not been given a trial, one can only assume that he is innocent.

I'm assuming something completely different. Since he walked with the Taliban, who are widely recognised as a bunch of terrorists, he is everything BUT innocent. Therefore he deserves just as much a fair trial as the Taliban themselves have given to their captives in the past, which is 0.0

He's doing fine collecting dust.

[Bozos of Bones]

Wiki has the right information in the right light.
EDIT: After reading it all through, I've come to the conclusion that he is doing fine collecting dust, as johnny said before. Why should he be treated any different than the other prisoners just because he is Australian? I even think Australia is wise not to ask for his freedom.

[ 11-19-2006, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: Bozos of Bones ]

[Leonis]

Originally posted by Bozos of Bones: Wiki has the right information in the right light. EDIT: After reading it all through, I've come to the conclusion that he is doing fine collecting dust, as johnny said before. Why should he be treated any different than the other prisoners just because he is Australian? I even think Australia is wise not to ask for his freedom.

That article contains some very interesting points if they are true...

Edit: post replies only for plural of the word "point"

[ 11-19-2006, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: Leonis ]

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by johnny: You think he deserves that much courtesy then ? How much courtesy have these guys shown every time they captured a western reporter, or people who are there to aid the local population ? They had their heads sliced of their bodies while it was being taped. A bullet in the back of his head would be the courtesy he deserves.

We're better than they are.

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by wellard: Wow some of you are so insightful ... not. Have you got FACTS about what he has or has not done? (And the answer to that is NO you have not) You must be magic to know what the USA military have not proved in a law court despite over 5 years of torture. Your posts also goes to show the root of the problem, that if you point a finger at someone who is Muslim and call him a terrorist then nearly every Tom Dick and Harry jumps on board and brings out a rope to lynch him without bothering to see if there is proof or whether that proof has been tested in a court of law.

He's caught hanging out with taliban terrorists in a warzone, carrying a gun.

He's a terrorist.

If the USA knows he did something against them then why has he not been charged and convicted with anything? Why do they continue to torture him? Why are all the British victims are freed but Australians have not?

Because he's a POW.

Should rumors be enough to keep someone to torture and jail for over 5 years? Judging by the histrionics shown in some posts it shows that there are still some Americans who are proud that their Australian allies can be treated this way. Hicks may not be innocent, but lets find out the facts by having a trial. Lets face it even Saddam would get a trial

Saddam got a trial after the war ended. Hicks is a POW. The war is not over.

[Micah Foehammer]

Originally posted by johnny: He was with the Northern Alliance ??? Never mind that, i misread your post. So he was captured by the NA, and handed to US forces later ? You gotta understand the surprise on the American's faces when they were handed a Taliban footsoldier, who happens to be a citizen of a nation that's supposed to be a trusted ally. Now, if it were an Aussie from Arab or north African descent, i could at least have some understanding for it, but a caucasian Australian ? Give me a friggin break here. You know why he went to Afghanistan right ? He went there looking for violence, and violence caught up with him. A white man with no Islamic roots whatsoever has no business in a shithole like Afghanistan. He's not your common crook Wellard, he's a sick mind, and would be best put out of his misery, because you definitely don't want to sent such a person back into society. He threw away that right when he signed up with the Taliban.

Time line (quoted for information from Wiki):

On October 7, 2001 the United States, aided by the United Kingdom and supported by a coalition of other countries including the NATO alliance, began the military invasion of Afghanistan, including bombing Taliban and al-Qaeda related camps

After arriving in Konduz on 9 November 2001, David Hicks joined a group which included John Walker Lindh (the "American Taliban"). This group was engaged in combat against Coalition forces, and during this fighting he was captured by "Coalition forces".

Note: In the second comment, the term "Coalition Forces" might refer to the combined forces of the Northern Alliance and the US-led NATO forces. While it IS a fact the elements of the US 10th Mountain Division were deployed to Afghanistan, I can not find any link that indicates that they were involved specifically in the fighting around Kunduz. I HAVE found references that indicate that US warplanes DID participate in the actions around Kunduz, and that they were assisted by Special forces troops inserted into the Kunduz area. These troops served two function: one was to infiltrate Taliban positions and act as spotters for air strikes and the second was to partipate as military advisers with the Northern Alliance forces surrounding Kunduz. I can find no mention of other colation forces in the Kunduz area.

[johnny]

Not just a terrorist then, but also a traitor, like his American buddy Lindh. Sorry, but there's only one fitting penalty for that.

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by johnny: Since he walked with the Taliban, who are widely recognised as a bunch of terrorists, he is everything BUT innocent. Therefore he deserves just as much a fair trial as the Taliban themselves have given to their captives in the past, which is 0.0

If he is not innocent, then what is he guilty of? Being a taliban? Being in the wrong place at the wrong time is not, in my possibly biased opinion, a valid reason to shut someone in a box for three years.

Also, the fact that they mistreat their prisoners is no reason for you to. Well, possibly a reason, but not one that would give your actions international acceptance.

Originally posted by Sir Krustin: He's caught hanging out with taliban terrorists in a warzone, carrying a gun. He's a terrorist.

That definition can't be right. A person who carries a gun in a warzone he is simply a soldier. If he carries a gun in some non-military settlement, with an intention to shoot civilians, then he is a terrorist.