My 2.2 cents (GST Inc.)

It is a real prick when your opinions are taxed. Australia least powerful political blog. (Plus any other crap I want to talk about.)

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Hicks deal seems to be in the Wind

The case of David Hicks seems to be heading towards a conclusion. The best evidence of this was the sacking of Stephen Kenny, the Australian part of the legal team. The reason given by the US side of legal team was that Mr Kenny may not have had Hicks best interests at heart as he was just protesting Hicks detention and not trying organise a deal. More likely is that a deal is about to be done and Kenny would have been an speedhump on the way to get the deal.
My personal feelings on Hicks is that is he is very dumb and was probably caught up in something that was bigger than he expected. My feelings that he is not real smart is caused by the fact he attempted to claim to be Malayasian when first captured in Afghanistan. The local Afghans might have believed this but anyone who has any idea of the racial make up of Malayasia who not buy that for a minute. I don't think he would have much use to the terrorists except as a human bomb.


  • At 12:32 pm, February 09, 2005, Blogger Potentially Ash said…

    Part of the reason that Mamdouh Habib was given back was the only "evidence" that had against him where obtained under extreme duress, electric rotating barrel style and the recent US court finding that any military trial judgment is appealable to a real court where torture evidence is inadmissible. So if we cant charge him, just bleed on him and send him home.

    What makes Hicks so interesting is that here is real evidence, most of it in the form of letters he wrote to his family, what will stand up in a real court. Terry Hicks' documentary "David Hicks vs. the president" works through a lot of these letters and tries to build a picture of why David joined the jihad. And yes, he may not be the smartest man (but don't be so quick to judge this), and yes, he adopted a fundamentalist islamic militancy, but whether this makes him a terrorist I have my doubts.

    So, what if Hicks goes to trial, gets a fair go, and is proven to be innocent of terror. That would be a case of Hicks vs. the president and Hicks winning. Not a good start to the legal war on terror. So then, you cut a deal. Hicks needs to be found guilty of something, something with the word terror in it. They might decide the only way to get him will be Al Copone style, ie. Terror tax evasion or even a terror parking ticket.

    Where does that leave David, you and me? Well, it will be years before David returns to Australia and he will never never get a sorry. I will buy his book. And you may end up preferring that you where Malaysian.


Post a Comment

<< Home