| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Down Under | ||
| Hicks denies son trained as terrorist | ||
| 2003-07-29 | ||
Terry Hicks, the father of Australian Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks, admits his son may have received military training with Al Qaeda but not terrorist training. Terry Hicks stood inside a wire cage near Broadway, one of Manhattan's busiest streets, to highlight the conditions he says his son is experiencing at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Mr Hicks is meeting with US lawyers to discuss plans for his son's trial. David Hicks has not been charged yet but is one of six detainees being considered for the first military tribunals. Mr Hicks has spent the last few weeks retracing his son's steps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. "If he's guilty I accept that but I don't think he is judging what I've seen in the last 3 weeks," Terry Hicks said.
| ||
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #14 In case you missed it, Igs, he wasn't IN Australia when he was picked up. So you see when Australians are overseas they need to abide by local laws. and when Australians are in a warzone they need to observe the rules and NOT fight against their OWN TEAM. Fucking lefties think they own morality. |
| Posted by: Anon1 2003-7-30 5:04:30 AM |
| #13 funny thing is...he didn't break any Australian laws, fucking yanks, they think they own the world |
| Posted by: Igs 2003-7-29 10:06:51 PM |
| #12 dammit tu3031, I almost shorted my laptop when I sprayed half a mouthful of wine all over the screen. And that was good wine, too... |
| Posted by: Carl in NH 2003-7-29 10:01:14 PM |
| #11 Maybe he just audited the training and didn't take it for a grade. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2003-7-29 9:23:22 PM |
| #10 Come on, guys! He received good terrorist training, not bad terrorist training. And don't tell me you can't tell the difference. It's relativism expanded to its logical extreme. |
| Posted by: Highlander 2003-7-29 4:48:04 PM |
| #9 He trained with Al-Qaida, but he's not a terrorist? And I'm sure, if the opportunity presented itself, he wouldn't kill or destroy an American target would he? Yeah, right! Boo-frickin'-hoo. Let him rot like the rest. |
| Posted by: Celissa 2003-7-29 3:30:45 PM |
| #8 Here is part of the story from The Age: 'Australian Taliban fighter David Hicks has freely admitted to Australian intelligence agencies that he trained with the terrorist group al-Qaeda, a senior intelligence source has told The Age. The comments support claims by Prime Minister John Howard, which have been denied by Hicks' family and legal team, who are yet to speak to the 27-year-old detainee at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. "If it revolves around him having trained with al-Qaeda, then it's a lay-down misere," the intelligence source told The Age. "There's this artificial debate going on with his lawyers, saying he was only with the Taliban - but he's never denied training with al-Qaeda." In four interviews with ASIO and the Australian Federal Police, the latest of which occurred in May this year, Hicks has apparently made no effort to deny an association with the terrorist organisation.' |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2003-7-29 12:33:01 PM |
| #7 Denial is not just a river in Egypt! Mr. Hicks needs some counseling. Maybe he can get together with the father of John Bin Walker and create a support group? "Parents and Idiots Getting Stupid" or "PIGS" for short. Sort of fits in with the whole Islam thing. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2003-7-29 12:12:26 PM |
| #6 Mister Hicks' little son should NOT be killed by the United States. We need to take this little piece of street litter, give him just enough parachute training to make it to the ground alive, and drop him somewhere on the northern side of Papua New Guinea's mountain range. In broad daylight. Two days before this takes place, we need to fly a squadron of UH-60 Blackhawks over the area, announcing a free lunch, to be dropped from the sky..... |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-7-29 12:07:10 PM |
| #5 Er, so, Mr. Hicks, you've just admitted your son is the illegal combatant he's imprisoned as. What's the beef exactly? |
| Posted by: someone 2003-7-29 11:26:49 AM |
| #4 If my dad was standing in a cage in the middle of Manhattan, I'd beg them to shoot me. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2003-7-29 8:57:41 AM |
| #3 terry hicks is a man in denial. His son admitted it according to prev. stories. Besides: fighting for the taliban against the northern alliance is still treachery as the northern alliance were our allies: we were fighting with them against the taliban! does he think we feel sympathy knowing he fought for the group that beat women back to the stone age and bombed the bamiyan buddhas? And encouraged and tolerated and hid Al Qaeda? Send him to the goddam firing squad, don't send him back here. Gitmo is not the place for him, hell is. Problem is, Terry Hicks is SURE to be on the front page of the al-SMH tomorrow in his cage whining about how unfair the USA is , and australia's hate-america media will lap it up and spread it and drive a HUGE WEDGE BETWEEN STRONG ALLIES. |
| Posted by: Anon1 2003-7-29 3:19:05 AM |
| #2 Lessee: 1) The Kid was trained by the Terrorist Org Al Qaeda. Check! 2) Daddy asserts it was Military training, not Terrorist training, from an Org, Al Qaeda, with no uniformed Military and nothing to indicate it knows anything about bona-fide Military training, but mountains of evidence that everyone ELSE it trained was trained as a Terrorist. Check! 3) He chose to fight for the Taliban and, by extension, Al Qaeda, his mentors. Check! 4) The Taliban was a Terrorist Org in its own right. Check! 5) The Taliban "Govt" was recognized as the legitmate "Govt" of Afghanistan by only 3 Govts in the world (Pak, SA, UAE). Check! 6) All 3 withdrew their recognition when the US announced it would ally with the Northern Aliance to remove the Taliban from power to end their repression and their support for Al Qaeda. Check! 7) The Kid decided to stay in Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban / Al Qaeda against the Northern Alliance and the US. Check! 8) The US and the Northern Alliance began the war to remove the Taliban / Al Qaeda. Check! 9) The Kid went to war; he wore no uniform and carried an AK-47 and admits he "fought" the US & Northern Alliance to defend the Taliban / Al Qaeda. Check! 10) But Daddy sez he's not a Terrorist. Check! 11) Daddy's argument is that he was Military-trained not Terrorist-trained. Check! 12) There is no evidence whatsoever to support Daddy's assertion. Check! 13) Now Daddy stands in a wire cage on the sidewalk of a street in NY in symbolic protest. Check! 14) Daddy is a fucking LOONEY. Check! Methinks this is one of the narrowest legal positions imaginable - the razor blade of splitting hairs. A clearer case of being a Terrorist and, by logical extension, merit for death, is pretty hard to imagine, short of surviving as a suicide bomber. This shitforbrains Kid picked up a weapon to defend the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Regards the death penalty, I believe it should be asserted for all of the Afghanistan combatants as, by definition, they demonstrated an overt desire / willingness to kill for the unholy terrorist alliance of the Taliban / Al Qaeda. It must be applied uniformly. Given my druthers, the asshole John Walker "American Taliban" Lindh should have been the first to be put down - and should be pushing up daisies already. Removing the death penalty option for the Brits and, now, this Aussie are mistakes, as well, but the excessive and undeserved mercy shown Lindh makes this problematic. Now, IMHO, you can't apply it to ANY of the battlefield combatants from Afghanistan, regardless of their nationality. |
| Posted by: PD 2003-7-29 2:58:32 AM |
| #1 "If he's guilty I accept that but I don't think he is judging what I've seen in the last 3 weeks," Terry Hicks said. Well, d'ya think that there could be a wee bit of a bias here? I mean, just a WEE bit????? Hmmmmmm????? ;) |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-7-29 1:28:04 AM |