David Hicks - Austrailian Terrorist captured, convicted and taking his case to the UN.

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


Actually the reason for me posting this was because peope were stating he was charged with an ex post fact law. I said he was not, and provided the info to prove that.

Al Queida and Taliban people have been instructed on what to do when captured. One of those tools is to continually file claims of abuse and torture.

Hence why I find claims coming from a group who has no issues cutting a person head off solely because they are christian and delivering food to people as not believeable.




posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Are you seriously suggesting that Gitmo doesn't torture suspects against the Geneva convention? Not to mention your own damned Constitution - something which appears to be being used more as a teapot doily, or a napkin, than something to build your country on.
edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Are you seriously suggesting that Gitmo doesn't torture suspects against the Geneva convention? Not to mention your own damned Constitution - something which appears to be being used more as a teapot doily, or a napkin, than something to build your country on.
edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)


Actually what im saying, and that people dont understand, is when the US signs a treaty, it becomes a part of the US Federal body of law, making it modifiable by Congress and able to be challeneged in court, as was done with the enhanced interrogation techniques.

Simply because the UN says its a violation doesnt make it so under US law, which is whats going on in this case. Britain has done the same thing as well.

People need to understand the UN is not a democratic entity nor is it a governing body.

Secondly, they are treated a lot better than how they treat their captives, which is to say we dont cut peoples heads off like they do then show it on tv as propoganda.

I wish people would be jsut as concerned about that as trying to stick it to the US because.
edit on 28-8-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Great, now you're defending torture. At least we know where you stand.

Doesn't matter how you word it, spin it or legalise it - torture is torture, and those who defend torturing people are no better than the torturers themselves.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by meathed
 


Once you understand WHO Al-Qaida is, you understand that if Hicks is being put away then so should half the CIA.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Great, now you're defending torture. At least we know where you stand.

Doesn't matter how you word it, spin it or legalise it - torture is torture, and those who defend torturing people are no better than the torturers themselves.


Tell ya what.. I will start caring about torture when you and the others start caring about the people Al Queida and the Taliban kill, and the manner they do it in.

Waterboarding is torture yet cutting a persons head off is acceptable?

I see where you stand....



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightAssassin
reply to post by meathed
 


Once you understand WHO Al-Qaida is, you understand that if Hicks is being put away then so should half the CIA.


Al Queida / Bin laden. Bin Laden was part of the Muhajadeen in Afghanistan duyring the Soviet invasion. The CIA supported the muhajadeen since its a cold war, eventually providing them with stinger missiles.

After the Soviets withdrew Bin Laden wanted the CIA to continue to support him and they did not. That torqued Bin Laden off, and here we are today.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Nobody ever said that cutting people's heads off is acceptable - but there you go again.... deflecting.

Why do you want to lower yourselves to the same level as those who cut off heads? Hmm? At least with the 'tewwowists' you know what you are going to get - unlike the US who renditions them, tortures them and then claims innocence.
edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Nobody ever said that cutting people's heads off is acceptable - but there you go again.... deflecting.

Why do you want to lower yourselves to the same level as those who cut off heads? Hmm? At least with the 'tewwowists' you know what you are going to get - unlike the US who renditions them, tortures them and then claims innocence.
edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)


Im not deflecting.. What I am doing i spointing out the differences in the manner people are treated. For some reason people are quick to jump on the bandwagon to go after the US, while ignoring atrocities elsewhere.

People act as if trying to impriove conditions in countries that are developing / dictatorship is to hard, so people just go after countries that wont drag them out in the middle fo the night for criticising its policies.

I ahve seen more people go after Gitmo while ignoring Iran, Taliban, Al Queida etc etc etc.

Just seems hypocritical. I dont see those same people trying to take the Taliban, Alqueida, Iran to the UN.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Im not deflecting.. What I am doing i spointing out the differences in the manner people are treated. For some reason people are quick to jump on the bandwagon to go after the US, while ignoring atrocities elsewhere.


I am not forgetting what the 'tewwowists' do to people, in their own country, after having had the US interfere with them for decades......nobody is ignoring what they do to people. Suggesting that is just your way of deflecting the conversation away from the fact that David Hicks was tortured into confession by the US in Gitmo.


People act as if trying to impriove conditions in countries that are developing / dictatorship is to hard, so people just go after countries that wont drag them out in the middle fo the night for criticising its policies.


Nobody asked the US to do so. Why is the US interfering in the M.E.? Pray tell what gives the US the right to invade sovereign countries on the basis of lies?


I ahve seen more people go after Gitmo while ignoring Iran, Taliban, Al Queida etc etc etc.


Because the US claims to be so high and mighty, so squeaky clean then they turn around and lower themselves to the same level as the supposed 'tewwowists' - then have the audacity to lie about it.


Just seems hypocritical. I dont see those same people trying to take the Taliban, Alqueida, Iran to the UN.


Remember when the Taliban asked the US to provide proof of Bin Ladens involvement on 9/11 and they would hand him over? Why didn't the US provide that proof huh? Instead of talking to them, they just accused them of harbouring him and WHAMMO - 10 years on you are still there spending your country into oblivion fighting a war that should never have been.
edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by meathed
I have never liked David Hicks for his actions nore believed his story.
The north alliance should have put a bullet in him when they had a chance. It would have saved some money and a few arguements.
I beleive he should at least be locked up forever for the terrorist that he is.
And he should never be allowed to speak at the UN.
edit on 28-8-2011 by meathed because: (no reason given)


Why do you claim he is a terrorist? Did he kill innocent civilians? Did he help do that? I dont see any evidence or suggestions even by his prosecutors to that end.

He joined an army whose cause he believed in. The taliban are natives to the afganistan territory, americans are not. US army invaded and occupied their country so they have every legitimate right to wage a war to defend it, under every conceivable national or international law. This man is a prisoner of war, nothing more or less.

I dont suppose you believe all prisoners of war should be executed, do you? That would say a lot about you.
Your calls for murder of this man are dusgusting imho.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Beheading people is absolutely unacceptable however let's not forget it was'nt all that long ago our Royal families, Barons and a long line of Popes did it, so did the Vikings, Nordics, Saxons, Asians and other cultures. As Caucasians, we decended from a long line of some of the most barbaric people that ever walked the earth.

To see this continue today amongst Muslim extremists, I get your point. But what does that have to do with David Hicks? Last time I checked I do not believe the man ever killed anyone



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Speaking of terrorism, torture, murder, genocide and other such activities, before criticizing and calling for murders of terrorists and scuh, I advise you get properly acquainted with the "School of the americas".

www.soaw.org...
www.nisgua.org...
www.derechos.org...
and so on.

There are plenty of examples showing a huge percentage of south american (and other) warlords and terrorist murderers were "educated" in terrorist tactics.

If David Hicks is a terrorist, then so are all the american officers and staff working in that facility, including all their commanders, all the way to most US presidents. So what did you say we should all do with terrorists?
edit on 28-8-2011 by badnickname because: Added another link.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


An interesting theoretical argument.

The problem is its based on speculation and leaps of logic on your part, which moves it from being factual to that of an opinion.

Al Queida and the Taliban arent signatories to the Geneva convention, or the CAT, which means, under UN Internatial Law, arent protected by the guarantees. Everytime they violate those treaties, the party harmed can respond in kind in a limited fashion.

If they didnt want the US in Afghanistan, then they should have turned Bin Laden over to the US, sineatd of moving the goal post by demanding evidence, and once provided stipulated they would only turn him over to a 3rd party and not the US.

When the Taliban made that choice, they sealed their fate.

Hicks not only survived, but is telling his side of the story.. Something prisoners on the other side dont get to do. So even though you think its barbaric, its nothing compared to the otherside.
edit on 28-8-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


While I understand the historical argument, we tend to over look one thing. While all people during those times faced the possibility of beheading or worse, its seems countries have grown out of that behavior except for a select few groups.

If these groups would update themselves and comprehend the fact its not longer the 9th / 14th century, they very well may be a world class country righ in history.

Instead its nothing better than a very large killing field. A group of morons have hijacked a religious and interpret the way they want, which runs in contradicition to the actual tenets.

Sad really...



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Sigh, fine. Torture is GREAT! Torture is the answer to the worlds problems!! ALL HAIL TORTURE!!!!!

Yep, lets all lower ourselves to their level to make ourselves feel better, to satisfy that primal urge for blood and retribution! Sounds like a great plan!!!

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little....

Oh how the mighty have fallen:

edit on 28/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Two facts wrong.

Bin Laden was never stopped being supplied by CIA. Al-Qaida ran the drug operation in Afghanistan. Al-Qaida supplied the CIA with drugs to import into the US, along with into other countries, all in the name of maintain those black project funds. Bin Laden was never pissed at the CIA.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
OH ! Am I going to get "flamed" for this but I feel I must ask a couple of questions.

1) When did the "patriot act" become a part of international law. I thought this guy was captured by the northern alliance in Afganistan. Does this mean they can then give him up for prosicution under the laws of a third country?

2) Did he ever discharge a weapon with the intent of harming or killing an American soldier? This would seem to be a major point if we are to have juristiction in his case as has been stated before as part of a UN mandate.

I am proud of my service to the U S but of late it seems a wheel has run off and things are not the same as before. I know the world has changed a lot in the past few years but our countries reaction to these changes does not seem to fit in all cases.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


I have noticed more and more over the last decade how many in the US seem to feel that US law applies to the entire world.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Nice picture.. Its a good example of what Iraqis are doing to each other, since that is where the photo came from.

Should I post pictures from 9/11 of charred bodies in the Pentagon? The wtc?

Hicks knew what he was doing by joining Al Queida. He knew what they stood for and their agenda.

He made his own bed, now he gets to lie in it.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join