[guitarman1]

LATEST: AUSTRALIAN DOMESTIC BIOLOGICAL TERROR ATTACK..........
go to end of thread to read more

New doubts about validity of Hicks charges

By Marian Wilkinson National Security Editor
June 1, 2005 Sydney Morning Herald




Australian Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks.
Photo: Reuters

Four international lawyers, including the former top human rights investigator in Afghanistan for the United Nations, have raised strong doubts about the legal basis of the US military's case against David Hicks, who has been held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for 3½ years.

Hicks is to face trial by a special US military commission on charges of conspiracy to attack civilians, attempted murder of coalition forces and aiding the enemy in Afghanistan. But the four lawyers have provided sworn statements to Hicks's defence team arguing the charges against him are flawed because they do not exist in international criminal law, do not outline a war crime or are too vague.

The lawyers are: Cherif Bassiouni, who investigated human rights abuses in Afghanistan; Antonio Cassese, chairman of the UN's inquiry into genocide in Darfur, Sudan, who also worked on war crimes cases in Yugoslavia; Michael Schmitt, a retired US Air Force judge advocate; and Tim McCormack, Australian professor of international humanitarian law at the University of Melbourne.

Professor McCormack's affidavit says that the charge of "aiding the enemy" is untenable, as Hicks's own government found he had not broken any Australian law.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Hicks's US defence lawyer, Major Michael Mori, told the Herald that so far the military commission had refused to even consider the experts' arguments, despite the lack of detail in the charges against Hicks.

"There has still been so far no suggestion that he fired at an American or injured any US serviceman," Major Mori said. "The prosecution argues he was fighting on the Taliban side, but so were tens of thousands of others."

But the Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, told the Herald that in recent talks with the US Attorney-General, Alberto Gonzales, he was assured "that the case against Hicks rests on substantial evidence" and the Pentagon intended to proceed with the military commission trial as soon as possible.

Both sides in the case are preparing for a legal ruling in Washington, due this month, which the Bush Administration hopes will allow Hicks's trial to go ahead.

Last November the military commission's proceedings were suspended after another Guantanamo Bay detainee, Salim Hamdan, won a case in a US civilian court which ruled that the commissions violated international and US law. The Bush Administration appealed and is optimistic that a higher court will uphold the commissions.

Hicks's lawyers say that whatever the result of this appeal, the case will ultimately go to the US Supreme Court, yet again delaying his trial and prolonging his detention.

In preparation for the next round of legal battles, Hicks has appointed a new Australian legal team to work with his US lawyers.

The Australian team is headed by a veteran of the Iraq war, David McLeod. The RAAF reserve legal officer told the Herald he saw his work for Hicks as "complementary to his military service as a legal officer in the war against terror".

Mr McLeod will be joined by an army reserve legal officer, Michael Griffin.

[guitarman1]

Elite Australian troops 'killed innocent Afghans'

May 31, 2005 - 6:58PM SMH online

Australian SAS soldiers were part of a patrol that killed 11 innocent tribesmen and wounded 16 in a bungled operation during the war on terror in Afghanistan, Time Magazine has reported.

One of the SAS soldiers was accused of souveniring the turban and gun of one of the dead villagers and was asked to show cause why he should not be discharged, the report said.

Two other Australian soldiers were also issued show cause notices, the magazine said.

The defence department tonight confirmed that disciplinary action was taken over "some internal aspects" of the patrol.

But it said an investigation had found that the Australians acted in self-defence and in accordance with the rules of engagement, which allowed the use of force to defend themselves and fellow officers if threatened.

"Each Australian element that opened fire, or called in fire, did so in response to direct threats to their safety," defence said in a statement.

Time magazine said five Australian members of the Special Air Service Regiment were part of a US-led mission in eastern Afghanistan to flush out Taliban and al-Qaeda forces in 2002.

The Australians shot dead two Afghan villagers they believed to be enemy fighters, and were later engaged in a fierce battle in which another nine civilians died, some from aircraft bombs, the magazine reported.

Time journalist Rory Callinan said his colleague Tim McGirk spoke to villagers who confirmed the story and said Australians had not fulfilled promises to apologise and provide compensation.

The SAS patrol leader has since quit the army, accusing his superiors of a cover-up.

"It was a cover-up," the patrol leader told Time.

The magazine also published for the first time the rules of engagement for the SAS during Operation Slipper, the code name for the post-September 11 Afghanistan mission.

The rules stated "incidental/collateral damage" was acceptable as long as it was not "excessive in relation to direct military advantage anticipated to be gained".

Defence Minister Robert Hill declined to comment, citing normal secrecy about the activities of the elite SAS.

"It's not normal process to respond to operational issues of the SAS," his spokeswoman said.

"The chief of the defence forces will determine if there is anything that needs to be looked at further."

The magazine said the six-member SAS patrol, known as Redback Kilo Three, set up an observation post near the village of Bhalkhel in eastern Afghanistan in mid-May 2002.

When a man armed with a rifle came near them and appeared to go for his weapon the patrol opened fire.

Alerted by the gunshots, other armed men began moving into position and firing.

The patrol radioed the remainder of the SAS's Three Squadron, with members setting off on the two hour trip to help their comrades.

While waiting for back-up, one of the soldiers souvenired a turban, rifle and magazine of bullets from a dead villager, Time said.

When they heard the gunshots nearby, tribesmen from the Sabari village, who were in dispute with the Bhalkhel tribesmen over forest rights, thought they were coming under attack and fired back.

A US forward air controller travelling with the Australian rescue convoy summoned an AC-130 aircraft and its laser-guided bombs smashed into the villagers' bunkers.

One of the survivors, Abdul Hassan, told Time he thought he was fighting the Bhalkhel.

"So the last thing I expected was for bombs to fall from the sky," he said.

The villagers alerted police, who contacted a nearby US base at Khost to say innocent people were being killed.

Time magazine located and interviewed relatives of the dead civilians, who left behind nearly 50 children now reliant on hand-outs to survive.

Village elders say an Australian officer later apologised and promised compensation, but they have received nothing.

AAP

[linskyjack]

Hicks is getting what he deserved--Even the most illogical Marxist/Leninist moron has to admit that fighting for the Taliban is fighting for the destruction of freedom---If robots Guitarman want to take up his cause, then so be it. I can think of many more people worthy of attention. By the way, did Hicks ever deny that he was fighting with the Taliban? NO!

Guitarman, I can imagine you living in a world run by the Taliban---Now that would be a sight to behold. Maybe not--you obviously despise women (look at your borderline reaction to the Corby case) so you would probably dig it!

From a Free David Hicks Website:

David Hicks, Australia

Background: The 29-year-old former ranch hand converted to Islam and later joined a terrorist organization in Afghanistan known as Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LET), or "Army of the Righteous." With a letter of introduction from LET, Hicks allegedly attended an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan in January 2001 and met Osama bin Laden. Hicks was caught by U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan in December 2001.

Charges: Conspiring with bin Laden and al-Qaeda to attack civilians and civilian targets, to murder, to destroy property and to commit terrorism; trying to murder American, British, Australian and other coalition forces; aiding the enemy (al-Qaeda and Taliban).


So I guess that self-destructive types like Guitarman want us to believe that Mr. Hicks didn't consort with the terrorists!

[guitarman1]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

Hicks is getting what he deserved--Even the most illogical Marxist/Leninist moron has to admit that fighting for the Taliban is fighting for the destruction of freedom---If robots Guitarman want to take up his cause, then so be it. I can think of many more people worthy of attention. By the way, did Hicks ever deny that he was fighting with the Taliban? NO!

Guitarman, I can imagine you living in a world run by the Taliban---Now that would be a sight to behold. Maybe not--you obviously despise women (look at your borderline reaction to the Corby case) so you would probably dig it!

Your amazing in your racist hatred of moslems ,do you even know one, You KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THIS CASE or for that matter any issue outside of the US , Now I'm a marxist/leninist, which I doubt you would even know what one was if you bumped into one, because you are an irrational YANK( like most yanks when it comes to commies), incapable of even understanding the philosophy behind communism, in the same hysterical and irrational way you racistly react to moslems. (Go ask MULDER I've said this before) I HATE ALL POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES I THINK ALL ( well 98.9% of) politicians are selfserving corrupt egotistical criminal perverts I have said this on TSG before, I'll say it for you again I HATE ALL PERSUASIONS OF POLITICIANS, THERE SCUM. Do you understand this simple but pointed statement, sheesh surely you could tell I was funning with you " OFF WITH THIER HEADS" oh brother your unreal, and you think I'm a MISOGYNIST , your clueless, I can't get enough of them . oh and of course
Having read your, again il-informed edit on Hicks, get a life Septic Tank , you and people like you and your criminal nazi-inspired pervert government are the evil ones you post trash lies perpetrated by your criminal pervert lying government I believe NOTHING YOUR LYING CRIMINAL GOVRNMENT SAYS. Got it NAZI.

[SlackAli]

Don't really want to get involved in this friendly debate, but guitarman, if you're a marxist/leninist - of whatever persuasion - then you must believe in political ideology.

[linskyjack]

Muslims---please, before calling someone a racist, please learn to spell it. I adore Muslims, particularly the ones who join radical religious parties in Afghanistan and in Pakistan. I particularly love the way they treat women, and non-Muslims. By the way. No you don't hate all political ideologies, you are at heart a Bolshevik---or perhaps an anarchist---You think you know how people should live! Thats pretty much the norm for a True Believer----(I doubt you have read the book). Usually he or she thinks that she has divine knowledge of the truth. In this case of Hicks---you have absolutely no idea of what the truth is--but as long as it gives you the opportunity to flame the USA---you love it. Actually maybe you stand for nothing? Seriously--I think you just daffy and thus entertaining! (Could we please get a comment on the Hicks case?--something other then you are a racist etc.) The facts are not denied---He joined a radical group in Afghanistan--home of your beloved Taliban ( I assumed he was a CARE worker!) Then he seems to have had some discourse with Mr. Bin Laden--another hero of yours! Hey, if he is a radical Muslim, I assure you he will get a fairer trial in the military court then he would before a theocratic court!

[guitarman1]

Originally Posted by SlackAli

Don't really want to get involved in this friendly debate, but guitarman, if you're a marxist/leninist - of whatever persuasion - then you must believe in political ideology.

HUH, hey slackali you have been slack in reading my postings I HATE ALL TYPES OF POLITICIANS ,me a commie I Hate them there politicians, and it FAILED,like shamocracy will in the near future.

[linskyjack]

Originally Posted by guitarman1

HUH, hey slackali you have been slack in reading my postings I HATE ALL TYPES OF POLITICIANS ,me a commie I Hate them there politicians, and it FAILED,like shamocracy will in the near future.

I think that the US government should release Hicks, send him back to Australia and force Guitarman to join his Mosque! Can you imagine dope smoking, beer guzzling, womanizing Guitarman kneeling to Mecca each day!

[SlackAli]

Originally Posted by guitarman1

HUH, hey slackali you have been slack in reading my postings I HATE ALL TYPES OF POLITICIANS ,me a commie I Hate them there politicians, and it FAILED,like shamocracy will in the near future.

Aplogies for misreading your post, but could have sworn you said you were a marxist/leninist. Oh well.

Has this character Hicks actually been tried yet? After all Brother Bush said only today in respect of the Yukos trial:

US President George W Bush said that he had expressed concerns to Moscow that Mr Khodorkovsky was judged guilty before even standing trial.

But I'm sure no double-standards are being applied here.

[guitarman1]

NO LJ your the clown and not a very good one either, I'm APOLITICAL dummy, and I'll tell you one thing about you,over the years I have observed that when creeps like you imply that their smarter ,more worldly or they have you all figured out or any other smarmy self belief in their own superior intelligence it ALWAYS MEANS IN ACTUALITY THAT THE A BIT THICK, like you, and DON"T EVER CORRECT MY SPELLING MR. CORVY,CORVY,CORVY. Got it stupe.
MOSLEM, MUSLIM, the Collins Australian /English dictionary right here next to my PC has both spellings, so who's a fool, look in a mirror.

[linskyjack]

No you aren't apolitical--how absurd----You practice the politics of hating the USA and supporting the theocracy! I have a better idea on how to deal with the Hicks issue---Since you are a great supporter of him and everything he represents---and since he was in Afghanistan doing humanitarian work--why not let him move into your neighborhood!

[WarC]

Double standard?! Hicks was in Afghanistan shooting at Americans, or so its claimed. Anyways, he wasn't in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan for the tourism. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't work so well on a battlefield you intend to win! He isn't being held as an American citizen charged with a crime, he's being held as he should; as an enemy combatant.

He's just lucky to be alive right now.

[linskyjack]

War, correct--this guy seems to be the poster boy for the True Believers in Australia---Obviously he was delivering care packages to the sufferring people in Afghanistan and is totally innocent of having any involvement with the Taliban or Bin Laden----He's just a misunderstood fundamentalist whacko who needs our love and care---I would prefer that Aussies like guitarman supply that tenderness.

[guitarman1]

Don't you get depressed being wrong all the time LJ? And in typical TSG fashion when losing an arguement about matters you know nothing about you play the GM1 dope smoking card, your smokescreen won't work, I am AGNOSTIC, but begrudgingly so I wont be a fundamentalist atheist, I do NOT believe in ANY religion,and anyone into organized institutional religion is just a bleeting sheep that will believe any nonsense as there incapable of independant thought. I HATE ALL POLITICIANS OF ALL POLITICAL PERSUASIONS => APOLITICAL, What don't you understand about that?
Can't you see a pattern Agnostic, Apolitical,Atopbloke.
I don't hate Americans how absurd I HATE YOUR NAZI-BUSH GOVERNMENT, I thought YOU hated Bush as well? Your an idiot wake up to yourself.

[SlackAli]

Originally Posted by WarC

Double standard?! Hicks was in Afghanistan shooting at Americans, or so its claimed. Anyways, he wasn't in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan for the tourism. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't work so well on a battlefield you intend to win! He isn't being held as an American citizen charged with a crime, he's being held as he should; as an enemy combatant.

He's just lucky to be alive right now.

'...or so its claimed' exactly! Personally I've got no idea why he was in Afghanistan but it would be nice for the facts to be aired in an open court wouldn't it? If he's guilty fine, do what you like with him. Within the parameters of international law of course. Oh sorry, I forgot, the US doesn't subscribe to international law