<< THREE MILES PER POLAR BEAR ~ MAIN ~ AUDIO CHALLENGE >>
HISSY FIT PROMISED
His time in Gitmo may have broken heroic al-Qaeda elf David Hicks, but the US military should think twice before confining ferocious Melbourne comedy lawyer Jeremy Sear:
If I were locked up indefinitely on those sorts of flimsy justifications, I would be absolutely irate. If I were ever released I would campaign vigorously against the amoral bastards who’d kept me locked up for as long as they could on such flimsy justifications.
Hear the man, BusHitlerites! Yeah!
There’s a name for Wankers like Sear—I just can’t think of it right now.
Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2007 02 05 at 11:53 AM • permalinkThree months and Sear would sign anything they put in front of him.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2007 02 05 at 12:05 PM • permalinkIf Jeremy were locked up on such “flimsy justifications”, it means that he dropped his comfortable urban nest to join a terrorist group, to fight and perhaps die for Islam.
Somehow, I just don’t see Mr. Lefty doing that, given that he is such a poseur. But he is foolish enough to believe that he will.
Dream on, Jeremy. All of Bushitler’s jack booted Rethuglicans are laughing at you.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 02 05 at 12:09 PM • permalinkThree months, richard? I think he would be crying for a pen and paper before the cell door was locked.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 02 05 at 12:10 PM • permalinkYep. Guarding a tank on a battlefield is just sooo flimsy. Why, it could happen to anyone. Just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
“Yes, your honour, I just popped out for some milk for the kids and to hunt down some Jews, and one thing led to another…you know how it is…next thing I know I’m in Afghanistan. I was minding my own business when these swarthy gents paid me a couple of bucks to watch their tank while they took a leak. And while they were away, would you believe it, the Northern Alliance came along and arrested me!”
To: Dept. of Homeland Security
cc: Dept. of DefenseDear Sirs:
This situation is completely unacceptable. I am being held in Guantanamo against my wishes, for the duration of an illegal war, guarded by intimidating soldiers who speak to each other in code, saying things like, “Oorah!” and “High and tight!” and “Semper Fi”. The boliche is stuffed with ham rather than with choicest pork loin, and I could swear that the black beans are straight out of a can. And in spite of my preference – stated numerous times, in writing – I continue to be served plátanos verdes, instead of plátanos maduros. Oh, and hel-lo? Cuba is the home of the finest cigars in the world, and what do I get? A box of 25 – count ‘em: 25 - Las Cuerdas Supremas de Nicaragua, rolled on the flabby, unshaved thighs of retired Sandinista concubines, every six weeks. Have you ever smelled burning cat fur? I am enclosing one of these dog-stool cheroots for your smoking pleasure.
As I say, this situation is intolerable. I demand to be released . . . or else! Govern yourselves accordingly.
Sincerely,
Not-So-Anonymous-Anymore Lefty
I hope that Jeremy doesn’t go completely ape-shit—he may threaten to strap a letter-to-the-editor to his chest, and, God preserve us, he’d be nuts enough to use it too!
Posted by andycanuck on 2007 02 05 at 03:42 PM • permalink‘I’ll thcream and thcream until I’m THICK!’
- Violet Elizabeth Bott.
Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2007 02 05 at 04:32 PM • permalink#10. Hahhahahahaa. That would work for me, RebeccaH!
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2007 02 05 at 05:01 PM • permalinkYawn. Poor Timmeh doesn’t “get” understatement. Not a surprise.
Now, did any of you Blairite halfwits read the rest of the post - and understand it? Or are you still convinced that Hicks being quite probably a jerk is in any way some kind of justification for holding him in prison for five years without charge?
Incredibly, your fearless leader also still thinks there are political points to be gained from running the unbelievably idiotic line that lefties are defending Hicks because we like what he stands for. Are you guys really so stupid that you’ll believe that?
Yikes
Mr Lefty is campaigning vigorously, right here, at us.
I’m staying out of this before I get hurt.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2007 02 05 at 05:34 PM • permalink#22 They’ve had five years to charge him if he’s guilty of more than being a jerk. And all they’ve been able to come up with, after an outrageous five years of detention, are retrospective charges which are so broad as to be meaningless. It’s pathetic.
So, no. Too late. He may well be an anti-Semite, but that would make him a dickhead, not a criminal. He may well have fought against the Serbs, but then, so did we, and it’s not a crime. He may have stood next to a tank in Afghanistan, again, not a crime. He may have supported the then government of Afghanistan - then, not a crime.
If someone’s a jerk but hasn’t committed a crime, you DON’T LOCK THEM UP FOR FIVE YEARS WITHOUT CHARGE. You don’t try to charge them with things that weren’t a crime when you say they committed them.
Well, if you’re a society governed by the rule of law and not one ruled executive fiat, that is.
I remember the days when conservatives actually claimed to support the rule of law. Then you got into power, found that it limited you (“What, I can’t just throw people in jail at whim? I have to wait for the courts?”) and threw the principle out the window (“Screw that - I’m locking people up in a place we control but which we can say isn’t part of this country instead. HA!”). It’s sad how far you people have fallen.
The problem is that the applicable/accepted legal rules which might be applied to Mr Hicks deliberately do not mention his situation. Hence, the US (or Canada or Australia) has carte blanche in deciding what Mr Hick’s status is, and what his treatment in custody should be. He is not a person in confinment as defined by a Criminal Code; he does not qualify for consideration under traditional Military Laws; he is not a combattant under the Geneva Conventions. Various countries have adopted rules defining an “unlawful combattant” and proposing suitable treatment. Generally these seek to avoid applying such precedents as do exist: firing squads.
Cheers
Posted by J.M. Heinrichs on 2007 02 05 at 06:13 PM • permalinkHow much of that five years, was through delays caused by Dawood, his father et el. Dawood, is just a celeb for the left, it is after all, an election year. If the legal people like Sears are so keen to help out, go and do it pro bono. I mean real pro bono, not a back hander via the Australian tax-payer.
Some tidbits for Jeremy:
8. The purpose of Common Article 3 is to set out the provisions of the LOAC that must be observed, as a minimum, during a non-international armed conflict.
This Article, which provides no definition of a noninternational armed conflict, does not affect the legal status of the parties to the conflict. Therefore, a governmental authority is still entitled to treat its opponents in accordance with its national legislation (i.e., as traitors or common criminals).
OTHER ARTICLES OF GENEVA CONVENTIONS NOT APPLICABLE
9. With the exception of Common Article 3, none of the provisions of the Geneva Conventions apply to a non-international armed conflict, unless the parties to that conflict agree otherwise.
(B-GG-005-027/AF-020 THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT AT THE OPERATIONAL AND TACTICAL LEVEL)Cheers
Posted by J.M. Heinrichs on 2007 02 05 at 06:34 PM • permalinkActually, I think it unfair to imply that Mr Dawood has not been campaigning vigorously
Posted by Margos Maid on 2007 02 05 at 06:41 PM • permalinkSo Jeremy,
How many German, Italian or Japanese prisoners of war were charged after being incarcerated for long periods?David Hicks dedicated himself to a bunch of people who delight in sawing off prisoners’ heads in front of cameras to show off their handiwork to the world at large.
He can count himself lucky that he was not summarily executed. The Geneva Accords afford the likes of Hicks no protection.
He aligned himself with a group that is dedicated to destroying the very basic freedoms we all enjoy. He can be held until the conclusion of the conflict.
#25 Jeremy Sear said:
Well, if you’re a society governed by the rule of law and not one ruled executive fiat, that is.
I thought the US Supreme Court made a decision in relation to the appropriateness of the then proposed Military Tribunal. I though Hicks was being charged under the Military Commissions Act. All sounds very Rule of Law to me Mr Lefty.
You should know this being a law talkin guy.
Mr Lefty….
I was involved last year in the trial of an aboriginal man, Joshua John Harris, at Lismore District Court. He was charged with aggravated dangerous driving causing death after he knocked over a middle-aged female pedestrian in Lismore at 5pm, pissed as a newt, and killed her.
Trouble was, she was en epileptic, and her death could have been caused by a massive brain aneurism, which occurred (according to the defence) at precisely the moment she stepped out into traffic.
The trial was long and hard-fought. Medical experts went head-to-head for a week. Harris was represented by one of the ablest barristers I have known, and in the end the jury came to the correct verdict IMO, which was an acquittal.
That is the rule of law. Drunk black man got the best defence money could buy. He was rightly acquitted of killing innocent white woman. Happens in thousands of courtrooms all around the country, every day.
Doesn’t happen a lot in Venezuela, tho’. Or Cuba. Or Hamas-controlled Gaza. Or any of the other scumbag societies your lot supports.
As for the applicability of the rule of law to Hicks, see #26 above.
happy vigorous campaigning.
You know, this is precisely why I advised Bush and Rove against imprisoning Sear. Nothing but trouble, I said. The aggravation won’t be worth it, I said.
And did they listen? Huh?
Oh, I guess they did.
Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2007 02 05 at 06:58 PM • permalink#26 Captain: I think you’re right; the closest approximation of Hicks’ status would make him firing-squad material. Keeping him in detention without trial is closer to what would be done with a uniformed combatant; still better than being shot to doll rags.
He was caught, was he not, in the company of the enemy? Is it likely that he was just over there for a full-immersion foreign language course?
Or are you still convinced that Hicks being quite probably a jerk is in any way some kind of justification for holding him in prison for five years without charge?
No, I don’t think he’s a jerk. If being a jerk was a criminal offense, most of humanity would be a ex-con.
Hick is a terrorist. Held without charge because the Geneva Convention and other international laws says he is an illegal combatant, as noted by JMH earlier, and subject to the rights that you and I enjoy, Jeremy. By his choice, I might add. Bush and Howard didn’t ask him to go to Afghanistan, and fight for the Taliban.
Not that you care, since you’ve arbitrarily promoted Hicks from terrorist to “jerk”. Nice display of moving the goal posts, BTW. A classic example of leftie argument techniques, de-demonizing the demons.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 02 05 at 07:42 PM • permalink‘Full-immersion’, paco?
You think maybe Dawood was acting the goat?Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2007 02 05 at 07:43 PM • permalinkI agree with Jezza Sear. His mate Hicksy shouldn’t be held at Gitmo Bay or tried by the Americans. He should be sent straight to Afghanistan or India and handed over to the people he was, at the very least, thinking of killing. He confessed in a letter to dad that he actually firing bullets into India. I’m sure there is a law against that, Jezza. There is no declared war between India and Pakistan and even if there was, Davo didn’t have a uniform. That is a sure-fire way to end up in front of a firing squad. Same in Afghanistan - there must be some sort of law there to deal with those foreign jihadists who came to the country to assist the Taliban in murdering people.
Give him to some of the Hazara boys from Afghanistan. Maybe the bloke i met who’s back was a solid mass of scar tissue from neck to butt where he was whipped nearly to death by some of Hicks mates. Or one of the other fellows who’s parents went missing after they fled because the Taliban were looking for them.
Id say there would be a few thousand of these chaps in Australia that could be contacted for a comment or two regarding the treatment of mr hicks.There would be NO way to miss the thuggish, murderous and oppressive regime the Taliban implemented in Afghanistan while hicks served them. He was happy to be a part of that as long as they were winning and able to shit on others.
Then he changed his mind when it went to shit for him and his thugs. Tough titty, like being a Jew hunter in Germany who tries to re-invent himself after the war he deserves contempt from any rational thinking person.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2007 02 05 at 08:01 PM • permalinkIf someone’s a jerk but hasn’t committed a crime, you DON’T LOCK THEM UP FOR FIVE YEARS WITHOUT CHARGE. You don’t try to charge them with things that weren’t a crime when you say they committed them.
No, you give them a blogspot and laugh mercilessly as they out themselves as a vigorous wanker of the highest order.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 02 05 at 08:37 PM • permalinkWally: “I demand to be treated in accordance with the law! That’s right soldier, you WILL wear the gloves while giving the body cavity search.”
American Bastard: “We don’t do body cavity searches, prisoner”.
Wally: “You WILL search me NOW! Do NOT deny me MY rights!”
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 02 05 at 09:10 PM • permalinkEL Cid! Long time since we talked.
How have you been? And how’s your lovely daughter?Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2007 02 05 at 09:42 PM • permalink#50. You didn’t miss much Latino. The compassionate, altruistic left restated its historical preference for the most monstrous, illiberal behavior imaginable and the selfish, uncaring right stood up for the true victims by supporting the continued incarceration of one of the aforementoned monsters. Typical really.
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2007 02 05 at 11:50 PM • permalinkIf I were ever released
Now Jer, that’s too much of a stretch.
The well muscled guards with their tight glistening oiled pecs and abs and quads are having far too much fun forming you and the other happy campers into pyramids (a party game perfected at Abu Ghraib) and pretending to tickle your nuts with cattle prods.No, no, Underscore! You do Jeremy an injustice. This is what would really happen in your scenario:
Guard 1: “We’ve got a real irate one, here.”
Guard 2 (pulling on latex glove): “Well, son, we can do this the easy way, or the hard way. What’s it to be?”
Jeremy: “Vigorously. Please.”
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 02 06 at 12:42 AM • permalinkIf I were locked up indefinitely on those sorts of flimsy justifications, I would be absolutely irate
At ease, Jeremy. I have spoken to the CIA and as at the moment Gitmo is reserved for jihadic deathbots who would tear seven different kinds of shit out of your spineless body. They have informed me that when the current troubles are over, they will then consider the internment of kitty fiddlers such as yourself. Good natured souls that they are, your arse banditry will also go unpunished for now. You are dismissed, feline fancier.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 02 06 at 02:00 AM • permalinkAll this talk how Mahamood Daewoo is to be unfairly charged retrospectively has been rejected...
US military prosecutor Morris Davis yesterday likened Australian terror suspect David Hicks to American Taliban member John Walker Lindh - a “friend and fellow extremist” serving 20 years for providing material support for terrorism.
“The US Congress expressly recognised material support for terrorism as a crime ... more than a decade ago,” Colonel Davis said.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
“Flimsy justifications”—being caught armed in a war zone, out of uniform, and in the company of a pack of war criminals?