US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

So arrest every member of the KKK then.

That's a good analogy equating an Islamic fundamentalist with the KKK.

BTW, if a KKK member is captured on foreign soil by foreign soldiers and suspected of acting against the interests of the US or her allies, I have no problem with his getting the same treatment.

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

Lol...what a wanker.

I am increasingly amazed at the fantasy world all the apologists live in...whats next, Habib is secretly a martian? Grasp at straws you loosers..... This is an ongoing pathetic farce and anyone who supports it should be ashamed of themselves

Let's just call each other supporters of opposite views then.

However the position of this character has been pretty well documented here by others and I think there is little doubt he is an Islamic jihadist, or facist, so even the circumstantial evidence is reasonable that he would like to kill us, and even you, if he had the opportunity. If you want to maintain he was a tourist/pilgrim in Pakistan or Afghanistan you surely can't expect any credibility.

What you do seem to say is that until he pulls a trigger (given his likely affiliations) there is nothing civilized people can do about it. Presumably you also oppose, as has already been asked but not answered, the rounding up of similar kinds in Europe, before any triggers were pulled?

What exactly would you consider grounds for detention of someone who professes sympathy and support for violent action on the grounds as expressed by islamic fundamentalists?

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

Let's just call each other supporters of opposite views then.

However the position of this character has been pretty well documented here by others and I think there is little doubt he is an Islamic jihadist, or facist, so even the circumstantial evidence is reasonable that he would like to kill us, and even you, if he had the opportunity. If you want to maintain he was a tourist/pilgrim in Pakistan or Afghanistan you surely can't expect any credibility.

What you do seem to say is that until he pulls a trigger (given his likely affiliations) there is nothing civilized people can do about it. Presumably you also oppose, as has already been asked but not answered, the rounding up of similar kinds in Europe, before any triggers were pulled?

What exactly would you consider grounds for detention of someone who professes sympathy and support for violent action on the grounds as expressed by islamic fundamentalists?

Once again, if he is guilty of something, I would want him dealt with appropriately. But after three years of imprisonment, including torture, nothing happens? He is just released. That is crazy. The least you would expect is a trial. Everything else is just rumour and implication.

 

[Brahe]

I guess we'll have to wait till rikzilla turns up with a rocket launcher in Iraq, or perhaps with a dirty bomb in Australia. Of course I could be wrong...

Let me ask you guys this; If rikzilla ends up killing your wife or kid will the grief you feel cause you to re-think your political stand?

Well, there we go--by his own words, rikzilla should be captured and held for no reason at all beyond the fact that he might kill someone. Just because we have no evidence that rikzilla is a murderer or will be a murderer is no reason not to lock this dangerous terrorist (Or maybe not! We shouldn't care!) away.

I'm sure you agree, don't you, rikzilla?

 

[Brahe]

Good luck Fool...should Habib end up killing someone there will be many here to remind you of your kind support of (potential/alledged) dangerous terrorists.

Of course, should nothing of the sort happen, I'm sure you'll still be repeating your totalitarian line, oblivious to all ethics and morality.

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

Let's just call each other supporters of opposite views then.

yep, I think the presumption of innocence is essential to civilisation....and you don't appear to think it applies to some people.

However the position of this character has been pretty well documented here by others and I think there is little doubt he is an Islamic jihadist, or facist, so even the circumstantial evidence is reasonable that he would like to kill us, and even you, if he had the opportunity. If you want to maintain he was a tourist/pilgrim in Pakistan or Afghanistan you surely can't expect any credibility.

rubbish...what has been documented here is exactly the same as what you are doing yet again, unsupported fairytales. Please provide a single scrap of evidence to support the ongoing accusations...just one little shred is all I ask. The US army, CIA and god knows who else has not been able to produce a single shred of evidence....maybe you will have more luck?

What you do seem to say is that until he pulls a trigger (given his likely affiliations) there is nothing civilized people can do about it. Presumably you also oppose, as has already been asked but not answered, the rounding up of similar kinds in Europe, before any triggers were pulled?

are they "similar kinds"?? tell me about them....If they are similar then are you saying there is no evidence against them and no charges against them either? There is no evidence against you either Elind and no charges pending on you....that would also make you a terrorist wouldn't it? After all...do we have to wait for you to do something before we take action?


What exactly would you consider grounds for detention of someone who professes sympathy and support for violent action on the grounds as expressed by islamic fundamentalists?
has he done that? can you tell me even a single thing he has done? I think it is up to those that want to detain someone to state what grounds they are doing it on....It seems you are happy to applaud people being imprisoned on no stated grounds......Maybe we should lockup all the wankers that post support on this forum for torture and detention without trial or charge....

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

What exactly would you consider grounds for detention of someone who professes sympathy and support for violent action on the grounds as expressed by islamic fundamentalists?
Originally posted by The Fool
has he done that? can you tell me even a single thing he has done? I think it is up to those that want to detain someone to state what grounds they are doing it on....It seems you are happy to applaud people being imprisoned on no stated grounds......Maybe we should lockup all the wankers that post support on this forum for torture and detention without trial or charge....[/B]

Did you notice that you pretended to answer the question without addressing it?


My understanding is that he is an Islamist fanatic but we (you or I) are not in a position to try the case as a common criminal issue. You call all American officials, and their supporters, liars automatically. I tend to call all Islamists liars, and that is how they gain the support of people like you.

We could both be wrong in specific cases, but I maintain that circumstantial evidence rules in these cases and for an "Australian" (who I doubt has much in common with you or anyone else in Australia) to have been arrested under circumstances that those officials (American and Pakistan) consider suspect is good enough for me during the duration of this war, because I have picked my side.

You have picked yours, and if you had the power to determine courses of action based on your high principles we would die on those principles and the Islamists would laugh all the way to their sorry heaven.

To answer your question above about arresting some of your fellow debaters (wankers as you call them); I see a difference between what they, and I, advocate in self defense and what Islamists advocate on the basis of their so-called religion. At the risk of sounding flattering I dare say that you too are capable of seeing that difference, even though you tend to call the two equivalent.

Now, answer my earlier question above, please.

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

Did you notice that you pretended to answer the question without addressing it?

I believe a person should actually do something before they are imprisoned...is that too complex for you? I believe that a person should be told what they are supposed to have done, is that a difficult concept? I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty, is that a problem?...Tell me what Habib did and I'll tell you if I think it deserves imprisonment. Come on Elind...what did he do?


My understanding is that he is an Islamist fanatic

And you are an American fanatic....shall we imprison you now?


but we (you or I) are not in a position to try the case as a common criminal issue.

due to a little problem of no evidence of any crime.

You call all American officials, and their supporters, liars automatically.

This is a lie...can you show me where I have accused anyone of lying about this issue.

I tend to call all Islamists liars, and that is how they gain the support of people like you.

you also tend to believe what you are told to believe, a very handy skill in a follower.

We could both be wrong in specific cases, but I maintain that circumstantial evidence rules in these cases and for an "Australian" (who I doubt has much in common with you or anyone else in Australia) to have been arrested under circumstances that those officials (American and Pakistan) consider suspect is good enough for me during the duration of this war, because I have picked my side.

picked sides? You really like to keep things nice and simple don't you. Anyone who objects to summary detention without charge or trial is assigned to the other "side". Tell me...is it possible to remain on your "side" and not sell out the basic principles that your nation and my nation were founded on? Can I retain the presumption of innocence and still be on your "side"? Can I hold the position that summary detention without charge or trial is unacceptable and still be on your "side"?

You have picked yours, and if you had the power to determine courses of action based on your high principles we would die on those principles and the Islamists would laugh all the way to their sorry heaven.

If we didn't kidnap Mamdouh we would die? If we don't abandon rule of law and presumption of innocence all is lost? Jeeeeezus H Christ isn't that what we are supposedly fighting to preserve??? Do you want to fight to prevent the spread of totalitarian rule by imposing totalitarian rule????

To answer your question above about arresting some of your fellow debaters (wankers as you call them); I see a difference between what they, and I, advocate in self defense and what Islamists advocate on the basis of their so-called religion. At the risk of sounding flattering I dare say that you too are capable of seeing that difference, even though you tend to call the two equivalent.

yet if George named any or all of them "suspects" without producing evidence or even saying what they are suspected of then you will stand to attention and salute as they are taken away?

would a simple overview of your position be that your government can imprison whoever it wants for as long as they want for any reason they want and they have your total support?

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

I believe a person should actually do something before they are imprisoned...is that too complex for you? I believe that a person should be told what they are supposed to have done, is that a difficult concept? I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty, is that a problem?...Tell me what Habib did and I'll tell you if I think it deserves imprisonment. Come on Elind...what did he do?

Oh well, I tried.......

And if you happen to be the next person who dies due to these fanatics, you would be happy that nothing was done to prevent it, in spite of the threats offered? We are not talking specifically about Habib, since you feel the same about all of them, but what he did was show himself to be a member of a gang out to kill all of us, according to the Pakistanis and Americans. I'll believe them first; it's that simple. Let's see what he spouts off about once released and make a further judgement about his leanings.


And you are an American fanatic....shall we imprison you now?

You would if you were an Islamic fanatic. Actually you would probably do much worse, but the distinction is apparently beyond your comprehension.

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

but what he did was show himself to be a member of a gang out to kill all of us, according to the Pakistanis and Americans.

Anything else you want to accuse him of without a shred of evidence? I give up....as you have repeatedly indicated...you have been told and you do what you are told.

You are a true believer Elind. With enough followers like you I could control the world......Certainly nothing annoying like rule of law, presumption of innocence, justice or any of that other liberal rubbish would get in the way... just believe without evidence...where have you heard that before?

 

[Mycroft]

Here is an interesting in depth article on Habib.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2004/s1157599.htm

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Army to release kidnapped Australian.

Anything else you want to accuse him of without a shred of evidence? I give up....as you have repeatedly indicated...you have been told and you do what you are told.

You are a true believer Elind. With enough followers like you I could control the world......Certainly nothing annoying like rule of law, presumption of innocence, justice or any of that other liberal rubbish would get in the way... just believe without evidence...where have you heard that before?

Again, you never answered the question posed many times. Namely what would you consider grounds for detention of someone professes support for terrorism? Being caught on camera chopping off someone's head perhaps? In this country some gangs are considered criminal organizations and members can be arrested for belonging. You presumably think that is also wrong. We must wait until they are seen commiting crimes, which we know is their primary purpose.

This turd Habib, according to Mycroft's kind link is described, in part as follows:


REPORTER: In March 2000, Habib packed his bags and headed off overseas. His destination was not Chechnya but Pakistan. He was away for just under two months. Habib's exact movements are unclear but he spoke to his friend Ibrahim Fraser before he left.

IBRAHIM FRASER: I met him at a cafe in Lakemba and he discussed to me that he had plans to go to Afghanistan to live an Islamic life in the Bin Laden camp. He felt that that was a good life to lead. He thought that would be good for his children. He thought that his children would have an Islamic upbringing and that they would also be able to study the Koran and everything Islamic. So he told me that. I said to him, "So do you mean that you would go for jihad?" And he said, "Well, if that's...if that was necessary, because..." He said, "But I really only want to live there. I'm not really interested in jihad, but I really want to live with Bin Laden."

REPORTER: According to Australian authorities, Habib travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan. Four Corners has been told that on this trip he did military training with the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba, which has since been listed as a banned terrorist group in Australia. The authorities say that notes from an L-e-T weapons course were later found in Habib's home. Several months later, back in Lakemba, Ibrahim Fraser spotted his friend again in Haldon Street.

IBRAHIM FRASER: I said, "Oh, well, so how was Afghanistan?" He said "Great." He said, "This is truly a great place."

REPORTER: Did he tell you what he'd done there?

IBRAHIM FRASER: No, he didn't tell me whether he'd done anything in Afghanistan. He didn't tell me...he didn't say that he'd been on jihad. He hadn't said that he had done any training. He just told me that he'd been looking for a...that he'd been to...met Bin Laden and been there and found it to be a really great place and...

REPORTER: He said he'd met Bin Laden?

IBRAHIM FRASER: I think so. I think he had. I think that's what he said.


And one of his islamist buddys says:

REPORTER:
What was your reaction when you learned he was in Guantanamo Bay?

SHEIK ABU AYMAN: Somehow, I wasn't surprised, because a man with a big mouth like this, he will end up there. In another way I was really shocked, because the assessment of the Government should be better than anyone else. They know he's a disturbed man, they know his background. He never did a real threat or a real problem for the Government or for outsiders. But the Government didn't do anything to let the American understand "This is not the right man in your hand. He is not what he claims he is." He is a disturbed man. He doesn't deserve that punishment for his big mouth.

So, perhaps I was wrong in this release being any sop to Australia who probably hope he stays in Cuba forever, but instead is just a recognition that his mental disturbance is probably no longer dangerous, hopefully. You on the other hand just keep trucking along defending them all, don't you?

 

[a_unique_person]

I haven't said it, and I believe Fool hasn't ever said, that he should be let go if he is guilty of something criminal.

The Four Corners article is an excellent piece of journalism, it tries to be objective, it gives information without taking sides. It is an example of what is missing from so much 'news' these days. So you have ignored what it also says.

Yes, there is some circumstantial evidence against Habib.

The article also has this to report too.

TORIN NELSON, FORMER GUANTANAMO BAY INTERROGATOR: Almost everybody that has come down to Guantanamo Bay to work there has usually gotten off the plane thinking that they're going to be working with 600-plus al-Qaeda and hard-core Taliban members. And then after not too long a period when they actually interact with them, they find that the majority of these individuals are...distantly removed from that type of idea. And you can see this evident in the fact that so few charges have been brought up against the detainees that are actually there.

SALLY NEIGHBOUR: Mamdouh Habib's family has heard nothing from him since March last year. His wife can only imagine the state he might be in. She's heard reports that can't be confirmed that he's dazed and confused, has refused his medication for depression, believes his family is dead.

MAHA HABIB: There's no correspondence, there's no letters. And he is... The Red Cross actually has said that he is refusing to write back. But why would he refuse to write back, you know? Doesn't... There's no explanation. I can't understand it.

SALLY NEIGHBOUR: It may be many more years before Habib's family sees him again, because even after his trial by a US military commission, there is no guarantee he'll be released as long as the so-called 'war on terror' continues.

PHILIP RUDDOCK, ATTORNEY GENERAL: The argument that the United States has taken is that, in this war in which they're engaged, they don't wish to release people that they believe are likely to go back and resume hostilities.

SALLY NEIGHBOUR: But that would blow away one of the most fundamental principles of the rule of law, would it not, if they were to do their time and still not be released?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: As I understand it, one of the...one of the accepted principles in the conduct of war under Geneva Conventions is that prisoners of war are held until the end of hostilities.

SALLY NEIGHBOUR: And in this case, that could be 50 years?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, we don't know, do we?

Habib may well be guilty, that is entirel possible. However, the way this case has been handled, we may never find out.

What we do know, however, is this.

But that would blow away one of the most fundamental principles of the rule of law, would it not, if they were to do their time and still not be released?

The fundamental principles of the rule of law, one of the cornerstones of Western Civilisation, has been thoughtlessly and recklessly cast aside. These principles have been created with great pain and sacrifice over many years, and in a moment of short sighted greed, cast aside.

People are always quoting this line from Franklin ""They that can give up Essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.", but I suspect most of them that do have no idea what it means.

 

[Elind]

I haven't said it, and I believe Fool hasn't ever said, that he should be let go if he is guilty of something criminal.

The Four Corners article is an excellent piece of journalism, it tries to be objective, it gives information without taking sides. It is an example of what is missing from so much 'news' these days. So you have ignored what it also says.

Yes, there is some circumstantial evidence against Habib.

The article also has this to report too.

Yes the article also has sympathy for what probably amounts to a disturbed individual. However Fool has yet to say what he would consider criminal. I think that in the simplest sense, associating with Osama BL is associating with a worse than criminal enterprise, and he sought out that contact; by his own words.

I think the problem here is that we don't have specific laws making that a crime and in a standard court of law he would have to be released. Mental state or not (I think all of them are disturbed, but dangerously) that is why he has been in Cuba.

I simply think that deliberate association with ANY terrorist group should be a crime. On that basis Habib is guilty by his own words, if we can believe the evidence we have seen here.

Fool and you inevitably think it's always lies and Americans lock them up just for the hell of it, with nothing better to do.

 

[The Fool]

Yes the article also has sympathy for what probably amounts to a disturbed individual. However Fool has yet to say what he would consider criminal.

you want me to type out a list of criminal acts? Do you imagine I have time to spare to type out what I would consider criminal? You seem to think membership of Al Qaeda is sufficient for imprisonment while Al-Qaeda is being hunted down.....well blow me down...so do I.

I think that in the simplest sense, associating with Osama BL is associating with a worse than criminal enterprise, and he sought out that contact; by his own words.

rubbish.....there is hearsay that this is what he said.....but it suits your position so you accept hearsay with glee.

someone claims they heard him say something...Thats enough to convict "by his own words"? especially such a strong witness with such a clear recollection of events..

"IBRAHIM FRASER: No, he didn't tell me whether he'd done anything in Afghanistan. He didn't tell me...he didn't say that he'd been on jihad. He hadn't said that he had done any training. He just told me that he'd been looking for a...that he'd been to...met Bin Laden and been there and found it to be a really great place and...

REPORTER: He said he'd met Bin Laden?

IBRAHIM FRASER: I think so. I think he had. I think that's what he said.

you are happy to imprison someone indefinitely on rubbish like this? Have a good look at yourself......


your basic problem is that you simply cannot stop yourself from believing without evidence. You do understand what hearsay is don't you?

I think the problem here is that we don't have specific laws making that a crime and in a standard court of law he would have to be released. Mental state or not (I think all of them are disturbed, but dangerously) that is why he has been in Cuba.

I simply think that deliberate association with ANY terrorist group should be a crime. On that basis Habib is guilty by his own words, if we can believe the evidence we have seen here.

Rubbish...you obviously believe that finding someone who thinks you said you associated with a terrorist organisation proves a crime. No evidence that it is true is required ,just someone saying they heard you say something..thats all that exists and its enough for you.

do you regard yourself as a skeptic?

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The fundamental principles of the rule of law, one of the cornerstones of Western Civilisation, has been thoughtlessly and recklessly cast aside. These principles have been created with great pain and sacrifice over many years, and in a moment of short sighted greed, cast aside.

You think so because you want him treated as a common criminal when he's not. He's more like a prisoner of war, which is the way the US Army treated him.

Habib got himself in trouble by loudly proclaiming his opposition to civilization and openly trying to recruit jihadists.

Of course, the reality here is that he's really just some mentally disturbed person who needs medical help to help him deal with his delusions of persecution and paranoia. I bet it's this realization that got him released. I bet if he had gotten himself arrested in Australia instead of Pakistan he would have ended up in a mental hospital instead of a prison camp.

 

[Elind]

Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish. What else can you say?

You must have been on OJ's legal team, or perhaps the jury.

Habib can deny every word he was claimed to have spoken, and on that basis alone he should not be convicted; but aside from other circumstantial evidence of where he had been, there is the little inconvenience of having been caught in a prohibited area, coming from Afghanistan, not to mention wanting to ruin his children's live by educating them in one of the nastiest philosphies on the planet, when they have a chance to do so in a civilized country. If you think he was not an Al Qaeda sympathizer and enabler, (it doesn't matter how little he was capable of contributing), then you are well named.

I have nothing but contempt for him and his belief system. You don't. Let's leave it at that.

 

[The Fool]

Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish. What else can you say?

You must have been on OJ's legal team, or perhaps the jury.

Habib can deny every word he was claimed to have spoken, and on that basis alone he should not be convicted; but aside from other circumstantial evidence of where he had been, there is the little inconvenience of having been caught in a prohibited area, coming from Afghanistan, not to mention wanting to ruin his children's live by educating them in one of the nastiest philosphies on the planet, when they have a chance to do so in a civilized country. If you think he was not an Al Qaeda sympathizer and enabler, (it doesn't matter how little he was capable of contributing), then you are well named.

I have nothing but contempt for him and his belief system. You don't. Let's leave it at that.

why didn't you just tell me abouit this problem you have with muslims and we could have saved a lot of time...

 

[Elind]

why didn't you just tell me abouit this problem you have with muslims and we could have saved a lot of time...

You call it "muslim", when most civilized Muslims call it deviant and having nothing to do with their religion?

That says a lot.

 

[The Fool]

You call it "muslim", when most civilized Muslims call it deviant and having nothing to do with their religion?

That says a lot.

Lol...whatever.

what was it you consider the "nastiest philosophies on the planet" ?

sorry you lost this guy...maybe you can go out and get another one.