The Australian politics thread

[Jono]

Liberal senators saying that Hicks should have never gotten the opportunity to ask a question on Q&A.

[Spark]

Originally Posted by howardj

It struck me the other night on Q and A that you can get away with a lot of unpopular positions if the economy is running well and you don't have any absolute disasters like pink batts. I mean, Howard was really on the defensive the other night to the point where it made you realise that apart from the economy and his approach on border protection, there was not much the Australian people liked.

I think in a way that could be a lesson for Gillard. As long as the economy is going well and she doesn't have any absolute calamities like pink batts, she should feel free to do what she really believes is right (introduce a carbon tax, act humanely to refugess, implement the Murray Darling plan regardless of how many farmers you piss off).

Much better to go to the next election saying you acted on climate change, were humane to refugees, acted to save the Murray Darling. Because, even if there are losers out of a carbon tax and the Murray Darling plan, you've still got the roaring economy as your safety net.

But it appears that she's already running in fright from the Murray Darling reforms. I don't think those farmers are ever going to vote for her anyway. Whereas, she will get enormous credit in the wider electorate if she acts and helps to preserve Australia's food bowl.

That may be the Windsor-Oakeshott effect in play. Doesn't want to anger them.

[Spikey]

Originally Posted by stephen

He's lucky he's still breathing as far as I'm concerned.

He wasn't just a criminal, he was treasonous. Even if he never fired a shot at an Australian, his intent was certainly to do so.

Every second that he's alive is one that he should be grateful for, regardless of his location.

jesus christ this post...

[Oscillatingmind]

The only thing that bothers me about the Hicks thing is that all pollies answer the same way, starting with stating the fact he is a convicted terrorist whom pleaded guilty, when we all know regardless of whatever he did he is only a convicted terrorist because that was the only means he could use to get out of the limbo he was in. So they all immediately go to that point to discredit all of this yet it was the Australian government insisting that he admit guilt & get out of the jail there & serve a year or two in Yatla.

see this is the first line on Q and A after Howard fluffed about a bit on the great democracy we are:

"I remind the people watching this program that David Hicks did plead guilty to a series of offences"

A mate of mine brought his autobiography, gave up after a chapter & gave it to me, so got to read that, as I've no idea who he was actually fighting with, was it the Taliban? if it was that then he should not be in this country, but I don't know, I'll have to read his book & check the ol facts.

[Matt79]

That the problem - you won't get any of the facts in his autobiography as it's massively inaccurate and self serving. He glosses over volunteering for and completing multiple advanced terrorism training courses in a paragraph simply stating that he felt he had no choice. He says he didn't know who al-Qa'ida was when he spent months in camps with them. He glosses over letters he wrote at the time in which he enthused about having been able to participate in heavy fighting with "infidels" and rails against the world Jewish conspiracy as "some regrettable and embarrassing letters".

He wasn't just with the Taliban - he was with al-Qa'ida proper before he departed to Pakistan. Then 9/11 happened and he went BACK to Afghanistan to rejoined the Taliban to help resist the Coalition invasion.

The ABC reporter Leigh Sales' biography of Hicks, Detainee 002, is a much more accurate and balanced account. It goes into proper detail about what was done wrong after he was captured, but doesnt simply insult the reader by lying about how Hicks ended up in that situation.

[Oscillatingmind]

I know, basically all autobiographies are going to be self serving.
How do we know he went back explicitly to the Taliban to fight with them post 9/11?, I mean if thats true well Howard really let himself down letting the hippy pressures get to him, the forced rush through lean sentence makes it seem sus. As, if they all believed with conviction then they'd just say **** him.

[Matt79]

Because that's what he said he did. Not all autobiographies are self-serving, but even allowing for the fact that most will be to some extent, there are those that are self-serving but at least acknowledge mistakes made and offering the subject's point of view, and then there are the ones down the Boris Yeltsin autobiography end that make a mockery of the whole thing. btw I highly recommend Yeltsin's "Midnight Diaries" for anyone looking for a laugh. He is adament throughout it that he didn't drink while in office - he was tired from a cold when he couldn't get off the plane in Ireland, and simply caught up with enthusiasm when he conducted the band in Germany!

[Matt79]

The relatively short sentence was, I think, a concession that the mismanagement that had occurred of him and others through Gitmo meant that there was no prospect of getting a conviction that would stand up without a guilty plea, a concession that politically it was becoming impossible to keep him in the limbo, and a way to make the issue go away.

[Oscillatingmind]

Okay I just read some of his letters, it all adds up, he got off light in my books. gah

[Oscillatingmind]

SO the argument I guess is int he process he was dealt, was it "humane" but **** was supporting a regime like Al-Qa'ida & the taliban with their record in Afghanistan "humane". Are there many cmparable studies of other say U.S or British citz being caught fighting for the taliban?

[Top_Cat]

John Walker Lindh. And he'll never breathe free air again.

Big difference was Lindh was actually in a battle and fought directly against American forces, tried to kill them and didn't surrender. Plus one of the CIA guys at the scene was killed.

Amazing doco on YT about it, actually. Stunning viewing if you get the chance.

[howardj]

Originally Posted by Matt79

That the problem - you won't get any of the facts in his autobiography as it's massively inaccurate and self serving. He glosses over volunteering for and completing multiple advanced terrorism training courses in a paragraph simply stating that he felt he had no choice. He says he didn't know who al-Qa'ida was when he spent months in camps with them. He glosses over letters he wrote at the time in which he enthused about having been able to participate in heavy fighting with "infidels" and rails against the world Jewish conspiracy as "some regrettable and embarrassing letters".

He wasn't just with the Taliban - he was with al-Qa'ida proper before he departed to Pakistan. Then 9/11 happened and he went BACK to Afghanistan to rejoined the Taliban to help resist the Coalition invasion.

The ABC reporter Leigh Sales' biography of Hicks, Detainee 002, is a much more accurate and balanced account. It goes into proper detail about what was done wrong after he was captured, but doesnt simply insult the reader by lying about how Hicks ended up in that situation.

Yep, it is amazing that folk seek to gloss over what this guy is like - in order to sharpen their political point. I mean, this guy would have been happy to cause harm to your or my family. He is certainly not someone whose history/conduct should be glossed over. I mean, people do get it - that the Howard Government was wrong to let this guy be detained so long without a trial. However, in the process and in making this point, let's not gloss over what type of bloke he is.

[Burgey]

What do people think of this chart, as a general guide to viewpoints?

On the extreme right, just out of shot are the words "Murphy is a ****"..

[Jono]

Lol, love the 91% war figure on the right.

[Spark]

Originally Posted by Burgey

What do people think of this chart, as a general guide to viewpoints?

On the extreme right, just out of shot are the words "Murphy is a ****"..

Eh, it's rather simplistic. I'd not be too keen on using it as a guide.