Gitmo Detainee Back On Australian Soil

David Hicks Was First Terror Suspect Convicted By U.S. Military Tribunals

(CBS/AP)  David Hicks, the first Guantanamo Bay inmate to face a U.S. military tribunal, was flown back to his hometown of Adelaide on Sunday to serve out the remainder of his sentence in a maximum security prison cell.

The former Outback cowboy and kangaroo skinner pleaded guilty in March to providing material support to al Qaeda, including attending terrorist training camps in Afghanistan.

Under a plea deal, he was sentenced to nine months in prison — a fraction of the life term he faced for his crime — and allowed to return to Australia to serve out his term.

Accompanied by police and prison officials, Hicks was flown from Cuba in a Gulfstream G550 jet chartered by the Australian government and landed early Sunday at the heavily fortified Edinburgh air force base on the outskirts of Adelaide.

Hicks, shackled and wearing an orange jumpsuit, was then taken to the Yatala Labor Prison, where he will serve the final seven months of his sentence in the high security G Division alongside the prison's most dangerous criminals.

"It's quite an old prison, in fact well over a hundred years old," sais CBS News correspondent Roger Maynard. "It houses some very serious criminals — murderers, rapists and bank robbers and the like. In many ways it's arguable that this prison has far worse facilities than Guantanamo Bay."

Nevertheless, lawyer David McLeod said Hicks was thrilled to be home after more than five years at the U.S. military camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"He is happy to be back on Australian soil," McLeod told reporters outside Yatala prison. "He visibly was elated when we touched down."

Prison officials have said Hicks will be kept in a 6-foot-wide single-bed cell similar in size to the one he left in Cuba.

The 31-year-old will be barred from having any personal items in his cell, and his visits with family will be strictly limited, with no physical contact allowed.

His telephone calls will be monitored, and he will be allowed little or no contact with other inmates, authorities have said.

Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock declined to comment on security arrangements, saying only "public safety is the primary concern."

Hicks' lawyer said his client has instructed him to discontinue any current court actions. "All he wants to do now is become a regular prisoner, serve his time, and proposes to make every use that he can of the rehabilitation processes here," McLeod said. "He wants to get on with his education. He wants to complete high school and if possible go on to university."

A high school dropout and Muslim convert, Hicks was captured in December 2001 in Afghanistan by the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance, and became one of the first terrorist suspects to be transferred to the U.S. naval base in Cuba.

He was tried by a military tribunal under a system created by U.S. President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001. The system has come under criticism as a violation of the prisoners' right to challenge their confinement in U.S. courts.

Hicks was accused of attending al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and conducting surveillance on the British and American embassies as part of his training.

He had spent only two hours on the Taliban front line before it collapsed in November 2001 under attack by U.S. Special Forces and the Northern Alliance.

While fleeing, Hicks came across a group of Arab fighters who told him they were heading back to the front to fight to the death. Hicks declined to join them and was captured in December 2001 as he tried to escape into Pakistan, according to the military's charge sheet.

As part of his plea deal, Hicks agreed to a 12-month order prohibiting him from talking to the media and stated he had "never been treated illegally" since he was captured in Afghanistan and taken to Guantanamo.

He is due to be released at the end of December, and the Australian attorney general has said he may be free to speak to the media about his ordeal, despite the U.S. gag order.

Ruddock said he did not believe Australia could enforce the media ban. But under local law, Hicks, a convicted criminal, would not be allowed to sell his story.

"We are of the view that he's free — once he has concluded his penal servitude — to speak as he wishes, but not to profit," Ruddock told Australian Broadcasting Corp. Sunday.

[gunnerv1]

FeelFree1- You just covered the entire DemocRatic Party- Vote Early and Vote Often (how many graveyards did the liberals visit for their voter rolls?)

[gunnerv1]

WW1 and WW2, Same results-Democracy
Viet-Nam and Iraq, Same results-Liberal interference

[randalds]

So in the end your spouse if in Iraq is there for a lie and nothing more.
Posted by antoniof123 at 09:10 AM : May 20, 2007

He gives you the freedom to post such inane messages, count your blessings...

Posted by holiveras at 09:19 AM : May 20, 2007

No, he is not fighting to defend America or our freedom anymore then I or hundreds of thousands of others in Vietnam were. This is not a war of last resort, but rather a war of choice. Iraq was no threat to us or our freedom. Bush and Cheney and there ilk used our troops the same way a thief uses a gun to rob a bank, except we're the ones being robbed and the money is covered in our troops blood. This is not a war for peace, but rather a war for profit. Everyone of our troops who have died in this war died in vain, for nothing. Their lives were cynically thrown away by a cold-hearted administration ruled by corrupt thieves.

[toddpw01]

This "war on terror" is more like the "war on drugs" than WW2, so I don't buy the argument that if it was okay in WW2 it should be okay now.

Bush has arranged things so that he could, if he wished, declare a random opponent to be an enemy combatant and disappear them to Gitmo without having to show any evidence to support his claim.

We've already seen how much he was willing to corrupt the DoJ to help the GOP get re-elected, so what makes you think he can be trusted to not abuse this power?

The Nazis were right, scare the public repeatedly and they'll let you do anything.

[gkc99]

Hicks is thrilled to be back in his own country so he can put his face in the dirt of his native land as he goes "A$$ IN THE AIR FOR ALLAH".

[feelfree1]

holiveras,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these important topics. I hope that I have answered your questions.

[feelfree1]

Re: "Do you seriously propose a military takeover by returning troops of the U.S. government?"

I hope that it does not come to that, but the way that these illegitimate pirates are operating, we may not have much choice.

I hope that your loved one returns safely and soon. Dieing in Iraq for nothing does nobody any good. We need him back here to support the American People, and to help us to kick these illegitimate pirates to the curb.

[feelfree1]

holiveras,

Re: "In what way is...the war illegal?"

The entire case for invading Iraq was based on an intentional hoax, cooked up by ideologue extremists like Cheney and Rumsfeld, with fake intelligence provided by men like Doug Feith, in the 'Office of Special Plans'.

Invading a country that poses no immanent threat to the invader, constitutes an 'illegal war of aggression'. Iraq posed no such immanent threat.

The fraud-based Bush war of aggression against Iraq is in violation of the U.N. Charter and the Nuremberg Charter, as well as other U.S. obligated international treaties. Our Constitution recognizes such treaties as the 'Supreme Law of the Land...', therefore, the illegal Bush war is in violation of our own Constitution.

The conduct of the illegal invasion of Iraq has also regularly violated the Geneva Conventions and the 'U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996'.

Re: %u201CAlso, did you vote ?%u201D

Yes, and I think that it counted. However, the Republicans successfully challenged tens of thousands of Iraq military veteran votes in 2004, particularly in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. This was one of the main methods, which the Republicans used to manufacture an electoral %u2018victory%u2019 in 2004.

[holiveras]

Thank you, speakinup..you are an oasis of sanity amongst the raging rhetoric in this discussion. Bless you and yours as well...

[feelfree1]

holiveras,

Re: "In what way is the current government illegitimate"

Our current Executive was never legitimately elected into office. Not in 2000, and not in 2004. Dirty tricks, voter intimidation, and outright fraud were used to seize power.

Here is an example from the 2000 Florida shenanigans:

www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html (speakers)

Since they grabbed power, they have packed the Executive and Judicial branches with their corporate cronies and crooks. Many of these cronies have blatantly violated their oaths to our Constitution, and in several cases, have even actively undermined it. They are, by far, the greatest enemy of the American people, and present the biggest threat- foreign or domestic.

More than this though, our government suffers compromised legitimacy because our 2 dominant political parties are in the pockets of big corporations and Isreali lobbiests, and are not serving the interests of the We the People.

[speakinup]

holiveras, please realize that mental cases like FeelFree1, are sick. Those that would support this person and those that conjecture like im4honesty, well they just aren't right in the head.

Your statments ring true, holiveras. They drop red hot coals upon the heads of these sick people of the world. They make these liberal idiots burn with frustration. So lap it up liberals. Get your blood pressure up there. You do your health more damage with each statement. Your statements here are rejected by those that have thoughts of worth.

God bless you and yours, holiveras.

[holiveras]

There is no good reason to disgrace yourselves in the illegal and disgraceful wars of the illegitimate Bush regime. We need you back home to help us regain control of our government run amok!

www.ivaw.org
Posted by FeelFree1 at 01:48 PM : May 20, 2007

Just wondering two things...In what way is the current government illegitimate and the war illegal? Also, did you vote ? (this is a democracy, the majority rules, and all of that).Do you seriously propose a military takeover by returning troops of the U.S. government? Please give our troops some credit for their intelligence in recognizing your rhetoric for what it is.
Just curious how you come to your conclusions..

[feelfree1]

Fortunately more and more of our bravest and wisest military men and women are refusing to participate in the illegal and disgraceful, fraud-based Bush war of choice. These are the only true American war heroes at the moment!

To our troops:

"Do not fight for a dying regime. It is not worth your life." GWB

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxKpeKQA6B4 (speakers)

There is no good reason to disgrace yourselves in the illegal and disgraceful wars of the illegitimate Bush regime. We need you back home to help us regain control of our government run amok!

www.ivaw.org

[fredgrad2000]

holiveras - Best to your husband...not everyone here is a Move.On.org wacko like antoniof123. Some of us value his service, like that of my 2 brothers.

The whole argument over Guantanamo is ridiculous - in WWII, German POWs (who were actually uniformed, recognized soldiers of a signatory nation BTW - a stated requirement of the Geneva Conventions) were captured, held without any sort of trial and held incommunicado with either lawyers or their families or Germany until the war was over in Southhampton, England...why in the name of God, would we not treat Islamic terrorists at least the same. Even if accorded the treatment of the Geneva Conventions (which I advocate fully), they are NOT POWs, and not American citizens; they have NO right to our US courts, none, zero, zilch!! We should TREAT them as POWs and do exactly what we're doing, hold them, incommunicado, until the war is over (meaning until the Islamofascists are either all dead or all in Gitmo or Osama and Zawahiri are on CNN in a US military prison BEGGING for our forgiveness!!). Until that day, these detainees captured can and should be held...and nowhere in the Geneva conventions does it require us to do a thing more.

[holiveras]

So in the end your spouse if in Iraq is there for a lie and nothing more.
Posted by antoniof123 at 09:10 AM : May 20, 2007

He gives you the freedom to post such inane messages, count your blessings...

[leftcoast196]

we were attacked because of our constant meddling in other countries internal affairs. if we would stay home and mind our business we wouldn't be hated and terrorized.

[antoniof123]

holiveras Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq. How can anyone still be hanging on to that though process? The administration lied to America and when people like me said we should not go to war. We were called trators, who is the trator now. The Dixie Chicks CD's were burned that is something that Nazi Germany did with books same thing no difference. So in the end your spouse if in Iraq is there for a lie and nothing more.

[holiveras]

Who ARE you people...? How quick we forgot those who suffered and are still suffering as a result of 9/11. Are you people Americans, or ?. Feel free to move to Iraq anytime...

A concerned military spouse

[mizpah63]

Justice would be served poetically if Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzales and Rice were all sentenced to even a short stretch in Hicks' confines at Guantanamo. In addition, neither comments nor profits allowed following their release. And, no publicly paid for Gulfstream jet transporting them back to the US; a rowboat seems appropriatey lavish.

[im4honesty]

"Hicks, shackled and wearing an orange jumpsuit, was then taken to the Yatala Labor Prison, where he will serve the final seven months of his sentence in the high security G Division alongside the prison's most dangerous criminals."



I suspect it has already been arranged. This man will not live seven months. I wonder if his murder will even make the news?