DADDY CLAIMS THAT DAVID HICKS WAS NOT A TERRORIST DESPITE RECEIVING TRAINING FROM AL QAEDA
Randy L. Harrington
July 04, 2006
AUSTRALIA—Terry Hicks the father of Australian David Hicks who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 claims that his son is not a terrorist, despite being trained by al Qaeda, being arrested in a war zone, and seeking out information about fighting in Afghanistan from Muslim Clerics in Australia.
David Hicks, a young man was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and turned over to American forces. He is one of the 450 detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, and will most likely be one of the first charged with attempted murder, and various other war crimes.
Father Terry Hicks, and a stable of defense attorneys in Australia have consistently petitioned the Australian government, and have taken failed legal action in the United States to release Hicks to Australia since his capture.
Terry Hicks being a father has been the loudest champion of his sons freedom. Spending countless hours, and perhaps countless Australian dollars trying to convince the free world that his son is innocent. His son was in a foreign war zone. Trained by a foreign terrorist organization that just took credit for a terrorist attack on the United States. And was fighting the Northern Alliance, an ally of the United States in its fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Despite the overwhelming evidence that junior was involved in a war against the interests of the United States, and his own home government of Australia, daddy dearest refuses to let it go, and is advancing a defense that leaves more questions than answers. The United States claims that it has the evidence that it needs to convict David Hicks.
In 2003 Terry Hicks claims to have gone to Afghanistan and Pakistan to trace the last few weeks of his sons steps. Mr. Hicks admits that his son received military training from the non-military terrorist organization al Qaeda in preparation for the Taliban fight against the Northern Alliance. Mr. Hicks claims that this does not make his son guilty, despite the absence of a reason why his son was on foreign soil preparing to fight a foreign war, for an unfriendly foreign government.
Mr. Hicks definition of a terrorist is also questionable in that he claims “A terrorist is someone who is trained to kill civilians and destroy civilian property and David's not that type of fellow anyway.” However, David was in a foreign country, and was receiving “military training” from al Qaeda, which is not a military organization. Al Qaeda's training would necessarily involve the attack on civilian targets, to inflict the maximum amount of devastation to the people that they claim as enemies. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization, and the Taliban was the ruling party of Afghanistan which was a state sponsor of the terrorist group of al Qaeda. I guess fighting for these organization would make you just “that type of fellow anyway.”
Earlier reports, and sources place young David Hicks searching out Muslim Clerics in Australia, who directed him to Afghanistan so that he could fight for the rights of Islam. From all indications young David quietly, and quickly developed the principles of Islam as his political, and religious beliefs. However, Terry Hicks remains silent on this issue.
Terry Hicks claims that his beliefs are based on information that was provided to him by Taliban and Northern Alliance sources during a 2003 trip to Pakistan, and Afghanistan. I am sure that if Terry Hicks were to speak directly to Osama bin Laden, that bin Laden would tell him that al Qaeda is not a terrorist organization. The dictionary.com reference for al Qaeda is “an Islamic terrorist organization started in 1988 by Osama bin Laden to resist Soviet forces in Afghanistan and which seeks to purge Muslim countries of Western influence and establish fundamentalist Islamic rule.” Mr. Hicks should note well that this is the definition applied to al Qaeda by the free world, and apparently the same definition applied by Australia, and the United States.
Mr. Hicks is also probably aware that his son's fight for the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, as he claims, was his a fight on behalf of a fundamental Islamic militia. The Taliban took over Afghanistan in 1995, and in 1996 set up a strict Islamic fundamental government whose objective was to use terror to purge all Islamic countries of western influence. How did young David come to be trained by al Qaeda to fight for the Taliban again?
Mr. Hicks claims to have spoken with Northern Alliance representatives that captured his son, and subsequently turned him over to American military authorities. He claims that when young David was captured that there were no coalition forces operating in the area of his capture (yet). However, the fact that Northern Alliance forces were friendly to coalition interests in Afghanistan would necessarily make them a friend of coalition forces. So young David was preparing to fight a Jihad on behalf of the Taliban of Afghanistan, and was trained by al Qaeda—yet he was not a terrorist, and did not commit any war crimes, because he is “not that type of fellow anyway.”.
Terry Hicks said “I spoke to the arresting officer that arrested David (a polite way for saying the enemy soldier that captured David) and my first question was how many Americans or Australians were there when David was arrested (captured) and there was none.” What Terry Hicks forgets to mention is that the United States, and coalition forces had already declared a war in Afghanistan, and were engaged in operations on the ground that were fighting the Taliban—an organization that young David freely joined.
When U.S. Ambassador to Australia Tom Schieffer was confronted with Terry Hicks' claims, and statements he sympathized with Terry about his sons plight, but found the claims of training by al Qaeda to be ludicrous, and he replied “I don't think al Qaeda is kind of into helping the sisters of the poor, they're doing bad things and...I think we've seen the result of al Qaeda training.”
I don't agree with the abrogation of US Constitutional, and common law, or the Bush administrations intentional circumvention of the Geneva Conventions in his war on terror. However, if the United States has the evidence needed to convict David Hicks, then he should be tried, and convicted. I also believe that David Hicks, if convicted, regardless of what Daddy Hicks says, should receive the maximum penalty under law, and should be held accountable. David Hicks was not some teenager who took daddy's car on a joy ride. He picked up a gun, and received military training on how to use that gun against the enemy. He intentionally, with full knowledge, and consent engaged in acts of war, was captured by his enemies, and is now sorry.
The United States has made a concession to the Australian government that if David Hicks is convicted he will not be executed. Terry Hicks should gracefully accept this concession, and help his son prepare a credible defense to the charges.
SOURCES/CONTRIBUTORS: Australian ABC Online; API
Copyright 2006 Randy L. Harrington. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
David Hicks, a young man was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and turned over to American forces. He is one of the 450 detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, and will most likely be one of the first charged with attempted murder, and various other war crimes.
Father Terry Hicks, and a stable of defense attorneys in Australia have consistently petitioned the Australian government, and have taken failed legal action in the United States to release Hicks to Australia since his capture.
Terry Hicks being a father has been the loudest champion of his sons freedom. Spending countless hours, and perhaps countless Australian dollars trying to convince the free world that his son is innocent. His son was in a foreign war zone. Trained by a foreign terrorist organization that just took credit for a terrorist attack on the United States. And was fighting the Northern Alliance, an ally of the United States in its fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Despite the overwhelming evidence that junior was involved in a war against the interests of the United States, and his own home government of Australia, daddy dearest refuses to let it go, and is advancing a defense that leaves more questions than answers. The United States claims that it has the evidence that it needs to convict David Hicks.
In 2003 Terry Hicks claims to have gone to Afghanistan and Pakistan to trace the last few weeks of his sons steps. Mr. Hicks admits that his son received military training from the non-military terrorist organization al Qaeda in preparation for the Taliban fight against the Northern Alliance. Mr. Hicks claims that this does not make his son guilty, despite the absence of a reason why his son was on foreign soil preparing to fight a foreign war, for an unfriendly foreign government.
Mr. Hicks definition of a terrorist is also questionable in that he claims “A terrorist is someone who is trained to kill civilians and destroy civilian property and David's not that type of fellow anyway.” However, David was in a foreign country, and was receiving “military training” from al Qaeda, which is not a military organization. Al Qaeda's training would necessarily involve the attack on civilian targets, to inflict the maximum amount of devastation to the people that they claim as enemies. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization, and the Taliban was the ruling party of Afghanistan which was a state sponsor of the terrorist group of al Qaeda. I guess fighting for these organization would make you just “that type of fellow anyway.”
Earlier reports, and sources place young David Hicks searching out Muslim Clerics in Australia, who directed him to Afghanistan so that he could fight for the rights of Islam. From all indications young David quietly, and quickly developed the principles of Islam as his political, and religious beliefs. However, Terry Hicks remains silent on this issue.
Terry Hicks claims that his beliefs are based on information that was provided to him by Taliban and Northern Alliance sources during a 2003 trip to Pakistan, and Afghanistan. I am sure that if Terry Hicks were to speak directly to Osama bin Laden, that bin Laden would tell him that al Qaeda is not a terrorist organization. The dictionary.com reference for al Qaeda is “an Islamic terrorist organization started in 1988 by Osama bin Laden to resist Soviet forces in Afghanistan and which seeks to purge Muslim countries of Western influence and establish fundamentalist Islamic rule.” Mr. Hicks should note well that this is the definition applied to al Qaeda by the free world, and apparently the same definition applied by Australia, and the United States.
Mr. Hicks is also probably aware that his son's fight for the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, as he claims, was his a fight on behalf of a fundamental Islamic militia. The Taliban took over Afghanistan in 1995, and in 1996 set up a strict Islamic fundamental government whose objective was to use terror to purge all Islamic countries of western influence. How did young David come to be trained by al Qaeda to fight for the Taliban again?
Mr. Hicks claims to have spoken with Northern Alliance representatives that captured his son, and subsequently turned him over to American military authorities. He claims that when young David was captured that there were no coalition forces operating in the area of his capture (yet). However, the fact that Northern Alliance forces were friendly to coalition interests in Afghanistan would necessarily make them a friend of coalition forces. So young David was preparing to fight a Jihad on behalf of the Taliban of Afghanistan, and was trained by al Qaeda—yet he was not a terrorist, and did not commit any war crimes, because he is “not that type of fellow anyway.”.
Terry Hicks said “I spoke to the arresting officer that arrested David (a polite way for saying the enemy soldier that captured David) and my first question was how many Americans or Australians were there when David was arrested (captured) and there was none.” What Terry Hicks forgets to mention is that the United States, and coalition forces had already declared a war in Afghanistan, and were engaged in operations on the ground that were fighting the Taliban—an organization that young David freely joined.
When U.S. Ambassador to Australia Tom Schieffer was confronted with Terry Hicks' claims, and statements he sympathized with Terry about his sons plight, but found the claims of training by al Qaeda to be ludicrous, and he replied “I don't think al Qaeda is kind of into helping the sisters of the poor, they're doing bad things and...I think we've seen the result of al Qaeda training.”
I don't agree with the abrogation of US Constitutional, and common law, or the Bush administrations intentional circumvention of the Geneva Conventions in his war on terror. However, if the United States has the evidence needed to convict David Hicks, then he should be tried, and convicted. I also believe that David Hicks, if convicted, regardless of what Daddy Hicks says, should receive the maximum penalty under law, and should be held accountable. David Hicks was not some teenager who took daddy's car on a joy ride. He picked up a gun, and received military training on how to use that gun against the enemy. He intentionally, with full knowledge, and consent engaged in acts of war, was captured by his enemies, and is now sorry.
The United States has made a concession to the Australian government that if David Hicks is convicted he will not be executed. Terry Hicks should gracefully accept this concession, and help his son prepare a credible defense to the charges.
SOURCES/CONTRIBUTORS: Australian ABC Online; API
Copyright 2006 Randy L. Harrington. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Print
Email
