nairbe wrote on Jan 11
th, 2011 at 10:29am:
There really are three easy questions to ask.
1. If Habib is so guilty why has the government settled? (don't give me the national security crap, they could have pulled closed hearings)
2. Why did the government refuse to aid an australian citizen being held by a foreign country and then handed around.(the government has a responsibility to help you even if you are guilty, remember he was not guilty of a crime in this country)
3. If you were in his position what would you do.
From here it gets complicated, we know he was arrested for suspicion of aiding a terrorist organisation. He was moved through other countries and ended in Cuba. there was no charge and no trial there has never been any evidence presented before a court to be proved or disproved and we are unlikely to ever know the truth because of national security.
To me it all smells a bit funny but in the end the Government blew any hope of nailing him down when they failed in their duty of care to an Australian abroad. This is why they settled.
OK nairbe I will ask you the same question I asked dna and didnt get an answer..
JUST WHAT SHOULD THE GOVT HAVE DONE????
do we invade a country that holds one of our own captive???????????????????
dna says NO>. In fact he thinks thats a silly question....
so if it was left to you... what would you do to have got Habib out of Egypt or as he ended up in Guantanamo.. how would you have got him out of Cuba?????????
the govt settled nairbe in the same way they settled with the pirates of the Viking... its the easy cheapest way out..I dont blame them mind.. its not their money after all..and I would probably do the same.
the govt DID NOT REFUSE TO HELP HIM OR HICKS>>THEY DID ALL THEY COULD EXCEPT INVADE..
so tell me all you critics who think you could have done better... WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE?
maybe we should have paid the Yanks billions that would have got them home earlier then they could have sued us ealier
I cant tell you what I would have done in his position because I am not a traitor and have no inclination to be one.so would never end up in his position.
My apologies for being so long in replying, school holidays and all.
There is a simple move the government could have made. As the UK did we could have requested of our ali that they return an Australian national to their country. That country being an ali there should have not been a problem as this should have been the automatic action taken. The government did not do this and it could be alleged that they took no action in this matter because they knew that there was no charge available to them in this country. As at the time he had broken no crimes and the legislation that was put into place was not retrospective the AFP could have placed him under a control order and held him for two weeks of questioning as a person of interest.
As i said the situation did smell bad for Habib, but this does not justify the dereliction of duty by the Australian Government in it's duty of care to an Australian national. All other suspicion and anger must be set aside for the complete support of the law in this country even if the outcomes are not what we want. This after all is what we are fighting for otherwise what the hell are we doing in these countries. It would be easier and cheeper to bomb them back to the stone age and keep them there.
Forum
Pages: 
