Category: War on Terror

DAVID Hicks is set to have his terrorism conviction overturned after the US conceded that the former Guantánamo Bay inmate is innocent, his lawyer says. What they mean is that at that time there wasn’t a law that said it was illegal to fight for the other side and try and kill westerners. He is guilty as sin by his own word and will never be accepted by decent Australians as anything else. Adelaide-born Mr Hicks was 26 when he was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 by the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, which believed he was fighting for al-Qaeda. He was held in the US-run jail in Cuba until 2007, when he pleaded guilty to providing material support for terrorism and was sent to Adelaide’s Yatala Prison to serve the rest of his seven-year sentence. He was released under a control order later that year. Hicks said he only pleaded guilty in an Alford plea agreement to escape the “indefinite solitary confinement I was suffering in Guantanamo Bay”.

“I am just sorry it has taken so long to clear my name.”

Believe me Hicks, your name is not cleared.

In an interview with Bill O’Reilly Lt. Col. Ralph Peters said the plan for fighting war is “

one, you accept that you are in a war. Two, you name the enemy: Islamist terrorists. Three, you get the lawyers off the battlefield and out of the targeting cell. You accept there will be collateral damage, and do you not apologize for it, you do not nation build. You don’t hold — try to hold ground. You go wherever in the world the terrorists are and you kill them. You do your best to exterminate them, and then you leave, and you leave behind smoking ruins and crying widows. If in five or ten years they reconstitute and you have got to go back, you go back and you do the same thing and you never never never send American troops into a war you don’t mean to win. And “be as merciless as the enemy, if you’re not willing to do that, they will win.”

A family member told me on the weekend the problem is we marginalize the Muslims.  Not that the extremists among them murder innocents; not that they rape and decapitate woman or sell them into slavery; not that they decapitate POWs by the thousands; not that they turn up and slaughter 2000 people in Nigeria; not that they turn up at schools and kill girls simply because they are at school; but that we marginalize them. With thinking like that no wonder we are losing the war. The war is against Islamic extremists, not against Muslims and the rational civilized Muslims need to get on the bandwagon and join the fight  They are getting slaughtered as well. Je suis Charlie gives everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling but achieves absolutely nothing.  The extremists look at these displays of western “No action but plenty of words and graphics” and smile.  They have us reacting as pacifists when, as LTCOL Peters says, we  need to hunt them down and kill them. The “marginalized’ Muslims come to our country, one presumes to be free of the uncivilized places where they come from, and then the young men go to the mosques and listen to preachers advocating that they work to create exactly the same uncivilized conditions in their new country. The mosques are creating the extremists and we let them. The “marginalized’ go off the rape, decapitate and kill other Muslims or westerners, show decapitation movies on YouTube and when they tire of it and feel a need for more of our decadent, Kafir social security money they fly back home. And we let them in. The media are printing reams of opinions on the problems of Islamophobia; worrying about violence that isn’t happening at the exact same time that the extremist Muslims are slaughtering innocents. The problem isn’t Islamophobia, it’s Islam in it’s extreme interpretations.

SYDNEY  siege gunman Man Haron Monis and his partner racked up tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees unsuccessfully ­defending themselves after sending hate mail to the families of dead Diggers — all at taxpayers’ expense. After shopping around, Monis found lawyer Hugo Aston. Aston told him he thought he had a case for an appeal against his conviction, for sending letters to the families of dead Diggers.

“It seemed there was a case here for the High Court to determine the veracity of the legislation under which he was charged,” Aston said yesterday. “Basically, on the implied right to free speech, because not only did he send the letters to families of the deceased he also sent them to politicians.”

How much did this appeal cost?

“I wouldn’t have a clue, it was all funded through the public purse, Legal Aid.”

Wouldn’t have a clue?  So he didn’t raise a file and record time spent on the case.  He didn’t discuss it with senior partners and Legal Aid were never sent a bill? Right! What he means is, he is embarrassed and the firm are trying to downplay their contribution. Who draws the line in these cases?  I have fondly thought that Legal Aid was available to poor people to help them get justice.  Now I find it’s available for enemies of the state to attack us. Further adding to the cost to taxpayers, Monis’s partner, Amirah Droudis, ran a concurrent case over the same matter, also to the High Court.

“They didn’t strike me as particularly sane sorts of people, they seemed a little unhinged,” Mr Aston said of the couple. “And, of course, what they were doing had nothing to do with Islam, it was born of fanaticism and ignorance.”

Aston’s law firm obviously did well out of the appeal but does anyone ever apply ethics when deciding who should get Legal Aid or is it just a case of “I think I see a loop hole where we can make money.

Legal Aid NSW paid for Monis’s legal representation — including a law firm and three barristers — as he took his case all the way to the High Court, despite his lawyer considering him “unhinged” and “fanatical” at the time.

The report ran to 85 pages and three judges of the high court went Monis’s way.  What were the thinking – that it’s really OK to send recently bereaved widows and families hate letters telling them their soldier relatives were murderers because…free speech? This whole affair offends me in so many ways. The judiciary release on bail a man charged with accessory to murder of his wife, of 40 or 50 cases of sexual abuse and found guilty of writing the letters to Army KIA Next of Kin and then Legal Aid chips in to help him by billing that taxpayer for the costs of a law firm and three barristers. And then he goes to the Lindt Cafe.    

His name is Man Haron Monis and he has just murdered two Australians and wounded two others in the Sydney seige He is known to police for being an accessory before and after the fact of the murder of his wife by his new girlfriend.  He has 40 charges of sexual assault against him and came to my notice for his habit of writing deplorable and offensive letters to the next of kin of diggers killed in action It has been Monis’ on-going legal battle for his conviction for penning the poisonous letters to the families of dead Australian soldiers between 2007 and 2009 that has consumed him. It is understood yesterday’s incident followed an unsuccessful, last-ditch attempt in the High Court on Friday to have the charges overturned. With all that is known about him I find it odd that the Magistrate considered him no threat to the public and released him on bail. Monis was sentenced to 300 hours of community service and placed on a two year good behaviour bond for the “offensive and deplorable letters” sent with the assistance of his girlfriend Amirah Droudis. They were sent to the families of  Private Luke Worsley and Lance Corporal Jason Marks, who were killed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. He also sent a letter in 2009 to the family of the Austrade official Craig Senger, who was killed in the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta in 2007. Monis claimed the letters were his own version of a “flower basket” or “condolence card”. Bree Till, widow of Sergeant Brett Till, killed while defusing a bomb on March 12, 2009, said at the time of his conviction:

“We sat reading these letters (which) made out to be something supportive but then the juxtaposition of this man accusing my husband of being a child-killer while dictating how I should raise my children. It was scary,” she said.

He fought the validity of the charges all the way to the High Court arguing they were political and only sought to persuade the families to oppose Australia’s military involvement in Afghanistan.

But when he lost that battle, and had to stand trial, he pleaded guilty to all 12 charges against him in August 2013

My take on the matter is that the people are fuming about the incident and questions will be asked of the police and the state politicians.  All I saw yesterday was blue uniforms saying how they wanted the incident to be resolved peacefully which is a noble aim that flies in the face of what we know about Islamic radicals and this guy in particular. The only good reason I can think of for not killing him by sniper is that the police had intelligence that he had bombs and/or accomplices who would detonate the bombs if things didn’t go his way.

If this is not the case then the question remains; why wasn’t he taken out, knowing what we do of his hatred of Australians?

The TRG teams are, of course, under orders so my statement is not leveled at them.

AN Australian serving as a sniper for Islamic State has been killed battling the Iraqi military amid airstrikes by coalition warplanes in Ramadi, in the tightly contested Anbar province, according to claims emerging from Baghdad. According to reports, an unidentified Islamic State fighter who is “probably” Australian was killed during heavy fighting in the south of Ramadi on Wednesday. Bit by bit we rid the country of sub-humans. I wonder if David Hicks might like to volunteer to fight for the enemy again?

TWO bombs have been dropped by a Super Hornet in Australia’s first direct strike on a terrorist target in Iraq, Defence has revealed this morning. Hooray F***k! Two bombs!  The tide of war has surely changed! Not. Even armchair-warriors will be aware by now that fighter bombers do not win a war by themselves, even if they cost the Australian government $250 million each.  Troops are need on the ground and so far, the Iraq army haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory. The western powers have handed over the tactical advantage to the terrorists by rattling on and on about how we won’t drop our bombs unless we can be guaranteed  that no civilians will be hurt. The Terrorists, who read Facebook, Twitter and local media, react accordingly, adjust their tactics and the subsequent windows of opportunity for the fighter bombers to attack are fleeting. $250 million dollars per copy of RAAF,  USAF and other airforce’s fighter-bombers cruising around looking for politically correct targets, in between refueling training, while the Terrorists hug the civilian population. It’s going to be a long war. News reports show videos and pics of Terrorists raising their black flag near Kobane.  Why are they still alive, I wonder?  If the news cameras can see them why can’t the missiles or smart bombs? The only people being serious about this war seem to be the Terrorists and if that continues, a lot of innocent folk are going to be decapitated or sold into slavery. Is there an agenda I’m missing?

A MAN shot dead after he stabbed two police officers in Melbourne last night was a known security risk who had used social media to attack Australian law enforcement as “dogs” waging a “war on Islam”. The 18-year old has been named as Numan Haider in media reports The Islamic Council of Victoria this morning expressed “deep sorrow” over the incident and called for an “objective” investigation, saying the attack showed the consequences of alienating young Muslim men. I think it’s more a consequence of a young Muslim men trying to kill policemen and if you want to go deeper you might question where he lives and where he got his radical ideas from.  It is this environment that is isolating young muslim men, not Australian society. Other media reports he was called to the police station to have a discussion about his use of social media and when he arrived he knifed both officers, one severley, and the Victorian policeman killed him with one shot. Reports also mentioned the AFP policemen was attacked whilst shaking hands with the man. I would imagine police forces around the country will be reviewing their handling of terror suspects subsequent to this incident.  Maybe  the phrases “Don’t shake hands with the bastards” and “treat as dangerous” will be mentioned in the text of  emails hitting their inboxes. Death is never a  good outcome but a terrorists death is better than the death of good guys in the war against terrorism. I trust the  policement heal quickly.  

TWO Australian citizens have been killed in a US airstrike in Yemen in what is the first known example of Australian extremists dying as a result of Washington’s highly controversial use of predator drones. Why highly controversial The drone killed 5 terrorists – I would think that would make it highly successful I was concerned when I first read the headlines but it turned out the two guys were fighting for al-Qa’ida. If you fight for the enemy I think you should loses your citizenship so the only thing to take from the incident is that 5 terrorists were killed and that’s a good result.