Category: War on Terror

It’s true that all Moslems aren’t terrorists but I can?t get it out of my head that at the moment all terrorists are Moslems. Islam, the religion of peace is proving anything but. I trust by now, particularly after the obscenity in Beslan, that apologists for the religion are finally coming around to a more realistic way of thinking. We are at war. There are plenty of left-wing commentators denouncing the Beslan tragedy but some still have a problem uttering the words ‘terrorists’ or ‘Moslem terrorists’. Separatist, guerillas, insurgents, hostage-takers are just some of the euphemisms that rattle through the media. None of these titles fits the image of child killers – they seem to offer some legitimacy that simply isn’t there. Much has been made over the last couple of days about the ineptitude of Putin and/or the Russian military. A lot has been said about the problems in Chechnya but the bottom line has to be that there are people in the world prepared to kill woman and children in such a horrific manner and it is they who must be stopped. As in killed, shot down like dogs. I wonder if Chechnya based reasons for hating Mother Russia really motivate the reported half Arab composition of the terrorist force? I think not. I think the Islamic terrorist organizations are recruiting for any theatre where the possibility of killing Infidels exists. Some clerics have denounced the latest round of terror as less than civilized but they need to do a hell of a lot more. Statements to the press and sermons denouncing terrorism are not enough while they are in the minority. While the Islamic leaders only make ‘we don’t agree’ noises they are subject to some deserved cynicism from the population at large. John Quiggan has a good post on the background of the Chechnya problem but I’m not prepared to accept that killing kids is an answer. I despised the IRA for what they did whilst fully understanding the hard times visited on them by the Poms as I will rile against any force that targets kids. As Mark Steyn points out no one offers up a plan to fix the problem, that is, no-one except Bush. At least he does have a plan and although it requires a democracy in the Middle East as a base to the solution and that is difficult, to say the least, it is a plan. Much is written by those who claim superior knowledge, about the reasons for the current Islamic assaults against our woman and children. Criticism from every angle but no alternative solution put forward for debate. The only answer for these commentators is Bush is wrong. Well if he’s so wrong, and you?re so smart, what is the right way to go about solving the issue. Tell us, but until you do, I suggest we stick to the old infantry maxim on terrorists Kill them. Shot them down like the dogs they are.

I have some empathy with Terry Hicks, the father of David Hicks but none with David. Obviously I’m a harder and less gullible man than * Niall who claims that Hicks appears to have maintained his sense of self, despite the irrefutable claims of physical and mental abuse. * Niall is still suffering from delusions of grandeur or paranoa or something that makes him deny other bloggers the abilty to permalink so just scroll down to The Fight Finally Begins – if you can be bothered. Irrefutable? 1. incontrovertible, irrefutable, positive — (impossible to deny or disprove; “incontrovertible proof of the defendant’s innocence”; “proof positive”; “an irrefutable argument”) Hicks himself claims to have been tortured. Well he would say that wouldn’t he. This claim was backed up British detainees who claimed that;

… Hicks was denied medical attention for a hernia and interrogated more frequently than many other detainees after his capture in Afghanistan.

The three men also claimed they suffered systematic brutality and were kept in open cages in the sweltering Cuban heat during their detention at the US military base in Guantanamo. Terry Hicks said his son’s abuse at Guantanamo was mental, not physical. Aww diddums. Cages in the open son, interrogated more than others, being spoken to in a nasty way. Just sounds like everyday life for an infantrymen to me. So, four terrorists claim they were treated poorly and a couple of left-wing lawyers and the father of one of them parrot their claims and it’s irrefutable! It is most probably irrefutable that Hicks was abused and torutured under the left wing rules that says if anyone says anything that makes the US look bad then it’s irrefutable. I have some empathy for Terry Hicks but I have more empathy and a lot of sympathy for the thousands of victims of the Taliban and it’s cousin Al Qaeda. I have no sympathy for David Hicks. Nor does the Australian Public – believe me.

Ian Barker, QC attacks an Australian editorial from two days ago

CONTRARY to your editorial (15/6), David Hicks will not get his day in court. That has been denied him. He will get his day before a military tribunal, whose members are answerable to the US President who has already branded him as evil. He will have no appeal, and not even a right of release if acquitted. The evidence will probably consist of admissions extracted by a process of interrogation one can only imagine, after two and a half years in custody. Hicks, Habib and others at Guantanamo Bay have been kept in a legal vacuum, at the mercy of whatever directions the US President chooses to give, unburdened by judicial or parliamentary scrutiny. If all this is a fair process, I wonder what The Australian would regard as unfair? You cannot dispose of the problem by assuming Hicks’s guilt, as you have done. That is why we have trials in courts of law, whatever their defects. Rules of decency and due process on the part of governments matter a great deal. It is humiliating for Australia that the Prime Minister did not intervene on behalf of two citizens illegally held on foreign soil by a foreign power. But no. The convoluted reasoning is that they should not be repatriated because they have not offended against Australian law. That should make Australians travelling abroad a touch uneasy.

You might feel humiliated Ian but I don’t. I feel indifference and I think you will find that the vast majority of Australian’s feel the same way. I understand what you are saying Ian, but frankly I don’t give a damn. Your letter is full of legal rights and not one solitary mention of his responsibilities as a humane human. I also understand that even seriel killers who cut up and eat their victims are entitled to legal defence but whatever you say, whatever spin you put on the Military Tribunals, Hicks will get legal reresentation. So whats your point. If an Australian travels overseas and committs a crime in Malaysia or Thailand They are charged under the laws of Malaysia and Thailand so why is Hicks different? Australian Drug Runners have been executed in these countries – did you feel impelled to write to the press then? Maybe your right, it isn’t fair, but we all know it will be a damn site fairer than the WTC obscenity and on balance the US will be be fairer than the Taliban have ever been to their own people. Meanwhile Alan Logan from Victoria sums up the general feelings in the community on Hicks

HAS The Australian conducted a survey to find if any significant number of Australians give a damn about David Hicks? No one I have met cares at all

No one I’ve met care about him either, Alan. Update: Hicks in Training

God knows what some people think the military are all about. The Government is under fire because reports by junior officers in the ADF mentioned Abu Ghraib and they, the Government, didn’t do what all good Lefties and anti US journalists demand they do. As in why didn’t you start screamimg ‘abuse’ at the US Military eigth months ago? Why didn’t you fall on your sword? Why didn’t you sack General Cosgrove? Why don’t you acknowledge that we, the press, know far more than you? Why on earth aren’t you doing what we suggest? STEVE LIEBMANN from Channel 9’s Today program tries to make Senator Hill confess up to something or other. Anything to keep the saga on the boil. Steve Liebmann;

it’s now known that Australian military lawyers were reporting concerns about human rights abuses in the prisons back to our officials, military officials, eight months before you knew anything about them. Why was that material not passed up the chain of command, at least to you

Senator Hill

Because it was the Red Cross talking about other parties who were running the prisons, not Australians. The Red Cross report didn’t even make it to Australia as we weren’t an occupying power.

Steve insists

But there were 20 or 25 reports…

Senator Hill tries to explain again.

You’ve got to remember that this was at the end of the major conflict phase, there were large numbers of prisoners, there were inadequate facilities, overcrowding, difficulties in processing, the prisons were being mortared each night – it wasn’t a satisfactory environment for the holding and proper processing of prisoners…We weren’t running the prisons we just had some lawyers advising constructively

Steve is still trying to get Hill to accept that he is wrong and that Steve is very right. Steve, being a journalist, clearly knows more than the Senator. Why doesn’t the Senator admit it?

Yeah but I mean these reports are coming through, the alarm bells aren’t ringing – does that mean we need a general review of your Department’s efficiency?

Senator Hill:

No, because it wasn’t for us to act upon them. The Red Cross didn’t even deliver the reports to Australia. The Red Cross won’t even give us the reports now because they know it wasn’t our responsibility.

For Christ’s sake can’t you understand English? (my words, not Senator Hill’s) There would have been literally thousands of reports from Iraq submitted by Officers on duty there analysing what they had been involved in, witnessed, advised on and otherwise reporting matters within their field of responsibility. Do the press, the journalists, on a jihad to destroy Howard, really believe that everything goes up the chain. How many reports do you expect Hill, or Cosgrove, or even Howard to read eveyday. They rely on summaries from Defence and thus rely on Senior Defence personnel (Generals and civilians) to anticipate problems that may be hidden in a report. I can’t see anyone anticipating that reports that indicated overcrowding and rough treatment in prisons in a war zone on the eve of a cease-fire would turn into such a witch-hunt. To repeat Senator Hill’s words .. at the end of the major conflict phase, … large numbers of prisoners, … inadequate facilities, overcrowding, difficulties in processing, .. prisons mortared each night – it wasn’t a satisfactory environment for the holding and proper processing of prisoners…We weren’t running the prisons we just had some lawyers advising constructively. It’s not meant to be a three star rest camp situation. In the immediate aftermath of battle these camps and prisons are designed to deny the enemy use of the incarcerated troops. At that point in time commanders and logisticians are flat out supplying and reinforcing their own troops and have to balance removing troops from the battle to POW management. It never works perfectly and anyone that demands it does should try and manage it themselves sometime. Interrogators are called in to sort the wheat from the chaff, the ordinary soldier from the man who knows something. The ordinary soldier is bulk stored until it is safe to send him back home and those who may know something are interrogated. Meanwhile the battle still rages with insurgents and western media doing their best to turn the tide of war in the terrorist’s favour. It’s working fairly well too.

The Australian has an article titled Al-Qaeda claims kill as payback and goes on to say;

AN American engineer was killed in a drive-by shooting and another US national was believed kidnapped at the weekend in Saudi Arabia in apparent retaliation for US atrocities at Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib prison.

My dictionary says; Atrocious: adj Extremely, or shockingly wicked or cruel, heinous. Atrocity: n The quality of being attrocious. I’d always used the word Atrocity in connection with events like the Holocaust, the WTC fly-ins, beheading people on video, Palestinian suicide bombers blowing up woman and kids or the IRA blowing up Mountbatten. I must admit that I never though to connect it to sleep deprivation and humiliation interrogation tactics. English is a living language and useage does change but I think it’s been kidnapped by journalists in a game of rising superlatives where the rules only apply to one side.

Now the Left have something specific to ignore and/or rationalize

AUSTRALIAN Guantanamo Bay prisoner David Mr Hicks has been charged by the US Government with conspiracy to commit war crimes, attempted murder and aiding the enemy. Mr Hicks is accused of returning to Afghanistan after the September 11 terrorist attacks on America in 2001 to fight against Australian and coalition troops.

How’s that for intent. After the September 11 terrorist attacks while the civilized world recoiled in horror, Hicks joins the fight against Australians and Americans. How can any Australian support him and say they are not supporting terrorism.

On one occasion when al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden visited an Afghan camp, Mr Hicks questioned bin Laden about the lack of English in training material and, after accepting bin Laden’s advice, Mr Hicks “began to translate the training camp materials from Arabic to English”, the US alleged.

I’ve got to give it to him, the bastards eager to please. Let me help you kill more of my countrymen and their allies.

Mr Hicks was also allegedly interviewed by Muhammad Atef, an al-Qaeda military commander, about his background and “the travel habits of Australians”.

“It is alleged Mr Hicks armed himself with an AK-47 automatic rifle, ammunition, and grenades to fight against coalition forces.”

I’ve met a lot of men carrying AK47s in my time but I never one that I could bond with. To help the Left formulate their rationalization strategy here are the charges.

The three charges Mr Hicks faces are: CONSPIRACY to commit war crimes; ATTEMPTED murder by an unprivileged belligerent; and, AIDING the enemy. If convicted, the prosecution will not seek the death penalty.

How’s that for Western decadance. While the Terrorists are slitting our citizens throats for prime time TV without the benefit of a crime or a trial we counter by not even seeking the death penalty. News.com have the story here

In the mid 60s I was a young soldier posted to the Intelligence Centre at Woodside South Australia. During the course of my time there I was detailed as staff on what was then called a Code of Conduct course. Maybe it still is, I don?t know. Young officers and NCOs would do the course to prepare them for war service so, if captured, they were at least aware of the interrogation methods of the enemy. They would volunteer and arrive at the Intelligence Centre all ready for a week in the classroom studying Communists and other terrorist organizations. That?s not what happened. They were put in a truck and were told they were going for a trip to look over the camp. A mile up the track the truck was ambushed, the students were captured in a very realistic and frightening manner (read shots fired, explosions, rough manhandling and rifle butts in the ribs) and they were bundled off to a camp we had built in the hills. The role of the staff was to break these officers and NCOs within four days. They were interrogated, forced to sleep in cells 1.5 m by 1.5 m that were designed NOT to give them a good night sleep. To small to lie down in, to low to sit up comfortably and the floor was large grade blue metal stone that neither encouraged sleeping nor sitting up. The temperatures at Woodside in June are in single figures Celsius. They were subject to sleep deprivation, hosed with high pressure hoses at random times like 02.30 and subject to sense disruption. The cells were blacked out so day or night was undistinguishable, and they were hooded when out of their cages, propaganda was blasted over loudspeakers at an unsafe level and they were manhandled to the point of bruising. They were stripped naked, hosed in cold temperatures and humiliated by staff. They were subjected to trails by Kangaroo Court, found guilty and given a death sentence. One guilty man was taken outside and a shot rang out. One of the students still inside the room feinted. After four days they were totally disorientated and were on the verge of believing what was happening to them was real, even though they knew they were on a course. Check out a man after 48 sleep deprivation ? he is functioning on the edge and after 72 hours the brain is loosing coordination. Then you question him and maybe the answers save lives. They volunteered. That?s what we do, us professionals. We are often harder on ourselves than on the enemy. We have to understand what it takes to get information out of a man that may, and often does, save lives. And we have to know how to withstand interrogation. If you have been brought up on WW2 movies with clever interrogators outsmarting the German pilot and learning his secrets just by clever script writing then forget it. It didn?t happen that way and it still doesn?t. This is not a profession for wimps. This is soldiering. We have to be this hard to protect our citizens against terrorism and sometimes, against themselves. So what the hell is going on in Abu Ghraib? Nothing untoward has been stated so far. Taking a camera into the centre and snapping happy shots with sexual connotations was pretty stupid but that?s about it. You see, the end does justify the means. Outside of murder or permanent damage; sense and sleep deprivation, some ego destroying humiliation and just a little bit of biff is OK while it saves lives. If you don?t like it – if its to much for your sensitive liberal upbringing then don?t read about it. just let us get on with trying to save your over protected indulgent self. I don?t mind if you have led a protected life and think these things that happen in war are so? well ..so terrible. Just let the soldiers do what they have to do. You think Abu Ghraib is all about human rights? You?re wrong. Abu Ghraib is all about an attack on Bush and Howard. The suffering of the poor dears in prison is of no import to the left. Don?t kid yourself that they feel for them. They only care about the damage it can do the US. And while we?re on the subject, why is it that the International Rules of War only apply to us Westerners? If we apply these so called rules to war then we are condemned to fail. The media demand the US behave like Amnesty International undergrads and don?t even talk of WTC or the USS Cole or a dozen other obscenities. The Terrorists can blow up our woman and kids but we can?t soften up Iraqi thugs for interrogation to try and prevent it happening again. The Taliban decapitate woman for adultery and we can?t lock up Hicks, a Taliban soldier, for volunteering to kill Coalition forces. He could have been in a position to kill an Australian and although he was most probably not professional enough to succeed, he would have tried. The left argue for a set of conditions and rules that flies in the face of every thing that happens in war. They demand the military be nice and humane to the Iraqi thug while the young soldier guarding him has just came back on watch after viewing Nick Berg?s 30 seconds of fame. Read him a bedside story, Sergeant, and tuck him in. There were no rights in 1944 and Allied and Axis troops were shot dead on sight over the first few days of the invasion ? armed or not ,and I don?t blame them. It was that attitude that gave us the freedoms we have today ? the ones we are fighting for. It sure as hell wasn?t anything that a Human Rights lawyer said or did. As indicated earlier I come from a harder world. While others of my generation were getting high on weed and giggling over Marx, quoting Mao Tse Dung, and having fun supporting the enemy at Moratoriums I was picking up the pieces of their insanity and listening to the headman of a village weep over his wife and daughter raped, sliced and diced on the orders of a Marx/Ho Chi Minh inspired and Western Press supported political commissar. Myself, I would give serious consideration to free-falling Osama Bin Laden from an aircraft at a height roughly equivalent to that distance people fell from the upper floors of the WTC. I would have the DZ fenced and populated by pigs and I would video the whole fall and the aftermath and offer the tape to AL Jazira. Transmit this, you bastards!