David Hicks wrote a book "Guantanamo: My Journey".

I heard on the radio they are trying to take away the earnings of this book from him.

Why would they do that? He didnt commit a crime in Australia?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hicks

Interesting read anyway

I would have thought that he would have been alowed to relese a book and make money out of it, he didnt commit a crime against Australian society?

Mark _australia said...

He did commit a crime under australian law, can't remember what it is called but going away to fight with a foreign force against our forces is illegal (Cth Crimes Act I think) and is akin to treason. Don't think they ever proved that one?

Proceeds of crime legislation of 2002: http://www.crimeprevention.gov.au/agd/WWW/ncphome.nsf/Page/POCA_funding_for_Non-Government_Agencies

A very interesting read, particularly about where the $ go to...

Also interesting that it does not say anything about being convicted of a crime for this to apply...

felixdcat said...

He was fighting OZ diggers as a mercenary, killing? his own country men! What would you call that? in my book he is a traitor and murderer, should have been left to rot in his jail cell abroad! The money from his book should be used to help victims of terrorism.

From wiki; On or about 9 November 2001 Hicks spent about two hours on the front line at Konduz "before it collapsed and he was forced to flee".

I agree that he shouldnt have been there but I dont think he was at the front line for long enough to kill anybody.

Come to think of it, my recollection is that it wasn't against Australian law at the time of the event. The Howard government changed the law after he'd been picked up by the US. Thankfully, some sanity prevailed and they didn't make the change retrospective.

Which is why Hicks has never stood trial in Australia - he wasn't breaking the law.

Don't get me wrong - I'm no fan of Hicks (I think he was being an idiot at best) but I do get pee'd when our own Governments can't be bothered.

From nine msn -

Profits from David Hicks' controversial book about his six years in Guantanamo Bay have been frozen as prosecutors pursue the Adelaide-born terrorism supporter under proceeds of crime laws.

NSW Supreme Court Justice Peter Garling issued a restraining order on Wednesday relating to Lakeside Pty Ltd and Misha family trust, which are linked to proceeds from Hicks' memoir.

The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) wants to seize profits from Guantanamo: My Journey, which sold about 30,000 copies and is believed to have generated about $10,000 for Hicks.

The memoir tells the tale of his incarceration in the controversial US-run jail between 2001 and 2007.

The court order came as politicians described the case as politically motivated.

"This is a warning bell to other authors who wish to publish a dissenting voice and expose Australian governments' criminal complicity," NSW Greens MP David Shoebridge told AAP during a small demonstration outside the court.

Mr Shoebridge questioned why a self-confessed felon such as Chopper Read could profit from book sales but not Hicks.

"There's clearly a political motive here," he added.

Federal Greens human rights spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young said the case was a smokescreen.

"Why is the government standing idle and refusing to investigate what the former prime minister John Howard and former attorney general Philip Ruddock knew of the treatment of Mr Hicks?" she said.

Hicks was sent to Guantanamo Bay after being rounded up in Afghanistan.

After years in jail he pleaded guilty to providing material support for terrorism and was sent to Adelaide's Yatala Prison in April 2007.

He was released in December 2007.

NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell said it was "entirely appropriate" prosecutors now try to seize his book profits.

"The bottom line is that we have legislation that says that people shouldn't profit from their crimes, or something they're convicted of, or some court action, and the law seems to be working entirely effectively," he told reporters in Sydney on Wednesday.

Inside the court, DPP lawyer Geoffrey Bellew, SC, sought an adjournment to August 16 so the parties could continue "advanced" discussions, with a view to agreeing on how the matter would be resolved.

Stephen Free, for Hicks, said he also needed more time.

Hicks was not in court and neither barrister commented outside court.

His father, Terry, said the court action was opening a can of worms, for his son, who is suffering post-traumatic stress disorder.

"He's been suffering that for a quite a while and he has been seeing people, trying to get through it," Mr Hicks told AAP from Adelaide.

"He's just taking one step at a time."

The matter will return to court on August 16.

doggie said...

From nine msn -



His father, Terry, said the court action was opening a can of worms, for his son, who is suffering post-traumatic stress disorder.

"He's been suffering that for a quite a while and he has been seeing people, trying to get through it," Mr Hicks told AAP from Adelaide.

"He's just taking one step at a time."

The matter will return to court on August 16.

Self inflicted by the way! Is he also going to sue and ask for compo???
Poor baby (would be) terrorist! Went to war and after 5 min on front line needed a nappy change .I bet he would have been better amongst the bombers coward squad!
If it was politically motivated the government would just try not to allow the book to be published so no one could read it!

Chopper Read killed a few people & he gained 'legend' status! Books, movies...the LOT!

As for Hicks - I'm with SomeOtherGuy - I reckon he's an idiot, but don't agree with the freezing of profits from his book.

That whole episode was very messy and since such a situation had not occurred with an Australian citizen before, there were no laws on our books to deal with it properly.
Had he been on Australian soil and fighting against us he would have been tried in an Australian court and certainly found guilty and then dealt with accordingly.
However, he was not on Australian soil. He had gone overseas and joined a force which was at war with Australian forces and our allies.

Had he been immediately returned home after capture it is most likely that a good lawyer would have got him released with no penalty.
This seemed wrong to those in authority and so it was probably decided to just leave him to be processed along with all the others who had been captured but for various reasons couldn't just be released. Consequently it was left to the Americans to keep him in confinement for a period which reflected the penalty for such an offence if the appropriate laws had been in place at the time.
I was quite happy for that to happen. The outcome seemed fair to me and it cost us nothing.

At the time, I thought a very appropriate penalty would have been that since he was prepared to fight with the Taliban, he should have been stripped of his Australian citizenship and left to live with the Taliban in Afghanistan. At the end of the conflict, he would have been released along with all the other Taliban fighters who were simply set free with the promise that they would not fight any more, but he would have to stay there.
Unfortunately, Australian law doesn't permit that either.

As usual, someone who apparently had no idea of what was reasonable and decent behaviour towards their own country suddenly had a much better understanding of it when they believed their country was not demonstrating reasonable and decent behaviour towards them.

He was very lucky really.
Other possible outcomes were that had he continued to actively fight with the Taliban then he could have been shot or blown up or some other outcome which doesn't give one the option to run home and write your memoirs about it.
Who would he be seeking compensation from over that?
The Taliban?
The local Mufti?
People sometimes make stupid decisions and do stupid things.
They should be aware that they have to wear the consequences of them without crying "foul' when one of the many obvious outcomes becomes a reality.

Should he be allowed to keep the proceeds from his book?
It depends what's in it I suppose..
If it's a book sledging the government because of how little it did to rush to his aid and save him then I don't think he should be given that facility.

The fact is, most people would see what he did as being wrong and unacceptable, so it also seems wrong that he should profit from it in any way.
If he's such a great author, let him write a book about anything else and he can then keep the money.

At worse Hicks is guilty of fighting with an army that was defending against foreign invaders. What gave the USA the right to invade Afghanistan? Sure the Taliban were a bunch of bastards when they were running Afghanistan but that doesn't give any country the right to invade. To say he was fighting Australian soldiers is laughable as Hicks was behind bars long before the first Aussie digger got Afghan dust on his boots.

Why the hell are Australian soldiers there anyway? Did Afghanistan declare war on or invade Australia? Do we learn nothing from history? It wasn't that long ago that the Soviets found out it was a stupid idea to invade and occupy a sh!t country like Afghanistan. 30 years later guess what? Australian soldiers are there.... People back in the 80s would have laughed or shook their heads in disbelief at such a situation.

I remember reading English FHMs British windsurfers brough over back in the the summer of 97/98 in Lancelin. There was a regular column on what the Taliban were doing like public executions of women who told some Mullah to get stuffed and things like that.

So anyone who decided to fight with them is a prick, no doubt about it. But since when has it been illegal to write about being a prick?

What are the facts?
Why was he in Afghanistan?
How was he captured and by who?
Why was he sent to Guantanamo?
Why were Australian forces in Afghanistan?
Did he know there were Australian forces in Afghanistan?

If he was an evil terrorist, actively trying to kill Australian (or anybody else), and wants the destruction of the Australian way of life... well, fark him. Hell send him back to Afghanistan.

If he was somebody who was out discovering other cultures, when sh!t just happened around him and some how got sent to Guantanamo to be tortured for years, and could only get out by pleading guilty to something... and now when he's trying to rebuild his life he gets his money stolen... well, shame on those who are taking his money. And we should be fighting for his rights.

I don't know if he's an idiot, I don't know him.

After reading about this on SMH, I looked for the book, and I don't think it has been released here yet. Instead I logged onto Amazon and ordered it for my Kindle.

I now want to read it more than before, in order to find out what he says happened. The little attention I paid to it over the years suggests to me that he got in over his head, and I am not sure he actually fought against any US/Australian forces.

I don't like the idea that nothing has been proven against him, and it appears that he really had the choice of a guilty plea or staying locked up.

Anyway, if the download works I can read for myself what he has to say.

Proceeds of crime? Well, I would argue that the proof of a crime doesn't seem to exist, and the circumstances of his guilty plea overseas leaves a lot to be desired.

FormulaNova said...

I don't like the idea that nothing has been proven against him, and it appears that he really had the choice of a guilty plea or staying locked up.

So being an Australian citizen who converted to Islam, then attended a terrorist training camp is OK?
That part was proven, (there was photos of him there!) and was enough for a charge. Namely, provising support to a terrorist organisation.
Then he was located in a foreign country with the guys who hate us and we fight against now.
That part was also proven and adds weight to the former.

No sympathy for him, whatsoever.

Mark _australia said...

FormulaNova said...

I don't like the idea that nothing has been proven against him, and it appears that he really had the choice of a guilty plea or staying locked up.

So being an Australian citizen who converted to Islam, then attended a terrorist training camp is OK?
That part was proven, (there was photos of him there!) and was enough for a charge. Namely, provising support to a terrorist organisation.
Then he was located in a foreign country with the guys who hate us and we fight against now.
That part was also proven and adds weight to the former.

No sympathy for him, whatsoever.

Well, I have to admit, I haven't kept up on the story in the papers, the whole time.

Of course, I think there is nothing wrong with an Australian citizen converting to any religion.

Did he join a 'terrorist training camp' or did he go off to fight a war that was a local war? Young people are often silly, and it would be easy to get caught up in a cause. I don't know if it was a local fight or a terrorist camp. I am not sure he did either.

He was located in a foreign country. Contiki are going to lose a lot of business if that becomes against the law. Young people often go off in search of adventure. I am not sure he went off to fight his own people (us), as I thought he got dragged into this before there was involvement by the US.

I do question the bit about hating us. Regardless of the current standpoint, did they (the people he joined) even know of us, if you consider it might have been a local war?

Again, I am not the most educated on this, and not sure one way or the other. On the other hand, if he wants to tell his side of the story, it would be good to hear it. The idea that he has been told not to discuss it is a worry. The fact he doesn't get paid for the book is neither here nor there, although without proof that a jury can see, I wonder if its valid.

Either way, I am just offering my opinion, and it will be good to see his views, and see if they hold water.

how do you make this statment really? may be 20 odd diggers familiys should adopt this mind set. who knows they might sleep at night i know you and others will give me **** and i dont give a crap as i really dont care you want to crap on but im sure i will be the first to be spouted down ( if you cant take it dont give it)

SomeOtherGuy said...

No Mark, not only was he not convicted of any crime, he wasn't even tried. He pleaded guilty... under duress! No Australian court would uphold his plea bargain as evidence. He served time here as part of a deal between our government and the yanks because they had nowhere to put him.

Basically the man has been presumed guilty by both sides of politics and hounded ever since. If he's proven guilty then fine, he should do the time. But it sounds like they can't be bothered... too hard... just hound the guy instead.

It seems pretty pathetic to me to uphold democracy by ditching it when it all gets too hard.

Briefly saw Hicks talking about it on the news. He is looking forward to his day in court. A number of legal types say the law is inadequate and probably won't stand up to a legal challenge.

My local federal MP, lucky Phil Ruddock was also weighing in saying stuff along the lines that Hicks pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and if he hadn't he may have been found guilty of a greater charge.

Of course that was possible. Its also possible Hicks may have been found guilty of no charges or his trial put on hold resulting in him still sitting a US military Cuban cage.

Conservative critics of the book don't like it. Probably because it shows them to be a bunch of hypocrites.