2
   

HABIB - released from US detention, but still "suspect".

 
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 27 Sep, 2005 03:12 am
.. The awful feeling that the US government is determined to have at least one show trial & that the Australian government might have agreed to allow Hicks to be the scapegoat. <sigh> Terrible for a citizen of one country to have to resort to trying for citizenship of another country to get some support from his government. Extremely depressing.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Nov, 2005 01:54 am
So the Brits have said no to a passport & our prime minister is saying no to bringing David Hicks back here. Four years in detention already. Terrible. Looks like he's going to be the token "western" Muslim tried by the US. What other country would allow this sort of treatment of a citizen? :

Last Update: Saturday, November 12, 2005. 4:32pm (AEDT)

Prime Minister John Howard says David Hicks could not be tried under Australian law.

Hicks can stay put: Howard

Prime Minister John Howard says he has no intention of bringing Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks back to Australia.

Coalition backbencher Danna Vale says the Prime Minister has ignored her plea that he ask United States President George W Bush to either have Hicks freed or sent home to be tried.

But Mr Howard says he is committed to the Hicks military commission trial, because Hicks could not be tried under Australian law.

"Because it was not a criminal offence at the time that the activity took place to train with Al Qaeda," he said.

"We do not intend to pass retrospective criminal laws.

"That would represent a very significant regressive move and it would violate the basis of our criminal justice system."

The comment comes amid concerns the first stage of Hicks military commission trial, due to start on Friday, may be further delayed. .. <cont>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1505277.htm
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Nov, 2005 02:06 am
Danna Vale is a Liberal parliamentarian. Here's here article from today's paper.:

Let's bring David Hicks home
November 12, 2005/the AGE

David Hicks has now endured Guantanamo Bay for almost four years.
If the US can't give him a fair trial now, we should do it or set him free, writes Danna Vale.


IF EVER the subject of David Hicks comes up in conversation, this Australian citizen is dismissed in a bevy of Aussie colloquialisms that describe his lack of judgement or intellectual fortitude. He just has to be either a prize dill, a young misguided fool, a folly-footed adventurer, an unlucky soldier of fortune, or even a bone-headed terrorist.

Of course, he could be a terrorist. But the longer he is confined in the bowels of Guantanamo Bay, he appears less the terrorist and more a prize dill, a young misguided fool who, alone, is facing the might and power of the greatest superpower the world has known since the Roman Empire.

And he is alone. This Australian is the only Western man with 500 others incarcerated in the worst prison known to the Western world that was especially created outside the Geneva Convention, and with all the ramifications of what that means to those who believe in the rule of law and the humane treatment of prisoners.

At times shackled to the floor, at times in solitary confinement in a cage-like cell, David Hicks has now endured Guantanamo Bay for almost four years. Yet this Australian has not been convicted of any crime; and with the recent judgement in the case of Hamdan v Rumsfeld, and the consequential delay in his hearing date of November 18, 2005, he may be left to languish for a further 12 months or more before being brought to trial.
.. <cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/lets-bring-david-hicks-home/2005/11/11/1131578231210.html
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Nov, 2005 02:17 am
Howard is right. Retrospectivity is an absolute anathema in the law (well in criminal law at least). So, no argument.

But - Hicks is not going to be tried according to the rules in the US courts which themselves use the English common law just as Australia does, to ensure a very high level of procedural fairness. The fact is that Hicks is going to be fitted up by a kangaroo court. Howard knows it and he wants it to happen to Hicks. Howard is complicit in the treatment being handed out to Hicks by the US Government.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Nov, 2005 04:13 am
Shame on our government. Almost 4 years in that hell hole. (Did anyone see the 4Corners program?) Surely he's done his time at Guantanamo Bay? Is death the only way to get out? How long does a person have to wait for a trial in a situation like that?
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Nov, 2005 04:27 am
Our government doesn't give a rat's about David Hicks just as long as public opinion is against him. The moment public opinion shifts Howard would be loudly demanding Hicks' return while privately begging George to get him out of the political mire.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  0  
Reply Tue 15 Nov, 2005 02:14 am
Quote:
U.S. judge delays trial of Guantanamo detainee Hicks

15 Nov 2005 04:35:40 GMT



(recasts with judge's delay order)

By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON, Nov 14 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge on Monday granted a request by lawyers for an Australian Guantanamo prisoner to postpone the scheduled resumption of his war crimes trial this week so that the U.S. Supreme Court can rule on the legality of such military tribunals.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly sided with lawyers for Australian prisoner David Hicks, who has been held for more than 3 1/2 years at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, rejecting the U.S. government's arguments to proceed with the case as scheduled on Friday.

The Supreme Court said last week it would decide whether President George W. Bush had the power to create the military commissions to put Guantanamo prisoners on trial for war crimes.

The case before the high court involves Yemeni prisoner Salim Ahmed Hamdan. The justices could find the trials unconstitutional or endorse them as legal, among other possible outcomes.

Hicks is one of about 500 foreign terrorism suspects held at the prison. His case was scheduled to be decided by a panel of military officers, called a commission, in the first such U.S. war crimes trials since World War II.

Lawyers for Hicks last week asked the judge to delay the proceedings in light of the Supreme Court's review. Monday's order came on the same day that the Pentagon had announced plans to proceed with the case without allowing the Supreme Court to rule in the Hamdan case.

Kollar-Kotelly issued a stay preventing the government from moving forward in the military trial "pending the issuance of a final and ultimate decision by the Supreme Court" in the Hamdan case.

The Hicks case already had been delayed by the government for a year after a previous unfavorable court ruling.

Hicks, 30, is one of nine Guantanamo prisoners to be charged, with the rest held indefinitely without charges. The U.S. government has asserted its legal right to hold Guantanamo detainees "in perpetuity." Critics decry the prison camp as a blot on America's human rights record.

AIDING THE ENEMY

Hicks was captured by U.S. forces in Afghanistan in November 2001 and was accused of being an al Qaeda fighter. He has pleaded not guilty to charges of aiding the enemy, attempted murder and conspiracy to commit war crimes. The most recent hearing in his case was in November 2004.

Human rights activists and military defense lawyers have criticized the commission rules on the grounds that they favor prosecutors, allow evidence obtained through torture and hearsay and permit no independent judicial review. The Pentagon argued the rules will provide for full and fair trials.

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld travels to Australia this week for annual bilateral ministerial talks. Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said he expected the military commission process to be discussed.

The Australian government has supported the commission process and refused to seek Hicks's repatriation, saying it could not bring charges against him under anti-terrorism laws introduced after he was detained.

But Australia's foreign minister said on Nov. 1 his country would investigate allegations that Hicks was beaten and sexually abused by American forces before arriving at Guantanamo, in light of statements made by his father and a former detainee.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 15 Nov, 2005 03:05 am
Thanks for posting that, Walter. So, now he's looking toward mid-2006. I hope he's still standing & in one bit when/if this trial actually happens. I do understand that this delay is meant to be in his best interests, but frankly wonder how long he can survive Guatanamo Bay.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Mon 12 Dec, 2005 02:16 am
Last Update: Monday, December 12, 2005. 5:10pm (AEDT)

Hicks likely to gain UK citizenship: lawyers

Lawyers for Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks are confident the British High Court will grant his application for UK citizenship tomorrow night.

Hicks has been detained for four years since he was captured in Afghanistan.

His court action is based on his mother's British citizenship and is aimed at securing his release.

Hicks's Australian lawyer David McLeod says the court decision will be handed down tomorrow night Australian time. ... <cont>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200512/s1529326.htm
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Dec, 2005 06:05 am
Last Update: Tuesday, December 13, 2005. 10:04pm (AEDT)

Court rules Hicks should be granted UK citizenship

The British High Court has ruled that British citizenship should be granted to Adelaide man David Hicks, who is imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay while he awaits a US military commission trial.

A High Court judge has ordered that a British passport be granted as quickly as possible. ... <cont>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200512/s1530292.htm
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Dec, 2005 07:33 am
US can't block Hicks's citizenship
By Chris Lines
December 13, 2005/the Australian


THE United States military will not be allowed to interfere in the registration of David Hicks as a British citizen.

The High Court in London today ruled in favour of Australian-born Hicks's entitlement to British citizenship, saying there is no legal reason for the British Home Office to defer registration on non-existent "good-character" provisions.

The Home Office had sought to indefinitely defer his citizenship on the basis of his behaviour before he acquired it - namely his alleged fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan.

"Parliament could have included a good character condition which would have made clear that pre-acquisition behaviour could be relied on to prevent or to deprive of citizenship," Mr Justice Lawrence Collins said in his written judgment.

"That it did not do so in registration cases strongly suggests that such behaviour could not be relied on either to prevent or to deprive of citizenship.

"I am satisfied that there is no power in law to deprive the claimant of his citizenship, and so he must be registered."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17563456%255E1702,00.html
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sat 14 Jan, 2006 04:25 am
& back to Habib & what the Australian government actually knew about his torture allegations :

Last Update: Saturday, January 14, 2006. 5:30pm (AEDT)

Mamdouh Habib was held in Guantanamo Bay before being released in 2005. (ABC TV)

Govt urged to reveal what ministers knew about Habib

Greens Senator Kerry Nettle says the Federal Government must reveal exactly what they knew about Mamdouh Habib's whereabouts, when he alleges he was being tortured by Egyptian authorities.

She says Freedom of Information documents published in the media today make it clear that ASIO knew he had been taken to Egypt by US authorities, despite federal ministers saying they could not confirm that.


Ms Nettle says the Government should now reveal whether ministers were informed.

"If ASIO didn't then that's a question that needs to be asked about why ASIO didn't, when ministers were making opposite statements to the information that ASIO had," she said.

"Either ASIO were telling the ministers and they were making different statements or there's a question about ASIO not passing on that information.

"My assumption would be that the information was passed on and the Government chose to ignore it."

Mamdouh Habib was arrested in Pakistan before being taken to Guantanamo Bay in 2002.

He was released in January 2005.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1547625.htm
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  0  
Reply Sat 14 Jan, 2006 05:11 am
oy!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 Jun, 2007 06:19 am
Anyone watch Four Corners tonight?

Very damning of the Australian government & authorities!:



Last Update: Monday, June 11, 2007. 5:32pm (AEST)

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200508/r56240_153475.jpg
Mamdouh Habib claimed he was tortured while being held in Egypt before being moved to Guantanamo Bay. (File photo) (ABC TV)

Documents show AFP, ASIO knew of Habib 'rendition'

Documents obtained by ABC television appear to contradict the Federal Government's claim that it never knew Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib had been sent to Egypt for interrogation.

Former CIA officers have told the ABC's Four Corners program that the rendition of Mr Habib for interrogation in Egypt would have required the approval of Australian authorities.

The program will tonight report on documents which show that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and ASIO knew Mr Habib had been handed to Egyptian authorities.

A former FBI agent in the Bin Laden Unit, Jack Cloonan, says it would have been very unusual if the Australian Government was not informed.

"It's impossible for me to believe that the Australian Government did not know that the Pakistani Government - maybe at the urging of the United States and others - didn't know that one of their citizens was being rendered to a third country," he said.

"I cant imagine under what circumstance the ASIO representative in Islamabad didn't know what was going on."

He says ASIO would have had to agree to it.

"If ASIO said, 'Whoa, wait a minute, do you understand what you are subjecting us to?" he said.

"Oversight, potential problems - legal or other wise? Yes, they would have to have acquiesced."

Mr Habib was captured in Pakistan shortly after September 11, 2001.

His legal team claimed he was tortured while being held in Egypt before being moved to Guantanamo Bay.

He was released without charge in January 2005.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1948035.htm
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 08:34 am
Like the author of this article, I'm baffled that there has been almost no response from the media, public or the politicians to the damning findings on Four Corners this week. (see post above) Rendition, torture & cover-ups, yet no one seems to care about what happened to Mamdouh Habib, an Australian citizen whose experience appears to have been even extreme more than that of David Hicks. Very troubling.:

Turning a deaf ear to suffering
Nina Philadelphoff-Puren
June 16, 2007/the AGE


The Australian Government is in denial about its role in the torture of one of its citizens, writes Nina Philadephoff-Puren.Consider the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen. He was tortured for a year in Syria after being taken into United States custody in New York. He was beaten, interrogated and made to sign false confessions, after a long confinement in a tiny cell that he described as "a grave". On his return to Canada without charge, he provided detailed testimony to Amnesty International about his deportation and incarceration. This led to a public inquiry into his allegations only four months later, which resulted in Arar receiving compensation and an apology from the Canadian Government.

In providing a public examination of his claims, the Canadians fulfilled their responsibility as ethical listeners. The Arar case begs comparison with Mamdouh Habib, detained in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere for more than three years without charge, before his release to Australia in January 2005.

Consider the following attempts to make Habib fall silent. Former Opposition Leader Kim Beazley opposed his request to address a Senate committee about his experiences in Guantanamo Bay. Former Education Minister Brendan Nelson condemned a university for permitting him to speak to students about what had happened to him. Three men in Sydney stabbed him outside his home, saying only that "you better keep quiet".

This is a man possessed of dangerous words. Our democratic instincts should be aroused by these efforts to stop us hearing them. As the ABC's Four Corners program Ghost Prisoners revealed this week, the story he has to tell goes to the heart of our democratic society and its integrity.

Habib was arrested as a terrorist suspect in October 2001 and interrogated in Pakistan before being rendered to Egypt. He reports that he was then tortured for months: beaten, threatened with dogs and electric cattle-prods, locked in a tiny box and kept for hours in a room that was filled with water up to his chin. By the time he was transferred to Guantanamo Bay the following May, he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.

What is chilling about this story is that Habib says that an Australian official was present during at least one of his interrogation sessions, a claim the Government denies. Habib insists his Egyptian interrogators relied on information ASIO officers had taken from his house in Sydney.

As the Four Corners program indicated, this all raises disturbing and frankly disorienting questions. The Australian Government repeatedly said it could not confirm that Habib was in Egypt. Documents revealed on the Four Corners program suggest otherwise. It is clear that officers of both the Australian Federal Police and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade knew exactly where he was. If the Government knew that an Australian citizen was there, it should have rung alarm bells. It sends a chill down the spine to think that they did nothing.

Habib is currently suing the Commonwealth in the Federal Court, claiming that the Government was complicit in his kidnap, false imprisonment and torture. The Government has tried to have his case struck out. Beyond the serious legal ramifications of this situation, the cruelty of the official obfuscations in this matter cannot be overstated. It is well known that torture attacks the voice as well as the body. A key aspect in any torture survivor's recovery is the ability to tell their story and have it acknowledged. Years of government denials have deprived Habib of that recognition.

Against enormous odds, Mamdouh Habib continues to speak out about his ordeal. His testimony is troubling, disruptive and no doubt inconvenient. His claims strike at the heart of the integrity of our institutions, our relationship with the US and our conduct in the "war on terror".

Dr Nina Philadelphoff-Puren is a lecturer in the school of English, communications and performance studies at Monash University.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/turning-a-deaf-ear-to-suffering/2007/06/15/1181414545991.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2007 03:18 am
The truth always comes out ... eventually.

Well, Mr Howard, Mr Downer & Mr Ruddock? Anything to say about this? Rolling Eyes :


No evidence but Habib banished anyway
Tom Allard National Security Editor
December 5, 2007/SMH


AUSTRALIAN counter-terrorism authorities had no evidence that Mamdouh Habib had taken part in terrorist-related activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan before he was abducted by the US and taken to Egypt and Guantanamo Bay, an ASIO agent told the NSW Supreme Court yesterday.

The ASIO officer, who interviewed Mr Habib three times in Islamabad in 2001, was testifying yesterday in a defamation case involving Mr Habib and the News Limited columnist Piers Akerman.

Officer 1, as the ASIO officer is codenamed, told Justice Peter McClellan that, before conducting the interviews, he knew only that Mr Habib had been in Pakistan and Afghanistan about the time of the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

"He may have been in Afghanistan for a number of reasons," Officer 1 said. "What he was doing, I did not know … that was the purpose of the interview."

He was none the wiser after the interviews as Mr Habib's "failure to answer the questions did not illuminate [his activities]".

He said there were suspicions - unfounded, it later emerged - that Mr Habib was involved in the September 11 attacks.

"It was a possibility but by no means the only possibility," Officer 1 told the court.

Within a month of the interviews taking place, Mr Habib was abducted by Pakistani and US officials and flown to Egypt, which has a prison system notorious for using torture.

Mr Habib spent about six months there, and has detailed extensive mistreatment, including being regularly beaten, subjected to electric shocks, deprived of sleep and left in neck-high water for extended periods.


Officer 1 said he was aware now that Mr Habib had been taken to Egypt but he had had no role in the abduction and would have stopped it if he could.

Two US officials believed to be CIA agents, an Australian Federal Police officer, Mark Briskey, and several Pakistani officials took part with Officer 1 in two of the interviews with Mr Habib.

Officer 1 did not identify himself to Mr Habib as an ASIO officer, nor did he inform Mr Habib of any rights he had to decline to answer questions, the court heard.


He played a quasi-consular role by offering Mr Habib a list of Pakistani lawyers and the business card of an Australian consular official, Alistair Adams.

However, he never bothered to find out whether Mr Habib had been able to make a call, and declined Mr Habib's repeated requests for a private talk away from the Pakistani authorities.

"You were prepared to leave him at the mercy of the Pakistanis, is that right?" asked Mr Habib's counsel, Clive Evatt.

"No," replied Officer 1, "There's an implication in that that I don't agree with, that it was some sort of calculated disposal of him of some kind or another. It wasn't."

A former taxi driver and ASIO informant, Ibrahim Fraser, said Mr Habib had told him in March 2001 that he had met Osama bin Laden, had undertaken military training with him and was planning to move to Afghanistan.

Mr Fraser admitted he had lied about Mr Habib in a previous media interview and had received a laptop from the Australian Federal Police. He said ASIO had paid the cost of his move from Sydney to Perth to be "close to my family".

However, he insisted he was telling the truth yesterday.

The hearing continues.


http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/no-evidence-but-habib-banished-anyway/2007/12/04/1196530679020.html
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Feb, 2010 01:45 am
Amazing. I had all but forgotten about Mamdouh Habib. And lo & behold, he pops up in the news again! Perhaps every dog does have it's day, after all? And governments might eventually be made to be accountable?
Mr Habib had quite a time with the Howard government, which basically wiped the floor with him & discounted his claims totally. Now, despite our present government's bid to prevent his case from proceeding, he will have his day in court. It should be interesting: Guantanamo, transported tortured in Eygpt .. amongst other things. It should be a very interesting case!


Quote:
Habib free to sue Government
Updated Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:29pm AEDT
.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200804/r241336_979034.jpg
Mamdouh Habib and his wife Maha at the Federal Court. (AAP: Paul Miller)

The Federal Government has failed in its legal bid to prevent former Guantanamo Bay inmate Mamdouh Habib from suing the Commonwealth.

American intelligence agencies alleged Mr Habib had prior knowledge of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, and that he trained with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

He was arrested in Pakistan in late 2001 and transferred to Egypt, where he says he was tortured.

Mr Habib ended up in the notorious US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, but was released in early 2005 without being charged.


He claims Australian officials were complicit in acts of torture against him while in detention in Pakistan, Egypt and the US.

Mr Habib wants to sue the Federal Government for false imprisonment, wrongful detention and assault.

The Commonwealth had sought to have the claim struck out, arguing that an Australian court did not have the power to determine the case.

The Government said that even though Mr Habib was an Australian citizen, his alleged torture happened outside Australia's jurisdiction.

But the court has ruled that it could hear Mr Habib's case.

The judgement was not immediately apparent because the Chief Justice was sitting in Brisbane and the two other judges of the Federal Court were in Sydney.

But once it became clear he had won, Mr Habib said he was pleased with the outcome.

"I'm really happy with the result today. At least I feel we've still got justice," he said.

He has called on the Government to launch a full investigation into his claims.

"I wait for the Government to investigate what ASIO have been doing overseas - how they rendered me, how they sent me to Egypt," he said.

"All these national security documents have to be released."

The Australian Government has denied the allegations of torture and the Federal Court has pointed out that the allegations remain untested.

Mr Habib is seeking unlimited damages.

His wife says nothing can repay her husband for what he suffered at the hands of authorities in Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/25/2830398.htm
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Feb, 2011 08:42 pm
Connecting up all the dots from the past to the present.
I didn't expect to be revisiting this long dormant thread again, but here we are again ..

Mahmoud Habib recently received compensation from the Australian government. (After years of denial of his "extraordinary rendition" from Howard's government.)

And now, more information, courtesy of Al Jazeera & Wikileaks:

Suleiman, now Egypt's vice-president (& possible next leader) has been implicated in Habib's rendition & torture ....


Quote:
.... At least one person extraordinarily rendered by the CIA to Egypt — Egyptian-born Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib — was reportedly tortured by Suleiman himself.

Suleiman the torturer


In October 2001, Habib was seized from a bus by Pakistani security forces. While detained in Pakistan, at the behest of American agents, he was suspended from a hook and electrocuted repeatedly. He was then turned over to the CIA, and in the process of transporting him to Egypt he endured the usual treatment: his clothes were cut off, a suppository was stuffed in his anus, he was put into a diaper - and 'wrapped up like a spring roll'.

In Egypt, as Habib recounts in his memoir, My Story: The Tale of a Terrorist Who Wasn’t, he was repeatedly subjected to electric shocks, immersed in water up to his nostrils and beaten. His fingers were broken and he was hung from metal hooks. At one point, his interrogator slapped him so hard that his blindfold was dislodged, revealing the identity of his tormentor: Suleiman.

Frustrated that Habib was not providing useful information or confessing to involvement in terrorism, Suleiman ordered a guard to murder a shackled prisoner in front of Habib, which he did with a vicious karate kick.

In April 2002, after five months in Egypt, Habib was rendered to American custody at Bagram prison in Afghanistan - and then transported to Guantanamo. On January 11, 2005, the day before he was scheduled to be charged, Dana Priest of the Washington Post published an exposé about Habib’s torture. The US government immediately announced that he would not be charged and would be repatriated to Australia. ....


Suleiman: The CIA's man in Cairo:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201127114827382865.html
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Feb, 2011 09:11 pm
@msolga,
I just read the first post from this thread (started in January, 2oo5!).

Shocking, in the light of what we know now. How our governments lie to us.

I am very glad that Mahmoud Habib has finally been vindicated.
It's been a long hard road from being kidnapped & tortured in Egypt, from Guantanamo Bay, to fighting the Australian government for compensation for his terrible ordeal, to now ....

I hope he & his family have been able to pick up the pieces & can live the rest of their lives in peace. Good luck to them.
Vincent2010
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Nov, 2011 07:15 pm
@msolga,
Seems Habib was considered non Australian upon his initial arrest in Pakistan.

Many Australians don't care much for Habib, however, we care less about government duplicity and ass public servants. Habib did not have a hope in hell in getting proper consular assistance from the Australian High Commission in Islamabad with Howard Brown as High Commissioner.

The central question in Habib’s case is not whether ASIO effectively
gave the green light to his transfer to Egypt, rather how Habib was
considered, treated and determined by the Australian High Commission
headed by Howard Brown, Senior Executive Service Band 1 public servant,
& his consul.

Habib's reputation upon his arrest in Pakistan was not flash. Neither was the reputation of Howard Brown: racist, biased & nasty and prone to panic, possibly not right in his mind. Typical of his head of post style for years, a red neck.

We can expect the review of Mr Habib's rendition by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, includes all references to Howard Brown's actions & Mamdouh Habib's rights as an Australian Citizen at the time of his arrest. Mr Habib had rights to proper Australian consular assistance in the first instance at the time of his arrest, regardless of any accusations or perceived behaviour.

quote from 'The Australian'

'Mr Stokes told the court he had no personal nor direct knowledge about
Mr Habib's rendition to Egypt but he had discussed it with other ASIO
officials during the past few years.

The court also heard conflicting evidence from Mr Stokes about who made
the arrangements for him to interview Mr Habib in Pakistan.

Mr Stokes said it was the Australian High Commissioner to Pakistan,
Howard Brown, who had arranged it.

In earlier evidence, Mr Brown told the court it was a security matter,
and that ASIO and the Australian Federal Police not he, had made the
arrangements directly through the US embassy.'
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 02:39:33