David Hicks once wrote: "Pakistan, Kashmir and Afghanistan (will) join together in a true Islamic state. The Islamic state is nearly completed....As a Muslim, I believe in destiny. I will always fight for the truth, Islam." He has fought for British citizenship because he believes it will win him release from Guantanamo -- not because he has any allegiance to the British crown, or respect for British history and culture. His attachment to Islam and declared enthusiasm for the Islamic state makes it overwhelmingly likely that he has no affection for Britain at all, and no intention of ever being loyal to Her Majesty's government. If he is freed and actually goes to Britain, he will most likely only work for jihad and the overthrow of the British state, and its replacement by a Sharia state.
Are British officials somehow barred from considering these facts? Do they even have any idea of what constitutes citizenship? In past ages it was taken for granted that citizenship was not merely a matter of location or parentage, but of one's loyalties and sensibilities. That's why citizenship was granted only after the passage of sometimes rather stringent civics exams -- at least in the U.S. But now the British are being compelled -- by their own courts -- to accept as one of their own a mujahid whose life is dedicated to destroying the system he is currently exploiting for his own advantage?
On what grounds? What possible advantage for Britain and its people is there in granting David Hicks citizenship?
Note, finally, that David Hicks is a white, blond-haired Australian. This yet again gives the lie to the knee-jerk "Islamophobia"-hunters who constantly characterize any resistance to the global jihad as "racism." If that charge were true, anti-jihadists would welcome Hicks into England, while opposing, say, Pakistani immigrants who share Hicks' faith. But that would be absurd. Britain has no more business welcoming Hicks than it does welcoming any other person, of whatever race, who holds to Hicks' totalitarian supremacist ideology that would overturn British society and destroy British culture.
But few in Britain seem to care.
"Hicks wins citizenship fight," from the Sydney Morning Herald, with thanks to David:
THE British Government has reached a legal dead end in its attempts to deny Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks his claim for British citizenship.Lawyers were advised in London early yesterday that the British Court of Appeal had refused to allow any further appeals from the British Home Office in the long-running case.
The news means the Home Office, which has twice lost to the Hicks legal team, must resume the process of making Hicks a citizen.
Everytime I hear about this traitor(and we see his father almost every second day on Oz TV) I wish that he had been shot out of hand when he was captured.
Fellow Australian?? My ****!!!!!!
We have a new Home Secretary - Mr. John Reid. A straight talker. Will we get something approaching sanity and dwill he do everything in his power to delay and deny any provision of "rights" to this deluded sick idiot.
The Aussies have it right. Leave the traitor to rot in Gitmo. He should have NO right to come to the UK.
How convenient for Islam that our laws are all about due process and rights. Things Islam has no respect for, especially when it comes to non-Muslims. In order to have decent, civilised, superior societies to live in, versus the degenerate squalor of Islam, we have laws that Islam uses against us.
And so Hicks will get his fair go, his due process, and in all likelihood get his UK citizenship. And he'll return to Oz, to a hero's welcome. All the leftie Islamo-appeasers will treat him like a celebrity, knowing that our anti-terrorism laws are not retroactive. Laughing at that. Clapping with glee. Too full of self-loathing to see they're idiots for celebrating such a thing.
But go ahead, put him on the telly, and ask him about how he thought the Taliban were great, them and their Islamic laws. The ones were women were beaten or executed, and basic human rights and compassion were eliminated. Ask him about how he wished the West (that includes Oz) would be destroyed, to be replaced by Islam. Mongrel scumbag.
Oh, and I wish they'd refer to this puke by his real name - Mohammed Dawood. Afterall, that's why he's in Gitmo. Because of the Mohammed part of his name.
we need more resolve in the military, this man should of been shot in a firing squad when he was caught/captured. he has no uniform, therefore should be shot on site.
Lawyers, journalists and many academics make up some of the most destructive people in Britain. They are amongst the first to brand those who dare criticise Islam as racists or fascists. Now I don't have much time or liking for Nick Griffin, but even the odious can occasionally tell the truth, and his quotes and predictions on Islam came frightfully true only a few weeks after they were said. And Winston Churchill put it succinctly when describing those who sap our strength in the most crucial of moments.
"The worst difficulties from which we suffer do not come from without. They come from within. They do not come from the cottages of the wage-earners. They come from a peculiar type of brainy people always found in our country, who, if they add something to its culture, take much from its strength. Our difficulties come from the mood of unwarrantable self-abasement into which we have been cast by a powerful section of our own intellectuals. They come from the acceptance of defeatist doctrines by a large proportion of our politicians.... Nothing can save England if she will not save herself. If we lose faith in ourselves, in our capacity to guide and govern, if we lose our will to live, then indeed our story is told." Winston Churchill, Royal Society of St. George, 24 April 1933
That is some quote.
Let's put it this way:
David Hicks is as English as Zacharias Moussaoui is French. No less, and no more.
Of course the lefties are behind him all the way!
And yes ,,I too am sick of this sight of his father on Oz tv.
He may well get out of all this by getting a British passport due to his mother being British, but no commentator here has asked what the heck was he doing in Afganistan in the first place?
Who is he kidding? I have no sympathy for him whatever. He went to learn how to fight jihad. He should be judged on intent.
I am hopeful if he comes back to Oz our new anti-terrorism laws will stop him at the airport and take him in.
He put himself there by free will. Yet another deluded convert!
Hicks will get his UK passport as he is a muslim. In Britain, msulims are the preferred people.
Turbinehead
The Home Secretary has the right to exclude anyone from Britain, quoting if necessary national security or security of the realm.
This power resides with the Home Secretary as Minister of the Crown, and no recourse to the Crown courts is possible. The only proviso is the EU provision but if memory serves me right, national security is specifically exempt from the EU charter that New Labour signed up to.
I get the feeling that the government does not really want to exclude Hicks, conscious as it is of the muslim vote - and thus this charade.
Has our dear ally Britain become the antechamber to dar al Islam?
"But few in Britain seem to care."
Well that's a load of bollocks for a start. Our government are a pathetic bunch of appeasers who have no care for their own people. I believe that we should treat people like Hicks the way he would treat us given the chance, he should not be allowed to use our laws. We should create a new set of laws that relate to people like Hicks. How pathetic that we should allow people like that to use our laws to destroy our culture. And people wonder why we are seeing the rise of the far right in this country.
David Hicks is famous for saying he would kill an American before leaving Gitmo.According to soldiers at Gitmo those were the first words he said. Given Hicks obvious penchant for violence how could he ever be considered for British citizenship?
DaveMate
You may like this site by a Londoner
http://uppompeii.blogspot.com/
From this site
Falconer casts doubt on deportation pledge
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=S33Z30OBL5W0DQFIQMFSFFOAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/05/07/udeport.xml
Afer the 7/7 bombing in London, this Labour government pledged that it will deport 500 terror spewing imams - mostly foreigners. It has still to do that.
It cant even extradite Abu Hamza to the US, and only came up with a few charges so that he could continue staying in Britain rather then face the courts in the US. And so it goes wioth Qatada and all the other imams.
The there was the case of a Somali criminal suspected in the murder of a policewoman. He could not be deported as was in danger in Somalia. Well guess what - he went to Somalia of his own accord, just as Omar Bakri left of his own accord.
Blair's government is all talk when it comes to muslim Jihadis.
More on the Dhimmitis disease that has overtaken Britain.
http://dailyablution.blogs.com/
On this blog there is update on the Somali who fled Britain for Somalia and other assorted violent foreign criminals. It is ofcourse entirely coincidental that their names tend to begin with Omar, Juma etc.
Even if Hicks is allowed to become a British citizen the UK government is not obliged to ask the US for his release simply because they did so in other cases. Those others cases related to genuine British citizens, though they were traitors. Hicks would be a sham citizen, his citizenship in effect a legal fiction. Therefore Blair and Co. could simply say, “We’re not going to ask for his release. He’s not a real British citizen; he’s just using us. We regard him as the responsibility of the US and Australian governments”. What would they have to lose? The courts can’t make them ask for his release; and no one but a bunch of drivelling lefties would object to such an approach. The great majority of the British people would regard Hicks’s citizenship as phoney and would support the government.
The world has gone insane. Why would this even go to court. Just say NO. Who in their right mind would want this man walking their streets? If he MUST be released , send him to a muslim country so he can be around his own.
Even if David Hicks did get British citizenship, why would the US be obligated to turn him over?