Pixelated Semantics |
|
|
February 14, 2005
It is telling that Mamdouh Habib's account of his torture at the hands of the US, Pakistan, Egypt, and Australians recieves far more coverage in the New York Times than domestically - though there is mounting evidence to support his story, and the government's plethora of denials (which have attracted more press than the claims) are increasingly threadbare. Saying that Habib's story "did not tally with intelligence assessments" Downer and Ruddock seem to forget that the lack of WMD in Irak also did not tally with assessments. Intelligence is not a legal instrument, and cannot not be used for evidentiary benchmarks, though the Howard government uses "intelligence" findings with liberal abandon in constructing what are often false, by legal standards, characterisations. Indeed, only yesterday Man of Steel was acknowledging "intelligence implicating Mamdouh Habib as a person of interest to Australian authorities could be wrong". Habib has stated that "The Americans, how they are treating people, they are the terrorists. They have no humanity". Neither, it would seem, does the Australian government, who have deliberately forged a PR campaign to convince us that Habib is a terrorist despite lack of any evidence and the clear use of torture; the abundance of the government line in the press over any reasonable reporting of Habib's claims or situation mocks fair treatment and justice in front of all of us. Comments:
Post a Comment
| HOME | EMAIL | Root Blog | Bloggerfind |
Newshounds | Blogion | Thought Criminals | Blog Search Engine | Blogarama | Blogwise | Blog Pulse | Blog Shares | Wilson's Blogmanac | Unspeak | Browning Mummery Blog | |