Skip to main content

A-G Ruddock disgraces his Office - and himself

This month's The Monthly features an article on David Hicks and the interrogation-methods employed on him by his captors.

As ABC Radio National's Breakfast program introduced an interview with A-G Ruddock this morning:

"Yesterday on the program we heard accusations that the infamous Guantanamo Bay base - and it's off-limits, CIA operated Camp Echo are being used by the United States to perfect psychological torture.

Australian David Hicks appears to be a key detainee being submitted to this alleged torture regime. Its claimed that Hicks was held in a closet sized, self contained cell without sunlight for 244 days and nights, watched around the clock by silent guards.

The accusations come as a new report into alleged CIA abuses is bringing to light the widespread American practice of rendition. Rendition is another word for the kidnapping of terror suspects and transporting them to secret prisons in third countries where they have allegedly been tortured out of the reach of US or International law.

The European report accuses a dozen European nations of turning a blind eye to rendition and even active involvement in the practice.

The United States denies any involvement in rendition or torture. Here's US Secretary of State speaking in December last year:

For its part the Australian Government has accepted United States assurances from the highest levels that torture is not being used at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere.

So has David Hicks been abandoned by Australia and tortured at Camp Echo?"

So, then we had our A-G being interviewed - check it our here. One word describes his responses to very, very serious allegations - appalling! Ruddock has not only diminished the Office he holds, but himself, as an attorney, who so flagrantly wears the Amnesty International badge.

This, here, is how The Age reports Ruddock's response to The Monthly article.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more