Chuck said (quoting Mencken): ""The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels"
Hicks is not a scoundrel...he's not a criminal in the sense that a shoplifter or a car thief is a criminal. He's a enemy combatent. Thats the model or template one should be applying to his case. [and, BTW, he was fighting to destroy the freedoms that Mencken was speaking about...Menckens works would have been the first on the Taliban's bonfire]
If we were still in the middle of WWII and Hicks was an avowed member of the Waffen SS, would you want him held in detention or returned to Aust to live next door to you? Apply this test to Hicks and I think it will clarify your thinking greatly.
If you answer "returned to Aust" then you are, frankly, not being honest.
