New RAF " Get you home"
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 431 Likes
on
227 Posts
They should have been brought back via means paid for out of their travel insurance, which, as law abiding British subjects on holiday, they would have had. Wouldn't they? 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And for those that wish to see "due process" and "the normal course of law" applied to said military tourists, and who feel that what the US has done is wrong and/or inhuman, consider this...
The normal rules of habeus corpus, due process, burden of proof etc etc, all apply in peacetime. Governments may deviate from these principles during times of war.
Not my statement (although it is my sentiment), but that of the US government last week. So if the US considers herself to be at war, and I think it's demonstrably clear that she does, then the US also considers that she is within her rights to alter or curtail the legal rights that suspects would ordinarily take for granted.
The suspects were captured by the US and held outside the UK, so the rights that are afforded them are those that the US chooses to give them. It's not up to the UK to decide what is or is not legal with regards their detention according to UK law. I think it's fairly obvious that some of what has been done would not pass muster under the British legal system, but as someone once said "Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore..."
The USA is a sovereign country, and it is up to the US to decide how she will apply her laws. Most of you complaining are not US citizens, so you may indeed complain about the whole state of affairs - it's your right - but don't expect Bush to lose any sleep over what you think. You don't get to vote in November. Bush has to do what he feels is in the best interests of the US.
Now the fact that British citizens are being held by the US does mean that we can make representations to the US government. But these representations should merely be that these people be accorded the rights that US law provides, not that they be treated according to the British interpretation of justice, or that they be treated as if they faced British law. Unfortunately for them, because they are being held outside the US many of the US laws don't apply to the detainees. Unlucky.
Moral of the story: if your country is at war with another, then it's not a wise move to go to that foreign country. Because if you get picked up by your side within the war zone, then people may think less of you. And if you should be so foolish as to be picked up whilst carrying arms, you should consider yourself lucky not to be shot out of hand. At the very least you should expect to spend quite some time in camps that don't much resemble Butlins. Your immediate actions on being taken as a POW should not include asking for a phone call and being given access to a lawyer. Unpalatable an idea it may be for the liberals amongst us, but c'est la guerre...
SBW
(And yes I might be said to be biased, being a US citizen too).
The normal rules of habeus corpus, due process, burden of proof etc etc, all apply in peacetime. Governments may deviate from these principles during times of war.
Not my statement (although it is my sentiment), but that of the US government last week. So if the US considers herself to be at war, and I think it's demonstrably clear that she does, then the US also considers that she is within her rights to alter or curtail the legal rights that suspects would ordinarily take for granted.
The suspects were captured by the US and held outside the UK, so the rights that are afforded them are those that the US chooses to give them. It's not up to the UK to decide what is or is not legal with regards their detention according to UK law. I think it's fairly obvious that some of what has been done would not pass muster under the British legal system, but as someone once said "Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore..."
The USA is a sovereign country, and it is up to the US to decide how she will apply her laws. Most of you complaining are not US citizens, so you may indeed complain about the whole state of affairs - it's your right - but don't expect Bush to lose any sleep over what you think. You don't get to vote in November. Bush has to do what he feels is in the best interests of the US.
Now the fact that British citizens are being held by the US does mean that we can make representations to the US government. But these representations should merely be that these people be accorded the rights that US law provides, not that they be treated according to the British interpretation of justice, or that they be treated as if they faced British law. Unfortunately for them, because they are being held outside the US many of the US laws don't apply to the detainees. Unlucky.
Moral of the story: if your country is at war with another, then it's not a wise move to go to that foreign country. Because if you get picked up by your side within the war zone, then people may think less of you. And if you should be so foolish as to be picked up whilst carrying arms, you should consider yourself lucky not to be shot out of hand. At the very least you should expect to spend quite some time in camps that don't much resemble Butlins. Your immediate actions on being taken as a POW should not include asking for a phone call and being given access to a lawyer. Unpalatable an idea it may be for the liberals amongst us, but c'est la guerre...
SBW
(And yes I might be said to be biased, being a US citizen too).
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The posts on this thread aptly demonstrate what happens when you take prisoners like these in the present circumstances.
The solution is obvious - don't take any prisoners like these next time and save us all a lot of trouble and taxpayers money.
The solution is obvious - don't take any prisoners like these next time and save us all a lot of trouble and taxpayers money.
Man of the Marsh
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TV News just announced that the final 3 have been released without charge. No doubt they will be well-compensated by selling their stories to the tabloids.
4PON4PIN - and of course the Comet 4s of 216 Sqn. Let's not forget them!
4PON4PIN - and of course the Comet 4s of 216 Sqn. Let's not forget them!
FV: They must either be crims (traitors, terrorists, etc. which is my personal choice) or combatants (in which case they're PoWs).
Might doesn't make right, and the US attempts to hold people without giving them any proper status (and in doing so holding people who were innocent local taxi drivers, back-packers who'd already been held as 'spies' by the Taliban etc.) flies in the face of justice, liberty, and international law. That's fine, if they want to make themselves even more hated and even more of a target than they are, but it doesn't mean that HMG should allow itself to become complicit in such an abuse of international law.
Might doesn't make right, and the US attempts to hold people without giving them any proper status (and in doing so holding people who were innocent local taxi drivers, back-packers who'd already been held as 'spies' by the Taliban etc.) flies in the face of justice, liberty, and international law. That's fine, if they want to make themselves even more hated and even more of a target than they are, but it doesn't mean that HMG should allow itself to become complicit in such an abuse of international law.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now now chaps!
These fine gentlemen are all innocent, law abiding citizens. It is mere coincidence that three of them are all from the same uk town and just happened to go to Afghanistan out of curiosity, independantly and without knowing that the others were there!
Or perhaps they knew each other and were learning a new trade that would make them famous back home?
I don't agree with the way the USA has not held any trial but surely something is a bit fishy here? Innocent until proven guilty - so bang em up and lets have a trial - then they can expalin their holiday disaster, claim on their insurance, sue AfghanTravel PLc and get on enjoying their new found fortunes.
For the journos out there, I will launch a boycott campaign against any paper that pay these guys for their "story".
These fine gentlemen are all innocent, law abiding citizens. It is mere coincidence that three of them are all from the same uk town and just happened to go to Afghanistan out of curiosity, independantly and without knowing that the others were there!
Or perhaps they knew each other and were learning a new trade that would make them famous back home?
I don't agree with the way the USA has not held any trial but surely something is a bit fishy here? Innocent until proven guilty - so bang em up and lets have a trial - then they can expalin their holiday disaster, claim on their insurance, sue AfghanTravel PLc and get on enjoying their new found fortunes.
For the journos out there, I will launch a boycott campaign against any paper that pay these guys for their "story".
Paying people for their stories makes me profoundly uncomfortable. But I would like to see them given an opportunity to put their side of the story, when the might of the US and UK states have come so close to declaring them guilty without having made any real effort to ascertain (let alone prove) that guilt, and when so many people have already made their minds up on their guilt.
I'm not sure about the gungas from Tipton - on the evidence presented so far it's hard not to conclude that they went out to Afghanistan to take part in some kind of Jihad. But the lad they released virtually on landing has suffered two years of equally harsh treatment and incarceration, and really does seem to have been no more than a back-packer who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. And among the Guantanamo detainees (some of whom are assuredly evil terrorists) there are some equally disturbing stories of innocents who were swept up and detained for no good reason.
The fact that a few brown-skinned chaps might have been wrongly imprisoned, and then kept illegally and with no access to proper legal representation may be an acceptable price to you as you sit in your armchair, but whether you like it or not, some of them were British citizens, and it is disgraceful that the USA should have treated them in this way, and disgusting that our own Government should have done so little to help them.
Britain and the USA are supposed to be beacons of all that is good about democracy and freedom. Our indiscriminate treatment of these people is therefore a matter for some embarrassment, if not shame.
I'm not sure about the gungas from Tipton - on the evidence presented so far it's hard not to conclude that they went out to Afghanistan to take part in some kind of Jihad. But the lad they released virtually on landing has suffered two years of equally harsh treatment and incarceration, and really does seem to have been no more than a back-packer who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. And among the Guantanamo detainees (some of whom are assuredly evil terrorists) there are some equally disturbing stories of innocents who were swept up and detained for no good reason.
The fact that a few brown-skinned chaps might have been wrongly imprisoned, and then kept illegally and with no access to proper legal representation may be an acceptable price to you as you sit in your armchair, but whether you like it or not, some of them were British citizens, and it is disgraceful that the USA should have treated them in this way, and disgusting that our own Government should have done so little to help them.
Britain and the USA are supposed to be beacons of all that is good about democracy and freedom. Our indiscriminate treatment of these people is therefore a matter for some embarrassment, if not shame.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko,
Max Clifford was on R5 this morning, speaking as an adviser to one of the 5 released. He said that at least one of them has already sold out to The Mirror, for a 6 figure sum. Also heard an interview from the one relative who has so far spoken out, but he was unable to say what his son was doing in Afghanistan.
Not sure myself that the 3 Tipton Brits will be able to explain what they were doing there, as Vage Rot points out.
Max Clifford was on R5 this morning, speaking as an adviser to one of the 5 released. He said that at least one of them has already sold out to The Mirror, for a 6 figure sum. Also heard an interview from the one relative who has so far spoken out, but he was unable to say what his son was doing in Afghanistan.
Not sure myself that the 3 Tipton Brits will be able to explain what they were doing there, as Vage Rot points out.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would someone please humour me and explain how preventitive detention is illegal under international law? In particular, under what statute, that the US is legally bound to observe, is such detention unlawful?
Please don't quote vagaries such as "international law", but be prepared to back up your statements!
SBW
Please don't quote vagaries such as "international law", but be prepared to back up your statements!
SBW
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sarboy
You're right in suggesting international law is something of an abstract concept. International law's main failing is there is often no effective means of enforcing it, especially when its transgressor is the world's only superpower. Effectively, the US can cherry pick what bits of international law it chooses to follow and ignore those it finds inconvenient. Unsuprisingly, some people find that a bit galling, though, in fairness to the US, most countries are, to some extent, selective in their application of international law.
Like many people, I have misgivings about the activities of the detainees and ex-detainees. As someone has already pointed out, if you choose to hang around near a war zone, when you could be elsewhere, don't start crying when things go pear-shaped. I reserve judgement, however, until the full facts have emerged, as I've yet to hear exactly where and in what circumstances the released detainees were found, at the time of their arrest by the US.
You're right in suggesting international law is something of an abstract concept. International law's main failing is there is often no effective means of enforcing it, especially when its transgressor is the world's only superpower. Effectively, the US can cherry pick what bits of international law it chooses to follow and ignore those it finds inconvenient. Unsuprisingly, some people find that a bit galling, though, in fairness to the US, most countries are, to some extent, selective in their application of international law.
Like many people, I have misgivings about the activities of the detainees and ex-detainees. As someone has already pointed out, if you choose to hang around near a war zone, when you could be elsewhere, don't start crying when things go pear-shaped. I reserve judgement, however, until the full facts have emerged, as I've yet to hear exactly where and in what circumstances the released detainees were found, at the time of their arrest by the US.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all you tree hugging hippies and liberal hacks consider this:
Following legal orders issued to me by the government of the day are to see me over an arab country protecting the freedom of its citizens. If I was to hit the silk (sorry manmade fibres cheaper you know) or perhaps accompany the metal coffin to a crash site, I would hope for the treatment as given by the marines in Cuba under the command of the USA. However, the cynic in me feels that my religious Muslim brother may not see it that way. Live by the sword and all.
With that in mind I would just like to say "there is no god but allah and mohammed was his prophet". I'll be the one running from the welcoming crowd throwing pork pies.
Rascist no realist yes.
Charlie sends
Following legal orders issued to me by the government of the day are to see me over an arab country protecting the freedom of its citizens. If I was to hit the silk (sorry manmade fibres cheaper you know) or perhaps accompany the metal coffin to a crash site, I would hope for the treatment as given by the marines in Cuba under the command of the USA. However, the cynic in me feels that my religious Muslim brother may not see it that way. Live by the sword and all.
With that in mind I would just like to say "there is no god but allah and mohammed was his prophet". I'll be the one running from the welcoming crowd throwing pork pies.
Rascist no realist yes.
Charlie sends
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well sent Charlie.
Tolerance and the rule of law are foreign to the originators of this dreadfull current period of terrorism so why are a few misguided citizens of the West so determined to exercise these attributes?
Do we impress such people with our western justice?
Do we lessen the liklihood of future agression?
Of course not. To protect our way of life we have to show them the same lack of mercy they show us but with greater strength and resolve.
Be nice to them and they think you are weak.
Tolerance and the rule of law are foreign to the originators of this dreadfull current period of terrorism so why are a few misguided citizens of the West so determined to exercise these attributes?
Do we impress such people with our western justice?
Do we lessen the liklihood of future agression?
Of course not. To protect our way of life we have to show them the same lack of mercy they show us but with greater strength and resolve.
Be nice to them and they think you are weak.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not stop feckin about...........tell dusty bin and his tea towel wearing co horts that, next time via a bucket of sunshine, Mecca starts to glow
Trash Mecca and we would have very differant ball game
And if they choose to ignore we follow, one by one, with all other sacred muslim sites.....which might just slow them down.
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Trash Mecca and we would have very differant ball game And if they choose to ignore we follow, one by one, with all other sacred muslim sites.....which might just slow them down.
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course, that's the answer: Meet mindless terror with arbitrary violence. After all, it's working just great in that haven of peace, Israel, isn't it?
I'm ****ed if I know how to stop a minority of worthless, suicidal, pseudo-religious morons wreaking havok around the world, (and if any of you geniuses have a realistic solution, let's hear it), but I'm pretty sure alienating an entire religion or race isn't going to help.
I'm ****ed if I know how to stop a minority of worthless, suicidal, pseudo-religious morons wreaking havok around the world, (and if any of you geniuses have a realistic solution, let's hear it), but I'm pretty sure alienating an entire religion or race isn't going to help.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was once a time when being caught on the battlefield fighting against one's own country was called treason. The penalty for which was to be tied over the end of a cannon that was then discharged with a load of grapeshot. I think that our Artillery chaps still have more than five suitable pieces?
Arbitrary violence it may be, but Justice can be a hard taskmaster. Especially when dealing with the sort of people who leave bombs in railway carriages during rush hour.
Arbitrary violence it may be, but Justice can be a hard taskmaster. Especially when dealing with the sort of people who leave bombs in railway carriages during rush hour.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And pussyfooting around with guys like this is not going to do much good either, Jacko.
Why do you think in that homeland of Sunnis, Saudi Arabia, they exercise rough justice and hold public executions? Such methods are very effective in keeping such people in check - they understand that if they are caught they cannot shelter behind a smart lawyer nor go from appeal to appeal to save their worthless skins.
Although the Israelis are not preventing terrorism with their tough line I wonder where they would be now without it - after all, the stated intent of their enemies is to wipe out the state of Israel.
Yes we enjoy religious freedom and welcome Islam in our country but try to take a bible into Saudi and you might get to see the inside of a Saudi jail - try to practise Christian worship openly and you certainly will. Tolerance does not exist in that country so why should we bend over backwards to be so accommodating to them?
Why do you think in that homeland of Sunnis, Saudi Arabia, they exercise rough justice and hold public executions? Such methods are very effective in keeping such people in check - they understand that if they are caught they cannot shelter behind a smart lawyer nor go from appeal to appeal to save their worthless skins.
Although the Israelis are not preventing terrorism with their tough line I wonder where they would be now without it - after all, the stated intent of their enemies is to wipe out the state of Israel.
Yes we enjoy religious freedom and welcome Islam in our country but try to take a bible into Saudi and you might get to see the inside of a Saudi jail - try to practise Christian worship openly and you certainly will. Tolerance does not exist in that country so why should we bend over backwards to be so accommodating to them?
Guys like these?
What, British citizens who neither the US nor the UK authorities can find any evidence against?
We? Us? They? Them?
They are British citizens and as such are entitled to the protection we'd extend to white Brits.
We don't model our justice system on that of the Saudis because we are a liberal democratic society. We treat our prisoners properly because that's who we are. Tales of what went on at Gitmo are almost enough to make me ashamed to have been an ally of the US in this ineffective and self defeating war against terror.
What, British citizens who neither the US nor the UK authorities can find any evidence against?
We? Us? They? Them?
They are British citizens and as such are entitled to the protection we'd extend to white Brits.
We don't model our justice system on that of the Saudis because we are a liberal democratic society. We treat our prisoners properly because that's who we are. Tales of what went on at Gitmo are almost enough to make me ashamed to have been an ally of the US in this ineffective and self defeating war against terror.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 80
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ABIW,
Like soddim I spent too many years in the Magic Kingdom having to tolerate these arrogant bastards. It will make my day when the day of judgement arrives and these gits get their just dues.
E5.
Like soddim I spent too many years in the Magic Kingdom having to tolerate these arrogant bastards. It will make my day when the day of judgement arrives and these gits get their just dues.
E5.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonico
The US could hardly charge "the Five" wityh treachery (or whatever is the American equivalent of Treason) because they are not US citizens. We are told they have been released because they present no significant terrorist threat. But according to an account in The Times a couple of days ago two of them were captured escaping from Taliban strongholds - one of them from the Tora Bora complex while covering the escape of OBL. Even if they are no longer a threat we need assurance that there is insufficient evidence to support a prosecution for Treason. No Tom, Dick of Harry (or Ibrahim) should be allowed to get away with giving aid and comfort to the Queen's enemies and, possibly, with fighting against our forces. A public inquiry with evidence on oath, please, and let the taxpayer pay for US witnesses to fly over, business class, and stay in a good hotel.
The US could hardly charge "the Five" wityh treachery (or whatever is the American equivalent of Treason) because they are not US citizens. We are told they have been released because they present no significant terrorist threat. But according to an account in The Times a couple of days ago two of them were captured escaping from Taliban strongholds - one of them from the Tora Bora complex while covering the escape of OBL. Even if they are no longer a threat we need assurance that there is insufficient evidence to support a prosecution for Treason. No Tom, Dick of Harry (or Ibrahim) should be allowed to get away with giving aid and comfort to the Queen's enemies and, possibly, with fighting against our forces. A public inquiry with evidence on oath, please, and let the taxpayer pay for US witnesses to fly over, business class, and stay in a good hotel.