Guantanemo Bay Boys
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The C-17A landed at Northolt at around 1700Hrs i think, with the four onboard who were of course immediately taken into custody at probably Paddington Green.
If the parents of such souls wanted them back so badly, they should of paid for a flight for them but then i don't think BA would like the idea of having Al Qaeda terror suspects on the aircraft.
If the parents of such souls wanted them back so badly, they should of paid for a flight for them but then i don't think BA would like the idea of having Al Qaeda terror suspects on the aircraft.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is a fight for survival of our way of life.
It no longer looks like "our way of life" - it looks like theirs....
Anyway, how is a terrorist going to destroy our way of life? Did Sept 11th destroy America and its way of life? Or is that what the US government is doing in the name of "anti-terrorist measures"?
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. - Hermann Goering
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see Gareth Peirce and Corin Redgrave are involved... makes me think they're guilty already!
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4047585
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4047585
Are there certain lawyers on this thread who are touchy about reaping a vast swath of legal aid by being involved in the defence of the accused?
I'll bet there are!
...toot,toot....the legal aid gravy boat is on its way....(like a gravy train, but it moves slower so lawyers can take bigger helpings)....
I'll bet there are!
...toot,toot....the legal aid gravy boat is on its way....(like a gravy train, but it moves slower so lawyers can take bigger helpings)....
Suspicion breeds confidence
SASless: Revenge is a dish best served cold, and its very cold at 40,000ft
Pr00ne: I'm not going to waste any more words on you.
hyd3failure: There's no smoke without fire.
Pr00ne: I'm not going to waste any more words on you.
hyd3failure: There's no smoke without fire.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ye Olde Pie Shoppe
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FatBaldChief....sorry to burst yer bubble....the war was on for years before the concentration camps became an issue of any discussion. The troops never did fight to the death because of that....except for very limited individual cases.
Sasless,
I was merely stating that we fought against a regime that employed such incarceration without trial tactics in the broader sense. Was that not obvious?
Maybe I should draw pictures next time. With a big fat crayon.
Sasless,
I was merely stating that we fought against a regime that employed such incarceration without trial tactics in the broader sense. Was that not obvious?
Maybe I should draw pictures next time. With a big fat crayon.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko
From your threads, I suspect you are an ambulance chaser - I also suspect you would argue that if a cat had her kittens in the oven, they would be called cakes!
Love many, Trust a few, Always paddle your own canoe!
From your threads, I suspect you are an ambulance chaser - I also suspect you would argue that if a cat had her kittens in the oven, they would be called cakes!
Love many, Trust a few, Always paddle your own canoe!
>Nice one son, any more religious bigotry and zenophobic trash in your banter box?<
Proone my old PC matey, the locker is well stocked with antidotes for Prating Ninnies like you.
Proone my old PC matey, the locker is well stocked with antidotes for Prating Ninnies like you.
On the same sort of subject, the newspapers reported 2 weeks ago that a Mr Adair recently released loyalist terrorist was flown from NI to the Bolton area by RAF Helo to be with his family. What was wrong with the Ferry or BA.
The difference is that Mr Adair was a released prisoner who had been legally arrested, who had been properly and fairly tried, judicially sentanced and legally imprisoned by the independent judicial apparatus of his own State. Mr Adair had been charged with specific offences, and had been legally represented. He was not kidnapped from one country to face summary punishment for what he had supposedly done in a second, by agents of a third, without the protection of his own (fourth) country. He was not subject to extended solitary confinement, or torture, nor did he have the threat of capital punishment hanging over him.
In the UK, our legal system is not based on the concept that "there's no smoke without fire." Nor do we work on the basis that membership of a particular religious or ethnic group (with or without untried circumstantial evidence) is sufficient justification to lock someone up. We don't lock up people without trial on a 'better safe than sorry' basis.
People keep referring to 'these people'. "These People" are UK citizens who have been illegally detained by the USA without proper legal representation and without trial, and who have now been released without charge.
Until some evidence against them is offered, then they are legally innocent.
In the UK, our legal system is not based on the concept that "there's no smoke without fire." Nor do we work on the basis that membership of a particular religious or ethnic group (with or without untried circumstantial evidence) is sufficient justification to lock someone up. We don't lock up people without trial on a 'better safe than sorry' basis.
People keep referring to 'these people'. "These People" are UK citizens who have been illegally detained by the USA without proper legal representation and without trial, and who have now been released without charge.
Until some evidence against them is offered, then they are legally innocent.
Suspicion breeds confidence
He was not subject to extended solitary confinement, or torture, nor did he have the threat of capital punishment hanging over him.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully believe that they have been tortured in there. You say would not call military interrogation techniques torture, I certainly would!
Tom Ridge, from the US Dept of Homeland security said it was "human nature" that torture might be employed in certain exceptional cases, he admitted there was "a real question" whether using torture on terrorists would actually gain the information required "given the nature of the enemy".
Allegations from Guantanamo include:
Prisoners were repeatedly punched, kicked, slapped, forcibly injected with drugs, deprived of sleep, hooded, photographed naked and subjected to body cavity searches and sexual and religious humiliations
One American guard told the inmates: "The world does not know you're here - we would kill you and no-one would know"
One of the soldiers told an inmate: "You killed my family in the towers and now it's time to get you back.
MI5 officer had told prisoners during interrogations that they would be detained in Guantanamo for life
Men said they saw the beating of mentally ill inmates
Another man was left brain damaged after a beating by soldiers as punishment for attempting suicide
A Briton said an inmate told them he was shown a video of hooded men - apparently inmates - being forced to sodomise one another
Guards threw prisoners' Korans into toilets and tried to force them to give up their religion
The men allege that when a new camp commander, Maj Gen Geoffrey Miller, took charge, new practices began, including the shaving of beards, playing loud music, shackling detainees in squatting positions and locking them naked in cells.
The report says: "It was very clear to all three that MI5 was content to benefit from the effect of the isolation, sleep deprivation and other forms of acutely painful and degrading treatment, including short shackling.
"There was never any suggestion on the part of the British interrogators that this treatment was wrong."
“ All the time I was kneeling with a guy standing on the backs of my legs and another holding a gun to my head” Ruhal Ahmed
The trio said they had eventually wrongfully confessed to appearing in a video with al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden and Mohammed Atta, one of the 11 September hijackers.
In the report, it is understood Mr Ahmed says shortly after his capture in northern Afghanistan in 2001 he was questioned by a British interrogator, who identified himself as an SAS officer, while an American soldier held a gun to his head, threatening to shoot him.
The UK Ministry of Defence acknowledged that such behaviour is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and has promised to investigate any such allegation.
Lawyer Gareth Pierce told BBC News: "There was not a single method that was not used to break their will to make them confess to something they were not guilty of, and all three did."
Most of that is from the BBC and although they are still allegations even the MOD has admitted that this is against the Geneva Convention so technically it is torture.
How the hell are they supposed to get proof of what went on in there??
Tom Ridge, from the US Dept of Homeland security said it was "human nature" that torture might be employed in certain exceptional cases, he admitted there was "a real question" whether using torture on terrorists would actually gain the information required "given the nature of the enemy".
Allegations from Guantanamo include:
Prisoners were repeatedly punched, kicked, slapped, forcibly injected with drugs, deprived of sleep, hooded, photographed naked and subjected to body cavity searches and sexual and religious humiliations
One American guard told the inmates: "The world does not know you're here - we would kill you and no-one would know"
One of the soldiers told an inmate: "You killed my family in the towers and now it's time to get you back.
MI5 officer had told prisoners during interrogations that they would be detained in Guantanamo for life
Men said they saw the beating of mentally ill inmates
Another man was left brain damaged after a beating by soldiers as punishment for attempting suicide
A Briton said an inmate told them he was shown a video of hooded men - apparently inmates - being forced to sodomise one another
Guards threw prisoners' Korans into toilets and tried to force them to give up their religion
The men allege that when a new camp commander, Maj Gen Geoffrey Miller, took charge, new practices began, including the shaving of beards, playing loud music, shackling detainees in squatting positions and locking them naked in cells.
The report says: "It was very clear to all three that MI5 was content to benefit from the effect of the isolation, sleep deprivation and other forms of acutely painful and degrading treatment, including short shackling.
"There was never any suggestion on the part of the British interrogators that this treatment was wrong."
“ All the time I was kneeling with a guy standing on the backs of my legs and another holding a gun to my head” Ruhal Ahmed
The trio said they had eventually wrongfully confessed to appearing in a video with al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden and Mohammed Atta, one of the 11 September hijackers.
In the report, it is understood Mr Ahmed says shortly after his capture in northern Afghanistan in 2001 he was questioned by a British interrogator, who identified himself as an SAS officer, while an American soldier held a gun to his head, threatening to shoot him.
The UK Ministry of Defence acknowledged that such behaviour is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and has promised to investigate any such allegation.
Lawyer Gareth Pierce told BBC News: "There was not a single method that was not used to break their will to make them confess to something they were not guilty of, and all three did."
Most of that is from the BBC and although they are still allegations even the MOD has admitted that this is against the Geneva Convention so technically it is torture.
How the hell are they supposed to get proof of what went on in there??
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple answer,
Get intell out of them in theatre, then bullet in back of head.
WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE.
Thus no-one can kick up a stink about "illegal detention" and treatment of prisoners, cos there aren't any.
Points, questions.
And btw. What prey tell do you think those so called British citizens were doing over there? Do you honestly believe they were tourists/aid workers? Come on. Are you really that naive.
Anyone who takes up arms, or plots to, against their own country reliquishes his/her rights as a citizen and should be thown to whichever wolves want to deal with them.
Oh, sorry. Lets give them a hug and some nice compensation.
Yours cynically
TTH
Get intell out of them in theatre, then bullet in back of head.
WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE.
Thus no-one can kick up a stink about "illegal detention" and treatment of prisoners, cos there aren't any.
Points, questions.
And btw. What prey tell do you think those so called British citizens were doing over there? Do you honestly believe they were tourists/aid workers? Come on. Are you really that naive.
Anyone who takes up arms, or plots to, against their own country reliquishes his/her rights as a citizen and should be thown to whichever wolves want to deal with them.
Oh, sorry. Lets give them a hug and some nice compensation.
Yours cynically
TTH
PileUp Officer
I have some sympathy for the Afghan Nationals held in Guantanamo who were fighting for their "cause". But what were the "British" group doing in that part of the world - playing cricket? Once released I'm not surprised they will say anything to further their case for compensation, and shed a bad light on the USA. Terrorism is a dirty game with no rules. Sometimes dirty tactics are needed to combat it.
I have some sympathy for the Afghan Nationals held in Guantanamo who were fighting for their "cause". But what were the "British" group doing in that part of the world - playing cricket? Once released I'm not surprised they will say anything to further their case for compensation, and shed a bad light on the USA. Terrorism is a dirty game with no rules. Sometimes dirty tactics are needed to combat it.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just suggesting solutions.
I would like to point out that I am not a Bush/Rumsfeld apologist. I think they have handled the "War on Terror" terribly.
I also believe that if we are seen to lose the moral highground then we risk becoming as bad as those we are fighting against.
I do believe that sometimes action which is fairly unpallettable for the general populus, and frankly scandalous to the media, is necessary.
We face a very different threat than we have every faced before. Terrorists with no regard for their own lives, let alone anyone elses.
So far bloody good intelligence has saved us from attacks, but for how long? Where has this come from? I'd suggest that some would have come from suspects held without trial both here and in the US, maybe not Gitmo (they've been in there a bit long for current activities).
The justice suggested by some of our more liberal posters would rely on action after an event, rather than prevention of that action. Even with only circumstantial evidence, I would gladly take one step down from the highest of moral grounds if it meant protecting the lives of my fellow countrymen.
Or are the lives of a few treacherous passport holders more important?
TTH.
I would like to point out that I am not a Bush/Rumsfeld apologist. I think they have handled the "War on Terror" terribly.
I also believe that if we are seen to lose the moral highground then we risk becoming as bad as those we are fighting against.
I do believe that sometimes action which is fairly unpallettable for the general populus, and frankly scandalous to the media, is necessary.
We face a very different threat than we have every faced before. Terrorists with no regard for their own lives, let alone anyone elses.
So far bloody good intelligence has saved us from attacks, but for how long? Where has this come from? I'd suggest that some would have come from suspects held without trial both here and in the US, maybe not Gitmo (they've been in there a bit long for current activities).
The justice suggested by some of our more liberal posters would rely on action after an event, rather than prevention of that action. Even with only circumstantial evidence, I would gladly take one step down from the highest of moral grounds if it meant protecting the lives of my fellow countrymen.
Or are the lives of a few treacherous passport holders more important?
TTH.
Suspicion breeds confidence
How the hell are they supposed to get proof of what went on in there??
Its a shame we'll never know the intel on them that led to their arrest in the first place.