Reply to: 5 "Britons" held in Guantanamo

[GreenerGrass]

Did this bizarre "business trip whilst claiming refugee status" in Gambia involve getting teenage girls to put drugs up their poonannies?

[Old Greg]

But the problem was up until very recently there was nothing the UK could do for them as the UK is considered a 3rd country to these men - they did what the could for the citizens of the UK but at that time the way the americans have setup up gitmo - "3rd countries" could not intervine or had no right to in the cases of this indiviuals.

The UK could have chosen to intervene for the refugees, saying that they had a duty of protection, and that the refugees had a presumption of innocence. I am sure the legal wranglings (a bout duties to refugees) are complicated, but a lot of this is political, and with the political will, they could have done this.

[fzbucks]

You have misunderstood me (maybe I have not made myself clear) - I have no idea whether he is innocent or not. As I've said, if he's done something wrong, try him. Or extradite him to Spain. But there is the presumption of innocence unti lproven otherwise - that's how we act as civilised people. So let's say he's an entirely innocent refugee kidnapped in Gambia. Such a man should be aided. But if he's found guilty after a fair trial, throw the book at him.

But the problem was up until very recently there was nothing the UK could do for them as the UK is considered a 3rd country to these men - they did what the could for the citizens of the UK but at that time the way the americans have setup up gitmo - "3rd countries" could not intervine or had no right to in the cases of this indiviuals.

[Old Greg]

As I said the same place as your evidence, I also agreed with another poster that there will be innocents locked up as there are in any kind of jail - I accept that I was being a bit over the top with the statement about more likely to be etc etc - however it is based on as much fact as your assumption that he is innocent - ie none.

You have misunderstood me (maybe I have not made myself clear) - I have no idea whether he is innocent or not. As I've said, if he's done something wrong, try him. Or extradite him to Spain. But there is the presumption of innocence unti lproven otherwise - that's how we act as civilised people. So let's say he's an entirely innocent refugee kidnapped in Gambia. Such a man should be aided. But if he's found guilty after a fair trial, throw the book at him.

[fzbucks]

No, you haven't 'only raised issue with what our country should do about it', you have suggested that Jamil El-Banna was more likely to have been money raising for organisations of ill-repute than on a legitimate business trip. That's a serious allegation. Where's your evidence?

As I said the same place as your evidence, I also agreed with another poster that there will be innocents locked up as there are in any kind of jail - I accept that I was being a bit over the top with the statement about more likely to be etc etc - however it is based on as much fact as your assumption that he is innocent - ie none.

[Old Greg]

the evidence is in the same storage file as your evidence to the contrary!

I've never argued at all that there should be no trials - if you read through the posts instead of just your usual trolling of anything remotely to the right if your thinking you will see that I have not defended Gitmo - only raised issue with what you expect our country to do about it - in another thread you would probably describe it as meddling in other country's affairs if that suited your opinion of the day.

No, you haven't 'only raised issue with what our country should do about it', you have suggested that Jamil El-Banna was more likely to have been money raising for organisations of ill-repute than on a legitimate business trip. That's a serious allegation. Where's your evidence?

[fzbucks]

And the evidence is where? The argument you are making seems to boil down to: if he didn't do anything, they wouldn't have captured him. Let's apply that across the board. We can do away with all that epensive due process of the judicial system. Of course the other way round of looking at it is: if he's guilty, why don't they put him on trial, convict him and imprison him, rather than let such a dangerous person go?

the evidence is in the same storage file as your evidence to the contrary!

I've never argued at all that there should be no trials - if you read through the posts instead of just your usual trolling of anything remotely to the right if your thinking you will see that I have not defended Gitmo - only raised issue with what you expect our country to do about it - in another thread you would probably describe it as meddling in other country's affairs if that suited your opinion of the day.

[Old Greg]

well my actions cause no suspicion to fall on me so that shouldn't be necessary

"business trip" in gambia my ar$e, more like fund rasing for organisations of ill repute.

how come every other muslim person who goes away on business isn't in gitmo then - perhaps you would like to house every one of the detainees in your town as you think they are all innocent especially the ones that were only on business trips etc.

And the evidence is where? The argument you are making seems to boil down to: if he didn't do anything, they wouldn't have captured him. Let's apply that across the board. We can do away with all that epensive due process of the judicial system. Of course the other way round of looking at it is: if he's guilty, why don't they put him on trial, convict him and imprison him, rather than let such a dangerous person go?

[fzbucks]

Perhaps you'd like to volunteer for a little trip there yourself.

well my actions cause no suspicion to fall on me so that shouldn't be necessary

"business trip" in gambia my ar$e, more like fund rasing for organisations of ill repute.

how come every other muslim person who goes away on business isn't in gitmo then - perhaps you would like to house every one of the detainees in your town as you think they are all innocent especially the ones that were only on business trips etc.

[Old Greg]

I think that's more than kind enough considering they have been free from the persecution of their home countries for the past 5 years - fed three square meals a day - given free tracksuits

Perhaps you'd like to volunteer for a little trip there yourself.

[fzbucks]

Presume talking about the sailors? They were held for what ? 12 days?

Did the UK go screaming to the UN? Yes (and funny enough UN did not give them what they wanted, total condemnation)
Was there talk about military action? Yes (but Blair turned it down )
Sanctions? Debated (But as Iran is one of the major suppliers of Oil in the Europe that debate would have gone on forever, hell it is UK and Europe that have been blocking the US in the UN from enforcing total sanctions against Iran for years for this reason)

Now considering 1 out 3 happened in less that 12 days while other 2 were debated vs. US who held UK citizens for 5 years with little beyond some odd moaning for the UK government ...yes it is exactly what I mean

the only talk of military action was by the armchair warriors on forums

the issue was solved with diplomacy which is what has ahppened here - althought he country coudn't do anything before for them as they were for the millionth time not british citizens

only since the US has agreed to deal with 3rd countries has the UK been able to do anything - I think that's more than kind enough considering they have been free from the persecution of their home countries for the past 5 years - fed three square meals a day - given free tracksuits - thats as much as out govenrment gives british citizens n liverpool so again whats all the complaining about.

You'll be wanting the british govenrment to pay for failed assylum seekers next.

[shaunbhoy]

because when you accept their refugee status you, as a country, become responsible for them and remain responsible for them until you either rescind their status or someone else (another country) takes responsibility for them.

Exactly, and it was a very noble gesture on the part of our cousins across the pond to "take responsibility" for them without demanding any payment.
I am sure without too much trawling we could find a great many more worthy of such an exchange package.

[Not So Wise]

What you mean like they did with Iran?

Presume talking about the sailors? They were held for what ? 12 days?

Did the UK go screaming to the UN? Yes (and funny enough UN did not give them what they wanted, total condemnation)
Was there talk about military action? Yes (but Blair turned it down )
Sanctions? Debated (But as Iran is one of the major suppliers of Oil in the Europe that debate would have gone on forever, hell it is UK and Europe that have been blocking the US in the UN from enforcing total sanctions against Iran for years for this reason)

Now considering 1 out 3 happened in less that 12 days while other 2 were debated vs. US who held UK citizens for 5 years with little beyond some odd moaning for the UK government ...yes it is exactly what I mean

[fzbucks]

2. Simple, UK is the USA's bitch these days.

Even for the british citizens the British Govrenment did the absolut bear minimum (if a non nuclear power had done the same as the US to British citizens (even ones they knew were guilty) the UK would be screaming to the UN, imposing sanctions and considering military action).

What you mean like they did with Iran?

[Not So Wise]

1 - who's says the intel is shady?
2 - Apparently we DO NOT "look out for" accepted refugees as these cases prove it. The Foreign Office worked to get the British citizens out of gitmo but hasn't for these 5 - why?

1. Who says it is not?
Considering this is the same inteligence agencys that said there were WMD's in iraq and locked up 100's of people in gitmo only to release them after a few years with no charge i would says odd's on the intel IS shady just by their track record

2. Simple, UK is the USA's bitch these days.

Even for the british citizens the British Govrenment did the absolut bear minimum (if a non nuclear power had done the same as the US to British citizens (even ones they knew were guilty) the UK would be screaming to the UN, imposing sanctions and considering military action).

These guys have probably been in limbo for the last 5 years with no body doing anything and now the US are ready to release them (there have been indications in press in regards to this) but have no where to release them to (because returning them to a country they are refugee's from would not look good) so most likely they did a favor to the British so they could look like they were actually doing something and getting the USA to lisen to them