Shaker shocker
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 oldcodger  31 Oct 15 10.33pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 31 Oct 2015 8.03pm
Quote oldcodger at 31 Oct 2015 1.00pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 2.39pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 30 Oct 2015 2.28pm
Quote Stuk at 30 Oct 2015 2.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 30 Oct 2015 12.45pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.26pm
Its actually irrelivent whether he is guilty or not, its about the fact that he's never been tried. The right to a trial, in the UK, dates back to the very first ever real documentation of law in the UK. Right or Left wing, I'd generally assume that the right of the state to imprison people without trial is illegal. Luckily the circumstance of his arrest, were solid. He was captured by bounty hunters, paid by the Northern Alliance (who were basically glorified smack runners with an army) fighting for Al-Qaeda / The Taliban (Dependent on who you ask). The Northern Alliance paid for foreign fighters, as it could pass them onto the US.
I hope his coffee lived up to expectation. He's a British national, married to a British Woman. It has everything to do with our law (as he's a citizen of the UK) and US law, as they're the country that took him to Guantanemo bay and Camp-XRAY which is a US base (and thus US nationality). He is not a British citizen, he is a Saudi Arabian citizen - I wonder how they would treat someone returning to the country strongly suspected of meaning it harm? Only he isn't strongly suspected of trying to harm the country. I know with the way you come across you feel that you're doing the right thing, but you clearly have little idea of the push at the time to fill GBay and how embarrassing it now is for them to admit that there are no grounds at all for the presence of many there. Hence innocent people remained for a long, long time. There was effectively a bounty system, all kinds of people got caught up in it. Edited by oldcodger (31 Oct 2015 1.01pm) Check this out:
The fact also remains that the US itself believed that countless numbers of those in Gitmo were completely innocent, so let's not get too excited about the prospect of people being locked up without trial.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Hoof Hearted 01 Nov 15 10.47am | |
|---|---|
|
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 01 Nov 15 1.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a soldier posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.28pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 01 Nov 15 1.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 01 Nov 15 1.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Y Ddraig Goch  In The Crowd 01 Nov 15 1.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 01 Nov 15 1.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 01 Nov 15 2.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.59pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
You keep saying that the US Government admitted they are holding innocent people - here is a much more balanced analysis of the leaked documents.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 01 Nov 15 2.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 2.09pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.59pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
You keep saying that the US Government admitted they are holding innocent people - here is a much more balanced analysis of the leaked documents. This was a good read and it's to be expected with this number of people that some released are not who they seem and those in Gitmo are sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. The article itself acknowledges that innocents were held and worrying that "assessments acknowledge the hazards of rewarding detainees for information" and of course torture played a role, so it makes it so difficult to know what to believe. I 'keep saying' that countless inmates were innocent because that was the analyse and conclusion of the US behind closed doors. It's their own findings and my whole point is that when people say that we need to 'protect the innocents' and how they are sickened by his release, they are saying that this system of lawlessness which resulted in the capture, imprisonment and torture of innocent people is fine.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 01 Nov 15 3.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 2.29pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 2.09pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.59pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
You keep saying that the US Government admitted they are holding innocent people - here is a much more balanced analysis of the leaked documents. This was a good read and it's to be expected with this number of people that some released are not who they seem and those in Gitmo are sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. The article itself acknowledges that innocents were held and worrying that "assessments acknowledge the hazards of rewarding detainees for information" and of course torture played a role, so it makes it so difficult to know what to believe. I 'keep saying' that countless inmates were innocent because that was the analyse and conclusion of the US behind closed doors. It's their own findings and my whole point is that when people say that we need to 'protect the innocents' and how they are sickened by his release, they are saying that this system of lawlessness which resulted in the capture, imprisonment and torture of innocent people is fine.
The analysis and conclusion was also that dangerous terrorists were released who were presumed to be innocent. It also says that only the hard-core suspects like Shaker Aamer were detained for long periods. By the way your 'system of lawlessness' is the reality of war - just like people being beheaded and burnt alive in cages.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| oldcodger 01 Nov 15 3.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 3.10pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 2.29pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 2.09pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.59pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
You keep saying that the US Government admitted they are holding innocent people - here is a much more balanced analysis of the leaked documents. This was a good read and it's to be expected with this number of people that some released are not who they seem and those in Gitmo are sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. The article itself acknowledges that innocents were held and worrying that "assessments acknowledge the hazards of rewarding detainees for information" and of course torture played a role, so it makes it so difficult to know what to believe. I 'keep saying' that countless inmates were innocent because that was the analyse and conclusion of the US behind closed doors. It's their own findings and my whole point is that when people say that we need to 'protect the innocents' and how they are sickened by his release, they are saying that this system of lawlessness which resulted in the capture, imprisonment and torture of innocent people is fine.
The analysis and conclusion was also that dangerous terrorists were released who were presumed to be innocent. It also says that only the hard-core suspects like Shaker Aamer were detained for long periods. By the way your 'system of lawlessness' is the reality of war - just like people being beheaded and burnt alive in cages. Yes, as I said they were sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. With such a number of people of course that is going to be the case. None of that gets away from the fact again as stated in the US intelligence that vast numbers are thought to be innocent. We're going to a whole new level if we go from saying we can imprison people indefinitely and assume guilt with insufficient evidence, or evidence obtained through torture or rewards.. to then saying that even if we never have any evidence 'they might have been guilty anyway', as if that proves that what happened prior was okay. You don't need to throw away your values and system of law just because there are monsters in the world. Instead you ensure that you yourself do not become one. Your first comment when I mentioned that the States themselves acknowledge the innocence of many in Gitmo was 'LOL'. Many innocent people were abducted, imprisoned, sexually abused and tortured. If you think that's 'a reality' from our side that I have to approve of or laugh at you are wrong. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 3.31pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 01 Nov 15 3.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 3.30pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 3.10pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 2.29pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 2.09pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.59pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 01 Nov 2015 1.40pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.34pm
Quote stevegood at 01 Nov 2015 1.29pm
Quote oldcodger at 01 Nov 2015 1.19pm
Quote Hoof Hearted at 01 Nov 2015 10.47am
This guy has terrorist written all over him and is biding his time to strike at some point in the future. Funnily enough Shaker Aamer is an old friend of Moazzam Begg. Which is interesting not least because at Gitmo, Begg himself identified Aamer as a ‘recruiter for al-Qaeda’. He said that Aamer had fought in Bosnia and had been a member of the jihadist group run by Abu Zubair al-Haili (a senior al-Qaeda operative from Saudi Arabia) and had among other things spent ’30 days training on the AK-47 and rocket propelled grenades’. Seven separate sources at Guantanamo also described Aamer’s connections to al-Qaeda.
Our allies shouldn't seek to bypass the need for trial and just abduct and lock people up, many of whom the US themselves acknowledge in leaked documents are very likely completely innocent. It seems in your quest to 'protect the innocent' you don't mind if innocent people are kidnapped, tortured and fed through their arseholes via 'rectal feeding' as an enhanced interrogation technique, so sexually abused too. Gitmo is a lawless hell hole. Even a solider posing as a prisoner as part of a training exercise there was beaten so badly he received a significant brain injury. Guilt didn't determine the treatment that people received. Be sickened by that. It's a similar situation to Abu Ghraib, where it was retrospectively viewed that vast numbers of prisoners were not Taliban or al-Qaeda or in fact guilty of anything, just unfortunates caught up in the incredibly flawed bounty system that was throwing money at people. Many tortured there died or killed themselves. The treatment of those innocents doesn't 'sicken you' then? I wonder why. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 1.22pm) very likely completely innocent[/i Did the wicked Westerners chop any of their heads off or burn them alive in a cage.
They show that about 220 were classed as dangerous terrorists, but 150 were innocent Afghans and pakistanis. The Pentagon said the files' release could damage anti-terrorism efforts. At least 150 people were revealed to be innocent Afghans or pakistanis - including drivers, farmers and chefs - rounded up during intelligence gathering operations in the aftermath of 9/11. The detainees were then held for years owing to mistaken identity or because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, the memos say. In many cases, US commanders concluded there was "no reason recorded for transfer".
Why did he travel on a false Belgian passport? What charity was he actually working for? That would be for a court to decide. Neither of those things are grounds for imprisoning him indefinitely without trial. The Bush administration stated that it had no evidence against him and he was cleared for transfer in 2007. If they truly saw him as a danger I very much doubt they would have. If they want to make a case as to his guilt they should do so and if he's guilty then throw away the key. None of this legitimises abducting and torturing innocent people which is the wider picture. I would've thought that was something that should at least be a cursory concern to us. If we are saying that he should be locked up forever without trial we are saying that all of that is okay too. It isn't.
You keep saying that the US Government admitted they are holding innocent people - here is a much more balanced analysis of the leaked documents. This was a good read and it's to be expected with this number of people that some released are not who they seem and those in Gitmo are sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. The article itself acknowledges that innocents were held and worrying that "assessments acknowledge the hazards of rewarding detainees for information" and of course torture played a role, so it makes it so difficult to know what to believe. I 'keep saying' that countless inmates were innocent because that was the analyse and conclusion of the US behind closed doors. It's their own findings and my whole point is that when people say that we need to 'protect the innocents' and how they are sickened by his release, they are saying that this system of lawlessness which resulted in the capture, imprisonment and torture of innocent people is fine.
The analysis and conclusion was also that dangerous terrorists were released who were presumed to be innocent. It also says that only the hard-core suspects like Shaker Aamer were detained for long periods. By the way your 'system of lawlessness' is the reality of war - just like people being beheaded and burnt alive in cages. Yes, as I said they were sometimes less or more of a threat than is understood. With such a number of people of course that is going to be the case. None of that gets away from the fact again as stated in the US intelligence that vast numbers are thought to be innocent. We're going to a whole new level if we go from saying we can imprison people indefinitely and assume guilt with insufficient evidence, or evidence obtained through torture or rewards.. to then saying that even if we never have any evidence 'they might have been guilty anyway', as if that proves that what happened prior was okay. You don't need to throw away your values and system of law just because there are monsters in the world. Instead you ensure that you yourself do not become one. Your first comment when I mentioned that the States themselves acknowledge the innocence of many in Gitmo was 'LOL'. Many innocent people were abducted, imprisoned, sexually abused and tortured. If you think that's 'a reality' from our side that I have to approve of or laugh at you are wrong. Edited by oldcodger (01 Nov 2015 3.31pm) Vast numbers? The West is at war with militant Islam and I am on the side of the West and am not overly concerned how the enemy is treated as much of the claims of torture etc is enemy propaganda. However, I would far rather be a prisoner of Western powers than a prisoner of militant Islamists.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.