Shaker shocker
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
jamiemartin721  Reading 30 Oct 15 12.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Oct 2015 10.31am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 30 Oct 2015 10.18am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Oct 2015 10.08am
Let's hope that he is/was indeed the victim of a miscarriage of justice and that he has peaceable aims upon his return to the UK.
Even if he is actually guilty, imprisoning him for 14 years without a trial, is a miscarriage of justice.
We firstly, he's not really guilty, as that would require a trial or demonstration of evidence. Secondly, had I been imprisoned falsely for 14 years by the US, I'd be very anti-American and their allies by now, even if I wasn't before. 14 years imprisoned at Git Bay almost certainly means he was held in conditions of the worst kind and subjected to techniques that are classed as torture. That's the kind of thing that creates an enemy, of even the most passive and kindly souls.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Oct 15 12.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 30 Oct 2015 11.12am
Quote Jimenez at 30 Oct 2015 11.00am
Expect to hear news of this guy next June when he is killed by a drone in the Yemen.
Technically that's an act of war against a sovereign nation state of the UN if you do it without permission. That goes beyond a miscarriage of justice. Killing people, on suspicion, without fair or impartial adjudication of the evidence, never ends well. Look how well it did with the 'solid evidence' of Iraq's weapons on mass destruction. I've no problem with killing people who are the enemy, my concern is the arbitrary acceptance that the state can do it more or less without oversight and without judicial engagement.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 30 Oct 15 12.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Similar cries and hand-wringing from the left centered around another Guantanamo Bay detainee, Jamal al Harith. He was released back into the UK and received £1 million from the tax-payers to compensate him for the dreadful wrongs done to him. Subsequently, he went of to fight for ISIS. Edited by stevegood (30 Oct 2015 12.40pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Oct 15 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.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 30 Oct 15 12.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Oct 15 1.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Not at all. Firstly, given that he was arrested supposedly for fighting for the Taliban in 2001 its highly unlikely he was a terrorist at all, given that they were the government of Afghanistan. Technically of course the Northern Alliance, were a terrorist group. I care very much about the dangers of crime and terrorism, but I also care very much about the legal rights of citizens and the duty of the state to abide by its own laws far more. Also the US never arrested him as a terrorist, or on grounds of being a terrorist, but that he was an 'unlawful combatant'. Secondly, you seem to suggest that high probability is grounds for arrest and imprisonment - what do you set that criteria being as probable? F**k knows what Cuba has to do with it. I would say the difference probably is that a) he's British b) That I have higher expectations of the UK and US than Cuba.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 30 Oct 15 1.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 30 Oct 2015 1.04pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Not at all. Firstly, given that he was arrested supposedly for fighting for the Taliban in 2001 its highly unlikely he was a terrorist at all, given that they were the government of Afghanistan. Technically of course the Northern Alliance, were a terrorist group. I care very much about the dangers of crime and terrorism, but I also care very much about the legal rights of citizens and the duty of the state to abide by its own laws far more. Also the US never arrested him as a terrorist, or on grounds of being a terrorist, but that he was an 'unlawful combatant'. Secondly, you seem to suggest that high probability is grounds for arrest and imprisonment - what do you set that criteria being as probable? Guantanamo Bay is in Cuba. He is not British, he is a Saudi citizen. Why do you have higher expectation of the UK and USA - the new left despise these countries as wicked capitalists.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 the_mcanuff_stuff Caterham 30 Oct 15 1.15pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Depends how you look at it. If you do not have a burning desire to destroy the US and the western world one day, 14 years locked up, without trial, in worse conditions than any western nation allows, with no knowledge of when you'll be released and undergoing torture... Well by the end of all that, by hell, you may be an enemy of the west. Not saying he's a terrorist or not. But I would suggest that if he is, the most sophisticated security intelligence machine in the world, might have found some evidence during the last 14 years, that he is.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| the_mcanuff_stuff Caterham 30 Oct 15 1.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 1.15pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 30 Oct 2015 1.04pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Not at all. Firstly, given that he was arrested supposedly for fighting for the Taliban in 2001 its highly unlikely he was a terrorist at all, given that they were the government of Afghanistan. Technically of course the Northern Alliance, were a terrorist group. I care very much about the dangers of crime and terrorism, but I also care very much about the legal rights of citizens and the duty of the state to abide by its own laws far more. Also the US never arrested him as a terrorist, or on grounds of being a terrorist, but that he was an 'unlawful combatant'. Secondly, you seem to suggest that high probability is grounds for arrest and imprisonment - what do you set that criteria being as probable? Guantanamo Bay is in Cuba. He is not British, he is a Saudi citizen. Why do you have higher expectation of the UK and USA - the new left despise these countries as wicked capitalists.
Cuba has a known problem with the way it treats descent. As does e.g. North Korea. Should we be held to the same standards? Or should we consider ourselves to be a little bit fairer? I would argue the latter.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| stevegood 30 Oct 15 1.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote the_mcanuff_stuff at 30 Oct 2015 1.15pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Depends how you look at it. If you do not have a burning desire to destroy the US and the western world one day, 14 years locked up, without trial, in worse conditions than any western nation allows, with no knowledge of when you'll be released and undergoing torture... Well by the end of all that, by hell, you may be an enemy of the west. Not saying he's a terrorist or not. But I would suggest that if he is, the most sophisticated security intelligence machine in the world, might have found some evidence during the last 14 years, that he is. You could have said that about Jamal al Harith, who after pocketing £1 million of our money is now off to engage in a bit of beheading and burning people alive with ISIS. I guess the wicked West has driven him to that? Probably because we only gave him a measly £1 million?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Oct 15 1.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 1.23pm
Quote the_mcanuff_stuff at 30 Oct 2015 1.15pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Depends how you look at it. If you do not have a burning desire to destroy the US and the western world one day, 14 years locked up, without trial, in worse conditions than any western nation allows, with no knowledge of when you'll be released and undergoing torture... Well by the end of all that, by hell, you may be an enemy of the west. Not saying he's a terrorist or not. But I would suggest that if he is, the most sophisticated security intelligence machine in the world, might have found some evidence during the last 14 years, that he is. You could have said that about Jamal al Harith, who after pocketing £1 million of our money is now off to engage in a bit of beheading and burning people alive with ISIS. I guess the wicked West has driven him to that? Probably because we only gave him a measly £1 million? Actually, if we'd tried him, he'd probably be spending the rest of his life in prison, without the possibility of parole, or after 14 years, executed even. The problem was not trying him, breaking our own laws and so on. If I remember rightly when he was arrested IS didn't even exist (and Al-Queda was a very minor threat to a few nations national interests). How well our war goes, those tactics have paid off so well.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| the_mcanuff_stuff Caterham 30 Oct 15 1.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 1.23pm
Quote the_mcanuff_stuff at 30 Oct 2015 1.15pm
Quote stevegood at 30 Oct 2015 12.54pm
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. Lol, you do make me laugh. There is a high probability that he is a terrorist and could well engage in terrorist activities here, but you don't really care about that do you because he is an anti-Western 'victim'. As for detention without trial, I don't hear you going on about the numerous people imprisoned without trial in areas of Cuba outside of G Bay - you know opponents of that model of socialist freedom that many on the left here so admire. Depends how you look at it. If you do not have a burning desire to destroy the US and the western world one day, 14 years locked up, without trial, in worse conditions than any western nation allows, with no knowledge of when you'll be released and undergoing torture... Well by the end of all that, by hell, you may be an enemy of the west. Not saying he's a terrorist or not. But I would suggest that if he is, the most sophisticated security intelligence machine in the world, might have found some evidence during the last 14 years, that he is. You could have said that about Jamal al Harith, who after pocketing £1 million of our money is now off to engage in a bit of beheading and burning people alive with ISIS. I guess the wicked West has driven him to that? Probably because we only gave him a measly £1 million? Who's to say? Seriously 14 years of that. Doubt he cares about the £1m. It's not like he's going to have much opportunity to spend it in some middle eastern quasi-wasteland. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. Probably was. No proof either way. But if he wasn't before, he is now. But if I think of my situation, would I rather have £1m and 14 years locked up like that (without knowing it was 14 years), not seeing my kids grow up etc. 14 years of the best years of my life, I would never get back. They may as well shove their £1m up their arse. And I mean that with 100% honesty and sincerity.
|
|
| 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.