welcome home binyam mohammed

[Rusthall Seagull]

You are interpreting the law as it is in a peace time environment. This person was captured in a situation of a war environment. It is actually to the US credit that they are realising him at all, as he was, I presume captured by US or other allied troops. They have zero obligation to do so whatsoever.

Hundreds of thousands of POW's were taken by either side in the 2nd World War yet they had no trial nor lawyers nor anything that this individual now hides behind. They were POW's like this man truly is........and yet naive people make out that he is some kind of wronged person and interpret the law that is in a peace time environment, in war there is no innocent until proven guilty there are opposition forces that need to be killed or captured.

Also as he was fighting for forces ultimately that were allied to the enemies of the UK he should be tried for treason.........yet now when he really needs it he now claims British citizenship so that fools can shout, cheer and even argue for his release, just because they are so anti American they cannot or will not see the truth of the matter for their own eyes.

so a british aid worker caught by the taliban would be fair game ?

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

Now your talking out of your arse.Pointless discussing it any further with you.

off you trot then....

 

[public school boy]

RULE BRITANIA,GOD SAVE THE QUEEN,I LOVE MARGRET THATCHER,DO YOU WANT TO SEE MY BOTTOM,LEGALISE UNDER AGE SEX.OH DEAR I THINK I'VE JUST SHIT MYSELF!!

Back to football matters please!!

 

[simmo]

so a british aid worker caught by the taliban would be fair game ?

I truly do not understand your point!

So you in your naive world think that the Taliban would not behead this person immediately. They would put him on trial with a jury and he would be found not guilty as he is only an aid worker and not a soldier, dream, dream, dream.

The only people whom truly know what this man was are the people that captured him. Whom were presumably US (or allied) soldiers, but you because of your own prejudices would not believe the US (or allied) soldiers if they said that this person was firing a gun at them.

This man that many now laud and is flying in today is a POW. Whom was captured fighting against the British (and her allies) wake up and smell the coffee in your dream world.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Yeah I can see why someone would go to Afghanistan in the middle of a war to try and kick his addiction to Heroin. Perfectly reasonable that!

JACKANORY! JIMMY HILL!

 

[gruntage]

There is no evidence that The U.K does not like Afganistan.our troops are out there to try a stop A TERRORIST ORGANISATION who treat women like farm yard animals,raise funds through the Ilegal drugs trade,use children as human bombs,would kill all non believers (as they put it!),would deprive YOU of your human rights,deprive you of being able to practice a religon of your own choice.our soceity is not perfect,but I know which soceity i want to live under.you want to live by their laws ,i suggest you leave now and i wonder how long it would be before you are begging to return!!!!!!!!.May be you think the world should have let Hitler acheive his dreams

NO NO. i agree the regime was wrong. i question what gives us the right to decide who is in charge? Mugabe is just as bad, why don't we remove him? answer there is no money in doing so. You believe that just as he is a muslim he is a terrorist?! if a white man was there and said he was on aid duty you would have NO questions, but due to this mans faith and colour you assume his guilt. as for corrupt regimes have you ever looked at the U.S govt system?! (i would just like to point out i am not anti U.S) or the torture methods used to question people like the man returning to the u.k. is that any better than what the taliban have done? should we not invade the u.s to stop things like this happening? as regards to the drugs, you can hardly blame the peasants for growing heroin, if you have a choice between starvation/ not feeding your family or a quick buck for growing poppies (which by the way will never effect you or your society as drugs are not permitted under islamic law) would you not take the offer of the drug barons offering you considerably more money than you would get growing a crop which would most likely fail under the climatic conditions.

 

[The Spanish]

i hope the local paper of where this fucker claims to have resided have not made themselves look as ridiculous as our very dear Argus with its pointless posturing, phony concern for human rights and nauseating claiming of him as 'one of their own'. Otherwise I would be boycotting that as well as the f***ing Argus.

 

[gruntage]

I truly do not understand your point!


The only people whom truly know what this man was are the people that captured him. Whom were presumably US (or allied) soldiers, but you because of your own prejudices would not believe the US (or allied) soldiers if they said that this person was firing a gun at them.
.

and you because of your prejudices believe them without question.

there is a high chance he was a terrorist, there is just as much chance he was there for other reasons. that is why we have a beautiful system of innocent until proven guilty. it is one of the freedoms (which as you all keep pointing out, we are lucky to have) we enjoy in this country. if you start assuming someones guilt does that not make a mockery of this basic freedom we enjoy?

 

[Lokki 7]

A few interesting points in this discussion from both sides. Personally, I am nervous about letting this guy back into Britain, not only MIGHT he be dangerous, but he will be mightily pissed of either way after the way he was treated. If he wasn't a terrorist before I wouldn't blame him for having those tendencies now.

And that is the issue, neither we nor the Americans actually know if he has done anything wrong. We despise the regime of the Taliban and their human rights violations, but commiting similar violations in response is no way to fight a moral war, we turn ourselves into the very thing we despise. As the Americans have done at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

If we cannot prove he has committed a crime then we should not condemn the bloke, but I'll be more comfortable knowing he'll have some spooks following his every move for a while, as I'm sure he will have.

 

[gruntage]

And that is the issue, neither we nor the Americans actually know if he has done anything wrong. We despise the regime of the Taliban and their human rights violations, but commiting similar violations in response is no way to fight a moral war, we turn ourselves into the very thing we despise. As the Americans have done at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

QUOTE]

correct.

 

[Simster]

If we cannot prove he has committed a crime then we should not condemn the bloke, but I'll be more comfortable knowing he'll have some spooks following his every move for a while, as I'm sure he will have.

Couldn't these spooks have followed him for a while seven years ago? I agree that his movements looked suspicious but, as you summise, surely he is even more likely to be a terrorist now than he was back then...

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

10 pages

 

[Lokki 7]

10 pages

Thanks for your input.

 

[User removed 4]

10 pages

miiiiine!!!

 

[simmo]

and you because of your prejudices believe them without question.

there is a high chance he was a terrorist, there is just as much chance he was there for other reasons. that is why we have a beautiful system of innocent until proven guilty. it is one of the freedoms (which as you all keep pointing out, we are lucky to have) we enjoy in this country. if you start assuming someones guilt does that not make a mockery of this basic freedom we enjoy?

You clearly haven't read my earlier post.

This man is a POW, he was captured in a war environment. There is no innocent until proven guilty for POW's there is the enemy whom if you are to be victorious need to be killed or captured and overcome. The normal rule of peacetime law does not necessarily apply in a war theatre. Supporters of facism in Britain e.g Oswald Mosley were jailed in the UK during the 2nd World War without trial, are you saying that is wrong?

The "hated" US have no obligation to release this man there has been no peace deal/terms signed with the Taliban/Al Queda and yet they release him thanks to the efforts of the utterly naive who make out he is not a POW but some innocent man going about his business in a war environment in some innocent way.

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

Thanks for your input.

You're welcome, glad to be of service.

 

[Lokki 7]

You clearly haven't read my earlier post.

This man is a POW, he was captured in a war environment. There is no innocent until proven guilty for POW's there is the enemy whom if you are to be victorious need to be killed or captured and overcome. The normal rule of peacetime law does not necessarily apply in a war theatre. Supporters of facism in Britain e.g Oswald Mosley were jailed in the UK during the 2nd World War without trial, are you saying that is wrong?

The "hated" US have no obligation to release this man there has been no peace deal/terms signed with the Taliban/Al Queda and yet they release him thanks to the efforts of the utterly naive who make out he is not a POW but some innocent man going about his business in a war environment in some innocent way.

But surely POW's should be released when the war ends if they cannot be found guilty of war crimes? By my reckoning that was May 1st 2003.

 

[DJ Leon]

You clearly haven't read my earlier post.

This man is a POW, he was captured in a war environment. There is no innocent until proven guilty for POW's there is the enemy whom if you are to be victorious need to be killed or captured and overcome. The normal rule of peacetime law does not necessarily apply in a war theatre. Supporters of facism in Britain e.g Oswald Mosley were jailed in the UK during the 2nd World War without trial, are you saying that is wrong?

The "hated" US have no obligation to release this man there has been no peace deal/terms signed with the Taliban/Al Queda and yet they release him thanks to the efforts of the utterly naive who make out he is not a POW but some innocent man going about his business in a war environment in some innocent way.

So he was a combatant then? What proof do we have of that other than that he was in Afghanistan?

 

[User removed 4]

But surely POW's should be released when the war ends if they cannot be found guilty of war crimes? By my reckoning that was May 1st 2003.

that was iraq, not afghanistan.

 

[Don Quixote]

Wasn't it the British and the Americans who supplied the taliban with weapons in the first place?