Binyam blames UK for mistreatment

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by YouAreHavingALaugh, Mar 13, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Of course he is innocent, however

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7940958.stm

    During the interview, Mr Mohamed's lawyer prevented him from answering questions about travel documents he had used to get to Afghanistan and a training camp he attended.

    Maybe not then.
     
  2. I wonder why???
     
  3. The same report makes clear that the reason for this is that:

    '...This was because Mr Mohamed's immigration status is currently under review.'
     
  4. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    Purely coincidental that it might harm his compensation claims if he give to much away. Its already on record I believe that he entered the UK illegally.
     
  5. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    ...and so do many others, but we don't illegally torture them do we?! :oops:
     
  6. And there is proof of torture? illegal or otherwise ?
     
  7. All I keep hearing is there were files with questions from the British. Nothing stating the actual British did the torturing?
     
  8. Dubious travel docs? Entering the UK illegally?

    And we are supposed to believe what he says?
     
  9. Whats needed for these cases is a special fast track court .Perhaps we could call it the "Fcuk off twat,yer getting nothing " Court? Cant remember the arabic for fcuk off,sorry
     
  10. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Excellent but predictable response to a serious issue... :roll:
     
  11. It is a serious issue and needs to be dealt with seriously, not by some crowd of bewigged gobshites out for another fat fee.My title for this court is of course open to change if some delicate souls feel outraged by it,but the spirit should be the same.
     
  12. How about the Court of Public Opinion. We all vote on the 'net, and whichever side wins, gets to choose what we do to him..

    Variation on "the money or the bag" - although apparently the Yanks have already bagged him :lol:
     
  13. The Telegraph has a bit on the UK mossies (in general) which may shed a bit of light on our pal Binyam
    telegraph


    PS blahblahblah Con Coughlin,blah blah blah right -wingers.
     
  14. IMHO there are too many people jumping onto the band-wagon and trying to get money for every minor mishap. I blame the spetics society who seem to sue for anything and everything and it seems to be slowly making its way over here.

    Case in point is the tart at Harringay Council who got sacked over Baby P ... now suing for wrongful dismissal. Hopefully the tribunal (after careful deliberation over the facts) will find that she was in fact negligent in her duties and that the sacking was lawful!

    But back on topic ... As I understand it he is sueing as he states that the UK Security Services aided and abetted the Septics in providing the information that led to his arrest and subsequent incarceration and alledges torture. Isn't the job of the Security Services just that?? To ensure the Security of the country by any means to ensure that the security is not compromised! Therefore, if there is any doubt that said gentleman was either in the country illegally or was considered a security threat then they were quite within their remit to try ensure the security of the country. I doubt if they actually condoned any torture or in fact ordered it ... merely asked the spetics "while you are holding him can you please ask him these questions....."
     
  15. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Of course not. Providing that they - or anyone acting on their authority - does so lawfully, dilligently and expeditiously.

    Does that remit stretch to using methods of torture, contrary to the UN Resolution or European Convention on Human Rights? No, if you believe MI5's website on the matter: http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/european_convention_on_human_rights.html

    Then why did the Government refuse access to Mohamed's lawyers when they requested the release of documents which they claim would prove he was mistreated? Well it seems the High Court ruled the papers should be sealed to protect relations with the US after receiving a State Department letter suggesting publication could harm security. But it has emerged this letter had been solicited by the Foreign Office! Why is the Government so concerned and worried that evidence which could prove or disprove Mohamed's story is witheld and suppressed? And what is at stake in our relationship with the US State Department?

    I will wait to see evidence obtained as a result of the Attorney-General's criminal investigation into the matter...
     
  16. In an ideal world...your submission is quite correct as are the points you raise, however our world is far from ideal. Both of us either are or have been in a line of work where their are circumstances where 'proper process' is not up to the task....when it comes to terrorism, the process I am sure is amended accordingly on a needs must basis.

    Most members of the public I would suggest (and that's all it is...a suggestion') do not want to know the workings of the security services...just that they are there and keeping them as safe as possible....and doing want needs to be done. I too have reservations where such a policy may lead...however, there it is.
     
  17. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    But surely we - as a supposed civilised Western culture - set the example, rather than become one? To resolve the issues and problems in a civilised manner, without feeling the need to resorting to the same tactics as our enemies? We know that Islamic terrorist organisations routinely torture and execute hostages for the own agenda. If the Security Services of GB and the US (if Mohamed is to be believed) are using these tactics also, does that makes them better? What's the difference? Well, at least we do it in secret, rather than broadcast the graphic footage on Al Jazeera... :oops:
     
  18. The difference is that this twat still has his head attached,all his limbs and his nails far as can be seen from the photies.And the is eff all wrong with his lip either.
     
  19. I do see your point....I really do however, it's an imperfect world and I do believe sometimes 'fire must be fought with fire', something I was flamed for expounding not long ago on this board, however I do believe it to be true where 'need must' so to speak......as ultimately, it is the saving of British lives etc that should be paramount. Justice for all is a fine and laudable concept....but only if everyone sticks to the rules of common decency and justice....and Terrorists don't.
     
  20. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Not disputing that at all, hence why our troops are fighting in Afghanistan right now. However in Mohamed's case, despite his colourful and somewhat questionable choice of lifestyle, he has not - in spite of his seven-year incarceration - admitted to being a terrorist or a member of any similar organisation, nor have the 'Intelligence Services' proved likewise (they have had sufficient time to produce evidence to support their allegations). And if they had done so, he would have been charged and tried accordingly, and not released back to the UK.
     

Share This Page