Binyam Mohamed to be released from Guantanamo next week

#1
This Ethiopian gentleman came here for asylum, then decided to go to Afghanistan , then was caught by the Pakistanis using a false passport,trying to return to the land of easy living.
He is imprisoned by thePakistanis, Then handed over to our americain cousins, where he is horribly abused by sundry perverted western females,
and sent to the Cuban holiday camp to recuperate.
He starts a hunger strike, and is talked out of it by a UK government doctor.
He is returning to us no doubt, by privatejet and he wants UK citizenship.
He does obviously fulfil all of the criteria that our daft government requires, especially as he been a member of the Cuban holiday club.
He will soon be getting his social from an office near you.
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#4
Hmm, would you feel the same amount of "sympathy" for this gentleman if he was of the same ethnic/cultural persuasion as yourself... :oops: :roll:
 

wet_blobby

War Hero
Moderator
#5
Errr, yes?

But not many people I know come from Ethiopia via Afghanistan and Cuba and want to live on state handouts after getting banged up for trying to kill UK/US soldiers or whatever the naughty little rascal did whilst fleeing life threatening persecution in his own country by nipping out to Pakistan from his safe haven in the UK.

I really must get out more I suppose.
 
#6
sgtpepperband said:
Hmm, would you feel the same amount of "sympathy" for this gentleman if he was of the same ethnic/cultural persuasion as yourself... :oops: :roll:
If he were from the same ethnic/cultural persuasion as most of us he would probably have become a chav.
Now my thoughts on Chavs is well known and in my opinion most are only slightly better than this ethnic person.
As for religion, religion has very Little to do with it, but it does make a good excuse for any crimes committed, and this isn't just Islam but most religions have been used to justify terrorist activities.
 
#7
slim said:
As for religion, religion has very Little to do with it, but it does make a good excuse for any crimes committed, and this isn't just Islam but most religions have been used to justify terrorist activities.
As Padre to the forum ,may I just say tut tut to that post.What will Katie and the other girls who are looking for pen-pals thing of us all?
 

Seaweed

War Hero
Book Reviewer
#8
For me the point is that he is NOT a British subject and so we should not be spending taxpayer's money on him. In my opinion he blew his right to residence when he left the country of his own accord, showing that he actually had no need to reside here.

However Gordon Mugabe had time to do a TV spot on Jade Goody; with only two wars to run and an economy rushing down the plughole he must therefore have time on his hands and so maybe will welcome this bod personally (as no good Muslim would shake hands with Gordon's fixer Mandelbum), and will happily fund xxx additional MI5 people to mind our new arrival. Next bill will be for the lawyers arguing (of course at our expense) against ANY measures to contain or watch this man. But hey, we're only two trillion in the hole, who cares!
 
#9
The reality is that many of the prisoners of the illegal camp in Cuba have nowhere else to go. Britain as the prime backer of the war against Iraq with our US ally are morally responsible to these people, whose situation we are largely responsible for. There was a call a couple of weeks ago for countries to offer asylum to inmates once released - this is the precondition of them being released. Britain has agreed to take in a share, though the majority are likely to gain sanctuary in the USA. Asylum means that if they can return to their native country without fear of persecution in the future, they will be required to leave - unless they seek and are awarded British or American citizenship.

Stafford Smith has been doing sterling work and is to be congratulated on his commitment to human rights for all, not just for the popular: the mark of a civilised, mature nation.
 
#10
dollygee said:
This Ethiopian gentleman came here for asylum, then decided to go to Afghanistan , then was caught by the Pakistanis using a false passport,trying to return to the land of easy living.
He is imprisoned by thePakistanis, Then handed over to our americain cousins, where he is horribly abused by sundry perverted western females,
and sent to the Cuban holiday camp to recuperate.
He starts a hunger strike, and is talked out of it by a UK government doctor.
He is returning to us no doubt, by privatejet and he wants UK citizenship.
He does obviously fulfil all of the criteria that our daft government requires, especially as he been a member of the Cuban holiday club.
He will soon be getting his social from an office near you.


Ditto to that , we are fxxxxxxxxxg stupid in this Country , :evil:
 
#11
wet_blobby said:
Errr, yes?

But not many people I know come from Ethiopia via Afghanistan and Cuba and want to live on state handouts after getting banged up for trying to kill UK/US soldiers or whatever the naughty little rascal did whilst fleeing life threatening persecution in his own country by nipping out to Pakistan from his safe haven in the UK.

I really must get out more I suppose.
Out of interest, I assume all that means he was convicted in a court of law?

Or are we following the New Labour example of getting rid of the rule of law and that?
 
#12
As RR is a democratic forum let's have a vote, and because it's a democratic forum it is not required to justify, qualify or explain the reasons for voting one way or another, nor to offer an alternative solution. In fact, very much like our splendid government.
Q. Should BM be allowed to come back to UK.


My answer..........No.


Ok, I know it's not a democratic forum etc etc, but just pretend!
 

wet_blobby

War Hero
Moderator
#13
shipsnthat said:
wet_blobby said:
Errr, yes?

But not many people I know come from Ethiopia via Afghanistan and Cuba and want to live on state handouts after getting banged up for trying to kill UK/US soldiers or whatever the naughty little rascal did whilst fleeing life threatening persecution in his own country by nipping out to Pakistan from his safe haven in the UK.

I really must get out more I suppose.
Out of interest, I assume all that means he was convicted in a court of law?

Or are we following the New Labour example of getting rid of the rule of law and that?
No it means the sponging twat has no right to be in the UK, he forfeited that right when he fled his supposed safe haven to go to Pakistan. Thus proving the UK isn't the only "safe" place in the world for him. Why the fcuk should the UK take him? Bloody yanks should have topped him out in Pakistan, far cheaper all round.
 
#14
Seaweed said:
For me the point is that he is NOT a British subject and so we should not be spending taxpayer's money on him. In my opinion he blew his right to residence when he left the country of his own accord, showing that he actually had no need to reside here.

....
Hurrah! Well said!
 
#15
thingy said:
The reality is that many of the prisoners of the illegal camp in Cuba have nowhere else to go. Britain as the prime backer of the war against Iraq with our US ally are morally responsible to these people, whose situation we are largely responsible for. There was a call a couple of weeks ago for countries to offer asylum to inmates once released - this is the precondition of them being released. Britain has agreed to take in a share, though the majority are likely to gain sanctuary in the USA. Asylum means that if they can return to their native country without fear of persecution in the future, they will be required to leave - unless they seek and are awarded British or American citizenship.

...
Do what????? We should have absolutely no obligation (moral or otherwise) to take ex-Guantanamo detainees into the UK. The fact that they have nowhere else to go is stuff all to do with the UK and plenty to do with the US that put them there in the first place and then denied them legal access and due process.
 
#16
wet_blobby said:
shipsnthat said:
wet_blobby said:
Errr, yes?

But not many people I know come from Ethiopia via Afghanistan and Cuba and want to live on state handouts after getting banged up for trying to kill UK/US soldiers or whatever the naughty little rascal did whilst fleeing life threatening persecution in his own country by nipping out to Pakistan from his safe haven in the UK.

I really must get out more I suppose.
Out of interest, I assume all that means he was convicted in a court of law?

Or are we following the New Labour example of getting rid of the rule of law and that?
No it means the sponging twat has no right to be in the UK, he forfeited that right when he fled his supposed safe haven to go to Pakistan. Thus proving the UK isn't the only "safe" place in the world for him. Why the fcuk should the UK take him? Bloody yanks should have topped him out in Pakistan, far cheaper all round.
I'm not arguing that we should take him - I was simply objecting to the 'this is what he's done' - if the Yanks could prove what they think he's done they'd have put him on trial, but like so many of the others, they can't. I tend to think the rule of law should operate for everybody, I know it makes me old-fashioned, but there it is. I'd like to think that's one of the things that makes us better than Islamists - shame we keep working so hard to undermine it.
 
#17
Agree fully. I don't agree with keeping someone in prison year upon year without charge. If they have enough to arrest him then they have enough to bring him to trial. If they haven't then they haven't enough to arrest him for so should let him go.
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#20
finknottle said:
He could be moving in next door to you.
So what? His opinions and points of view is no more extreme or less relevant than yours... last time I checked, he has not killed anybody or committed any heinous crime, other than being the wrong colour in the wrong place at the wrong time... :oops:

BBC News said:
He arrived in the UK in 1994 he arrived in the UK and sought asylum on the basis of his family's opposition to the Ethiopian government. His application was rejected, but in 2000 he was given exceptional leave to remain in the UK for four years.

Living in North Kensington, west London, Mr Mohamed worked as a cleaner and studied electrical and electronics engineering.

In 2001 - the year he converted to Islam - Mr Mohamed travelled to Pakistan, and then Afghanistan. What he was doing there is the crux of his legal battle. According to Mr Mohamed, he wanted to kick a drug habit and get away from familiar haunts in London. He says that he also wanted to see whether Taleban-run Afghanistan was a good Islamic country - a path followed by other young Muslim men who were fascinated by events in that war-torn region.

US authorities, however, say that while in Afghanistan, he fought on the front line against anti-Taleban Northern Alliance forces.

They claim he was cherry-picked by al-Qaeda because of his UK residency, and received firearms and explosives training alongside British shoe bomber Richard Reid.

Prosecutors claim he planned to travel to the US, rent several flats in an apartment block and then blow it up with a timing device.
My bold: So the guy was legitimately living here from 2000, with indefinite leave to travel to and from the UK. No evidence from what I can see of this man being an "illegal immigrant" (a common ignorant phrase, often confusingly used when describing those seeking asylum).

Additionally, the allegations made by the US authorities about his supposed terrorist activities have not been substantiated; no evidence has been entered or referenced, so it appears that he was arrested in Pakistan - probably on the advice of a post-9/11 paranoid CIA - as a result of a "seize and sift" operation (i.e. arrest everyone, shake them down and see what information is found. A questionable tactic, and probably counter-productive).

Religious or cultural xenophobia aside, I fail to see how anyone can be grateful or pleased that these activities are being conducted in "our name" by those who seek to act as supposed 'intelligence services'. As with any investigation - regardless of the level of offence allegedly committed - the arrest and subsequent detention of a suspect should only be approved if there is sufficient evidence to support those allegations. Somebody somewhere got pissed on power, and should now be made accountable for their questionable actions.
 

Similar threads

Top