Re: Britons detained in Cuba

[i]From the Times today (12/07/03) - The fate of the nine Britons detained in Guantanamo Bay holding facility in Cuba, will not be resolved for a long time, despite the efforts to ensure trials are held in Britain, Whitehall Officials said yesterday...

Whats your opinion on this?[/i]

I personally feel, that any individual (who is classed as domiciled in this country) who fights in a war or commits a crime abroad, especially one against his or her host nation, and are found guilty of any crimes what-so-ever, should be tried by the arresting forces, preferably by the governing body of the country, in this case, by a military court.

Basically, I feel that it is an act of betrayal, let alone Treason, to leave the country which gives you shelter, and a decent standard of living, and fight against it in a foreign theatre. Individuals should not be allowed to choose countries which seem to have a more relaxed attitude due to liberalisation beleif's. But then again, knowing Great Britain, they will probably be welcomed back home like hero's. After all, we allow former (!) terrorist's as MP's in the house... Yes, I know!

R.S.V.P.

Dave the Rave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpw39

any individual… found guilty of any crimes what-so-ever, should be tried by the arresting forces, preferably by the governing body of the country, in this case, by a military court.

---

That’s just it, though, these people haven’t been found guilty of ‘any crimes what-so-ever’.

In fact, they have not yet even been charged with anything. They have no access to the evidence upon which they are being held and have no contact with the outside world. They have been subjected to questioning techniques including sleep depravation and white noise.

Any trial that they do face will be before a military committee rather than a judge and jury. The committee, the prosecution, and their defence will all be appointed by the Department of Defence. The DoD will also specify the rules of the trial. The defendants will have no right to appeal and, if convicted, may face the death penalty.

Hardly seems conducive of a fair trial and sound conviction, does it?

If these people are guilty of the crimes that they will, eventually, be charged with then they should be held accountable. Until they can be given a fair trial there is no way that they can unquestionably be found to be guilty. The British government has an obligation to these people, regardless of their crimes, to ensure that they are given a fair trial.

The US seems to be singularly unable to provide that fair trial. Even the location of the detainees (Guantanamo) betrays the US desire to deny these people their basic human rights afforded under the American Constitution and legal system (the only reason they are being held on non-American soil).

Let us not forget that these people are being held by a nation who has refused to sign up to the International Criminal Court and has demanded that any US war criminals be tried in the US by a US court. There were even reports that the US had threatened to ‘rescue’ any of its citizens held in The Hague. Sauce for the Goose?????

So George W what do you reckon, he says he didn’t chop the cherry tree down, even though he has a hatchet in his hand and he was stood adjacent to the tree. "Well we must give him the benefit of the doubt, as those liberal pinko’s will be on our backs in the assembly again"…

So what are you saying, if you stood with a smoking gun in the vicinity of violence, you are expected to be given a fair trial? War, is not a pleasant state of affairs for any culture. The worst are religious wars, as with God on your side, it would seem that the masses believe that they are invincible, and so they are…

What where they doing out there when they are domiciled in the UK? Certainly not on holiday, "come to sunny Basra, open shooting season"? I think not... I don’t have to be a rocket scientist to suss out they where there on their beliefs in religion.

This country (UK) has accepted them or at least their previous generations, to stay in this free and democratic (sic) country of ours. In most cases, all we request is that you honour our country and respect our beliefs. Not turn against us, and as 3 of them came from the same area in this country, it is quite obvious that there's a little nest of vipers where being groomed for stardom. Or are we going to have another one handed Mullah at the local Mosque again before the government takes action.

To actually go to that theatre of war, and conduct themselves in a way, that would bring disgrace on them selves if they did it in their own county. Where punishment, I may remind you is quite severe… I think it was the Maquis de Sade, who coined a term with which to fight fear was with a greater fear, the better to control...

The saying, “never bite the hand that feeds you” springs to mind, and we all know that if they are transferred back to this country for trial, our legal system has four levels of justice; 1. One for the rich & famous, 2. One for the poor, 3. One that we would like to see happen, and 4. One that actually happens, and low and behold, they are all totally different.

I totally agree with free professional legal representation at all times, however, if caught flagrente (!), then come on, one has to be morally honest and own up to the crime. And I believe that to go down that road of “legal wranglings” to which country would be the most sympathetic towards whoever/whatever cause, we don’t want to be doing that.

If we as foreigners travel to certain middle east countries, we are expected to adhere to their customs and traditions. In certain situations over the years, foreigners have experienced the wrath of allah by not adhering to certain basic rules of their host nation’s culture.


However, we are more lenient, and supposedly forward thinking and democratic, why are we different?


What more can I say? :evil :D

Ciao,

Dave the Rave.

Ps... and while I'm on my soap box, I am always wary of a country who has had a "B" movie actor as a President, one who hasn't got a clue what "having a sexual relationship" is, and the other who was known throughout the world as "peanuts", whats also worrying, they have a history of shooting their own presidents (but mentioning the previous, this could be understandable). And hey, as well as giving us the "Hoola - Hoop", they've introduceduced us to "Blue on Blue", such a nice terminology for a "Goddamawfullf???up", God Bless America!!!

:evil sorry, couldn't resist that... :cool:

Ciao,

dpw,
Im not disagreeing with what your are saying, BUT these so called "Brits" in the jail in Cuba have nothing to do with Iraq, they were arrested in Afgahistan for being part of the Taliban, and as for as I am concerned should do their time for being "Terrorists".
You cannot compare them with anybody in Iraq.
The Mullahs in the UK have a lot to answer for.
Golach

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpw29

So what are you saying, if you stood with a smoking gun in the vicinity of violence, you are expected to be given a fair trial?

---

Ummm… yup, that's exactly what I'm saying. Don't you think everybody has a right to a fair trial??? I suspect you would if you were the one being convicted without one.

We don't know the details of these people's capture. We don't know if they had a 'smoking gun' or if they were simply standing on the wrong street at the wrong time. True, being in that place at that time does kind of indicate a certain amount of either guilt or stupidity… but I don't claim to know which one… and, unless you are omniscient, I don't see how you could possibly know either. After all, the US certainly isn't sharing the details.

Oh, and some of the people currently being held in Guantanamo were picked up in Pakistan. That hardly seems indicative of a 'smoking gun in the vicinity of violence'.

Remember, Dave, you are talking about arrests made by an army who also arrested a load of farmers in Iraq because the US translator got the Iraqi for 'farmer' and 'terrorist' confused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dpw29

This country (UK) has accepted them or at least their previous generations, to stay in this free and democratic (sic) country of ours. In most cases, all we request is that you honour our country and respect our beliefs. Not turn against us, and as 3 of them came from the same area in this country, it is quite obvious that there's a little nest of vipers where being groomed for stardom. Or are we going to have another one handed Mullah at the local Mosque again before the government takes action.

---

Dave, I think you will find, if you trace families back far enough, that there aren't many of us who are true-blood British. Small-minded, thinly veiled racism such as the paragraph you wrote above belongs in the pamphlets of the BNP and nowhere else.

I would not be too happy with these people standing trial in Britain because they have not actually broken any British laws, except possibly treason. However that would be difficult to prove. What I do believe is they will get a fair hearing in Cuba by a responsible military court and must accept their punishment. I do not think anyone of them will be executed that would invite revenge but they should serve extremely long jail terms under extremely harsh conditions. They knew exactly what they were getting into. (This is not people marching off to war like 1914, they were involved with training camps needing introductions from one-eyed/handed/legged (take your pick) mullahs). Personally if I was in charge there would be no detainees in Guantanamo Bay (I hope that's correct, the spelling not the sentiment), they would not have made it that far. Anyone who is stupid enough, lets face it they are not desperate, to take on the United States and their allies must expect to come out on the losing side.
It is not a perfect solution and not one I would normally endorse but we face unconventional warface and as such must retaliate with unconventional methods.
Whether anyone in down town Quetta or Leicester or wherever takes any notice and behaves according to their Koran rather than their fanatics is a different matter.
Paddy
Ps I have been abstemious long enough now I must go and socialise under a sequioa tree.

Quote:

---

True, being in that place at that time does kind of indicate a certain amount of either guilt or stupidity… but I don't claim to know which one… and, unless you are omniscient, I don't see how you could possibly know either.

---

I'm not God, however, taking into consideration the possible benefits of such an exhaulted position, then just maybe.... Mmmmm

But joking apart, I would have thought it unusual to say the least under those prevalent circumstances, that three of the Detainee's, all came from the same town...

And with regards to having a free trial system, I am and always will be "FOR" a free and just system for all. However, I would find it very interesting reading there reasons for being in that theatre of war. Come on, lets be honest, our basic need is survival, you don't go and put your life at risk in a cavalier attitude, do you?

And whilst we're on the subject of allowing people free legal rights, you want to check out the difference between a mental health patient and Joe Soap.

I've not heard anything further about the case, so if anyone can update me, I'd be obliged, :evil :D Ciao,

Dave the Rave


Ps... Good odds at Willim Hills, Tony Blair not being in power at the next elcetion, and for a nice double, how about a new conservative regime (Arghhhh). [evil]