999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 He might well do for being locked up without trial. But why are we paying not the USA? And if the USA are not to pay, why us and not the Saudis? Its been asked 4 times on this thread and answered. He is making a claim against the US, but the way they have legislated makes it difficult. Its hard to know his full case until it comes out in the press, but its likely to be based on the UK being complicit in torture via MI5 agents, so his claim will relate to British involvement. Presumably not the Saudis because MI5 dont work for them. ---------- Post added 01-11-2015 at 20:41 ---------- I assumed he was a British citizen but he's a Saudi so don't understand why he has not returned to his own country . When you think of all the British soldiers who have been killed and wounded in Afghanistan, it's a disgrace this foreigner has been flown into Britain in a private jet and that the subject of compensation via the British tax payer is even been discussed . He's a British resident, so until the UK government says otherwise he still has a right to live here. His family is British and lives here. I dont think there are any scheduled airlines flying to Guantanomo, so they used a charter. If its the British Govt and MI5 who have tortured him, then they would be the correct people to claim compensation from. As said all over this thread if Britain wants to sign up to international agreements concering human rights, upholding laws and be against torture, then it has to live up to that standard and not carry out the activities it condemns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scania Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 But has anyone actually missed him whilst he's been gone? I haven't. Charity work my backside. ---------- Post added 01-11-2015 at 20:53 ---------- Deserves every penny. You really are a daft lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shanes teeth Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Some people make it very easy to argue the case on his behalf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 But has anyone actually missed him whilst he's been gone? I haven't. Charity work my backside. ---------- Post added 01-11-2015 at 20:53 ---------- You really are a daft lad. Whether you believe he should have been there or not, doesnt answer the question of whether you believe the UK govt had a right to torture him, contrary to its own laws? Youd think in 13 years theyd have been able to charge him with something or produce some evidence against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 But has anyone actually missed him whilst he's been gone? I haven't. Duh! Course you wouldn't. His wife and children surely did though. Charity work my backside. Your backside is full of, same as anyone else's. This guy was robbed of thirteen years of his life for nothing. If it was you, you'd just say 'whatever' yeah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scania Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Duh! Course you wouldn't. His wife and children surely did though. Your backside is full of, same as anyone else's. This guy was robbed of thirteen years of his life for nothing. If it was you, you'd just say 'whatever' yeah? Is all this crap regardless of what his real motives for being there were? Or do all charity workers globetrot on fake passports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slordy71 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Duh! Course you wouldn't. His wife and children surely did though. Your backside is full of, same as anyone else's. This guy was robbed of thirteen years of his life for nothing. If it was you, you'd just say 'whatever' yeah? family made so cosy whilst waiting by the british taxpayer no doubt? just because they couldnt prove it doesnt mean he wasnt guilty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickey finn Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 just because they couldnt prove it doesnt mean he wasnt guilty :hihi::hihi: soooo funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) just because they couldnt prove it doesnt mean he wasnt guilty Except in English Law you are innocent until proven guilty. They had 13 years and couldnt manage it. Still doesnt excuse the torture. Btw on that reasoning doesnt it mean every person found innocent should still have suspicion against them? It boils down to what you can prove and if you cnat prove anything then you have no reason to detain someone. Edited November 1, 2015 by 999tigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 just because they couldnt prove it doesnt mean he wasnt guilty I'm so glad I'm not you. If you're married, I feel really sorry for your wife. Ditto children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts