RonJeremy Posted November 1, 2015 Author Share Posted November 1, 2015 I started off agreeing and asking why, but the fact he is a SA citizen and only a Britsih resident is a bit if a red herring. He will launch a claim and its guesswork on hiw mych he might ask for, but it looks likely the claim against the UK will be for their role in illegal imprisonment and torture for 13 years. If thats the case then nationality would be irrelevant. From the british tax payer becayse it was MI5 who took part in some of the torture. When you say torture? Do you mean deprivation of sleep, S & M rituals and waterboarding? Or do you mean actual torture like the Taliban did? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1358063/I-was-one-of-the-Talibans-torturers-I-crucified-people.html (And this is one of the milder links I found). The Taliban would skin people alive. Crucify them. Starve them to death. These people are really really awful and he was out there helping them. It's mental comparing the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Deserves every penny. He deserves nothing apart from a one way ticket out of the UK on the first available plane . Dont tell me you believe all that cobblers about him being in Iraq on " Humanitarian grounds " ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 The Met police investigated torture allegations and found no evidence to support claims that MI5 or MI6 were complicit in the torture of prisoners. You got a link? Finding no evidence just means they hadnt found any, not that it didnt exist. They would have also been under US restrictions whilst interviewing him back in 2010. He now has the opportunity to be interviewed as a free man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningman1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 You got a link? Finding no evidence just means they hadnt found any, not that it didnt exist. They would have also been under US restrictions whilst interviewing him back in 2010. He now has the opportunity to be interviewed as a free man. Whilst that is true, it is a ridiculous thing to say. After all just because no one has found any evidence that you are a child abuser it doesn't mean you aren't one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 When you say torture? Do you mean deprivation of sleep, S & M rituals and waterboarding? Or do you mean actual torture like the Taliban did? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1358063/I-was-one-of-the-Talibans-torturers-I-crucified-people.html (And this is one of the milder links I found). The Taliban would skin people alive. Crucify them. Starve them to death. These people are really really awful and he was out there helping them. It's mental comparing the two. You're right about it being 'mental comparing the two'. The UK or America cannot be compared with the Taliban, thankfully. Nor should they be. On the point of torture, I was listening to a dramatization of some of his experiences on Radio 4 the other day, and it sounded horrendous. ---------- Post added 01-11-2015 at 15:03 ---------- The Met police investigated torture allegations and found no evidence to support claims that MI5 or MI6 were complicit in the torture of prisoners. I may be wrong but I'm sure that MI6 were found to be complicit in the 'extraordinary rendition' of prisoners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 When you say torture? Do you mean deprivation of sleep, S & M rituals and waterboarding? Or do you mean actual torture like the Taliban did? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1358063/I-was-one-of-the-Talibans-torturers-I-crucified-people.html (And this is one of the milder links I found). The Taliban would skin people alive. Crucify them. Starve them to death. These people are really really awful and he was out there helping them. It's mental comparing the two. Theres no need to compare it to the Taliban, the relevant standard of conduct is that which the UK government sets itself and agrees to. Just becayse it may not have been as extreme as the Taliban doesnt mean it still doesnt amount to torture. Wouldnt you be angry if you had been illegally detained for 13 years, refused a trial and then tortured, with the UK government being complicit in that? thats what hes claiming. You will have to read the court documents to see what his exact allegations are. He still has to prove his case, so people are getting ahead of themselves. If it didnt happen though, then the government is unlikely to settle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted November 1, 2015 Author Share Posted November 1, 2015 You're right about it being 'mental comparing the two'. The UK or America cannot be compared with the Taliban, thankfully. Nor should they be. On the point of torture, I was listening to a dramatization of some of his experiences on Radio 4 the other day, and it sounded horrendous.[ I'm sure it wasn't nice, but he was a prisoner of war and found with the other Taliban torturers. He doesn't appear to have been crucified or had his skin peeled off him whilst alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Whilst that is true, it is a ridiculous thing to say. After all just because no one has found any evidence that you are a child abuser it doesn't mean you aren't one. I asked you for a link to clarify your claim about them findining no evidence. Their investigations were limited because restrictions were imposed on them at the time by the authorities in Guantanomo, so i wouldnt have been reaching the conclusion it was good proof of whether the events happened. This was an obvious flaw. Now they have the opportunity to investigate more fully and he has the opportunity to speak freely. He may or may not be able to provide further evidence. ---------- Post added 01-11-2015 at 15:14 ---------- I'm sure it wasn't nice, but he was a prisoner of war and found with the other Taliban torturers. He doesn't appear to have been crucified or had his skin peeled off him whilst alive. If it was illegal in the way he was treated it was illegal. Its the laws of this country that are relevant not some comparitive torture test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slordy71 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 The Americans admitted they had no evidence against him and cleared him for release in 2007. It took them 8 years to get round to actually releasing him. Imagine you got arrested and after some time locked up your captors said "sorry mate, we've got no evidence against you so we are letting you go". Then it took 8 years for you to get out, would you not demand compensation? hes not a british citizen so no i dont really care, if it looks, acts and confers with terrorists then its a pretty fair assumption there are or have something to do with terrorism, just because it cant be proved doesnt make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningman1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 I asked you for a link to clarify your claim about them findining no evidence. Their investigations were limited because restrictions were imposed on them at the time by the authorities in Guantanomo, so i wouldnt have been reaching the conclusion it was good proof of whether the events happened. This was an obvious flaw. Now they have the opportunity to investigate more fully and he has the opportunity to speak freely. He may or may not be able to provide further evidence. If it was illegal in the way he was treated it was illegal. Its the laws of this country that are relevant not some comparitive torture test. It wasn't my link and the laws of this country are irrelevant as those laws only govern what happens within UK territory. hes not a british citizen so no i dont really care, if it looks, acts and confers with terrorists then its a pretty fair assumption there are or have something to do with terrorism, just because it cant be proved doesnt make it so. No, you are missing the point. He was cleared for release 8 years ago. It does look dodgy him being in Afghanistan at that time, travelling on a fake Belgian passport, but he should have either been put on trial or released years ago. If you don't really care about people who are not British citizens then I genuinely feel sorry for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts