BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late

Subject: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 03:58 PM

Beaten, tortured and witness to the deaths of fellow inmates; cleared for release by George W Bush in 2007 and again by Barack Obama, Shaker Aamer will soon be back with his family.

Not that soon, though. It's going to take another 30 days to "complete the legalities." Legalities? Even Shaker Aamer might have a laugh at that, except that this wholly innocent man, bought by the US from bounty-seekers, was incarcerated in Guantanamo without trial for all of the time it has taken a daughter he has never seen to reach the age of 13. There's not a lot to laugh at there.

The UK's role has been deplorable; for the US, Aamer's case is truly shaming. Shaming that a strong, rich, partly civilised nation should be reduced to paranoia by someone with no means to harm it even if he wanted to.

Bravo Clive Stafford Smith and his colleagues at Reprieve, which has long pressed for Aamer's release. All credit too to John McDonnell, the UK's new shadow chancellor (finance secretary), who formed and chaired an all-party parliamentary group at Westminster which has pursued Aamer's case tirelessly. And credit to the hundreds - maybe thousands - of others who campaigned for Aamer's release. Just a disgrace that their efforts were ever needed.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 04:26 PM

Of course they all proclaim their innocence but we'll never know the truth of it, will we?

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 04:27 PM

Agreed. One of the first principle of human rights should be that you cannot be incarcerated for any length of time without charge and trial. His case is an outrage that casts the west, in some regards, as every bit as bad as those illiberal regimes that we are so quick to condemn.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 04:28 PM

Agreed with Peter, that is. Not our bloody stupid Guest.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 05:16 PM

Dimwit guest, whoever you are, what we do know is that US prosecutors have never brought forward credible evidence against him, much less allowed whatever evidence they do have to be tested in any court. We also know that he has been cleared for release by two US presidents since 2007. The whole saga stinks, and we have not yet heard the half of it.

Correction: it is a son, not daughter, whom he has never seen.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: GUEST,#
Date: 25 Sep 15 - 09:05 PM

The story of Omar Khadr's incarceration at Guantanamo is both a Canadian national disgrace and an international one, too. As Steve pointed out, "One of the first principle of human rights should be that you cannot be incarcerated for any length of time without charge and trial."

The recent--meaning past 20 years or so--move toward more and more invasive government control over people through mechanisms like the US Patriot Act and Canada's Bill C-51, bring laws that tolerate people being held incommunicado because habeas corpus can be suspended WITHOUT judicial oversight is one of the scarier things happening these days. Not new, but still not recognized by many people as the monster it really is.

As Peter said about Shaker Aamer's story: "The whole saga stinks, and we have not yet heard the half of it." Ain't that the truth!

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Sep 15 - 04:37 PM

"We have not yet heard the half of it" implies rather that now we will. I doubt that very much.

The thirty days to complete the "legalities" reminds me of previous cases where they have released prisoners held extra-legally for years, without ever being put on trial, and have insisted on keeping them in chains and blindfolds right up until the planes had landed and they had to be handed over to freedom. Nothing short of gratuitous cruelty.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 04:05 PM

It's all rather ominous as secret trials roll on in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Sep 15 - 09:40 PM

weird story - just shows, there are some places its a damn good idea to stay away from.

i've got to admit i was initially very sceptical. for which organisation was he a charity worker - didn't they take up his case?

obviously no one is going to admit they approve of torture. however common sense tells us that it is an inevitable part of warfare - intelligence gathering, etc.

its pretty dumb pretending otherwise, and that suddenly people in life and death struggles are going to adhere to any civilised 'rules'. war is really the abandonment of civilisation.

or am i being hopelessly cynical?

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 11:18 AM

The Mail gets a bad press here, but it has campaigned for this and has been praised by SA supporters for it.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 01:15 PM

No one is going to admit they approve of torture? Well, the former president and vice-president of the United States did as I understand. And I'm afraid so did you just now in a way Big Al, by applying the term "inevitable" to its use. No, it's not inevitable that it should ever be accepted.

There are criminals who will use the confusion of war to carry out all kinds of vicious crimes, and that may be inevitable. Rapes will take place, and torture too, but there is nothing inevitable in them being used officially or clandestinely as a means of interrogation.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 02:32 PM

what's my acceptance got to do with it. I have never been a soldier. but if my son were a soldier, i would feel that his commanders were derelict in their duty if they didn't do ANYTHING to gain military intelligence before putting my son's life at hazard.

morally perhaps that's wrong. but that's what i mean when I say in accepting the need for war, implicit is the abandonment of civilised standards of behaviour.

perhaps you disagree - and see it war as a sort of cricket match where we all do the decent thing.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 05:58 PM

Your acceptance was relevant because it clashed with your remark that noone would mkadmit they approved of torture.

True, war is brutal and ruthless. But abandoning the belief that there are things which constitute war crimes would be a dangerous backward step. Torture in these circumstances is a war crime. Those who practice it, and those in authority who authorise or condone it, are war criminals. In fact those who even justify it are in a real cense accessories to war crimes, either before or after the fact.

"ANYTHING to gain military intelligence..." Which would presumably include such methods (which have been used) as raping or killing a captive's wife or children in front of them.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Sep 15 - 10:47 PM

well you can go on pretending that such methods aren't used if it helps your conscience.

the war crimes notion is a bit of hypocrisy really. god knows how many German ladies were raped by the invading Russians who sat in judgement over them at Nuremberg.

was it Sasoon who came up with the phrase 'the order to run mad' - thats what war is. you're kidding yourself if you think its anything else.

its not what i accept.. its what it is, its the quidditas - the nature of war.

deny it - if it helps you make it through the night.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: banjoman
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:22 AM

If his release was sanctioned by two Presidents, then I have to ask just who is running the USA - not the elected president.
I think that the whole business of Guantamo brings both the USA and its allies down to the level of those they publicly denounce.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:07 PM

Of course such methods are used. Those who use them, are criminals. Anyone who authorises them, or gives them the nod is a worse criminal.

The fact that all too often, as with Bush and Cheney, they get away with it is shameful. But most rapists escape conviction too. That is no reason to see rape as something society should accept - "it's the nature of some men".

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:38 PM

well the spycatcher book raised the same sort of questions about England

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:10 AM

No one would seriously deny that there've been cases of British military and intelligence using torture. The cause of Shaker Amaar's continued imprisonment is believed to have been because once free it will become harder to conceal British involvement in his torture.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 04:07 PM

whats interesting is how this will be perceived....will it deter people from joining ISIS if they know they could be signing up for thirteen years of torture if they get nicked.
will it inflame the passionately anti -west sentiments and recruit more freedom fighters

its going to be interesting

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:37 PM

I doubt if anyone has ever been deterred from joining any knd of army by fear of what might happen if they are captured. Stuff like torture must surely encourage recruits, and also ensure that they will fight to the death rather than surrendering.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:29 AM

i think maybe the first hunger striker to die - excited followers of the IRA. however as the policy of letting them die continued and the stories of their deaths dropped to page 5 - i think some of the glamour of martyrdom faded. even for the family's of the hunger strikers.

anyway - you pay your money you takes your choice. either you tear up the rule book when you're involved with a war with terrorists - or you give them the due process of law.

i have a lawyer friend - who says the individuals rights under the law are sacrosanct. i understand the point of view.

i wonder if those poor bleeders lining up to be beheaded, or the families of dead servicemen, or whose lives have been devastated by having legs blown off would agree with my lawyer friend.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 02:56 PM

Regardless of which countries do it, torture is quite plainly wrong (and usually useless in terms of gaining reliable information, as evidenced in Aamer's case). Alas the world is full of Big Al Whittles who think it's fine.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:19 PM

i don't think its fine. i think it goes on. i understand why it goes on. so do you.

we both enjoy the benefits of living in a savagely defended highly privileged society. i accept my part in the collective guilt for this situation. you don't. you're a hypocrite. you find relief in abusing others, and thinking you're something special.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 04:58 PM

Big Al Whittle: I understand why it goes on. So do you.

It goes on because there are plenty of people with the same mindset as Big Al Whittle: "...if my son were a soldier, i would feel that his commanders were derelict in their duty if they didn't do ANYTHING to gain military intelligence before putting my son's life at hazard."

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 06:06 PM

right and you think otherwise.....

you can't think your way into how someone would feel whose kid was out there. your lack of imagination isn't my fault. it isn't a defect in me.

your need to do a smug superior holier than thou rant is your problem.

I'm not talking about right and wrong. I'm talking about what is.

Stand up tell them they're wrong to want every possible thing done to protect their kids. Don't whine at me. Write to your MP. the ministry of defence. your mp. join Amnesty International. Done any of those things?

or is it just easier to unload abuse on pensioners using a folksong website. don't worry you have several like minded individuals to keep you company.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Oct 15 - 08:36 PM

I understand that it goes on, I even understand why it goes on.

The same goes for rape, for child abuse, for brutality of all sorts, for fraud, for tax evasion...

That doesn't mean shrugging it off and accepting those things.

As for the suggestion that "every possible thing" is justifiable in a dirty struggle - "those things" includes most of those activities as "interrogation" methods which have been used, typically by "friendly countries".

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 04:59 AM

hardly shrugging off...i'm just saying its an inevitable part of the beastliness of war.

just as much as the jolly marching bands , the medals....soldiers of the queen. brave lads of the gallant IRA...ISIS, Waffen SS.   that is how war is conducted

am i really being that obscure. is the point i'm making that difficult to grasp?

obviously, it is.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: GUEST,ollaimh
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 01:17 PM

you see the real face of the british and American laissez faire capitalists in the torture and illegal imprisonment. they would destroy all out constitutional rights if they could.   they give corporations legal rights but not people.

the british have always used torture and war on civilians and ethnic cleansing, and americans are going down that road.   most republican want to remove the sdeparation of church and state so they can have god's sanction for crimes against humanity. then we will have a true American Taliban.

omar khadr was a child soldier as well. these modern Nazis have no morals and no respect for human life.

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Oct 15 - 01:26 PM

there ain't no sanity claus...

Subject: RE: BS: US to release Shaker Aamer 13 years late
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Oct 15 - 08:08 PM

Apparently Shaker Amaar has warned his family that he thinks he very likely won't be seeing them. He thinks there's a very strong chance he'll be killed before he is released.

Thirty days is a long time.