Lawyers to sue or British daintees in Cuba

[The PIT]

Yes our Government are going to be sued for aiding and abetting the US. Daft isn't it.
Also it seems that if they were returned to the UK for trail they wouldn't be for treason which they should be. Of course they maybe innocent and got caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time.
If they're guilty and get off on a technical issue we'll be releasing people who have one aim to destroy the western culture onto the streets to corrupt other people.

[mdhome]

Simply put, these people should be tried, fair and square and it should be done in the US. If they are innocent then fair enough.

However, I dont want these people ever putting foot on British soil again. They knew what the Taliban stood for and they were prepared to stand up against our soldiers and countrymen. In my eyes they are part of a small but growing minority of Moslems in the UK who use our freedoms against us. To my mind, biting the hand that feeds you is one of the most contemptuous acts anyone can perpetrate.


Regards MD

[dancray]

"To my mind, biting the hand that feeds you is one of the most contemptuous acts anyone can perpetrate. "

So I suppose the colonies in america should not have bitten the british hand 250 years ago and simply accepted doing what the lords in London wanted?


There is nothing wrong with fighting for what you believe in, just do not engage in war crimes imho.

Everyone believes they are right...that is the nature of ALL humans - arrogance in their beliefs. Remember that the victors write the history books...not exactly a balanced viewpoint.

[The PIT]

Originally posted by dancray
[B
There is nothing wrong with fighting for what you believe in, just do not engage in war crimes imho.
[/B]

It's better to go via the ballot box and if you loose shut up and take the result. Killing innocents is not the way to go. Neither is encouraging young people to take blind hatred against any other religon.

[mdhome]

Originally posted by dancray

So I suppose the colonies in america should not have bitten the british hand 250 years ago and simply accepted doing what the lords in London wanted?

Sorry but that is a piss poor analogy. The two have very little in common.

Regards MD

[dancray]

"Sorry but that is a piss poor analogy. The two have very little in common. "


I think it is a "piss rich" analogy;

and opinion are like bellybuttons - everyone has one.


And you have a right to express yours, but please do not believe that just because you "say so" makes it true. And of course the ballot box is the best way to go; I was just taking exception to MdHome's statement "To my mind, biting the hand that feeds you is one of the most contemptuous acts anyone can perpetrate. "

That is like saying you should never criticize christianity because the Salvation Army gives you a hot meal; demanding obedience because you feed someone is arrogant to the extreme. If we all obeyed the hands who feed us, we might as well be mindless servants. No thanks, but I find it ironic that Mdhome's viewpoint originates from the country that basically perfected and engaged in massive imperialism and colonialism. I'm sure Mdhome may have an opinion on India's decision to bite the british hand and decided to become independent...

what is the old saying...one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fight...Israel was accused of terrorism by the western powers on many occasions during its infancy...the uk viewed the usa as a terrorist state in the 1770s...even recently the MI6 and the CIA viewed the KLA in Kosovo as terrorists but are now forming the governing body of that territory...seems like biting the hand that feeds you is the spark which has led to the independence of many nation states...

[Paulr]

There is no religious group that cannot be critised.
Christianity has as much of a checkered past as any, The Crusades anybody?
I am afraid the truth is that not all "fighting" can be done through the ballot box.
Biting the hand that feeds you is sometimes the only way you can break free, if the hand that feeds you is also the hand that poisons you and gives you a good slapping now and again.

It was always highly unlikely that these people would be tried for Treason here in the UK.
Treason is actually the only crime left in the UK that can in fact carry the Death Sentance - usually reserved for direct attacks on the Crown, any decent lawyer would have any proposed charge of Treason dropped in seconds for a lesser crime, unless the person in question had held a gun to our good old Queen's <sarc> head.

[mdhome]

Dancray
My country houses nearly 2 million Moslems most of whom are law abiding people. Now when the not so law abiding people start anti semitic hatred or hatred of the US or setup and support terrorist organisations that threaten my and your freedoms using the freedoms that my country has given them I have a right to be pissed. Some of these people have good reasons for feeling the way they do but if they dont like our culture then they should leave. The fact that I am against western policy in the middle east is another matter. For what it worth, Britain is probably one of the biggest recruiting grounds for these type of people. So much so I am surprised that good ole G.Bush hasnt threatened us with retaliation.

BTW, I took a *homeless* lodger into my home several years ago. All my family and friends treated him with respect only to see him walk off with the family credit cards. Now please find offence with that, after all it was a case of biting the hand... :

ps , sorry if I sounded so close minded. Just a bad choice of words

Regards MD

[spoogenet]

Originally posted by dancray
"Sorry but that is a piss poor analogy. The two have very little in common. "


I think it is a "piss rich" analogy;

and opinion are like bellybuttons - everyone has one.

*snip*

No thanks, but I find it ironic that Mdhome's viewpoint originates from the country that basically perfected and engaged in massive imperialism and colonialism. I'm sure Mdhome may have an opinion on India's decision to bite the british hand and decided to become independent...

Whoah now, back up paddy wagon....beep beep beep.....

I believe using India, or any colonial reference for that matter, should be considered a "piss poor" analogy. India was colonized by the British, before which the Indians had a strange tendency of feeding themselves with their own hands. When the British took over, you could hardly say that the British were now the feeding hand. The conqueror doesn't become the magical "hand that feeds you" when it's your own country that they took over.

On the other hand, if an immigrant to a country uses the freedoms of that country against the very country that gives him the freedoms, that is biting the hand that feeds you.

The two aforementioned situations have a HUGE difference, they do not both fall under the "biting the hand that feeds you" umbrella since there is a distinct matter of principle and moral difference between immigration and colonization.

Once, however, immigrants become well enough settled, they are as good as any other member of the society. Anybody who uses the freedoms of their mother country to the detriment of the public is biting the hand that feeds them. Whether they are morally bound and justified to do so, though, is an entirely different matter that must take into account things such as the manner in which one promotes his cause. Terrorism, no matter how noble your cause, is unjust in itself.

b

[RedRed]

Pit & MDhome.

Of course the families of those detained are fighting through the courts to have their kids back. If your grandfather had gone to spain to fight Franco during the Spainish Civil War, you would hope that your govt would do its utmost to have them returned.

Whats wrong with that?

The American Prisoner is being treated completely differently from the others, allowed legal council, and a civil court. Ol' Donald Rumsfelt said yesterday that he felt that most of the prisioners would be returned to their countries of origin, if they were tried there anyway. (US realising that their policy was again untennable, but not admitting it). To be tried in this country, which is what the families want, the evidence for holding them will need to be supplied. Lets hope it was more substantial than the crXp that the US supplied to convict the pilot last month....

'er.... nothing, but he is a bad man..... honestly!!!'

Catch a grip!

RedRed

[The PIT]

Originally posted by RedRed
Pit & MDhome.

Of course the families of those detained are fighting through the courts to have their kids back. If your grandfather had gone to spain to fight Franco during the Spainish Civil War, you would hope that your govt would do its utmost to have them returned.

Whats wrong with that?

My problem is that they're going for lets get some money trip.

Then they should be tried for treason and if they are found to be guilty suitable punished and if not set free.

The American Prisoner is being treated completely differently from the others, allowed legal council, and a civil court. Ol' Donald Rumsfelt said yesterday that he felt that most of the prisioners would be returned to their countries of origin, if they were tried there anyway. (US realising that their policy was again untennable, but not admitting it). To be tried in this country, which is what the families want, the evidence for holding them will need to be supplied. Lets hope it was more substantial than the crXp that the US supplied to convict the pilot last month....

Yes I made comments about the lack of evidance supplied.


Catch a grip!

RedRed

Wondering when you'd show up.

[mdhome]

Hello Red
As stated in my first post, I dont have a problem with them being justly tried. What I dont understand is why should they be tried in the UK. Afterall they were caught by US and not British soldiers. If the US finds the reasons for holding them untenable then surely they are innocent and dont need to be tried anywhere.

My concerns about are these
The conditions that the are being kept in,
Them having a fair trial,
Ambiguity in the way Americans are treated over non Americans.

I think the US will release most of them. Is it possible for them to sue the US government?

Regards MD

[RedRed]

Pit:

Hello My old friend....... Its good to hear from me again

MDhome

good to be back.

I think it would not be possible to sue the US govt, unless the inmates were released without charge anywhere, and perhaps only then under a civil liberties issue (which would be hard to get to stick).

The UK govenrment are going to be sued for 'aiding and abetting' the US insofar as they have not attempted to defend the civil liberties of a British citizen held in another country WHITOUT CHARGE and WITHOUT access to legal recourse or support.

The UK has signed the UN charter which necissates this defense.

It is intresting that at least 2 of the 5 britians held have been defined as POW's rather than al'qeda. (these are the two seeking legal help)

it is also intresting that Britian is now the only country who has NOT formally requested return of their nationals. (even Australia -has a prisoner, and asked for him back)

RedRed

[mdhome]

Originally posted by RedRed
Pit:


The UK govenrment are going to be sued for 'aiding and abetting' the US insofar as they have not attempted to defend the civil liberties of a British citizen held in another country WHITOUT CHARGE and WITHOUT access to legal recourse or support.

The UK has signed the UN charter which necissates this defense.


RedRed

Hello Red
I didnt realise that was a part of the UN charter and part of our obligations. If that is the case then we deserve what we get. Yet again you have enlightened.

regards MD

[mdhome]

Pleased ignore, screwup

**--- screwup ----**