Government to compensate ex-Guantanamo Bay detainees

[jbi]

So in order to become a millionaire I need to go abroad and scheme toward/kill my own countrymen, get caught and then claim "abuse" and get a payout.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11762636

[HD Adam]

jbi said:

So in order to become a millionaire I need to go abroad and scheme toward/kill my own countrymen, get caught and then claim "abuse" and get a payout.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11762636

Yes. It's their Ooman Rites innit?

HTH

[Liokault]

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

[AndrewW-G]

Liokault said:

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

To shut them up and therefore avoid a very public and very very expensive court case

[SplatSpeed]

AndrewW-G said:

Liokault said:

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

To shut them up and therefore avoid a very public and very very expensive court case

bullets that expensive??

[thinfourth2]

AndrewW-G said:

Liokault said:

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

To shut them up and therefore avoid a very public and very very expensive court case

As much as i don't like the idea of giving them cash its a saving in the long run.

A court case would cause nothing but hassle and a huge amount of criticism of the blue ties despite it was entirely driven by the red ties

[CommanderJameson]

HD Adam said:

jbi said:

So in order to become a millionaire I need to go abroad and scheme toward/kill my own countrymen, get caught and then claim "abuse" and get a payout.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11762636

Yes. It's their Ooman Rites innit?

HTH

Too fking right it is.

If they were guilty, they should have been found so in a court of law, like we do with other criminals.

Not this half-arsed "we think they're guilty, we really do, but we haven't got jack diddly-squat that'll stand up before a judge, so we'll just cage 'em up for a few years" bks.

Rule of law is sacrosanct. Giving this lot of undoubtedly unsavoury characters a massive wedge should hopefully point out that it's not good enough to just go "ooh, but doesn't he look like a terrorist?" any more.

[Shuvi Tupya]

When you think about it, it is kind of amazing they didn't release them and then have an unknown entity shoot them dead once they are safely off the property

":shrugs: We dunno what happened to him, we let him go due to lack of evidence. He was obviously killed by people that knew what he had done.."

[Marf]

AndrewW-G said:

Liokault said:

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

To shut them up and therefore avoid a very public and very very expensive court case

Bingo.

The government and the security services do not want this stuff being discussed even in closed sessions.

It's not about human rights, reparations or apologies, its hush money.

Edited by Marf on Tuesday 16th November 18:25

[Liokault]

Marf said:

AndrewW-G said:

Liokault said:

Or you could look at the bigger picture. We don't have to give them compo, so why are we?

To shut them up and therefore avoid a very public and very very expensive court case

Bingo.

The government and the security services do not want this stuff being discussed even in closed sessions.

It's not about human rights, reparations or apologies, its hush money.

Edited by Marf on Tuesday 16th November 18:25

Really? I thought it was because of this: "But the settlement also paves the way for the government to launch an inquiry headed by former judge Sir Peter Gibson into the claims made against the intelligence and security agencies" (from the linked site). As two cases can't be heard at the same time.



Fundamentally, we did it. I personally think it’s not wrong to kidnap, extradite and torture minority’s, as long as that minority is not the one i'm in.

[Jimbeaux]

CommanderJameson said:

HD Adam said:

jbi said:

So in order to become a millionaire I need to go abroad and scheme toward/kill my own countrymen, get caught and then claim "abuse" and get a payout.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11762636

Yes. It's their Ooman Rites innit?

HTH

Too fking right it is.

If they were guilty, they should have been found so in a court of law, like we do with other criminals.

Not this half-arsed "we think they're guilty, we really do, but we haven't got jack diddly-squat that'll stand up before a judge, so we'll just cage 'em up for a few years" bks.

Rule of law is sacrosanct. Giving this lot of undoubtedly unsavoury characters a massive wedge should hopefully point out that it's not good enough to just go "ooh, but doesn't he look like a terrorist?" any more.

They were rounded up in a battle, not arrested for shoplifting on a high street.

[JagLover]

CommanderJameson said:

Too fking right it is.

If they were guilty, they should have been found so in a court of law, like we do with other criminals.

Not this half-arsed "we think they're guilty, we really do, but we haven't got jack diddly-squat that'll stand up before a judge, so we'll just cage 'em up for a few years" bks.

Rule of law is sacrosanct. Giving this lot of undoubtedly unsavoury characters a massive wedge should hopefully point out that it's not good enough to just go "ooh, but doesn't he look like a terrorist?" any more.

What crime had your average captured German soldier committed that justified keeping them confined for the whole of WW2?

A number of these men were picked up on the battlefield as I understand it. Lock them up until the war with Islamic terror organisations is over. This doesn't mean they are criminals.

[Jimbeaux]

Shuvi Tupya said:

When you think about it, it is kind of amazing they didn't release them and then have an unknown entity shoot them dead once they are safely off the property

":shrugs: We dunno what happened to him, we let him go due to lack of evidence. He was obviously killed by people that knew what he had done.."

If we'd just played by their rules we would have shot their a$$ full of holes on the spot instead of feeding them, giving them prayer mats, a Koran, steady food, etc.

[Shuvi Tupya]

Jimbeaux said:

Shuvi Tupya said:

When you think about it, it is kind of amazing they didn't release them and then have an unknown entity shoot them dead once they are safely off the property

":shrugs: We dunno what happened to him, we let him go due to lack of evidence. He was obviously killed by people that knew what he had done.."

If we'd just played by their rules we would have shot their a$$ full of holes on the spot instead of feeding them, giving them prayer mats, a Koran, steady food, etc.

Shoot them full of holes?? Could be worse, could be beheaded by a butcher with a rusty old machete, if you really wanted them to feel at home!

[Jimbeaux]

JagLover said:

CommanderJameson said:

Too fking right it is.

If they were guilty, they should have been found so in a court of law, like we do with other criminals.

Not this half-arsed "we think they're guilty, we really do, but we haven't got jack diddly-squat that'll stand up before a judge, so we'll just cage 'em up for a few years" bks.

Rule of law is sacrosanct. Giving this lot of undoubtedly unsavoury characters a massive wedge should hopefully point out that it's not good enough to just go "ooh, but doesn't he look like a terrorist?" any more.

What crime had your average captured German soldier committed that justified keeping them confined for the whole of WW2?

A number of these men were picked up on the battlefield as I understand it. Lock them up until the war with Islamic terror organisations is over. This doesn't mean they are criminals.

Sense. War vs. civil crimes - difference.

[Jimbeaux]

Shuvi Tupya said:

Jimbeaux said:

Shuvi Tupya said:

When you think about it, it is kind of amazing they didn't release them and then have an unknown entity shoot them dead once they are safely off the property

":shrugs: We dunno what happened to him, we let him go due to lack of evidence. He was obviously killed by people that knew what he had done.."

If we'd just played by their rules we would have shot their a$$ full of holes on the spot instead of feeding them, giving them prayer mats, a Koran, steady food, etc.

Shoot them full of holes?? Could be worse, could be beheaded by a butcher with a rusty old machete, if you really wanted them to feel at home!

There is that, but class must be taken into account.

[odyssey2200]

Should have shot them on the battle field.
No agro, no expense.

[Jimbeaux]

odyssey2200 said:

Should have shot them on the battle field.
No agro, no expense.

In all seriousness, yes.

[ShadownINja]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these supposed to be innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. It may be very suspicious that they happened to be where they were but if they are not guilty (ie they're walking about freely in the UK) then surely they didn't deserve to be waterboarded or whatever extreme sport they enjoyed.

[samwilliams]

Jimbeaux said:

Sense. War vs. civil crimes - difference.

In that case, it was completely appropriate that they were treated the way they should have been as prisoners of war.

Oh...