British man Amer Shaker released from Guantanamo Bay

[kingalfred]

Lets remember a fact, that the security services in UK have prevented more 7/7/05 happening . All of them by so called "British citizens" who happen to be 2nd generation and show no inclination to Britishness or any other attribute associated with tolerance and justice.

Edited October 31, 2015 by kingalfred

[Seastallion]

It's not the US justice system. He never set foot on US soil and therefore never gained any US rights. He was a prisoner of war under military jurisdiction and law on foreign soil.

If he had been brought to the US, which rarely if ever happens to prisoners of war, he would have gained rights of people in the US.

The rules for trying or convicting or detaining someone caught on a battlefield on foreign soil are completely different from US criminal law.

In the article there is a long laundry list of things he was accused of doing and belonging to and the US military isn't in the habit of turning that type of person loose when captured as a prisoner of war.

Cheers.

Sorry you are right let me rephrase : 13 years without charge is the current low for the US judicial system and military justice. He was on a US military base. He should have received due process. He was accused and not proven guilty. Sadly being accused seems to be the new guilty. Oh well, so much for the US constitution. It was a nice idea.

You're still mistaken and your terminology is incorrect. Please leave the term "US Judicial System" out of the equation. He wasn't in the US and he wasn't subject to the US Judicial System. Prisoners of war aren't entitled to US due process. "Oh so much for the Constitution" is wrong. He had no Constitutional rights because he isn't American and he wasn't in America.

He was a prisoner of war under military laws and jurisdiction pertaining to prisoners of war. He had no rights or access to the American Judicial System.

You're spinning your wheels on this.

Cheers.

You're falling behind legal technicalities (that may prove to be flawed anyway) and ignoring the concept of justice.

What is legal may not be just, and in the gitmo cases, that is the case every time.

[jacky54]

should never have been held without trial, should have been executed without trial, this is a war not a game.

[yellowboat]

should never have been held without trial, should have been executed without trial, this is a war not a game.

It is not a game, but even in war there are rules and honor. What you describe is dishonorable and is exactly what ISIS is doing.

[Seastallion]

should never have been held without trial, should have been executed without trial, this is a war not a game.

On what grounds?

[chuckd]

It's not the US justice system. He never set foot on US soil and therefore never gained any US rights. He was a prisoner of war under military jurisdiction and law on foreign soil.

If he had been brought to the US, which rarely if ever happens to prisoners of war, he would have gained rights of people in the US.

The rules for trying or convicting or detaining someone caught on a battlefield on foreign soil are completely different from US criminal law.

In the article there is a long laundry list of things he was accused of doing and belonging to and the US military isn't in the habit of turning that type of person loose when captured as a prisoner of war.

Cheers.

Sorry you are right let me rephrase : 13 years without charge is the current low for the US judicial system and military justice. He was on a US military base. He should have received due process. He was accused and not proven guilty. Sadly being accused seems to be the new guilty. Oh well, so much for the US constitution. It was a nice idea.

You're still mistaken and your terminology is incorrect. Please leave the term "US Judicial System" out of the equation. He wasn't in the US and he wasn't subject to the US Judicial System. Prisoners of war aren't entitled to US due process. "Oh so much for the Constitution" is wrong. He had no Constitutional rights because he isn't American and he wasn't in America.

He was a prisoner of war under military laws and jurisdiction pertaining to prisoners of war. He had no rights or access to the American Judicial System.

You're spinning your wheels on this.

Cheers.

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

[yellowboat]

Sorry you are right let me rephrase : 13 years without charge is the current low for the US judicial system and military justice. He was on a US military base. He should have received due process. He was accused and not proven guilty. Sadly being accused seems to be the new guilty. Oh well, so much for the US constitution. It was a nice idea.

You're still mistaken and your terminology is incorrect. Please leave the term "US Judicial System" out of the equation. He wasn't in the US and he wasn't subject to the US Judicial System. Prisoners of war aren't entitled to US due process. "Oh so much for the Constitution" is wrong. He had no Constitutional rights because he isn't American and he wasn't in America.

He was a prisoner of war under military laws and jurisdiction pertaining to prisoners of war. He had no rights or access to the American Judicial System.

You're spinning your wheels on this.

Cheers.

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

You are right. The US military failed at providing justice. A failure that will sadly haunt them.

[Seastallion]

Sorry you are right let me rephrase : 13 years without charge is the current low for the US judicial system and military justice. He was on a US military base. He should have received due process. He was accused and not proven guilty. Sadly being accused seems to be the new guilty. Oh well, so much for the US constitution. It was a nice idea.

You're still mistaken and your terminology is incorrect. Please leave the term "US Judicial System" out of the equation. He wasn't in the US and he wasn't subject to the US Judicial System. Prisoners of war aren't entitled to US due process. "Oh so much for the Constitution" is wrong. He had no Constitutional rights because he isn't American and he wasn't in America.

He was a prisoner of war under military laws and jurisdiction pertaining to prisoners of war. He had no rights or access to the American Judicial System.

You're spinning your wheels on this.

Cheers.

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

The key word is "justice".

Whatever bits of paper have strokes of ink written on them that "legitimise" grossly immoral acts, do not convey justice.

Argue that, not the smears of ink on paper.

[chuckd]

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

You are right. The US military failed at providing justice. A failure that will sadly haunt them.

The US Military wasn't required to provide justice. They were charged with providing penal facilities for enemy combatants.

They have done so and are continuing to do so in an exemplary manner.

[katana]

Wonder if Amer Shaker will follow in the footsteps of Muslim convert Jamal al-Harith who was released from Guantanamo Bay back to the UK in 2004 and paid £1 million in compensation by the UK Government from taxpayers' money.
At the time of al-Harith's release from Guantanamo Bay, then-UK Home Secretary David Blunkett, said: "No one who is returned...will actually be a threat to the security of the British people."
However it was revealed a few weeks ago that he was able to slip out of the UK 18 months ago to go fight with IS in Syria.
Questions were of course raised as to how al-Harith was able to leave the UK to join IS and on the effectiveness of the Government’s ability to monitor terror suspects.

http://www.channel4.com/news/jamal-al-harith-guantanamo-detainee-flees-to-syria
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267074/UK-gave-freed-Guantanamo-inmate-1million-compensation-s-fled-Syria-joined-ISIS.html

[FritsSikkink]

If some of you anti-US, pro terrorist supporters would like to offer your assistance by providing a home and comfort for any prisoners of Guantanamo, please PM me with your name and home address and I will provide it to the US authorities.

I have heard they are looking for sponsors to help house the underprivileged terrorists.

Any volunteers?

where is your prove they are terrorist?

Try learn to think yourself and don't believe all the BS your government is telling you

[simple1]

Sorry you are right let me rephrase : 13 years without charge is the current low for the US judicial system and military justice. He was on a US military base. He should have received due process. He was accused and not proven guilty. Sadly being accused seems to be the new guilty. Oh well, so much for the US constitution. It was a nice idea.

You're still mistaken and your terminology is incorrect. Please leave the term "US Judicial System" out of the equation. He wasn't in the US and he wasn't subject to the US Judicial System. Prisoners of war aren't entitled to US due process. "Oh so much for the Constitution" is wrong. He had no Constitutional rights because he isn't American and he wasn't in America.

He was a prisoner of war under military laws and jurisdiction pertaining to prisoners of war. He had no rights or access to the American Judicial System.

You're spinning your wheels on this.

Cheers.

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

Post removed to enable reply.

To be frank I find it difficult to support the proposition that Gitmo detainees were only subject to UCMJ. The Supreme Court was deeply involved with ruling on legal procedure for detainees. The US Supreme Court disagreed with the opinion UCMJ was not bound to international conventions of law for detainees at Gitmo. The Supreme Court battled for a number of years on legal processes applicable for detainees & as I recall some decisions relating to the detainees were ruled as unlawful and Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions for the protocol for treatment of the detainees was enforced by the Supreme Court; is this incorrect?

[RidgeRunner]

This guy was just doing charity work when he was roommates with Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker ...... who pled guilty on six felony charges: conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries, conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy, conspiracy to destroy aircraft, conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction, conspiracy to murder United States employees, and conspiracy to destroy property.

Edited October 31, 2015 by RidgeRunner

[freebyrd]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

[RuamRudy]

Wonder if Amer Shaker will follow in the footsteps of Muslim convert Jamal al-Harith who was released from Guantanamo Bay back to the UK in 2004 and paid £1 million in compensation by the UK Government from taxpayers' money.

At the time of al-Harith's release from Guantanamo Bay, then-UK Home Secretary David Blunkett, said: "No one who is returned...will actually be a threat to the security of the British people."

However it was revealed a few weeks ago that he was able to slip out of the UK 18 months ago to go fight with IS in Syria.

Questions were of course raised as to how al-Harith was able to leave the UK to join IS and on the effectiveness of the Government’s ability to monitor terror suspects.

http://www.channel4.com/news/jamal-al-harith-guantanamo-detainee-flees-to-syria

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267074/UK-gave-freed-Guantanamo-inmate-1million-compensation-s-fled-Syria-joined-ISIS.html

So are you suggesting that Shaker should be held accountable for the actions of al-Harith or the failure of the UK security forces? Otherwise, why bring it into the discussion?

[yellowboat]

You and others who choose to look the other way are also spinning their wheels. He was in US custody. He was cleared of all charges 10 years ago. The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. You are standing by a framework which is flawed in its unfairness.. These men should have gotten trails or let go.

"The US judicial system failed to convey justice. The US military is part of that system. "

Wrong, yet again. The US Military has their very own justice system. It is called the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and it is separate and apart from the various Municipal, County, State and Federal justice systems in the US.

This guy and his comrades never fell under any of them, and you can add the Geneva Convention to those systems these guys never fell under..

Your hole is deep enough. You need to put the shovel down and stop digging.

You are right. The US military failed at providing justice. A failure that will sadly haunt them.

The US Military wasn't required to provide justice. They were charged with providing penal facilities for enemy combatants.

They have done so and are continuing to do so in an exemplary manner.

There is doubt the average sailor or soldier conducts themselves in an exemplary manner. Sadly they are let down by their "superiors". Guantanamo Bay detention camp, Abu Ghraib and water boarding are nothing to be proud of. And then your statement "US Military wasn't required to provide justice". Then who was to provide justice ? There was a complete lack justice, and how can a great military allow that to happen ?

[RidgeRunner]

As much as I enjoy seeing Muslim extremists suffer, the entire GW Bush Iraq/Afghanistan episode has lowered the value of the USA "stock."

They may not like the USA but it was nice when we could be counted on to be fair.

Unfortunately the USA fell right into BinLadens trap.

The US Military operation in the Middle East is the extremists biggest recruitment tool.

[FritsSikkink]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

There have been many: Tony Blair

[nontabury]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

There have been many: Tony Blair

True,though to be exact, he's Scottish.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.

[7by7]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

There have been many: Tony Blair

Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness

Adams has always denied that he was ever a member of the Provisional IRA. Yet many have claimed otherwise; including ex members of that organisation; even saying he has been directly involved in murders carried out by the Provos.. Oddly, despite calling such allegations 'libellous,' Adams has never sued anyone over such allegations.

McGuinness has never denied his membership.

He was convicted of IRA membership by the Republic of Ireland's Special Criminal Court in 1973 after being caught with a car containing 250lb (113kg) of explosives and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition.

He revealed to the court his membership of the Provisional IRA, declaring: "I am a member of Oglaigh na hEireann and very, very proud of it."

Despite being held for 13 years by the Americans, Amer Shaker has never been charged with any offence.

Edited November 2, 2015 by 7by7

[freebyrd]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

There have been many: Tony Blair

Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness

Adams has always denied that he was ever a member of the Provisional IRA. Yet many have claimed otherwise; including ex members of that organisation; even saying he has been directly involved in murders carried out by the Provos.. Oddly, despite calling such allegations 'libellous,' Adams has never sued anyone over such allegations.

McGuinness has never denied his membership.

He was convicted of IRA membership by the Republic of Ireland's Special Criminal Court in 1973 after being caught with a car containing 250lb (113kg) of explosives and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition.

He revealed to the court his membership of the Provisional IRA, declaring: "I am a member of Oglaigh na hEireann and very, very proud of it."

Despite being held for 13 years by the Americans, Amer Shaker has never been charged with any offence.

I would question what he was doing in the location he was picked up in? How many innocent everyday Brits travel to dodgy foreign climes and wander into areas frequented by the Taliban? As a former soldier it wouldn't be on my sightseeing list.....

[RuamRudy]

Will there ever be a day when an article about a British terrorist will be a John Smith, Fred Bloggs, Tom Green......?

There have been many: Tony Blair

Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness

Adams has always denied that he was ever a member of the Provisional IRA. Yet many have claimed otherwise; including ex members of that organisation; even saying he has been directly involved in murders carried out by the Provos.. Oddly, despite calling such allegations 'libellous,' Adams has never sued anyone over such allegations.

McGuinness has never denied his membership.

He was convicted of IRA membership by the Republic of Ireland's Special Criminal Court in 1973 after being caught with a car containing 250lb (113kg) of explosives and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition.

He revealed to the court his membership of the Provisional IRA, declaring: "I am a member of Oglaigh na hEireann and very, very proud of it."

Despite being held for 13 years by the Americans, Amer Shaker has never been charged with any offence.

I would question what he was doing in the location he was picked up in? How many innocent everyday Brits travel to dodgy foreign climes and wander into areas frequented by the Taliban? As a former soldier it wouldn't be on my sightseeing list.....

His story is that he was working for an Islamic charity in 2001 when he was captured by the Northern Alliance in Jalalabad and sold to the Americans. No credible evidence has been made available that discounts his story.

[Mosha]

And Britiish civilian courts jail a marine for shooting dead a taliban fighter, Someone is taking the piss.

[KunMatt]

So what's the sweeps on how long before this guy is in the news doing something relating to ISIS?

I'm looking forward to it just to be able to throw it in the faces of all the lefties who are inadvertently helping terrorists.

[RuamRudy]

And Britiish civilian courts jail a marine for shooting dead a taliban fighter, Someone is taking the piss.

The difference being that there is clear evidence that one committed murder and a war crime, whereas there is no evidence whatsoever that the other was acting illegally.

[7by7]

Indeed.

Blackman's defence is that he thought the man was already dead.

In which case, one has to wonder why he walked up to him and shot him, saying as he did so "Shuffle off this mortal coil" Not the actions of a professional soldier!

As has been repeatedly said, there is zero reliable evidence that Amer Shaker ever committed any crime; even the American government concede that. He has never been charged with any criminal offence, let along tried and convicted.

But it seems that for some people the mere fact that he is Muslim means he must be guilty.

Which speaks volumes about them.

[KunMatt]

Indeed.

Blackman's defence is that he thought the man was already dead.

In which case, one has to wonder why he walked up to him and shot him, saying as he did so "Shuffle off this mortal coil" Not the actions of a professional soldier!

As has been repeatedly said, there is zero reliable evidence that Amer Shaker ever committed any crime; even the American government concede that. He has never been charged with any criminal offence, let along tried and convicted.

But it seems that for some people the mere fact that he is Muslim means he must be guilty.

Which speaks volumes about them.

Ok, let's give it a couple of years and see what this guy and/or his immediate family get involved in.

You will know the answer to this 7by7 given your vast knowledge and help in the visa sections. How has this Saudi citizen got British privileges? Is he married toa Brit or something? Why wasn't he deported back to Saudi?

Edited November 2, 2015 by KunMatt

[7by7]

Ok, let's give it a couple of years and see what this guy and/or his immediate family get involved in.

Charity work, perhaps? He does have a history of that!

Or are you assuming that because he is a Muslim that he must also be a terrorist and after lying low for a few years will reengage in terrorist activities?

You will know the answer to this 7by7 given your vast knowledge and help in the visa sections. How has this Saudi citizen got British privileges? Is he married toa Brit or something? Why wasn't he deported back to Saudi?

Media reports say he is a Saudi Citizen and his wife is British and, therefore, so are his children. I understand from such reports that he had Indefinite Leave to Remain in the UK based on his marriage.

Even so, in normal circumstances if an ILR holder spends a continuous period of two or more years outside the UK then their ILR will lapse and if they wish to resume residency in the UK they have to apply for the appropriate visa.

Normal circumstances; Shaker's are far from normal as he didn't choose to remain outside the UK; he was prevented from returning the UK because he was falsely and illegally imprisoned without trial by the US government.

Whilst this case is extraordinary, there is provision in the immigration rules for those ILR holders who do spend longer than two years out of the UK to simply return and resume residence; the most common, but not only, reason being that they have accompanied their British spouse whilst said spouse has been posted abroad by their employer. I suspect that Shaker was able to resume his UK residency under these provisions.

He was not deported to the UK!.

He was released and allowed to return home to the country where he lived before his capture and where his family still live so he could be reunited with them after 13 long years of false imprisonment.

If the Saudi government believe he has criminal charges to answer in Saudi Arabia then they can always apply for his extradition from the UK. They could have made such an application to the Americans while they held him; but didn't. Q.E.D.

[KunMatt]

Ok, let's give it a couple of years and see what this guy and/or his immediate family get involved in.

Or are you assuming that because he is a Muslim that he must also be a terrorist and after lying low for a few years will reengage in terrorist activities?

Yes.