Saudi prisoner at Guantanamo released by US after 14 years

[webfact]

Saudi prisoner at Guantanamo released by US after 14 years

MIAMI (AP) — A Saudi prisoner at the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who authorities said was a recruiter and fighter for al-Qaida has been sent back to his homeland, the Pentagon said Monday amid a wave of releases from the detention center.

Muhammed Abd Al-Rahman Al-Shamrani was among the first prisoners taken to the U.S. base in Cuba when it opened in January 2002 to hold suspected enemy combatants. He had long been deemed too dangerous to release even as most of the prisoners from Saudi Arabia were sent home.

A profile of al-Shamrani first released by the Pentagon in 2014 said he "almost certainly remains committed to supporting extremist causes, and has continued to incite other detainees against the detention staff at Guantanamo." His attorney, Martha Rayner, had said that the allegations against him were no more serious than prisoners who had already been released.

His case was reviewed again last year by a government board amid an effort by President Barack Obama to reduce the Guantanamo prison population and move the remainder to the U.S. The board concluded that the Saudi security measures and rehabilitation program for militants are adequate to minimize the risk of him taking part in extremist activities.

"Mr. al-Shamrani looks forward to participating in the Saudi reintegration program, reuniting with his family and establishing a peaceful and productive life in his home country," said Rayner, professor at Fordham University School of Law in New York.

Al-Shamrani is the fourth of 17 prisoners expected to be released this month from Guantanamo. The prison now holds 103 men, including more than 40 cleared for release.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-01-12

[neverdie]

Cleared for release should mean, walking out the door.

It's a strange world we are living in

[Linky]

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

[neverdie]

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

One day the truth will come out about what George Bush and his cronies did and some people will be shock.

They should be placed In Guantanamo bay and left to rot.

History won't be kind to these fools and people hundreds of years from now will wonder why people from

This era allowed it to happen.

[reggaebkk]

I guess there was no evidence against him and he was detained without any legal charges... at Gulagnamo... where East meets West.

[Jimbo2014]

I'm sure he will settle down quietly harboring western countries no ill will. ?..... NOT

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

let's see how long it is before he is identified as one of the top figures in ISIS or some other radical group.

[Linky]

let's see how long it is before he is identified as one of the top figures in ISIS or some other radical group.

Im sure if you were held in such conditions for 14 years and never charged with anything you would be just a smidgen peeved.

They cant prove he did anything wrong before but it would not surprise in the least he would now want some revenge. If so, congratulations on the govt for taking someone who has done nothing and turning him and his family into potential terrorists.

[mopar71]

"His attorney, Martha Rayner, had said that the allegations against him were no more serious than prisoners who had already been released."

Is that supposed to make people feel better? How many times have we heard of released Gitmo detainees re-joining the fight?

[Lopchan]

"almost certainly remains committed to supporting extremist causes," And here was me thinking that the US justice code says something like guilty if proven beyond reasonable doubt. Obviously the yanks get to decide just what is reasonable doubt when they detain people without charge..........

I'm almost certain that possibly maybe perhaps the US are guilty of deprivation of Liberty.....

the Liberty bell isn't just cracked, it's shattered in this and many other cases.

[LomSak27]

14 years in custody without charge - no evidence against him ... yadda yadda yadda

Did he get arrested for shoplifting, vagrancy, under age drinking? Was he scheduled for a court date? Sorry troll brigade .... "enemy combatant. He had long been deemed too dangerous to release even as most of the prisoners from Saudi Arabia were sent home"

A POW that no state wanted to claim. Well maybe he can find a job with ISIS in Syria, or head to Cologne or Paris to get EU citizenship.

[Linky]

14 years in custody without charge - no evidence against him ... yadda yadda yadda

Did he get arrested for shoplifting, vagrancy, under age drinking? Was he scheduled for a court date? Sorry troll brigade .... "enemy combatant. He had long been deemed too dangerous to release even as most of the prisoners from Saudi Arabia were sent home"

A POW that no state wanted to claim. Well maybe he can find a job with ISIS in Syria, or head to Cologne or Paris to get EU citizenship.

He wasnt arrested full stop, for anything.

[hyperHowie]

I personally know an attorney who went to GB many years ago when these releases were really moving along. Yes, he said there were some detainees who were framed by others in their country (owed a debt, maybe a bad landlord, a grudge, et). OTOH, he stated there were some incredibly evil ppl there who should never.see the light of day and will do anything to kill westerners (this was their goal prior to incarceration. These POWs were screened by both their countrymen and those who captured them (NATO soldiers.) Obviously in a combat environment it's more difficult, but you still try to do things like DNA (yep) & fingerprints. That's how some of these ppl were caught.

There was a similar problem an older relative said when he was part of early occupation forces during WWII Germany. How to release all prisoners, except those hard core Nazis who even the other German POWs were a little concerned about. There were cases of fanatical Nazis killing fellow POWs who just wanted to go home after the war and didn't want to hear their rabble rousing BS. The transition was easier as we were dealing with a modern westernized nation whose fighters wore uniforms, followed some order & discipline and with their deranged visionary dead & their forces defeated, they signed a treaty. These GITMO guys are not in that mold.

GITMO prisoners never wore uniforms, don't follow the Geneva Convention, still have a massive reason to kill infidels, and their motivator is Allah (Blessed be his Name.) There is no end of mission for them. You see what's happening w/ ISIS. Do we really want to add murderous combat veterans to rejoin them or help other terrorist groups? When we start seeing more innocent Europeans or Americans killed in potential large scale blasts, you'll know that we might've been too lenient on our releases. We're talking about the bottom-of-the-barrell 'pro' terrorists that are there now. How many of the 140 left are in that group, we do not know.

[IAMHERE]

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

Got to figure the Saudi was released in exchange for Colin Rutherford the Canadian 'tourist' held by the Taliban probably sort of without charge.

[Acharn]

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

One day the truth will come out about what George Bush and his cronies did and some people will be shock.

They should be placed In Guantanamo bay and left to rot.

History won't be kind to these fools and people hundreds of years from now will wonder why people from

This era allowed it to happen.

Oh, pfui. Is history unkind to Benjamin Harrison for his role in the planters' coup overthrowing the Kingdom of Hawaii? How about McKinley's role (and Theodore Roosevelt's) in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent insurrection in the Philippines and bloody, brutal dictatorships in Cuba? The United States is not doing anything different from what we've done since the time of Andrew Jackson.

[Acharn]

I personally know an attorney who went to GB many years ago when these releases were really moving along. Yes, he said there were some detainees who were framed by others in their country (owed a debt, maybe a bad landlord, a grudge, et). OTOH, he stated there were some incredibly evil ppl there who should never.see the light of day and will do anything to kill westerners (this was their goal prior to incarceration. These POWs were screened by both their countrymen and those who captured them (NATO soldiers.) Obviously in a combat environment it's more difficult, but you still try to do things like DNA (yep) & fingerprints. That's how some of these ppl were caught.

There was a similar problem an older relative said when he was part of early occupation forces during WWII Germany. How to release all prisoners, except those hard core Nazis who even the other German POWs were a little concerned about. There were cases of fanatical Nazis killing fellow POWs who just wanted to go home after the war and didn't want to hear their rabble rousing BS. The transition was easier as we were dealing with a modern westernized nation whose fighters wore uniforms, followed some order & discipline and with their deranged visionary dead & their forces defeated, they signed a treaty. These GITMO guys are not in that mold.

GITMO prisoners never wore uniforms, don't follow the Geneva Convention, still have a massive reason to kill infidels, and their motivator is Allah (Blessed be his Name.) There is no end of mission for them. You see what's happening w/ ISIS. Do we really want to add murderous combat veterans to rejoin them or help other terrorist groups? When we start seeing more innocent Europeans or Americans killed in potential large scale blasts, you'll know that we might've been too lenient on our releases. We're talking about the bottom-of-the-barrell 'pro' terrorists that are there now. How many of the 140 left are in that group, we do not know.

Your second-hand story is not persuasive. How did your attorney friend know about the evil of some of the prisoners? Stories the guards told him, right? You know, one of the reasons most of the prisoners had to be released was that there were no files showing why they were being detained. So they had to make files, mostly based on interrogations of other prisoners and sometimes based on torture -- oops, I mean "enhanced interrogation." Hey, would you like an extra ration of food? Just confirm you saw Prisoner Y at a training camp. I know you've been standing in one place for ten hours, but if you'll just verify that you heard Prisoner A say Prisoner B was in his Taliban unit you can sit down, we'll even give you a cup of coffee. I don't think a "combat veteran" who's been confined to a cell for twelve or thirteen years really represents much of a threat. There are good reasons why 650 of 775 detainees have been "relocated" without trial. There are more good reasons why they only have evidence of wrongdoing to try about a dozen of the remainder, even in the ridiculous kangaroo courts called Military Commissions. Even under those circumstances they can't get convictions, and when they do manage to squeak through a conviction, the tough, hard-eyed military officers on the Commissions give lighter sentences than the civilian courts do. The only guy there I think probably was dangerous is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Have you heard anything in the last two years about how *his* trial is progressing? I have to admit that I think by now there probably are quite a few there who hate America and Americans and will do everything they can to harm us if they are released. If you had been held in jail for no reason for 13 or 14 years you would probably feel the same way about your captors.

[hyperHowie]

I personally know an attorney who went to GB many years ago when these releases were really moving along. Yes, he said there were some detainees who were framed by others in their country (owed a debt, maybe a bad landlord, a grudge, et). OTOH, he stated there were some incredibly evil ppl there who should never.see the light of day and will do anything to kill westerners (this was their goal prior to incarceration. These POWs were screened by both their countrymen and those who captured them (NATO soldiers.) Obviously in a combat environment it's more difficult, but you still try to do things like DNA (yep) & fingerprints. That's how some of these ppl were caught.

There was a similar problem an older relative said when he was part of early occupation forces during WWII Germany. How to release all prisoners, except those hard core Nazis who even the other German POWs were a little concerned about. There were cases of fanatical Nazis killing fellow POWs who just wanted to go home after the war and didn't want to hear their rabble rousing BS. The transition was easier as we were dealing with a modern westernized nation whose fighters wore uniforms, followed some order & discipline and with their deranged visionary dead & their forces defeated, they signed a treaty. These GITMO guys are not in that mold.

GITMO prisoners never wore uniforms, don't follow the Geneva Convention, still have a massive reason to kill infidels, and their motivator is Allah (Blessed be his Name.) There is no end of mission for them. You see what's happening w/ ISIS. Do we really want to add murderous combat veterans to rejoin them or help other terrorist groups? When we start seeing more innocent Europeans or Americans killed in potential large scale blasts, you'll know that we might've been too lenient on our releases. We're talking about the bottom-of-the-barrell 'pro' terrorists that are there now. How many of the 140 left are in that group, we do not know.

Your second-hand story is not persuasive. How did your attorney friend know about the evil of some of the prisoners? Stories the guards told him, right? You know, one of the reasons most of the prisoners had to be released was that there were no files showing why they were being detained. So they had to make files, mostly based on interrogations of other prisoners and sometimes based on torture -- oops, I mean "enhanced interrogation." Hey, would you like an extra ration of food? Just confirm you saw Prisoner Y at a training camp. I know you've been standing in one place for ten hours, but if you'll just verify that you heard Prisoner A say Prisoner B was in his Taliban unit you can sit down, we'll even give you a cup of coffee. I don't think a "combat veteran" who's been confined to a cell for twelve or thirteen years really represents much of a threat. There are good reasons why 650 of 775 detainees have been "relocated" without trial. There are more good reasons why they only have evidence of wrongdoing to try about a dozen of the remainder, even in the ridiculous kangaroo courts called Military Commissions. Even under those circumstances they can't get convictions, and when they do manage to squeak through a conviction, the tough, hard-eyed military officers on the Commissions give lighter sentences than the civilian courts do. The only guy there I think probably was dangerous is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Have you heard anything in the last two years about how *his* trial is progressing? I have to admit that I think by now there probably are quite a few there who hate America and Americans and will do everything they can to harm us if they are released. If you had been held in jail for no reason for 13 or 14 years you would probably feel the same way about your captors.

What many fail to recognize is that the people held at Guantanamo, while maybe not war criminals, are all combatants caught during an international armed conflict. Under Geneva Conventions we can hold until the cessation of hostilities to prevent them from returning to the battlefield as many relocated detainees have. There was no plan to try many and we didn't

[neverdie]

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

One day the truth will come out about what George Bush and his cronies did and some people will be shock.

They should be placed In Guantanamo bay and left to rot.

History won't be kind to these fools and people hundreds of years from now will wonder why people from

This era allowed it to happen.

Oh, pfui. Is history unkind to Benjamin Harrison for his role in the planters' coup overthrowing the Kingdom of Hawaii? How about McKinley's role (and Theodore Roosevelt's) in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent insurrection in the Philippines and bloody, brutal dictatorships in Cuba? The United States is not doing anything different from what we've done since the time of Andrew Jackson.

So what. Just because bad things happened previously doesn't make their wrongdoings anything less than what they are.

Liars, theives and murderers are liars theives and murderers, simple really.

[hyperHowie]

[quote name="neverdie" post="10298635" timestamp="1452571145"

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

One day the truth will come out about what George Bush and his cronies did and some people will be shock.

They should be placed In Guantanamo bay and left to rot.

History won't be kind to these fools and people hundreds of years from now will wonder why people from
This era allowed it to happen.

Oh, pfui. Is history unkind to Benjamin Harrison for his role in the planters' coup overthrowing the Kingdom of Hawaii? How about McKinley's role (and Theodore Roosevelt's) in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent insurrection in the Philippines and bloody, brutal dictatorships in Cuba? The United States is not doing anything different from what we've done since the time of Andrew Jackson.

So what. Just because bad things happened previously doesn't make their wrongdoings anything less than what they are.

Liars, theives and murderers are liars theives and murderers, simple really.

Don't see how this relates to the US policy towards armed enemy combatants...;-) It's covered by the Geneva Convention, which these foreign fighters don't observe. Its kept them out of the combat mix and that's made it safer for NATO troops and many of us, even those who don't appreciate it even when we're all better off for it.

[Linky]

No its the geneva convention that the US govt decided does not apply to these uncharged prisoners.

[Ulysses G.]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

[Linky]

I personally know an attorney who went to GB many years ago when these releases were really moving along. Yes, he said there were some detainees who were framed by others in their country (owed a debt, maybe a bad landlord, a grudge, et). OTOH, he stated there were some incredibly evil ppl there who should never.see the light of day and will do anything to kill westerners (this was their goal prior to incarceration. These POWs were screened by both their countrymen and those who captured them (NATO soldiers.) Obviously in a combat environment it's more difficult, but you still try to do things like DNA (yep) & fingerprints. That's how some of these ppl were caught.

There was a similar problem an older relative said when he was part of early occupation forces during WWII Germany. How to release all prisoners, except those hard core Nazis who even the other German POWs were a little concerned about. There were cases of fanatical Nazis killing fellow POWs who just wanted to go home after the war and didn't want to hear their rabble rousing BS. The transition was easier as we were dealing with a modern westernized nation whose fighters wore uniforms, followed some order & discipline and with their deranged visionary dead & their forces defeated, they signed a treaty. These GITMO guys are not in that mold.

GITMO prisoners never wore uniforms, don't follow the Geneva Convention, still have a massive reason to kill infidels, and their motivator is Allah (Blessed be his Name.) There is no end of mission for them. You see what's happening w/ ISIS. Do we really want to add murderous combat veterans to rejoin them or help other terrorist groups? When we start seeing more innocent Europeans or Americans killed in potential large scale blasts, you'll know that we might've been too lenient on our releases. We're talking about the bottom-of-the-barrell 'pro' terrorists that are there now. How many of the 140 left are in that group, we do not know.

Your second-hand story is not persuasive. How did your attorney friend know about the evil of some of the prisoners? Stories the guards told him, right? You know, one of the reasons most of the prisoners had to be released was that there were no files showing why they were being detained. So they had to make files, mostly based on interrogations of other prisoners and sometimes based on torture -- oops, I mean "enhanced interrogation." Hey, would you like an extra ration of food? Just confirm you saw Prisoner Y at a training camp. I know you've been standing in one place for ten hours, but if you'll just verify that you heard Prisoner A say Prisoner B was in his Taliban unit you can sit down, we'll even give you a cup of coffee. I don't think a "combat veteran" who's been confined to a cell for twelve or thirteen years really represents much of a threat. There are good reasons why 650 of 775 detainees have been "relocated" without trial. There are more good reasons why they only have evidence of wrongdoing to try about a dozen of the remainder, even in the ridiculous kangaroo courts called Military Commissions. Even under those circumstances they can't get convictions, and when they do manage to squeak through a conviction, the tough, hard-eyed military officers on the Commissions give lighter sentences than the civilian courts do. The only guy there I think probably was dangerous is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Have you heard anything in the last two years about how *his* trial is progressing? I have to admit that I think by now there probably are quite a few there who hate America and Americans and will do everything they can to harm us if they are released. If you had been held in jail for no reason for 13 or 14 years you would probably feel the same way about your captors.

What many fail to recognize is that the people held at Guantanamo, while maybe not war criminals, are all combatants caught during an international armed conflict. Under Geneva Conventions we can hold until the cessation of hostilities to prevent them from returning to the battlefield as many relocated detainees have. There was no plan to try many and we didn't

No they were not all caught in a battlefield. One was at university, some were in Gambia, others Bosnia, Pakistan.

Google the list of detainees.

Former chief of staff to colin powell has stated that of the 800 or so detained only about 2 dozen could be guilty. The others are innocent but still held because it was thought they may know something.

[lostboy]

[quote name="neverdie" post="10298635" timestamp="1452571145"

14 years in custody without charge. The US should be ashamed. Any complaints from the US about human rights abuses of other countries ring hollow and hypocritical.

One day the truth will come out about what George Bush and his cronies did and some people will be shock.

They should be placed In Guantanamo bay and left to rot.

History won't be kind to these fools and people hundreds of years from now will wonder why people from

This era allowed it to happen.

Oh, pfui. Is history unkind to Benjamin Harrison for his role in the planters' coup overthrowing the Kingdom of Hawaii? How about McKinley's role (and Theodore Roosevelt's) in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent insurrection in the Philippines and bloody, brutal dictatorships in Cuba? The United States is not doing anything different from what we've done since the time of Andrew Jackson.

So what. Just because bad things happened previously doesn't make their wrongdoings anything less than what they are.

Liars, theives and murderers are liars theives and murderers, simple really.

Don't see how this relates to the US policy towards armed enemy combatants...;-) It's covered by the Geneva Convention, which these foreign fighters don't observe. Its kept them out of the combat mix and that's made it safer for NATO troops and many of us, even those who don't appreciate it even when we're all better off for it.

You keep referencing the Geneva Convention, erroneously. The Geneva Convention caters for 2 categories; POW who are combatants in recognised uniforms; and, civilians, who should be tried under the domestic laws of the country that holds them. The US has not respected the spirit, intent or the provisions of the Geneva Convention. The US should have tried all civilians captured according to US domestic laws. By not doing so, the US has contributed significantly to the destabilisation of the region and the radicalisation of legions of future combatants.

Guantanamo Bay is a war crime.

[lostboy]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

[Ulysses G.]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

They are unlawful combatants and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

[Linky]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

They are unlawful combatants and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

Not all of them where combatants at all.

[lostboy]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

They are unlawful combatants and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

Unlawful combatant is not a term recognised under international law. It is a designation unilaterally determined by the US. It has no standing. No other country has signed any protocol recognising it. Many countries, however, has ratified the protocols under the Geneva Convention.

this US unilateralism is a war crime.

[mopar71]

I think all Gitmo prisoners should be released and put on the first Malaysian Air flight our of Cuba they can find.

[hyperHowie]

They were not fighting in uniform. They were terrorists and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

They are unlawful combatants and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

Unlawful combatant is not a term recognised under international law. It is a designation unilaterally determined by the US. It has no standing. No other country has signed any protocol recognising it. Many countries, however, has ratified the protocols under the Geneva Convention.

this US unilateralism is a war crime.

NOT fighting in uniform among other matters,denied them POW status, but they were treated with Geneva protections. It is clear their status as enemy combatants allowed them to be retained. There is no credible entity that had maintained otherwise to include Obama.

[lostboy]

The Geneva Convention classifies them as Civilians subject to the domestic laws of the country holding them.

They are unlawful combatants and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

Unlawful combatant is not a term recognised under international law. It is a designation unilaterally determined by the US. It has no standing. No other country has signed any protocol recognising it. Many countries, however, has ratified the protocols under the Geneva Convention.

this US unilateralism is a war crime.

NOT fighting in uniform among other matters,denied them POW status, but they were treated with Geneva protections. It is clear their status as enemy combatants allowed them to be retained. There is no credible entity that had maintained otherwise to include Obama.

I am not arguing the issue of detention. I am pointing out that under the classifications allowed by the current protocols to the Geneva Convention, signed by multiple countries, not wearing a uniform classifies a combatant as a civilian. Such civilian is to be tried under the domestic laws of the country that has the person under detention. Guantanamo Bay was a legal fiction based on a unilateral classification that no other country has signed into international law. Until the Geneva Convention is changed, its classifications remain international law. The US has violated that law by not applying the US domestic criminal justice system to detainees. They are guilty of war crimes.