How long after he has got his Guantanamo compensation before he's in Syria with the other bacon Dodgers . Just like what the last one did.
I think we waited too long to release him. Dropping him off half way over the Atlantic at 35,000 feet would be more than sufficiant.
After being locked up for 14 years without charge who could blame him for being a tad pissed off with us?
Because his missus is British, as are his 4 kids. And because he's not a terrorist. Have a read, do a little research rather than acting like a Daily Mail reader... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaker_Aamer
I'd be wanting compensating for the 14 years of my life lost on a whim too. Money can't get those years back but it's impossible to get them back so as usual that compensation will be monetary.
She dint sarnd British lad. Any idea what he was doin in Afghan area,could have been researching holiday programme eh
He was working for an Islamic charity, allegedly. Look, I only know as much as the next man, and there looks to be absolutely **** all evidence to suggest he's a terrorist, they charged him with **** all, yet incarcerated him for 14 years anyway. And what he has been through in that time is stuff I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. But aye, he's brown, his missus isn't a Smith, he once went to Afghanistan and so yep, terrorist basterd.
Too many ifs lad no smoke without fire but I ll agree with you the Sherman's should have handled it a lot better ie proved with evidence or released. It's all a bit iffy.
The ifs are all on the side of those locking him up. There are no ifs to being innocent, just ifs to him being guilty. If the government locked you up tomorrow for possibly beng a paedophile and never charged you would it be fair to say no smoke without fire? Would it be right to say that your defence is based on ifs? If you never abused a kid, if you're not a paedophile, if you did nothing wrong. I'd say a far more just respond would be to say you're innocent because IF you weren't then you would have been charged. IF you weren't then you'd be a monster, IF you weren't then you'd have been be something deplorable. I'd also say there's a lot of smoke without fire if someone throws a smoke bomb in your direction and blames it on you.
He doesn't have a British passport, as less than two minutes' research would have told you. There's a lot of wilful ignorance masquerading as common sense on this thread. But that kind of nonsense seems to have become standard on this board recently.
He's allegedly considering legal action against the British government for complicity in his treatment, not for being responsible for his incarceration. I agree that if he's innocent he deserves compensating so its now up to the US and to some extent the UK governments to prove the reasons he was locked up.
That's for the legal people to sort out now. Personally I find it very worrying that people can be held for so long with no charges being brought. If they are linked to terrorists then provide the evidence, charge them, prove it and then throw away the key.