ISIS Militant Who Suicide Bombed Iraqi Forces Was A Released Gitmo Detainee

[tkhayes 153]

He was also a born-and-raised Briton. The U.K. lobbied for his release after his torture.

If you want to convict and detain people without trial and persecute while pretending to uphold the rights that you claim to believe in, then in fact you are EXACTLY like your enemies. I thought we were better than that....no?

Besides that, he blew up Iraqi soldiers, and seriously....we are claiming that we give a fuck? I assure you we do not, given the number that have died that did not make the news this week

[ryoder 1,412]

JerryBaumchen

Hi Bill,

Quote

Because the right wing excels in sowing fear.

Last night FRONTLINE did a story on one former GITMO prisoner. He was very afraid of just about everything.

People supporting what this country did at GITMO should have watched it.

Jerry Baumchen

I just watched it: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/out-of-gitmo/

The scene where a bunch of armed men broke into his apartment while the PBS crew was remotely getting a live audio/video feed was like something out of a movie.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[sonnyblu 0]

SkyDekker

Quote

But as an aside, if you knew somebody was 100% guilty of murder, but got away with it for whatever reason - is it morally wrong to seek justice outside of the law?

Killing OJ would still get you sent to jail.

That's not what I asked, but whatever. Morality is rather subjective, so it doesn't really matter. I was just interested in hearing some opinions.

SkyDekker

And how exactly was he initially accused of committing a suicide bombing?

He wasn't.

[sonnyblu 0]

jakee

Quote

Tho I can't necessarily agree with how things may have been handled at Gitmo, This recent suicide bombing more accurately suggests that perhaps officials there were on to something. Maybe they knew something that we didn't, something they couldn't prove.

??

Officials at Guantanamo had nothing to do with the reasons the inmates were there.

Right, I meant to correct that.

[sonnyblu 0]

wolfriverjoe

***
There have been plenty of people falsely imprisoned for 5,10, 20+ years, some even on death row. When they are finally released, I'm sure they're are relieved and cherish time with their family. They may be angry at the system and even file lawsuits like normal people.

What they typically don't do is start committing the crimes of which they were initially accused. They don't start killing people and blowing themselves up...

While those sort of things do happen, and are a travesty of justice, at least those defendants had their "day in court."

They also had the right of appeal and humane treatment (well, mostly anyway).

Gitmo detainees have none of these.

I understand that.

The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

Isn't it more likely that this guy was just an extremist all along - that those involved with his capture and initial detention had him pegged right the first time?

His treatment thereafter is another issue.

[sonnyblu 0]

kallend

******Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

There have been plenty of people falsely imprisoned for 5,10, 20+ years, some even on death row. When they are finally released, I'm sure they're are relieved and cherish time with their family. They may be angry at the system and even file lawsuits like normal people.


How many were systematically tortured and beaten? Is waterboarding common in US prisons?

Ok, so being waterboarded and not having your day in court are the basis for becoming a suicide bomber?

[billvon 2,475]

>The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what
>caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

There's no way to prove its effect either way. But such detentions will surely make it more likely for the detainees to decide to take action later.

[sonnyblu 0]

billvon

>The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what
>caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

I think most people would take action if they were falsely imprisoned regardless of how they were treated. This guy received a share of a mulit-million doallar lawsuit. A normal person might move on and set up their family for life.

An unstable extremist however might still blow things up regardless of how he was treated. Besides, this wasn't even an attack against the U.S, right?

billvon

There's no way to prove its effect either way.

I agree

[quade 3]

sonnyblu

***>The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what
>caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

I think most people would take action if they were falsely imprisoned regardless of how they were treated. This guy received a share of a mulit-million doallar lawsuit. A normal person might move on and set up their family for life.

An unstable extremist however might still blow things up regardless of how he was treated. Besides, this wasn't even an attack against the U.S, right?

billvon

There's no way to prove its effect either way.

I agree

Okay, but what do you think the odds are? 1 in 10?

I think you can see where I'm going with this.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[airdvr 200]

Quote

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

He didn't take actions against us.

I know you want to believe this was some poor lost lamb. He wasn't. He was a bad guy who was mistreated. He won a suit and was given 1 million dollars for his troubles. Even after all that he decided to be a suicide bomber against Iraq, a country that had very little to do with his treatment.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[jakee 1,280]

sonnyblu

***>The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what
>caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

I think most people would take action if they were falsely imprisoned regardless of how they were treated. This guy received a share of a mulit-million doallar lawsuit. A normal person might move on and set up their family for life.

So you can see that being falsely locked up would make people want to do something - but the way they were treated during incarceration wouldn't have any impact on what they wanted to do or how strongly they wanted to do it?

Quote

An unstable extremist however might still blow things up regardless of how he was treated. Besides, this wasn't even an attack against the U.S, right?

And being locked up, tortured, beaten and generally mistreated with the goal of causing extreme psychological stress, for years, by a western government, while also in the company of real extremists who do preach about the evil of the west and the importance of taking action against it.... could feasibly cause someone to become an unstable extremist.

Don't you think?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Phil1111 943]

airdvr

Quote

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

He didn't take actions against us.

I know you want to believe this was some poor lost lamb. He wasn't. He was a bad guy who was mistreated. He won a suit and was given 1 million dollars for his troubles. Even after all that he decided to be a suicide bomber against Iraq, a country that had very little to do with his treatment.

So if he bombed Germany that would be ok? Suicide bomb attack in France would be OK?

He was released by the US government after two years of detention due to lack of evidence.

It's important to separate what is known from the unknown and to separate the feelings against Islam,IS from the end result. Because there was two years of wrongdoing on the part of the US at GITMO.

That is the use of illegal and criminal actions upon a non-citizen. Who was never determined by the US to be either a terrorist or a combatant. At the time of unlawful detention. He was among the first to be released.

[nigel99 151]

billvon

>The issue I take exception with is the idea that his treatment at Gitmo was what
>caused him to commit this attack 15 years later.

If you were held by a foreign government for no reason you could determine - without a trial - for years, would it make you more or less likely to take action against them?

There's no way to prove its effect either way. But such detentions will surely make it more likely for the detainees to decide to take action later.

Also consider that while mistreating an innocent person he is likely surrounded by some 'genuine' terrorists. It's pretty easy to see how he could have been driven to this end point.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[airdvr 200]

Quote

It's important to separate what is known from the unknown

Agreed. Now tell me how he ended up in Afghanistan to begin with.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Phil1111 943]

airdvr

Quote

It's important to separate what is known from the unknown

Agreed. Now tell me how he ended up in Afghanistan to begin with.

Given he used three different identities that are known. I'm guessing that IS that the forging of passports and travel in the EU- Syria figured out.

[quade 3]

Phil1111

***

Quote

It's important to separate what is known from the unknown

Agreed. Now tell me how he ended up in Afghanistan to begin with.

Given he used three different identities that are known. I'm guessing that IS that the forging of passports and travel in the EU- Syria figured out.

I'm not sure it's all that difficult for a person to travel TO a number of these countries. It's making first contact with locals and staying alive for the few few days until you do that I think is the difficulty. He would have more advantages than say, you or I, since he basically looks the part and speaks the language.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[airdvr 200]

Now the why...

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[quade 3]

airdvr

Now the why...

Why are you not open to the idea his mind became poisoned inside of Gitmo?

Haven't you ever heard about people going into a prison on false charges and walking out changed?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,679]

quade

***Now the why...

Why are you not open to the idea his mind became poisoned inside of Gitmo?

Haven't you ever heard about people going into a prison on false charges and walking out changed?

He's not open to the idea because he's not able to imagine himself in the place of others less fortunate. Typical conservative.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Phil1111 943]

airdvr

Now the why...

Too easy.

He absolutely needed to meet Allah ASAP. So Allah could put him straight about Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

"The Nature of the Day of Judgment

The resurrection that will take place on the Last Day is physical, and is explained by suggesting that Allah will re-create the decayed body (17:100: "Could they not see that God who created the heavens and the earth is able to create the like of them"?). On the Last Day, resurrected humans and jinn will be judged by Allah according to their deeds. One's eternal destination depends on balance of good to bad deeds in life. They are either granted admission to Paradise, where they will enjoy spiritual and physical pleasures forever, or condemned to Hell to suffer spiritual and physical torment for eternity.

The day of judgment is described as passing over Hell on a narrow bridge in order to enter Paradise. Those who fall, weighted by their bad deeds, will remain in Hell forever. The Quran specifies two exceptions to this general rule:

- Warriors who die fighting in the cause of God are ushered immediately to God's presence (Surah 2:159 and Surah 3:169); and - "Enemies of Islam" are sentenced immediately to Hell upon death. "
http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/afterlife

Since al-Baghdadi is a false prophet. His followers go to hell immediately.

Sort of reminds me about other religions and those who have false ideas about how to get to heaven. How to do the work of God...But I digress.

Glad to help.

[airdvr 200]

It's a simple question.

Quote

After some time back in Manchester, in 2002 Al-Harith travelled to Pakistan for a backpacking trip. While there, he paid a truck driver to take him to Iran. The truck was stopped when he passed near the Afghan border. Taliban guards, seeing his British passport, arrested him as a British spy, which was consistent with their usual treatment of foreigners.[1]

American troops discovered Al-Harith among numerous foreigners held by the Taliban in jail in Kandahar and released him. He was being aided by the Red Cross to make arrangements to return to Britain. They enabled him to call his family in Britain, whom he told he would be soon flying home. The Red Cross had arranged with the British embassy to fly him out from the American airbase to Kabul to meet the British representative.

Al-Harith was detained in Kabul by US forces who found his explanations regarding the purpose of his travels in the region to be implausible. He was arrested as a suspected enemy combatant and transported to Guantanamo Bay detention camp, where he was one of nine British citizens detained. He was interviewed by representatives of MI5 and the British Foreign Office, as well as by US officials, and provided interrogators with useful information about the Taliban's methods.[7] The United States notified the Australian government of Al-Harith's detention because he had recently been in the country. The ASIO carried out an investigation of his activities while in the Australia and concluded that he had not constituted a security risk.[1] After being held for two years, during which he claimed to have experienced "cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment",[1] he was released without charge.

If it walks like a duck...

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Phil1111 943]

airdvr

It's a simple question.

Quote

After some time back in Manchester, in 2002 Al-Harith travelled to Pakistan for a backpacking trip. While there, he paid a truck driver to take him to Iran. The truck was stopped when he passed near the Afghan border. Taliban guards, seeing his British passport, arrested him as a British spy, which was consistent with their usual treatment of foreigners.[1]

American troops discovered Al-Harith among numerous foreigners held by the Taliban in jail in Kandahar and released him. He was being aided by the Red Cross to make arrangements to return to Britain. They enabled him to call his family in Britain, whom he told he would be soon flying home. The Red Cross had arranged with the British embassy to fly him out from the American airbase to Kabul to meet the British representative.

Al-Harith was detained in Kabul by US forces who found his explanations regarding the purpose of his travels in the region to be implausible. He was arrested as a suspected enemy combatant and transported to Guantanamo Bay detention camp, where he was one of nine British citizens detained. He was interviewed by representatives of MI5 and the British Foreign Office, as well as by US officials, and provided interrogators with useful information about the Taliban's methods.[7] The United States notified the Australian government of Al-Harith's detention because he had recently been in the country. The ASIO carried out an investigation of his activities while in the Australia and concluded that he had not constituted a security risk.[1] After being held for two years, during which he claimed to have experienced "cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment",[1] he was released without charge.

If it walks like a duck...

So he was being held in a Taliban prison as a spy. Captured on his way to IRAN

Man Its Friday and I need to have a drink too!!!

[airdvr 200]

You can choose to believe what you want...

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 1,679]

airdvr

You can choose to believe what you want...

And the FACT is that he was never convicted of anything, and just imprisoned for being "implausible" by people who are recruited on the basis of having no imagination.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Phil1111 943]

kallend

***You can choose to believe what you want...

And the FACT is that he was never convicted of anything, and just imprisoned for being "implausible" by people who are recruited on the basis of having no imagination.

Its OK I will not make age an issue of this debate. I am not going to exploit, for discussion purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience.