How Could This Be Our Fault Anyway?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35089908
Ok ok thanks for not suing us but surely Gitmo is an American operation! So on what basis is the UK culpable anyway?

[TheChair]

If you read more than the headline, you 'd know why.

[ToraToraTora]

I read it, you mean this:
"He has alleged that a British official was present at one of his beatings. "

so what? means nothing, are you saying that the country of any witnesses to anything like this should be sued? You must be a lawyer!

[youngmafbog]

Even more interesting were his comments on the extremists, telling them to go to a country that would better suit them!

I guess as he says a Brit was present at one of his interrogations some may think compo is in order. Very difficult to prove that though I would have thought in the murky world of intelligence.

[ichkeria]

I honestly don't know if Shaker Aamer is or was a dangerous militant or a cynical liar, but I was amused to hear him being billed as being able to reveal what UK intelligence officers really knew about his captivity.
That makes him a truly insightful person ...

[youngmafbog]

And there you go TTT!

[Svejk]

No doubt wanted to sue us but even his anti-British lawyers told him, 'No king chance'. ;-)

[ToraToraTora]

surely, the WWW should have been able to dig up something on yewman writes svejk!

[jim360]

There are several reasons that could easily have prompted Shaker Aamer to consider a compensation claim from the UK government:

- He isn't a British citizen but a British resident -- in itself, this led to the (Labour) government taking a while to even get around to thinking to ask for his release, which sucks.

- For the last six years he has been the only British resident in Guantanamo Bay. All the rest were released in 2009 or earlier. That's a shocking six-year delay and also sucks.

- Then there's this allegation, courtesy of the Independent, that the UK government has spent a lot of money and effort on withholding evidence that could have been used to prove his innocence: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/letters-raise-fears-for-last-briton-in-guantanamo-6804791.html . If true, that's also pretty damning. People should have the right to defend themselves in law.

- It's alleged that he was tortured, and that British agents were present during some such sessions. Even if not actively involved in torturing Aamer themselves, if anyone in the UK Government knew what was going on and didn't make efforts to stop what is an illegal and immoral practice, then he would well have a right to claim compensation on the grounds of complicity.

- Since 2007 the US Government has admitted that it has no evidence against Shaker Aamer, and he was also cleared for release. Despite that he has spent eight further years incarcerated, without any charges brought against him. Without even a case against him. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/20/british-resident-guantanamo . The allegation made in that article is that the UK Government (or people on its behalf) were making only token gestures of trying to release Aamer because if he did come here he would have some damning evidence about torture and we didn't want that to come out. Bad luck for him that he may even be the victim of a shabby attempt to cover up the shadier side of Intelligence services.

* *

Possibly there are a few other reasons besides. Frankly the UK Government should consider themselves lucky that he has decided not to sue the crap out of them for the experience he went through based on apparently absolutely nothing other than his being in Afghanistan in 2001.

And despite all that, not only is he not suing the UK government, he's even spoken out pretty strongly against Muslim extremism.

[youngmafbog]

I'm sure there is time yet. No doubt his phone hasn't stopped rining with compo lawyers (in between the PPP calls !)

[youngmafbog]

Maybe he didnt fancy looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life waiting for some spook to finish him off.

As I'm sure you know jim, proving anything of what you have said there would not be possible.

[ToraToraTora]

so is he not suing the Americans jim? They have the most litigious regime on earth, there must be lawyers falling over themselves.

[Ellipsis]

Yes, he is clearly money-grabbing and is afraid of being bumped off, but that doesn't explain why he isn't suing, why he publicly denounced extremism and why he told extremists to "get the hell out" of the country.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35085957

[jim360]

Possibly you are right ymb, although my understanding is that the conditions of proof required in compensation claims are somewhat more lax than in a criminal case, so it might not matter. And anyway there would always have been the possibility, or even near-certainty, of an out-of-court settlement. Which he may well be getting anyway, if divebuddy's link is anything to go by.

At any rate, for a man to be locked up for six years while the authorities try to find a reason to lock him up, and then a further eight years while it's decided where he would go on release (I'm not clear on the details of this bit -- seems that he was cleared for release to Saudi Arabia but had no desire to go there) is quite shocking and does no credit to anyone involved.

[zebo]

If he did sue and it went to court, he would have to answer some awkward questions about why he was where he was picked up.

[retrocop]

He wasn't totally 100% sure,when asked directly on BBC news last night, that a British Agent was allegedly present during his alleged torture. About 88% ish I believe.

[ichkeria]

I have to say that while there seems absolutely no reason whatever for him to have been kept incarcerated for so long after everyone else, there must have been SOME reason. His being held was really making a cause celebre and a lot of bad publicity for the US and UK, and if it was to stop dubious evidence coming out well, he's out now, as presumably he was always destined to be, so if that was the motive and the people who held him were really that nefarious, why not arrange for him to "die of a serious illness".

I suspect the truth is the Shaker Aamer was indeed an al Qaeda operative, but they messed up the evidence, and spent years trying to cobble stuff together again, but finally admitted defeat. It doesn't reflect well on anyone that is for sure.

[KARL]

If I was "picked up", "rendered", imprisoned without charge for 14 years of which the jailers still kept me locked up for eight years after deciding I was to be released because there was no evidence against me, I certainly would not expect where I was when all this began to be an awkward matter - if it was some sort of sign of criminality then that would have been a legitimate reason for charges with the expectation of a conviction (in a proper court).

[Peter Pedant]

.

surprising 3T - you seem to accept he was tortured but not by the right people ....

doesnt a little bit of you - your fingernails perhaps- tell you we shouldnt be doing that ..... rather than - I know! I'll leavethe room and the torture can continue but I can then deny it all .....if I dont see then it didnt occur

[Svejk]

Did we try German POWs in a court of law, Italians?
Very hard to prove criminal cases against enemy combatants. It's not as if his fellow Islamists are going to stand up in court and tell the truth. They wouldn't know the meaning of the word.
And just to clear up another matter that's bothering our SJWs.
8 years he was given clearance to return to his own country. He chose not to.