PDA

View Full Version : Guantanamo Briton 'went to fight'



jameshr4
03-06-2006, 12:28 PM
Guantanamo Briton 'went to fight'
By Francis Harris in Washington
(Filed: 06/03/2006)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/06/wguan06.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/03/06/ixworld.html

A British detainee told the American authorities in Guantanamo Bay that he would be "humbled" to be described as an enemy combatant and had left Britain to join armed Islamist groups.

The statements and writings of Feroz Abbasi, from Croydon, south London, were among thousands of pages of papers from the US detention centre in Cuba released by order of the American courts.


Feroz Abbasi: handwritten defence
The Bush administration had asked that they be kept secret.

The 187-page file on Mr Abbasi was one of more than 300 prisoner cases released to the Associated Press after its successful Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Many of those denied any link to al-Qa'eda and many professed affection for the United States.

Mr Abbasi, who was freed from the camp last year, was one of those apparently proud to describe themselves as Islamist combatants.

In one section of his lengthy handwritten defence, he stated: 'Do not be fooled into thinking I am in any way perturbed by you classifying me as. . . 'enemy combatant'. In fact quite to the contrary I am humbled that Allah would honour me so."

Elsewhere he explained: 'I actually left Britain to either join the Taliban or fight for Allah in [Indian-occupied] Kashmir." Mr Abbasi complained that military police had *** in front of him while he was trying to pray and had tried to explain why he should be considered a prisoner of war and thus entitled to better treatment.

He talked about his "pure hate" for the Americans, which seemed to stem partly from the use of atomic weapons on Japanese civilians in 1945.

At a US military tribunal, he referred to his last will and testament, in which he wrote that he had been driven by a desire to take action against "militarily aggressive Americans and Jews".

Mr Abbasi, who was born in Uganda and raised in Britain, appeared to answer evidence that he had joined a group of hard-core al-Qa'eda fighters at Kandahar airport, Afghanistan, received military training, volunteered for a "martyrdom" mission and met Osama bin Laden.

He and three other British citizens freed from Guantanamo were not charged with criminal offences in Britain.

But the Home Office withdrew their right to hold passports, stating that they would target British or allied interests while abroad.

Mr Abbasi and his lawyer Gareth Peirce have said that he was tortured while in custody and that this tainted evidence which formed the basis of the Home Office decision.



Why was he ever let out and now there is going to be that programme on Channel 4 in the UK, showing them as sweet anmd innocent and caught up in Afganistan by accident!

ed316
03-06-2006, 12:31 PM
Why was he ever let out and now there is going to be that programme on Channel 4 in the UK, showing them as sweet anmd innocent and caught up in Afganistan by accident!

Human rights group, political pressure, and the sheer hatred for anything that the Bush admin does. It doesn't matter what the detainees do, just as long they can jab a finger in the admin's eye.

Fargin
03-06-2006, 12:34 PM
I always considered Guantanamo Bay a great place to produce terrorists.

ed316
03-06-2006, 12:36 PM
They were all angels and upstanding members of their community before winning an all expense paid vacation to Gitmo.

jameshr4
03-06-2006, 12:37 PM
A review of that TV programme that's going to be shown in th UK, at least one paper can see through it but its makes me angry that they can be shown to be sweet and innocent when its obvious that they are not!!!!!

The bay of empty

Michael Winterbottom's film about Guantanamo is unbalanced and lazy, says Roland Watson, who has visited Camp X-Ray

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,14934-2062339,00.html

Guantanamo Bay tends to arouse strong feelings. And so it is with Michael Winterbottom’s The Road to Guantanamo, his 90-minute feature film for Channel 4 about the trio of West Midlands friends who spent more than two years in US captivity. The film is fuelled by anger, disbelief and a sense of injustice, which is both its strength and its weakness.
We begin by watching the carefree friends, Ruhal Ahmed, Asif Iqbal and Shafiq Rasul, leave Britain for Iqbal’s wedding in Pakistan. Within days, in a moment portrayed as impulsive and naive, they are in Afghanistan surrounded by falling bombs. After a catalogue of misfortunes — they try to return to Pakistan but are instead driven towards the fighting — they are captured.




Their handling by Northern Alliance and then American captors provides the core of the film. But it is their route to imprisonment that is the best cinema: the excitement of the innocents at the prospect of sampling huge Afghan nans, their ignorance of what language is spoken where they are going and their longing for a pizza when the going gets tough. The film has all the makings of a happy-go-lucky road movie before it veers off into edgy drama.

The scenes from Camp X-Ray are a letdown. Life for the inmates is repetitive and interminable — it certainly slows the narrative to a plod. Seeing one of the three shackled to the floor and left to the mercy of a strobe light and loud music may be shocking, but much is predictable. The Americans, whether they be CIA, Marines or civilians, are a nasty bunch. The British, from M15 and the embassy, are more palatable. The detainees are misunderstood.

Some moments provide easy pickings for pedants. An inmate is ordered to take down the towel that he is using as an impromptu sun shade. As one of the first British journalists to visit the camp, I saw prisoners sheltering behind their towels. One of the captives states that they were not allowed to pray. Yet by the time The Times was on hand (not coincidentally, perhaps), a camp imam had been appointed. From then on prayers were relayed through a loudspeaker five times a day.

Our three heroes — whose first-person testimony is cut in to the scenes played by actors — are given an unchallenged romp through their stories that leaves two big questions insufficiently explored. Why did they cross the border into Afghanistan? The proffered answer is that they heard an imam say that they should help their Muslim brothers. But what about the wedding? It is as if the purpose of their presence in Pakistan did not exist.

They entered Afghanistan on October 13, saying that they never believed the US would bomb the country. Yet the bombing campaign was six days old. And their flight? They asked to be taken to Pakistan yet their taxi driver seems to have heard: “Take us to the fighting.”

That Winterbottom to accepts their motives unquestioningly leaves the film unbalanced. There is suppressed outrage, for instance, that interrogators should suspect that three foreigners picked up on the battlefield alongside al-Qaeda and Taleban fighters may have something to do with the militants.

The film has been fêted — winning the Silver Bear at the Berlin Film Festival — but it is hard to resist the impression that the plaudits are as much political as cinematographic.



The Road to Guantanamo, Thurs, Channel 4, 9pm

joshfox0
03-06-2006, 05:14 PM
no you don't understand hes a sweet sensitive misudnerstood man its the system thats made him the say he is honest! p-)

Laworkerbee
03-06-2006, 06:18 PM
Still want him back England? :)

Oddbod
03-06-2006, 07:01 PM
Still want him back England? :)

Brick wall
Wooden post
Blindfold if requested(we are a compassionate nation)

Laworkerbee
03-06-2006, 07:09 PM
Brick wall
Wooden post
Blindfold if requested(we are a compassionate nation)

Ah rule .303 my favorite :)

cut
03-06-2006, 07:23 PM
Whatever their true reasons for all this, they weren't involved in combat from the sound of it, and presumably if anything was proveable the US would have kept them. To be honest I think that 3 or 4 years of imprisonement, and forceful questioning is punishment enough for what they actually did.

Am I wrong?

Laworkerbee
03-06-2006, 07:39 PM
Whatever their true reasons for all this, they weren't involved in combat from the sound of it, and presumably if anything was proveable the US would have kept them. To be honest I think that 3 or 4 years of imprisonement, and forceful questioning is punishment enough for what they actually did.

Am I wrong?

As long as they killed nobody and as long as they renounce the Taliban and Islamic extremism I guess....sure let them go, but make sure to track their asses too!

halloweenjack
03-07-2006, 07:36 AM
anyone got any questions for Moazzam Begg (one of the other guantanamo detainees) ? He's doing a talk at my university.

gsm
03-07-2006, 10:22 AM
Some more interesting comments on Winterbottom's film about Guantanamo;

If it's all so simple, I need answers to a couple of questions on Guantanamo
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2006/03/if_its_all_so_s.html

ed316
03-07-2006, 10:25 AM
anyone got any questions for Moazzam Begg (one of the other guantanamo detainees) ? He's doing a talk at my university.

How did he got Gitmo.

Why does he live in a society he deems morally corrupt?.