4 Guantanamo detainees arrested in Britain

[Freddie Stubbs]

Associated Press

LONDON — Four Britons who were freed after being detained for up to three years at the U.S. military camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, returned to Britain today and were immediately arrested.

"Police arrested the men under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which refers to the alleged involvement in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism," Metropolitan Police said.

The four men — the last of the British detainees at Guantanamo — were accompanied by British anti-terrorist officers on a military flight which landed at the Northolt Royal Air Force base, west of London just after 5 p.m. (11 a.m. CST).

Moazzam Begg, Feroz Abbasi, Martin Mubanga and Richard Belmar were among some 550 prisoners from 42 countries swept up in the U.S.-led war on terrorism and detained without charge.

more: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/3008390

[plcdude]

1. can't be having

those guys talking to the press now can we?

[oneold1-4u]

3. objectivity

At least one that they let go,returned to Afghanistan to pick up a gun and go back to the job before he was killed. There are some of these islamic jihadists I wouldn't want sent back to a house next door to anyone. If you want them all free then find a safe place for them and yourself. If they are from another country, let them feed and clothe them in their prisons if they wish.

[proudbluestater]

6. Do you have a link for that?

No charges were brought against the folks in Guantanamo Bay because they are not terrorists or criminals. The regime is just too embarassed to admit they screwed up and now refuses to let them go.

[Rockerdem]

8. No one is saying that these guys are innocent

But just give them due process. There is a likelihood that some of them are muderous and the scum of the earth, but we (and the British) can give up our freedoms just to keep suspects in jail forever.

[rogue_bandit]

2. Why were they let out?

Why were they let out if they were still considered terrorists? This is all too confusing.

[Bridget Burke]

4. They were never charged with anything.

(From the article)

Peter Clarke, head of the Anti Terrorist Branch, said police had discussed the case with representatives of Britain's Muslim community and recognized there were strong feelings about it.

"But the fact is that we have an absolute duty on behalf of all communities to investigate the circumstances leading to the men's detention," Clarke said.

So, the British are "arresting" them because they were detained.

At least these men had the British government behind them, to convince the US that they should either be tried or be released. Most of the detainees have no such backing. They haven't been charged, either, but the US can apparently hold them forever.

[NYC]

5. Then the question is why weren't they charged?

They were held for 3 years as terrorists, but never charged with a crime and never tried.

On what basis were they detained? On what basis were they released?

How do we know they are terrorists if they were never tried? (Of course, we don't.)

[proudbluestater]

7. Center for Constitutional Rights brought a suit that let them go free

There were about 9 people named in the lawsuit filed from their NY office. That's why they got free, they were being held without charge, without attorneys, indefinitely.

"Center For Constitutional Rights Responds to Release of Foreign Nationals From Guantánamo Bay Cuba

Synopsis

After three years of detention in what have proved to be subhuman conditions, four British citizens and one Australian were released from Guantánamo Bay today. The men were held without charge. Their friends and family endured news of their torture and deteriorating health. They were branded international terrorists and ‘bad men.’ Yet, after three years of legal battles and public outcry, they have been released without charge, confirming once again the morally and legally bankrupt detention policy of this Administration.

Reports that there are others who will be released from Guantánamo Bay support the longstanding contention of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) that the U.S. has violated fundamental democratic principles by holding prisoners without access to an attorney or a court of law to challenge the basis of their detention. These latest releases reveal another troubling fact – that clearly a number of those arrested, detained, tortured and interrogated for as long as three years had nothing at all to do with terrorism or the war in Afghanistan. The bounties paid by the Government for suspects guaranteed arrests but not corroboration of any person's role in any activity. Without a hearing, the detainees have had no chance to assert their rights or seek justice.

The story of these men reveals precisely what is wrong with the U.S. approach to dealing with terrorism suspects. Torture, arbitrary detention and disregard for international law do not win the struggle for freedom and democracy. The release of Feroz Abbasi, Martin Mubanga, Richard Belmar, Moazzam Begg and Mamdou Habib, while welcome, does not diminish the plight of hundreds more who remain at Guantánamo. Despite the Supreme Court ruling in our case, Rasul v. Bush, the current Administration has done nothing to ensure that the remaining detainees will have access to the U.S. legal system to determine their guilt or innocence. On the contrary, U.S. authorities at Guantánamo are constructing a permanent prison, one in which two more British permanent residents we represent, Bisher al-Rawi and Jamil el-Banna, languish, and a handful of others, including Australian David Hicks, await trial before commissions that military lawyers have called ‘shams.’"


http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/report.asp?ObjID=sKVJ0dI9EH&Content=505

[AP]

9. According to the BBC today, British intelligence has assembled a dossier

on them and will be arresting them based on their own investigation, but the government apprently concedes that it's very likely that, after questioning them and processing them, there may not be enough evidence to hold them or pursue a case against them.

It seems like they're going to get way more due process in the UK than they got from the US.

[Chicago Democrat]

10. Yay! Maybe they will have a real trial...

I hope

[RockStar]

11. From the fryan pan into the boiling water.