Although I don’t think anyone should be held illegally, I really don’t understand why this Saudi is constantly described as the “last British detainee” and similar headlines. Then when you read it article it points out that he is actually not British.

Sick of all the publicity he’s getting as well.

Still think he has a lot to answer as well, why would you move your family to “experience an Islamic atmosphere” in Afghanistan in 2001?

Personally I would let the US make any payments that are due to him, don’t see why the UK should pay.

I really do not understand it.

He is Saudi with a British wife and kids and therefore has the right to permanent residence – understood but that is not British. AFAIK he has never applied for citizenship. I didn’t post on this before as it will only attract the “pantomime villan” type responses from the usual suspects.

A victory for his supporters and campaigners to have gotten the press to describe him as such.

He is a Saudi

Because he’s a British resident with a British wife and British children who, 14 years ago, was in the process of applying for British citizenship. Something must have happened to have delayed that application.

Because he’s a British resident with a British wife and British children

He’s not British then.

14 years ago, was in the process of applying for British citizenship.Something must have happened to have delayed that application.

He migrated to Afghanistan?

He is not described as British either by wiki or his own campaign “Shaker Aamer is a Saudi national and long-term British resident, with the right to return.”
Problem solved.http://www.saveshaker.org/about

Because he’s a British resident with a British wife and British children

I have a good friend who moved to Austria 20 years ago. Married an Austrian girl and has since had three kids with her.
They all live in Austria together, as they always have.

He is British. He would never describe himself as Austrian, and neither would anyone else.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34675324

The headline “Shaker Aamer: Last UK Guantanamo Bay detainee lands in Britain”

just one of many.

Er… that article starts with the words “the last british resident”.

Because why pass over a good story when lax reporting and catchy headlines can whip up your readers into a froth?

If you google Shaker Ahmed only the Daily Mail describes him as British all other sources say Saudi or British Resident.

Er… that article starts with the words “the last british resident”.

No it starts with a headline that indicates he is from the UK.

You realise a headline isn’t meant to contain all the detail of the story? I can’t see why anyone would get worked up about this, but even if you did, you have to read all of 4 words into the article for the headline to be “corrected”.

All the articles I’ve read have said that he’s a British resident rather than a citizen

Obviously it’s more important to determine his exact nationally and residence status than if he was illegally imprisoned and tortured. I suspect there would be less hair splitting if he was, for example, a fast runner.

Yeah he is not British and that’s the big issue.

Not the fact that he was detained for 14 years without trial by our closest ally in a conflict we played a major part in. Then as civilised societies we go and lecture other nations on human rights.

One year less than this fella:

The BBC has repeatedly called him the last British inmate at Guantanamo including on TV reports

Andrew Marr show had an interesting discussion on this today (and Chrissie Hinde closing the show !)

For the avoidance of doubt keeping people locked up for 14 years without trial is an issue as is torturing prisoners

I too am offende that people call Joanna Lumley British. She was born in blooming India! and that Sid James is a blooming African!

Time to take a stand …..or sit down…..and tut on mass, whilst having a cup of tea.

If it winds bigots up that much, he can be called whatever nationality achieves that the most.

what a delightful thread. 😐

So what exactly is the issue he is a British resident he is described by the BBC as a Saudi National ( just google his name) occasionally he is described as the last British Detainee perhaps because he is a British Resident . Who really has an issue with this or is confused ?

Obviously it’s more important to determine his exact nationally and residence status than if he was illegally imprisoned and tortured.

Some things are more important than other things. That’s obvious enough.

But does that mean that we can’t have threads discussing the less important things ?

Next time someone starts a thread about a coffee grinder, maybe they should think twice. Surely people trafficking is a more important topic ?

Next time someone starts a thread about a coffee grinder, maybe they should think twice. Surely people trafficking is a more important topic ?

Let’s not forget that the coffee involved is stolen from a bush and then roasted alive. No coffee is in this country is here under it’s own free will.

Has he got a good chance of getting us a gold medal in The Olympics?

Has he got a good chance of getting us a gold medal in The Olympics?

There are far more important topics than sport to be discussed.

How do you expect people to concentrate on such trivia while the entire universe is facing heat death.

The OP’s question is about a British resident, who has been detained in Guantanamo bay (that’s why it’s in the news after all). It’s a fair comment to make that of the two connected facts, it might be more important to concentrate on the legality of the detention and alleged torture (or interrogation as security agencies might prefer to call it) of said British resident than how “British” he is. It’s not analogous to saying an entirely unconnected situation is of greater concern for example…I dunno…maybe saying “How can you worry about what coffee grinder to buy when people are being trafficked?”

Ok then. Fair point.

“How can you worry about what coffee grinder to buy when 2.5 million acres of Central American rainforest has been cut down to produce coffee in a more efficient way, drinking coffee is killing the rainforests”

😉

I didn’t post on this before as it will only attract the “pantomime villan” type responses from the usual suspects.

Not if you say somethign that is factually accurate and true
You seem to think its other faults that your posts are, as others repeatedly say “lies” and your claims couter to the evidence you are posting.
You are neither a pantomime not a villain you are just wrong and unwilling to grasp /see/deal with this without writing things like that ad blaming others for your own shortcomings.

For the avoidance of doubt keeping people locked up for 14 years without trial is an issue as is torturing prisoners[/quote
No one was doubting this was wrong

Still think he has a lot to answer as well, why would you move your family to “experience an Islamic atmosphere” in Afghanistan in 2001?

What questions would those be, exactly? The Americans twice cleared him as posing no security risk, in 2007 when a tribunal involving all six of the main US intelligence* agencies endorsed his release, and 2009 when a panel set up by Obama gave a similar decision.
He went to Afghanistan because he was finding life difficult financially in Britain, didn’t want to live on benefits, the Afghan civil war was ending in 2001, and foreign investment was going into the country. Aamir was hoping to get grants and contracts for water projects and a co-ed school, perfectly reasonable things to do.
Any other ‘questions’ that you feel need to be answered?
*I use the term advisedly, it’s quite probably an oxymoron.

have a good friend who moved to Austria 20 years ago. Married an Austrian girl and has since had three kids with her.
They all live in Austria together

Sounds like an Aussie to me.

Easy mistake to make.

Are you a journalist 😉

What questions would those be, exactly?

One which springs to mind is what was the charity he was working for in Afghanistan?
Surely they have a name and would be able to have confirmed the charitable work.

Do you not think the Americans asked him that question ?

You’d have thought they’d have the answer by now.

They do have the answer , why not get the Americans to publish the complete transcripts of his interrogation together with a description of the circumstances of each session .

It would seem a lot easier just for Shaker to say in public what this charity was.
It shouldn’t really be contentious should it?

It would seem a lot easier just for Shaker to say in public what this charity was.

Really? Let’s pretend for a minute that you’ve been locked away for 13 years and have the might of the US criminal and intelligence services bearing down on you, trying to prove that you’re a terrorist, d’you not think they might have checked that out? If there was a question over his reasons for being in Afghanistan, do you think the Bush administration would’ve agreed that he was innocent of all charges in 2009, and the Obama administration agreeing and reinforcing that in 2013?

I didn’t post on this before as it will only attract the “pantomime villan” type responses from the usual suspects.

OH NO HE ISNT !

Given that he did say what the charity was and it was examined by the Americans what is your problem now ? Or does he have to be reinterrogated by you persoaaly before you accept the American conclusion.