I was approached by some protesters while walking past Parliament at lunchtime. They were protesting about Shaker Aamer - a Saudi, but UK resident with 4 kids- has been detained in Guantanamo Bay for 13 years. It was really interesting. I began with a wholly cynical view, but they did get me thinking....

I have since Google him and watched part of a debate in the Commons today (originated by John McDonnell MP for Hayes, and it does seem a little alarming

Sifting through the thousands of lines of text about him on the net, I am not sure if he was planning a terrorist act, neither am I sure he was tortured as claimed. But that is the point - nobody really knows as he has not been on trial!. Whilst other UK residents have been released, he has been incarcerated without charge or trial for 13 years! He has a teenage son he has never seen as he was born after the detention started.

I am no 'apologist'. If he is guilty of what the US & UK have claimed, lock him up and throw away the key - I have no sympathy. But for goodness sake, the US/UK should really put up or shut up and charge him and put him on trial.

The US have promised to close the camp, in fact Obama came in promising to do just that. Now they are worried about what message that would send to terrorists, as if keeping innocent people locked up without trial provides the US with better PR!!!

I suppose that with the election around the corner, there is some hope he might be released to help Cameron get some votes, but six US agencies are currently involved in a review of his case - despite him being cleared to be transferred to Saudi Arabia. The US refuse to give the Uk a timescale when those agencies will report back.

Gwantmo is where it is so the US does not have to worry about the niceties of protection under the law.

If they were up to be behaving decently and observing the protections of Natural Justice they would have sited the facility in Maryland or Arizona.

Of the gentlemen concerned I know nothing and don't really want to know. The fact it is this man in Gwantmo and not you or other posters on this site means the US knows something.

Rendition holding of prisoners without trial, sounds medieval doesn't it but better that than another 9/11 or 7/7. At times it is a question of balance. I don't like Gwantmo or what it stands for but see the requirement for it if the rest of us are to enjoy the protections under the HRA.

Remember hooky? All that nasty rhetoric and attempts to subvert young muslims and there was little the UK authorities could do to stop him under the Human rights laws. And what about Haroon Aswat both subsequently have been convicted of serious terrorist crimes after extradition to the US and jailed. These two are not the only ones

The whole purpose of the facility is so people like us don't have to worry

I agree that society needs to be protected from terrorists and that we (UK) are too damn soft as demonstrated by the Liberals getting rid of the Control Orders for instance.

But I maintain that suspicions from Govts are insufficient can never be enough to lock someone away for life in a country miles from their family

Charge them, bring them to court and when found guilty, lock em up for ever.

If the US and Uk have so much evidence on this guy, why not prosecute him??

There is your dilemma.

Suppose they have compelling evidence which would not be admitted under natural rules of justice. We all know water boarding took/takes place at Gwantmo this may well have wielded up compelling reasons to keep these people locked up.

Problem is we are in living in a different age. When you have terrorists prepared to kill thousands of persons by flying airliners into tall buildings or exploding a dirty nuclear weapon in a city centre you have to all the tools in the box to gather that intelligence.

Some of these tools would not pass the fair gathering test if the person was put before a court of law bringing us back to the Hamza problem. It doesn't make the evidence any less untrue.

So under such circumstances what can they do? Clearly it is not an option to release them to go about their business and you have already outlined how the liberals scuppered control orders.

Gwantmo fills the void.

I think what's going on is very wrong. Sinister even.

Which bit Jon??

In my view we need a place like Guantanamo, there are plenty of terrorists out there that are 'known' to the intelligence services but who cannot be brought to trial because to do so would compromise sources etc. In the UK they invoke Human Rights legislation to escape justice so Guantanamo is a useful facility where they should be kept and allowed to rot. Some may say this is extreme but we are in a different world fighting a different and violent no-holds barred war against people who pay no heed to normal civilised behaviour fuelled as they are by religious extremism.

Locking people up for years without charge, without trial.

So what would you do with what you know is a committed terrorist with the ideology to take thousands of lives who has yet not done anything wrong and that you cannot bring before the courts as:

A:You have no evidence
or
B: What evidence you have cannot be used as it was gathered outside of the natural rules of justice or those same rules dictate that sources have to be declared in the so called interests of fairness.

You could release the person, enact some legislation where they have to report to a police station every 24 hours, place them under 24/7 surveillance and bar them from using the telephone/internet. Didn't we try that until the Liberals chirped in? There will always be dissenters in Parliament and wider who think the rights of one individual trump the safety of thousands.

In the 70's the Government used internment to take known (and suspected) terrorist's off the streets of Northern Ireland. Not a 100% success as it turned out as it created a sympathy for the republican movement and they were able to recruit handsomely as a result of it, but it did assist the problems in the short term and stop the violence in the province spiralling out of control to all out civil war.

Internment today could not happen under the auspices of the HRA. If the HRA was in force in the 70's and internment unavailable then the situation in NI could have deteriorated with the loss of many thousands of lives. The security services today are being asked to protect us with one arm tied behind their back.

I don't like what Gwantmo is but when as a civilisation we demand rules like the HRA we need something like it to counter.

If there is a better solution then I am all ears.

But Jon, in the UK we let known 'terrorists' roam freely in our streets and their 'human rights' seem to trump every other consideration! Guantanamo isn't the perfect solution and I'm not arguing that it is, but in todays uncertain world the old rule book has to be put aside to deal with this asymmetrical threat from within. I'm all for Magna Carta but our foreign friends have no truck with it, there is only one way and it's their way or a beheading. I never thought I'd come round to this way of thinking but events have made me realise that our enemies take advantage of our Western liberal society in their hatred and commitment to destroy us.