An Uzbek national, who is free to leave Guantanomo Bay, has nowhere to go to and his lawyer is looking for permission for him to live in Ireland. There is a scandalous situation at the moment in which individuals who have been locked up and tortured and not found guilty of any offence, can't leave Guantanamo because their own States won't readmit them.
This includes a minor who was 15 when taken to Guantanamo.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1117/1226700659498.html?via=mr

This seems to be an opportunity to redeem some of the damage done when we have failed to investigate US abductions through Shannon.

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

How many people are there released from Guantanamo, who would actually want to come to Ireland? I find it shocking that after all they have been through, and all the complaints from other countries, that when people are released (in some cases because it was found that they were taken on the basis of mistaken identity) no one will take them in.

I'm not giving an opinion on whether or not he should be admitted, I am merely stating what I believe the Irish Government's position in the matter will be. I would imagine they feel that quite alot of people from Guantanamo will want to come to Ireland if they set a precedent. Particularly as their lawyers will reckon that they have a good chance at getting it.

johnfás wrote:

I'm not giving an opinion on whether or not he should be admitted, I am merely stating what I believe the Irish Government's position in the matter will be. I would imagine they feel that quite alot of people from Guantanamo will want to come to Ireland if they set a precedent. Particularly as their lawyers will reckon that they have a good chance at getting it.

Quote :

Closing Guantánamo presents several challenges, not least the question of what to do with the 50 or so exonerated detainees who remain at the camp because they cannot lawfully be sent back to their countries of origin due the risk of torture or other mistreatment.

We are not talking about a lot of people.

Surely as a matter of principle the Americans should take them in? Their redemption is bigger than ours. (Who are we to deprive them of a chance?)

cactus flower wrote:

An Uzbek national, who is free to leave Guantanomo Bay, has nowhere to go to and his lawyer is looking for permission for him to live in Ireland. There is a scandalous situation at the moment in which individuals who have been locked up and tortured and not found guilty of any offence, can't leave Guantanamo because their own States won't readmit them.
This includes a minor who was 15 when taken to Guantanamo.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1117/1226700659498.html?via=mr

This seems to be an opportunity to redeem some of the damage done when we have failed to investigate US abductions through Shannon.

I think it is not a case of Uzbekistan not admitting its national but more a case of the national rightly fearing for his life were he to return home. Any manifestation of islamic faith is enough to make one run foul of the gruesome regime there.
So surely with is life in peril, he becomes a de facto refugee with the right to asylum.
Since we have offfered assistance in getting people to Cuba, perhaps we could seek some absolution by helping them out.

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

While it is tempting to use the term "floodgates" if in reference to the number of those wrongfully arrested and incarcerated by the locker-room warriors of the Bush regime, it is, however, inaccurate.
We are taking individual cases and nothing that will lead to "rivers of blood."

Kev Bar wrote:

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

While it is tempting to use the term "floodgates" if in reference to the number of those wrongfully arrested and incarcerated by the locker-room warriors of the Bush regime, it is, however, inaccurate.
We are taking individual cases and nothing that will lead to "rivers of blood."

We are speculating and have no idea how many such applications will be brought. My point is that the Government will likely fear a flood of such applications and a precedent to accept them if they were to accept this application. That is not to say that I do not support that application nor is it to say that the Government will or will not grant it.

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

They would be much more afraid of giving the two fingers to the Yanks which is what this would mean or at least look like it meant. Let him in I say.

johnfás wrote:

Kev Bar wrote:

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine the Government will be very weary of such requests fearing a floodgates situation.

While it is tempting to use the term "floodgates" if in reference to the number of those wrongfully arrested and incarcerated by the locker-room warriors of the Bush regime, it is, however, inaccurate.
We are taking individual cases and nothing that will lead to "rivers of blood."

We are speculating and have no idea how many such applications will be brought. My point is that the Government will likely fear a flood of such applications and a precedent to accept them if they were to accept this application. That is not to say that I do not support that application nor is it to say that the Government will or will not grant it.

You would have known if you'd read my earlier post -

Quote :

what to do with the 50 or so exonerated detainees who remain at the camp because they cannot lawfully be sent back to their countries of origin due the risk of torture or other mistreatment.

Also, I think the "fear of floodgates" argument is off the mark in this case. The suggestion was that we should take a couple of people in who have nowhere to go.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1213/guantanamo.html

Portugal have done.

johnfás wrote:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1213/guantanamo.html

Portugal have done.

That's good news. its terrible to think about that boy who was captured at 15 years of age still locked up.

I really think we should do the right thing on this - where is Michael D., or any other voice of the irish conscience, to make a pitch for it?

Well - it was another Micheal - O'Mairtín, who has spoken up in favour of doing the right thing.

http://www.examiner.ie/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=ireland-qqqm=ireland-qqqa=ireland-qqqid=80842-qqqx=1.asp

Frankly, I don't see why taking another 1-5 people would be too much of a bother..if the Portuguese can do it, so can we.

A happy Barack might give some concessions on American FDI here and taxation changes at the same time???

This guy has finally got out.

Quote :

14/01/2009 - 21:26:20
A US judge has ordered the military to release a Guantanamo Bay detainee who was arrested in Pakistan when he was 14.

Mohamed el-Gharani was one of the first people to be sent to the military prison in Cuba in 2002, where he has been held ever since.

US District Judge Richard Leon ruled today that el-Gharani, who is also known as Yousuf and is now 21, is not an enemy combatant and must be released.

His lawyer says he was accused of being a member of al-Qaida in 1998, when he would have been 11 years old.

El-Gharani, from Chad, was arrested at a mosque in Pakistan by police when he was 14. He was then turned over to US forces.

Yes Ireland needs to atone between Shannon stopovers and the McElvedy's. I think we should take any that want to come.