TIPTON Taliban et al!

Accidently found myself in Afghanistan

  • Traitor

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Unfortunately Geographically compromised

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
Brits overseas happen to wander into a war zone whilst studying the Koran. They happen to be thousands of miles from its ( The Qouran) geographical and ideological base and in the wrong country for the recognised islamic schools that may be a possible alibi.......... so the question is shoot em or hang em :?:
burn em! one of them went to pakistan on a 'computer course' Pakistan been one the worlds leading centres of computing excellence i can understand that choice......
As Ging knows, I live around the corner from the "Tipton Taliban" homeworld and I hear that there is much trouble afoot.

One of the mosques that was (wrongly) named, although obviously very Muslim, is also very Afghany and very Northern Alliance (most of them from that particular mosque are there because they had legged it from the taliban). This happens to be about 100 yards from the mosque that these fcuking traitors were recruited from.

Now, considering that Tipton has a BNP councillor (the "ethnic" part of Tipton is segregated and makes up about 15% of the population) that won by a large majority and, within the ethnic muslim minority the people are split down into rival factions (broadly speaking, taliban supporters and "the rest") and the majority of the muso's there are a bit jacked off about the adverse publicity and the fact that the rest of the "ethnic minority" in Tipton is Sikh (who officially backed the BNP in the last election due to the total anti muslim stance), I don't give their chances of lasting very good odds.

Edited by Bad CO on grounds of poor taste...
I'm totally lost at why this country allowed them back in. Their excuses for being in a war zone didn't even convince my 4 year old nephew, but Mr Blunkett allowed them in. I wonder just what they'll preach to their new found fans, now that they're back? Anti-American, anti-Brit, anti-anything not Muslim? At least we have the Sikh's on our side!
I think its only fair that these 'geographically challenged' tourists are allowed back into this country. It is also right and proper that they be allowed to sue the spams for their 'cruel and inhuman' treatment. The fact that they will also be seeking compensation from the british government for not helping them more is highly appropriate.

They are clearly much maligned individuals who are just misunderstood by the vast majority of us heathens and we need to mend our ways immediately so that we fit in better with their way of life.

The british taxpayer will of course willingly fund these actions from the kindness of their hearts.

Oh, - and the fact that they'll end up make several thousand quid each from selling their stories to the press will be really useful to those poor souls.

Irony's wonderful isn't it? :D
Gunny Highway said:
I'm totally lost at why this country allowed them back in.
Why are you lost? We let everyone in. The less likely they are to work and the more benefits they can claim the better.
put the bastards on trial for treason,deport them after a long sentence at a hard jail not one of these left wing tree hugging butlins camps, the famous prisoner charlie bronson would just love to be on the same wing as them!!! if they survive deport them and there followers france or germany sounds a good place for them
The whole episode of the return of these creatures to UK, and their subsequent release, reeks of New Labour spin.

If the spams felt there was no purpose in holding them fine, release them. Presumably there is an airport in Cuba; these 'students' managed to find their way to some of the remotest parts of Afghanistan, so are doubtless capable of purchasing a ticket back to UK.

Why are my taxes funding their return by Crab Air, utilising an a/c that would be much better employed supporting HMF on ops elsewhere? If they needed to be questioned further, nick them at the airport when they get back - or am I forgetting that we appear to have no immigration control whatever.

This story seems to me to be much more about the Dear Leader (may he rule a thousand years) trying to keep in with the muslims, who have traditionally voted Labour, than about actually preventing terrorism. Various mosques and muslim communities here continue to harbour individuals who incite terrorism and recruit for terrorist organisations - Blunkett does nothing.

We should not be surprised at Bliar's appeasement of the musos; look at his record in NI.

I am now not sure which is more dangerous; Al-Mujahiroun, Abu Hamza et al, or this contemptible Govt.
To quote the visionary from the past Kenny Everett:

"round them up in a field - and bomb the bast*rds"

Voulantry scuicide bomb of course!
The latest news is all of the suspects have been released without charge.

Now, that either means innocent, or the security services and the Police are unable to find sufficient evidence to charge them

There is a possibility, that all of these suspects are indeed innocent of course.

However, I am damn sure that these are not the only people from the area that ended up in Afghanistan, malice aforethought. Some of those people are now back in the UK , having never been lifted , so that is something to think on.

I'm starting to wonder whether the arresting criteria in the 'stan was "Goddamn, he speaks English, bang him up"

As ORG mentions, there were a few British muslims who went over to fight for the Northern Alliance , and certainly, one of the Gitmo incarcerated, had originally been lifted from a jail, where the taliban had put him, for distributing anti-Taliban literature.

Why were they there in the first place? For a variety of reasons, good, bad and innocent, the problem is, it seems we arrested the wrong ones.
...let's stop tip toeing around the PC mulberry bush.

It's a general understanding - well publicised in the media - that young men were/are recruited through mosques and religious learning centres to a variety of Islamist causes. These people were then sent to training camps around the World, Afghanistan being the prime location for a little terrorist schooling, with Pakistan being a nice little R&R/further education location.

What possible legitimate reason could anyone from the UK have for going to Afghanistan? None.

I believe that their let off is a mixture of government political correctness and a probable lack of evidence that would pass the current 'kiddie-fiddling-is-a-life-style-choice-human-rights-Cherie-lining-her-pockets' judicial system we have in this country now.

All that has been done is show that people can get away with it. If one of these men had been involved in killing a British soldier would the parents of theat lad get as much say as the families of those held at Guantanamo? Probably not.

Nice to see that they are already hiring the big PR men to hawk their books and stories around for the big money......'nuff said.

Here's a suggestion. All the proceeds raised from their book rights go to the families of thse killed by terrorist acts in NY and Bali. Now that would be an act of reconcilliation wouldn't it....... ;)
Disgusting is the only word i would like to say on the whole affair.
While the reasons for the 4 being in Afghanistan do look downright suspicious, one of the principlies of our Democracy is that you are innocent until proven guilty. If the evidence will not stand up in a court of law then let then go.

Those held in Guantanamo and the 14 (I think) held in UK prisons without legal representation or any prospect of a trial are there because of "intelligence". More often than not someone else's word that the guy is a terrorist.

My point is this; either change the rules so that the intellegence can be used in a court of law or let them go. If Blunkett gets his way it will not be long before any UK citizen can be locked up without being charged just because there is intelligence source that claims that they are a terrorist.

Is this the same intelligence that told us there was concrete evidence of WMD in Iraq, or the same intelligence that arrested a frenchman before christmas simply because he had the same name as a wanted terrorist (who by the way, was alreay in Guantanamo!).

The UK is either for Democracy and the Rule of Law in the War against terrorism or against it. At present we are just being hypocritical.
What possible legitimate reason could anyone from the UK have for going to Afghanistan? None.
NGO's and Aid organisations? Islamic Relief had a lot of people there , and when the mass exodus started, and refugees were trying to cross into Pakistan, there were a lot of British Muslims who volunteered to help

People volunteer to help in all sorts of conflict areas , and do travel to them to do so.

I know this, because I have. Does that make me a terrorist?

Sorry, too broad a brush with that statement.

There is no doubt some young moslems travel to places like Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, to experience "Year Zero" Islam. Some of them may well take up arms in defence of that ideal.

There is no doubt some young moslems travel to areas of conflict. to kill Westerners/Christian Infidels. I seem to remember the case of Moslems from Birmingham being caught bang-to-rights by the Sudanese 5-oh with a boot full of AK's , having just shot up a bus full of tourists. Of course, the first thing they did was yell for the British Ambassador , but we stood firm on that one. There was also the 2 South London idiots who travelled to Israel to martyr themselves. Well one did, the other bottled and was slotted by Hamas for not wanting the perfumed virgins as badly as his oppo.

But what about ultra right wing American/British/South African/Canadian Jews who travel to Israel, to take up arms in the intifada , in defence of illegal settlements? Are they not illegal combatants, by virtue of the fact they are not originally from that country, but feel bound by their common religion to be involved?

The real question is , what about the British Muslims that DID travel to 'stan to serve with the Taliban , who weren't caught, and are back in the UK?

Frankly, if they are innocent of all charges, and want to flog their stories to the press, then good luck to them I say. the American Government has already said they won't pay them a cent in compensation for false imprisonment.

Or, is the crux of the arguement , some of you are presenting is ;

They are Muslim, therefore they are guilty?
Chicken Jim you seem to think Britain is a Free Democracy, its not. It is a Constitutional Monarchy** which operates a Closed Democratic system of government.
Also, the posters of this topic are hypocrites... are you sure they're just not all hugely pissed off by the fact British subjects were found in Afghanistan - potentially pulling the trigger at British soldiers: me, you, everyone else?

**The Uncodified Birtish constitution doesn't change the basic fact Britain is a Constitutional Monarchy.
One question - didn't 2 of these chaps go to Pakistan "for a wedding" then found months later in Taliban camps in Afghanistan?

Long way to go for a wedding reception!!
PartTimePongo said:
Or, is the crux of the arguement , some of you are presenting is ;

They are Muslim, therefore they are guilty?
No, not that being a Muslim means you are guilty, but that voicing anti-british satements and incitememt to racial hatred makes you guilty. At least that's what I'd get arrested for if I stood on a corner or in front of a camera and started slagging off Muslims. I am all for equallity, but all too often it's a bit of a one way street.

Let's not forget, if I was in Afganistan a few years ago and they thought I was anti-Taliban, I wouldn't have got a trial either...... I wouldn't have had the luxury of being locked up for a couple of years and I certainly wouldn't have got any compensation..... or should I say my family wouldn't.

PTP, if your point is that they could have been working for an NGO, then why didn't any of the NGO's working in the area have them on their lists of employees? They should have been in clearly marked vehicles, had some form of recognisable badge or dress and an ID card or pass. The NGO's are responsible for accounting for all their personnel and a simple comparison with a list of NGO's missing personnel and a list of captured claiming to be NGO would have cleared that up.

Whatever they did or did not do, they ended up in a war zone during a conflict and were not killed.... the rest is gravy.

You make a valid point and I agree that "what reason, none" is too broad a statement for valid argument. I would venture a personal opinion though that I believe it unlikely they were working for a legitimate NGO or relief organisation.

At the same time there let us not get down the erroneous argument that we believe they are guilty just because they are Muslim. That is just daft and the kind of line that stops valid debate for fear of being labelled 'racist' or similar. The fact that they were Muslim and in Afghanistan is no more relevant to their guilt than being Jewish and in Israel. The fact is that they were arrested by Coalition anti-terrorist forces and detained because of whatever circumstances they were caught under. Many British Muslims that work overseas were not arrested, why is that? Probably because they had a valid reason for being there.

I await the facts to see what the story is but I would be sceptical about their account.
Got to admit to siding with PTP on this one.

The evidence against these people seems to have been ropy at best.

This may have been because there was none or it may be because the methods used in Camp Delta to extract it have made it inadmissible in a british court.

It would be nice for america to make public at least some of its rational for keeping these people.

As to how guilty they are I keep an open mind. I took the white european view that being found in Afghanistan was clear evidence of guilt, however an asian collegue (who BTW is firmly in the "hang the bastards camp") pointed out that the Pakistan/Afghan border is pretty porous and familes have ties on both sides.

As for trying these people for treason, we would have to prove they had been fighting BRITISH troops, very difficult as these guys were in US hands, after that we are running out of options. The Taliban were not a proscribed organisation, Al-Qaeda was but is really an umbrella franchise, and its difficult to prove membership of it.

I could draw an analogy with Rhodesia, a number of UK citizens joined the Rhodie army in the 70's, because they did not fight the British they did not commit the crime of treason. Had the UK invaded to end UDI, and they had fought the British Army, it would have been a diffierent story. If these guys have joined the Taliban, they have been in the legal army of the Emirate of Afghanistan (as then was) and this, as I understand it from my betters, is not a crime.

Anyway the Telegraph tells us these people are going to get 24 police protection, it will be interesting to see who their visitors are.


Similar threads

Latest Threads