Guantanamo inmate told "You can't return to UK"

mickyv · Joined: 12 Dec 2006

There are two facts that are definitely known;

1) the four year despair of the man’s family
2) the four year despair of a man locked up in inhuman condition & denied due process.

Sorry I can’t see any sentimentality in this whatsoever.

nekokate · Joined: 13 Dec 2006 Location: West Yorkshire, UK

I'm inclined to agree that the angle the article used was (arguably) one of oversentimentality; the contrived Fathers Day plea to the government from an innocent child who has little idea of the complexities of the case, but when I wrote "is this not obscene?" I was referring more to the fact that someone who was allowed to live in the UK, and has his family here, could possibly be told "you've been away too long, so piss off" when it's perfectly clear that his abscence wasn't his own decision - he'd been incarcerated illegally and without charge in Guantanamo Bay for the duration.

mickyv · Joined: 12 Dec 2006

Without doubt & by any criteria the decision to deny him re-entry to Britain is obscene, but I cannot see any sentimentality in a child pleading for his father to be released, and the fact that another appeal (one of hundreds no doubt over the four & a half years) is made on Father’s Day, is of course deliberate but pertinent. The family has every right to try all means to embarrass or move cold hearten politicians into trying to secure the release of their love one, without accusations of sentimentality. Sentimentality insinuates trying to
“induce an emotional response disproportionate to the situation” or being “falsely emotional”; is that really what people think that the man’s family are ?! Are their action disproportionate to the situation ? I for one, think not.

major.tom · Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:59 pm Post subject:

I can understand faceless' reaction. Any story that plays to the emotions (including sentimentality or fear) should be taken with spoonfuls of salt.

Not that we should ignore the fact that his family miss him and he *had* a right to be in GBR. Those are valid points. But the Independent might have better served their readers by presenting a less emotive narrative.