Guantanamo four are 'too dangerous to free'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The four British Muslims who are to remain at Guantanamo Bay are too dangerous to be released, an American official was last night reported as saying.
All four trained at al-Qa'ida camps where they learned bombmaking, methods of assassination and urban warfare techniques, making them a "serious threat" should they be released, the source said. The highly unusual step of releasing details of the charges against the men had been taken to counteract opinion expressing concern over the conditions in which detainees were being held at the prison camp in Cuba.
The four are Feroz Abbasi, 23, from Croydon, south London, Moazzam Begg, 36, from Birmingham, Richard Belmar, 23, and Martin Mubanga, 29, both from London. Five other detainees are expected to be returned to the UK this week.
Louise Christian, a lawyer for the families of two of the men - Mr Abbasi and Mr Mubanga - reacted angrily to the claims, reported in today's Daily Telegraph. "It is outrageous that these allegations are being made when the detainees do not have a voice."
The unnamed Bush administration official justified the public airing of confidential evidence. "If the British Government had captured Luftwaffe pilots bombing London during the middle of World War Two, they would not have given them lawyers to argue that they were innocent," he said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments