Oh. My. God. The Daily Mail!

I saw a comment somewhere earlier today that said that the paper review on this morning's Broadcasting House was 'typical BBC' in that all three guests - a BBC presenter, a BBC comedian and a poet 'discovered' by the BBC - made the kinds of remarks about Shaker Aamer that only people inside the BBC bubble (and its various connecting bubbles) could possibly think and say. 

Though only two of the guests were actually involved (the BBC presenter and the BBC comedian), I think that's a fair point. 

Are these views (the only views heard) typical of the general public? I very much doubt it:

Carrie Gracie: Sue, you first. What caught your eye? 

Sue MacGregor: Well, I'm looking at The Observer, this morning's Observer, and the Shaker Aamer story is, of course, featuring very large too in that. He is the British chap who was in Guantanamo Bay for so many years and he's just flown back and The Observer has a lead story on it: "Shaker Aamer will need years of therapy after release from Guantanamo." Now, of course, Guantanamo was one of the first promises that President Barack Obama made in his first term of office, which was, I think on Day Two, which was it would close close down, and everyone thought - well, a lot of people thought - this would be a very good idea. And as we all know, it's still open all these years later. And Michael Cohen in The Observer in the story next to the Shaker Aamer story, says, what a shame that President Obama didn't try to get it through Congress then because now it looks impossible with an increasingly right-wing Republican opposition.  

Carrie Gracie: Hmm. Sanjeev Kohli, what do you make of the coverage of this story? 

Sanjeev Kohli: Well, I do worry because there's talk of him maybe getting a million pounds compensation and I can already read the Daily Mail reader's reaction to this. To them I would say a million pounds doesn't really cover 14 years of your freedom being taken away from you. I understand that when he left his pregnant wife and his child was born when he was incarcerated. So, yeah, I can't see that any amount of money would actually compensate for that. What it does also do is it gives us a new time-frame because I believe that one 'Shaker Aamer' is going to be equivalent to I think two 'Chilcotts'. So I think the scientists out there...we could have a new time-frame we could apply to science now. 

Having got over Sue MacGregor inevitably going straight to The Observer (something she's done before on these paper reviews), I was immediately struck by her calling Shaker a "British chap" - which couldn't be more wrong for starters. And, oh, he's going to have to endure years of therapy. (My heart bleeds for him). And, oh, she's more than happy (despite being a BBC presenter) to make it clear that she shares the belief that closing Guantanamo would be "a very good idea". And that, despite the evidence that Barack Obama broke his promise, it's mostly down to those increasingly right-wing Republicans. "If only", eh Sue?

Sanjeev, like a true BBC comedian, went straight for Daily Mail readers, ("O.M.G. The Daily Mail...er..readers! Total Nazis!"), ignoring the fact that the evil Daily Mail has been one of the most active campaigners for Shaker Aamer's release (though no one on BH pointed that out). Yes, said Sanjeev, give Shaky the money, give him more money, give him all the money in the world, and please think of the children and his pregnant wife (who were in Afghanistan, I believe, when he was arrested doing his 'bid' for 'charidee'). 

Alas for him (though not for me), his 'time-frame' joke bombed even worse than that Tim Vine joke I posted the other day.

Friends reunited

I felt uncomfortable listening to The Reunion about Guantanamo the other day.

“In 2002, a detention camp was hastily built in a remote corner of Cub,(sic) to house the men captured in America's "war on terror". Thirteen years later, it is still there. And in the intervening time, Guantanamo Bay has become a byword for controversy, a place Amnesty International called "the gulag of our time".

(I do wish the BBC would stop quoting Amnesty International. Their opinion is no longer meaningful after a hatful of scandals and impropriety.)

We know Moazzam Begg attended a terror training camp in Syria alongside other notorious individuals, and he makes no secret of the fact that he is a campaigner for Islamist causes. Charges of terrorism against him were dropped amid cloak-and-dagger claims that Ml5 knew all about his activities.  The other ex-inmate of Guantanamo featured in this programme, Sami al Hajj, is also a devout Islamist; the human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith specialises in defending Islamists and alleged terrorists, and Colonel Mike Bumgarner appeared somewhat remorseful about his role as guard at Guantanamo.

Sue MacGregor questioned the two men about their ill-treatment during their detention in Guantanamo. Her sympathetic manner seemed more appropriate for interviewing traumatised bystanders who’d unexpectedly witnessed an atrocity; say, people caught out 'at the wrong place at the wrong time', like holiday-makers at a Tunisian idyll. Or survivors of a tsunami or a natural disaster. 

All the participants in this reunion appeared to agree that the detainees were innocent. They were unfortunate victims of injustice rather than associates of enemies of the West and opponents of democracy. 

We know that Guantanamo Bay was controversial, and that torture and cruelty were allegedly inflicted upon the inmates. It’s not something the west is proud of. In an ideal world the civilised West would be above that, and suspects would be treated humanely, given a fair trial, and either imprisoned or released. However there is nothing ideal about this world now that Islamic terrorism is firmly established and growing.

I felt the presence of  a massive elephant in the studio. Other episodes of this series have featured individuals with different perspectives on a given incident, at least when the occasion is as controversial as Guantanamo. This time everyone in the studio was on the side of Islam and its apologists.