Comment at end
10th February, 2010
UPDATE: Score on R4’s PM tonight: Eddie Mair 0, David Miliband 1 (Listen here.) Shameful from the anti-Iraq war, anti-Blair, anti-government BBC. You have one mouth and two ears, Mr Mair. Learn to listen
UPDATE 2: It was MI5 wot dun it! Binyam Mohamed: the government lawyer’s letter to the court of appeal, annotated by Ian Cobain. See Guardian here
[Have these idiotic liberal semantics dissectors the foggiest idea of how little most of us care about such as Mohamed, or how much we appreciate MI5? NO. They have NO idea. No wonder I have no idea which party to vote for. Not one of the major parties stands up for Britain’s interests any more. But an interloper and this dreadful traducement of our secret services – ah, well, they’re different. They surely ARE. Very different. SHAMEFUL nonsense from the courts.]
HIS HOME? NO, IT’S OUR HOME & WE DON’T SHARE IT WITH TERRORISM SUSPECTS
That was my first thoughts on quickly reading the self-congratulatory Reprieve website this morning.
He may have been living here, but he was a “temporary resident” in the cute British way we have of harbouring terrorism suspects or wannabes.
As often before the courts in Britain have made a laughing stock of British “justice”. There is more than welfare dependant payments encouraging so many from other lands to dump themselves upon our liberal, self-destuctive nature.
Meanwhile the courts have handed David Miliband and the Labour party an election-winning card. Let’s see if they have the nous to know how to use it.
From Reprieve’s site:
British resident Binyam Mohamed spent seven years in US custody, most recently in Guantánamo Bay. He came home to the UK in February 2009, after all charges against him were dropped.Binyam was detained in Pakistan and tortured by his Pakistani guards. During this time, he was interrogated by the British and US intelligence services. The British agent was later cross-examined in the proceedings before the British Court and it was clear that he knew that Binyam was to be handed over to the Americans and also that he was at risk of harm
The Court of Appeals today ordered the publication of seven paragraphs that the Foreign Secretary had sought to suppress. Here are the paragraphs:
The following seven paragraphs have been redacted:
[It was reported that a new series of interviews was conducted by the United States authorities prior to 17 May 2001 as part of a new strategy designed by an expert interviewer.
v) It was reported that at some stage during that further interview process by the United States authorities, BM had been intentionally subjected to continuous sleep deprivation. The effects of the sleep deprivation were carefully observed.
vi) It was reported that combined with the sleep deprivation, threats and inducements were made to him. His fears of being removed from United States custody and “disappearing” were played upon.
vii) It was reported that the stress brought about by these deliberate tactics was increased by him being shackled in his interviews
viii) It was clear not only from the reports of the content of the interviews but also from the report that he was being kept under self-harm observation, that the inter views were having a marked effect upon him and causing him significant mental stress and suffering.
ix) We regret to have to conclude that the reports provide to the SyS made clear to anyone reading them that BM was being subjected to the treatment that we have described and the effect upon him of that intentional treatment.
x) The treatment reported, if had been administered on behalf of the United Kingdom, would clearly have been in breach of the undertakings given by the United Kingdom in 1972. Although it is not necessary for us to categorise the treatment reported, it could readily be contended to be at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the United States authorities]
This self-righteous Telegraph article from 5th February shows how far down the road to stupidity our press, as well as our courts have gone. These (presumably Conservative-leaning) commenters are right:
“First of all, since when did British residents get interrogated without a lawyer in a secret place of detention in Pakistan not just with the knowledge of our intelligence agencies but also their hands-on assistance?”
He wasnt resident in Britain, he was resident in Afghanistan.
Nor was he a British Citizen, which is rather a bigger issue, he was an Ethiopian.
An Ethiopian with temporary rights to reside in Britain who is arrested for terrorism in Afghanistan after spending 10 months in Afghanistan.
Nothing for the F/O to get involved in.
I really do not care if this foreign national was tortured on foreign territory by foreign agents. Resident does not equate to citizen.
The big question is why was this terrorist allowed British residency in the first place?
……and excrutiatingly hard to get worked up about. I mean really, in all honesty, does anyone other than the odd rampant libertarian or bored student give a toss when so much better blood has been spilt?
Such hypocritical bull
I heard William say that torture is unacceptable under any circumstances.
However, as Labour’s defence cuts submerge Britain ever closer to nuclear disarmament and potential nuclear attack, the lives of millions may one day depend on information from any source.
ANY CIRCUMSTANCES? Ok, the location of a terrorist nuclear weapon hidden in London can be discovered by torturing the person who concealed it.
Would it be right to torture to save millions of lives, or would law and ethics deny the secret service the only possible avenue for discovering that device?
In the real world, we all know what would happen. So, it effectively means that torture, through theoretical precedent, can’t realistically be outlawed.
Why don’t we just get real?
Were are at War like WW1,WW2 and the Cold War. We gave hospitality to an Ethiopian who decided he would prefer to murder us instead. But defended by a liberal left lawyer and David Davis – anything anti US goes.
I do not care for rendition, Guantanamo or any of it. But when you are at War the normal rules have to be fudged or suspended ! Obama will find that signing a bit of paper to satisfy his leftish supporters is easier than sorting Guantanamo as a problem.
Our security services are following 2000 + suspects in the UK and that means there will be as many again who are ’sleepers’ and not on the radar. These people want to murder us and US citizens – they had a good go with 3000+ in the USA and 50+ in London. These are the sort of people who recruit female and child suicide bombers – the type of people who threw 150+ Al Fatah supporters off a tower block in Gaza recently.
We know in the UK that those Islamofascists under curfew are still planning attacks on us. What do people expect in War ? In WW2 we interned the enemy within. We ought to do the same again.
If you go to Westminster it is like a fortress ( and deservedly so). It contains though hoardes of troughing MP’s living a secure and privileged lifestyle – far distant from the problems they have created/ allowed to develop in the UK.
The IRA came close to assassinating one PM. It murdered others and condemned Mrs Tebbitt to a wheelchair. Islamofascists have no fear of death so when the next tranche of killers get through I hope that Liberty, David Davis et al will remember that we followed all of the Queensbury rules. That will make them content. But not those murdered or their loved ones.
Who cares! These guys are terrorists and deserve what they get. An Ethiopian trying for residency in Britain, caught in Afghanistan where he was “sorting out personal issues” – don’t make me laugh!!!!
Aside from Rik, the comments here really brighten my day, and give me hope that we can win the war against Islamo-fascism. I’m also glad that people have pointed out the absurdity of Neil getting so worked up about the fate of a British “resident”, not even a citizen, caught in Afghanistan! As for “abandoning” the war on terror, when one side “abandons” a war and the other does not, it’s called losing. Has anyone here seen any sign that Islamic fanatics have abandoned their war against us? Anyone? Anyone?
Neil, I notice that you didn’t mention that Al-Queda training materials instruct their members to ALWAYS claim torture. Nor, more importantly, did you point out how dozens of those released from Guantanamo have gone back to terrorism! Not that I expect impartiality and fairness from someone affiliated with Amnesty International, of course. How much of your time do you waste attacking democracies, and how little time do you spend going after dictatorships that violate human rights on a far more massive and blatant scale than democracies could ever imagine?
Binyam Mohamed is not British, is not a British resident (he may have once lived in the UK) and was strongly suspected of having terrorist links. Why is the UK judicial system getting involved with this man and putting the UK/US intelligence sharing agreement in jeopardy? Thank goodness that the US government has the backbone to take real action in the supression of terrorism. The human rights of the many (us)outweigh the rights of one foreign terrorist suspect. If this man has been tortured, then those now making a fuss should address their concerns to those who did so, not encumbering our courts with this nonsense.
Oh please do us all a favour, and shut up about abuse of human rights again. Firstly where is the evidence that the supposed torture happened. Secondly this was an Ethiopian, captured in Afganistan, and interrogated, harshly or otherwise, in Pakistan and Morocco. These are both sovereign and Islamic countries. Might I ask what the hell this has to do with Britain, or our pontificating, politically correct judiciary. Where this a British citizen then he should stand trial for treason, in a British court of law.
…’Since when did Britain allow torture by proxy? ‘…
That’s easy, I’m surprised you hadn’t heard.
When the Labour Party surrendered to the Provisional IRA, that’s when. That’s when ‘murder’ – the legal term – was replaced by the phrase ‘clearing up a few administrative affairs’ by a prominent pro-IRA British Labour MPs, to abject silence by the Prime Minister of the time, also the leader of Parliamentary Labour members. Proxy endorsement by spineless and supine silence. So that’s when the current Government decided that, … well, let’s call them ‘rigorous interview techniques’ were given the unambiguous OK by Labour. Don’t remember ‘Liberty’ or ‘Amnesty International’ raising so much as a peep then either? So it’s a little strange they might choose to become involved at this very late stage.
Unless to ‘Liberty’ and Amnesty; IRA violence is perfectly fine by them. And let’s face it, they probably do think that in any case.
As far as the alibi of the traditional Guantanamo inmate, that they wandered away from a wedding in Stepney and then mysteriously ambled into a Guerilla training camp on the Afghan\Pakistan border, that should be a warning to anyone who wants them to live in dangerous britain. Freed on british streets, they seem incapable of finding their way home.
Bad idea to house them here then.
The best solution is not to allow entrance to any nationals of Middle Eastern and African countries. Then there will be fewer such anguished moral problems for m’learned friends to debate in our courts for which we, the taxpayers, foot the bill.
The man is not British. Resident does not mean citizen or subject. The passport he had was forged. I don’t know why the High Court is wasting time on this. Is this the best the whingers can do to find a test case against rendition?
Tags: Afghanistan, BBC bias, binyam mohamed, britain, court of appeal, David Miliband, Eddie Mair, Ethiopian, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, liberal courts, not binyam mohamed's home, not British, PM BBC, telegraph, terror suspect, Terrorism, usa