Tweet
Think Progress has found a London Daily Telegraph article that will make your blood run cold. Remember last week the British High Court ruled that documents describing the treatment of Binyam Mohamed, a British resident and prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, could not be released to the public because the Bush Administration had threatened to stop sharing intelligence with England ?
Story not true.
UK government suppressed evidence on Binyam Mohamed torture because MI6 helped his interrogators
So when the Britsh Foreign Secretary asked the court to withold information it was to hide this:
A British official, who is regularly briefed on intelligence operations, said: "The concern was that the document revealed that intelligence from the British agencies was used by the Americans and that there were British questions asked while Binyam Mohamed was being tortured.
"Miliband is being pushed hard by the intelligence agencies to protect the identity of those involved."
The 25 lines edited out of the court papers contained details of how Mr Mohamed’s genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding, the controversial technique of simulated drowning, "is very far down the list of things they did," the official said.
[emphasis added]
Got that? Waterboarding is not even the #2 most evil thing the did.
NO ONE can tell me with a straight face that the monsters who perpetrated these acts could possibly have believed for a nano second–batshit crazy John Yoo memos or no–that this was not a crime.
This debunks the good faith reliance on legal opinions defense–flat out. And if federal prosecutors feel squeamish about arguing that to a jury, I don’t.
Hell, I would even feel confident arguing that to a jury in the federal courthouse in Manhattan.
You know, the courthouse that is a short stroll away from Ground Zero? You know, the courthouse that would draw a jury pool full of people who know exactly how horrible the attacks of 9/11 really were? I have confidence that those New Yorkers would recoil, just as I do, at the thought that these atrocities were carried out in their names, and would vote to convict those who betrayed our nation’s honor and human values in such a depraved way.
Let me repeat, because this is important, the Binyam Mohammed documents negate the "good faith reliance on a legal opinion" defense; both for the guys with the scalpels (and whatever else they did that was "worse than waterboarding" [shudder]) AND for the guys that ordered them to do it.
Remember, Cheney said that they ordered each technique individually from the White House.
Twenty-seventh in a series on torture and the law.
[Editor's note: The photo by takomabibelot features a banner created and designed by Firedoglake reader BonnieT of Austin, Texas, where she operates OpposeTorture.org.]
117 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Yes, but the CIA operatives were wearing suitcoats and ties, so it’s all good.
-Andy Card
How much is it going to take before Obama directs Holder to investigate the Bush administration’s crimes against humanity? How much?
I make my calls, send my emails but is there any hope at all of justice prevailing?
I can’t even think how to comment on this. Horrific.
Up until now, there has been some debate about whether or not field level people had a valid defense (back when we thought waterboarding was the “worst” of it) that they had resonably relied upon the fact that there were supposed to be legal memos that said it was legal to do this.
But slicing someone with a scalpel? It would be impossible to believe that ANYONE would think that was not illegal.
So, since this seems to shoot a giant cannon hole through the “good faith reliance” defense, maybe Obama will act?
OMG, and I think it is only going to get worse as we find out more of what was done in the so called WOT.
This must be prosecuted, I don’t give a damn what cover a DOJ piece of paper was supposed to have said.
This won’t make the news.
Our citizens need the more stimulative stimulus stimulation.
Move along.
OMG…. Hideous
Will Obama hold the war criminals to account?
The torturers are not guilty of torture.
Those who authorized torture are not guilty of having authorized torture.
Those who were tortured, were not tortured.
Does that sound like Karl Rove to Yoo?
Well, I’m trying to MAKE it make the news. You can do your part. There is a spotlight function at the top of the thread. It lets you email this post to the news outlets of your choice.
That unnamed “British Official” is going to meet with a very speedy and ignominious end. Or maybe just plain death.
T-
War Crime Trials NOW! How can we ever live this down as Americans unless these War Criminals are brought to justice and punished to the full extant of all Laws both American and International!
Wow. Haven’t had my knuckles rapped like that since gradeschool.
Let me see if I can remember how the spotlight function works.
Thanks LHP. Love your work, always have.
T-
Aloha, lhp and Ya’ll! The TP article goes on further…
All the more reason close Gitmo…!
Huff Post says Leahy wants a “comprehensive” investigation of the Bush administration. Suggests the creation of a truth and reconciliation commission to uncover the “misdeeds” of the past eight years.
Thanks VERY much, LHP.
One of the things that Mr. Mohamed is trying to get released are the photographs of his cut genitals that were taken by officials, so he can prove when it was done.
Mr. Mohamed is STILL in Guantanamo, is on a hunger strike, and by accounts is dying :(
Standing for justice and accountability,
For Dan,
Heather
DING DING DING! We have a winnah!
I do enjoy seeing the Lake featured so prominently…
Such a commission SHOULD have the ability to refer some cases for prosecution.
His US Armed forces lawyer is going the England to try to get the dossier released. She said that she was shocked by how thin he was.
I think you are right that he is dying.
this is one of THE MOST important posts, I just got here so I don’t know if anyone posted this from think progress;
UpdateToday in San Francisco, “a little-publicised court case into the treatment of Mohamed will open” in federal court. Andrew Sullivan notes that “we’ll find out if the Obama administration intends to keep the evidence as secret as the Bush administration did.”
his brother was interviewed by the BBC. The audio is not availbale in all geographic areas for some reason.
Hi Perris. We have people trying to get real time info on that. We’ re following it
Yup, and make sure to contact the TV and radio media outlets, because they’re where most Americans get their news nowadays.
Conditions at Gitmo have deteriorated under Obama. Can’t remember where I found that, maybe democracynow. Especially related to prisoners on hunger strikes. Apparently being forcably fed even more brutally than during W.
The problem with having a Truth and Reconcilition Commission regarding torture under the Bush administration is that they are designed to operate where the victims and perpetrators are citizens of the same country, and therefore they give immunity from prosecution in return for truthful testimony. The overwhelming number of victims of torture, including Mr. Mohamed, are not Americans. Americans do not have to right to decide that the victims cannot seek justice.
Standing for justice and accountability,
For Dan,
Heather
The BBC interview with his military lawyer
H/t to Siun for the last 2 links
sorry, I believe that was not the real cia, I believe they were “team b”
cheney’s cronies put into the cia to make shit up, when the real cia wouldn’t play along they made up crap to undermine nixon’s detante, when they wouldn’t play along again cheney got team b going again and made up crap to get us into Iraq and I believe it was team b that did this torture bullshit
because the real cia KNOWS the only reason you initiate policies of torture is to perpetuate insurgency
You can only spotlight to 10 members of the chattering class at one time.
All of you need to pick 10 and spotlight. Now get to it.
Thank you, Prof prop. My darkest suspicions realized. Truly sickening.
THANX Lhp!
Yeah–guess ya gotta force it down or they die on ya- and THEN where are ya?
we need to talk about this from a national security perspective not a moral perspective
we need to point out torture CAUESES issues it does not prevent them, torture CREATES insurgents it does not disuade them, torture PREVENTS us from getting info it does not enhance info
“There was a lot bout this prisoner business they didn’t tell me when I signed on with this outfit”
Yeah, but the way I read it, Leahy is not demanding prosecution. Just “fact finding.”
We gots plenty of facts. What we need is accountability.
No one should be above the law.
Bob in HI
evil, evil, evil. Trials for war criminals NOW, starting with bush & cheney.
people like jon stuart have to be our journalists and that’s sad for the fourth estate
I have a diary recognizing his journalism, check this out;
Would these reports be enough, legally speaking, for a US Attorney to have Mr. Cheney brought in for questioning under oath? They suggest reason to believe a crime was committed, and VP Cheney’s statements about his role in overseeing the regime of enhanced interrogation techniques would imply that he approved of this.
And if so, could any US Attorney do this, or would it only be one with geographic jurisdiction (USA for DC, USA for wherever Cheney is now, or some other USA?)
Perfect.
And when(?) you argue that case, may I humbly offer to “carry your briefcase” for the occasion?
The jury would be out for all of 20 min., I think.
I can only guess, but in our experience of similar cases in Canada (we have at least eight that we know about, which to me means that there must be more), both things are always true — government officials and agency people in both countries are doing a lot of CYA.
The Telegraph is always going to have a Tory tilt, and David Davis definitely is, so this is a political overstatement:
I have no trouble at all believing that MI6 conspired (and politicians at higher levels? up to the PM?), but pretty obviously, no one involved is off the hook.
Stephen Gray mentioned precisely these activities in his book Ghost Plane. Good to see it’s making it’s way into somebody’s legal system
Thank you, LHP.
Passing along the knuckle-rapping, are you? *g*
(not disagreeing, just chuckling)
Force-feeding is torture as well. Ye gods: this has to stop yesterday.
Only 10 digs, need thousands
The trick would be for the AUSA to actually get his paws on the documents in the first place.
I have no clue how they are written or how thorough a record they make.
I am fact deficient, here.
There aren’t a lot of good options at the moment are there? Obama wants to figure out how to let those go who are not dangerous and then find some solution for those who are- in the meantime- he either lets em all go, lets em die, or force feeds em..
Just one small caveat – please remember I share the passion of everyone here – just one teeny tiny “but”-
As to timing -I honestly think the American public is so panicked over being unemployed or about-to-be-unemployed and generally how to make ends meet that most will not or cannot give full attention to this issue, horrible as it is.
Timing is often everything in accomplishing your ends – I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to hold off on ramping up for just a little while. Once people feel that the economy is going to stabilize and can ease off the current panic, they’ll be able to absorb the news and react with the indignaiton required to get prosecutions moving.
(Okay, ducking -please take in spirit intended)
ABSOLUTELY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Standing with you,
For Dan,
Heather
This story had already come out quite some time ago, but certainly needs airing for the SF court proceedings.
Here is an excerpt from his lawyer’s amicus brief from Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Jan 2006:
The masked men first used the scalpel to slash a
small, one-inch cut on Mr. Mohamed’s right chest. Mr.
Mohamed recalls screaming because the pain was so
sudden. Next, they cut him on the left side of his chest.
He resisted screaming this time, as he knew the cut was
coming. This appeared to agitate Marwan all the more.
“One of them took my penis in his hand and began to
make cuts,” reports Mr. Mohammed. “He did it once,
and they stood still for maybe a minute, watching my
reaction. I was in agony, crying . . . I was screaming.”
This appalling abuse went on for perhaps two
hours, and Mr. Mohamed’s penis was cut 20 or 30
times. There was blood all over the place.
This torture procedure was frequent at first, and
then took place every three or four weeks. The men
would enter the cell, tie him up, and spend about an
hour cutting small slashes in his penis. They would do
it slowly and deliberately. One man would make a cut,
and then would smoke a cigarette, talking to the others
in some Moroccan dialect that he could not catch. Then
another would take his turn. They never addressed a
word to him. Mr. Mohamed describes how they would
tip some kind of liquid on the cuts. The burning was
like grasping a hot coal, but not with your hands.
At one point, Mr. Mohamed asked a guard why
they were willing to do America’s torture, and the
guard said: “America’s really pissed off at what
happened, and they’ve said to the world, either you’re
with us or you’re against us. We Moroccans say we’re
with you. So we’ll do whatever they want.”
When Mr. Mohamed asked another guard what
the point of the torture was as he was willing to say
anything and everything they wanted, the guard told
him: “As far as I know, it’s just to degrade you. So
when you leave here, you’ll have these scars and you’ll
never forget. So you’ll always fear doing anything but
what the U.S. wants.”
At least Cheney/Bush’s allies were willing to be truthful about the actual purpose of torture.
BTW, I made a total hash out of the blockquoting system in my #44.
Ignore the block quotes
If you leave a comment it gets counted twice!!
All these pigs should be tried and punished and sentenced to Gotmo so they can get the “Treatment”. They earned it in Spades!
AAAANNNNDDD his new Pentagon General Counsel has not yet gotten his full Senate vote, and so, is not availbale to do those reviews.
Senate needs to get off its ass
Remember, Cheney said that they ordered each technique individually from the White House.
someone needs to ask Colin Powell and everyone else present at those meetings why they failed to speak out.
DIGG!!
Let me get a couple of things out of the way quickly. First, that Miliband did have two (at least) reasons to engage in the cover up (as the article acknowledged) – to protect British intelligence agents (who, unlike US Presidential torturers are at least the subject of an investigation by AG Scotland) AND ALSO to protect the CIA and the relationship with the CIA. Second, it was the Obama White House that specifically and directly issued a “thank you for keeping our secrets” to the British gov after the court’s ruling. Think about that – the court issues an opinion that says, “we have evidence of criminal activity in front of us, but Miliband is telling us that if we release it the US will jeopardize our national security and quit sharing information with the UK, so we have to suppress evidence of UK and US governmental crimes to protect national security”
And Obama says, “thanks guys.”
To me the only thing heartening at all in the article is the fact that the House Judiciary is pushing on this case. Since last year I have been puzzle and angry that no one in Congress seemed to want to track down WHO and on WHAT AUTHORIZATION the statments about US intel sharing were being made by, since Miliband was publically announcing them. Think how many Americans are in the UK at any given time, and explain to me how threatening to withhold information that may protect them isn’t something Congress should take a look at?
The info on Mohamed’s treatement has been pretty public since at least the publication of Grey’s Ghost Plane and his story gets some pretty direct treatment there. Also, there is background on Mohamed in Rose’s Vanity Fair piece, Tortured Reasoning.
Some additional info on Mohamed’s case is that he reportedly got “the treatment” from the CIA when they picked him up in Morocco (it was Morocco, where the US much later sent Errachidi -the London chef – in what seemed an attempt to disappear him after they released him from GITMO) That treatment allegedly included the quaint CIA custom of stripping their detainees then having women take pictures of them. And in Mohamed’s case, apparently even the CIA picture babe gasped a bit at what she saw. Now what do you think happened to those pictures? Or to any of the other CIA still pics? You think there were no emails or communications about the genital mutiliations? I don’t buy it – and yet, how many lawyers in the Bush – and now Obama – administration have sat quiet and sat silent about all this despite court orders to produce. The Deputy Solicitor General, with reported torture/hypothermia killings and disappeared children and razored genitalia stood before the Sup Ct and certified that the US doesn’t torture and it doesn’t even do things “like” torture. And he’s never had to pay one penalty for it.
Keep in mind that Mohamed is the “other source” with Zubaydah for the Padilla material witness warrant. Go back and read Comey’s Padilla presser again – he and his “research team” would have pretty much HAD to ave the info on Mohamed’s interrogation before he gave that presser, but look at all he leaves out. Also, Mukasey was the Judge who handled the orginal material witness warrant and Padilla’s lawyers raised torture of the underlying sources before Mukasey, who dismissed it as a concern. We can trust the FBI and DOJ after all, right? umm, has he ever followed through on any of his professional duties after he came into possession of this kind of evidence?
Mohamed also is a named plaintiff in the Jeppeson suit being argued today in the 9th circuit.
So many people and places intersect in his story, it’s no wonder no one wants it told. The list of those who have told lies to cover up this case and this man’s treatment is awfully long. I’d like to understand how, after his case, Rice was able to ok sending Errachidi to Morocco too, for that matter, but no one really is dogging any of this. Certainly not Congress, and MOST CERTAINLY not Obama or the lost souls (in the truest sense of the expression) at DOJ.
I was confused by the article — where was the torture done? It doesn’t sound like Guantanamo. And were British (and/or Americans) at the site?
Or was this some black prison where the UK/US had a ‘hands off’ (wink wink) approach?
The problem with that, is that it will soon be too late.
Binyam will soon die from self imposed starvation.
Today, the Obama DOJ stuck by the claim of states secrets entered by the Bush Admin in a case in California against the airline company that provided the rendition planes. I ronically, Binyam Mohammed is a co-plaintiff in that case.
Holder/Obama did NOT change litagtion tactics. BMAZ will have a piece up soon about it, but–Pups–no change to beleive in.
not on rendition and torture
Well, has anyone tried reasonable conversation with those who are on hunger strike? I doubt that most want to commit suicide, so why not find out what their specific complaints are? I suspect that a lot of them are reasonable.
Force-feeding can kill people. Over time, it certainly damages the digestive system permanently.
A couple of questions:
Who allegedly conducted this torture? US personnel or persons from another nation?
Is there verification of this story?
and Obama is running cover for the sick sadists that did it and ordered it. So you have exchanged one war criminal for another. Obstruction and aiding and abetting BushCo crimes(by failure to investigate and prosecute) puts the scalpel in Obamas hands. Until BushCo is held responsible the US has no moral authority on anything or anyone. No different than Saddam. You have one very sick society.
Well yes, but so does death.
Well … there are certainly ways to make the force feeding less of a nightmare, including using anesthetic when inserting the tube, and NOT beating them up when they won’t cooperate.
These men need hope. They need to know that they will be listened to.
Standing for justice and accountability,
For Dan,
Heather
Seems to me that we’re out there beyond the facts by about three miles with this story.
Who in that administration has a mind that works like this? And did they get off watching the videos?
The CIA folks that actually did it are like whores who set absolutely no limits as to what they’ll do for a buck.
Sick.
Call me naive but I think being held in isolation at Guantanamo for years and being tortured and probably not being allowed to fully and freely exercise your religion just might be enough to have someone go on a hunger strike
Oh. Somehow I missed the part about the hunger strike.
I see your point, absolutely.
And I haven’t forgotten debater Obama saying presidents need to be able to do more than one thing at a time.
OTOH, I do think the average person trying to figure out whether they will be able to pay the bills or buy groceries next week just isn’t going to take it in, and without public pressure, I doubt that much will happen soon enough.
I will DIGG and try to SPOTLIGHT (never done that yet), though. Maybe I’m too pessimistic, or maybe Leahy will take it up with the administratio, as well as his committee.
Keep in mind that Panetta indicated not only no charges, but no investigations. That pretty much jives with a situation where, after real investigations, you wouldn’t be able to help but charge.
Holder has said he just can’t figure out how anyone who is following orders can have mens rea. That’s such a crock. He can’t call anyone guilty without an investigation or seeing the memos and facts, but he can certify mental states without any of that. The response to that kind of crap (including Mohamed’s case, el-Masri’s where they knew for months he wasn’t the right el-Masri but kept him anyways, etc. etc. etc.) is too damn long to get into right now, but let’s start with step one.
Everyone involved in this (including the highly credible Scott Muller who has now had some light shed on his “questionable” testimony over the killings of the wife and infant child of an American missionary) was so certain that the actions being contemplated were so legal that the lynchpin of their program was . . . to try to locate it in places where US courts would not claim jurisdiction.
What idiot buys that? Being told “of course it’s legal, so let’s make sure you only do it in places where no US court will claim jurisdiction”
Obama’s crew makes me so angry. It’s fine, necessary and good to work on the economic disaster, but here’s a clue. Depraved societies always fail, and there is nothing that provides proof positive of depravity as much as a President and his AG and his head of the CIA saying that Presidential torturers are above the law – whether they say it in words or by their actions.
On June 12th, last year, at a small press conference in Vancouver, I did. His answer rambled on for ten minutes, like some trying to get out of acknowledging that they had done something wrong.
Standing for justice and accountability,
For Dan,
Heather
Rachel will be on it.
I agree, Obama has about a gillion emergencies all happening at once. I hope hrested up well during his vaca in Hawaii. He will need all his energy now
No argument at all.
Obama’s got a very short time frame to make changes- or he becomes culable and the door will shut tightly for the duration of his presidency.
No kidding. I agree completely.
Is that a vibe, or do you know that?
58 – the genital razoring part of the “story” took place in Morocco according to all the published accounts. It has been reported in Ghost Plane and by numerous other sources and has pretty much been confirmed by the British High Court itself, when it issued it’s opinion that the information it was being asked to suppress showed evidence of crimes of such magnitude that it had, of its own motion, “invited” the British media to file for the information’s release and when the court said in essence that it had been blackmailed into not releasing evidence of crimes.
????????
Please clarify what you mean, I’m not sure what you are getting at.
With gratitude,
Heather
Mistype in the title — should be WaterboarDing, not Waterboaring!!
That has basically been Prof Turley’s take when he’s on KO. That if Obama does not investiagte and 9where appropraite) prosecute torture, he become complicit inthe crimes himself
Obama taking same stand as W on extraordinary rendition lawsuit. It’s a state secret.
Mary, if you read the Daily Telegraph article, it seems to imply that razoring may have taken place when US and British agents where present and that they knew it was being done
That is new news
little monster who rams firecrackers into frogs’ rectums and lights them – grows to be big monster…
I’m confused.. Did we mutilate the guy or did the Brits?
ThanxJust fixed it
79 – It has been reported pretty consistently that when the US transported him from Pakistan to Morocco (the kind of transport Panetta says he wants to conintue – Mohamed was not Moroccan and there were no warrants against him outstanding in Morocco, “interrogation for the US” was pretty much the only reason for the shipment) they were aware of his questioning and his being tortured during the questioning (the torture being basically the point of handing him off to Morocco) Pretty much like Arar’s torture, there were questions given to the torturer and info that the US wanted tortured out of him. The most “new” part of the news is that the UK was ALSO sending questions to the torturers.
And Obama’s WH thanked the high court for keeping the lid on this.
Is there any hope from the international community? Since we didn’t sign on to the ICC, is that possibility out? Any word on this from Phillipe Sandes?
Not sure. According to the daily telegraph, the Britsh High Court redacted partsout of a report about Binyam. Supposedly the redacted sections talk baout the scalpelling. And indicate that the Brits were present and knew and were complicite.
What it does not make clear is whether Americans were present. Whether it was americans who did this or whether this was the Morrocan scalpelling.
A difference betrween the British report and the Ghost Plane report is that in GP Binyam was not questioned when they cut his penis. He was merely being mutilated to break him down.
The British report seems to indicate that British intelligence officers provided questions to be put to him and provided info to form the the basis of questions to be put to him and got info from those questions.
Which suggests that there may have been sperate instances of doing this to the poor wretch.
What I mean is that it would be helpful to have more information about this story such as where did the alleged torturing happen, who allegedly DID the torture, and is there any confirmation that the events actually happened..
Stuff like that.
Or puts them on the military base of some general looking for a promotion.
As anyone who has been paying attention will have noticed I have been trying to get you guys interested in the Binyam Mohamed case for ages. Now may I help a little, having read the published High Court judgement in full.
This issue is probably about rendition. No-one is suggesting that either British or American personnel actually cut Mohamed’s genitals. No, it’s more subtle than that. You send them off to less scrupulous people, in this case Moroccans, to do it for you. Then you get him back suitable wrecked and try less obvious methods. Actually for what it’s worth I think this is worse than doing it yourself.
Further, the material at issue here, the judgement makes clear, is nothing so graphic as photos. It is not agent’s reports, American or British. It is the redacted passages from their OWN judgement which explain why the HIgh Court Judges judges themselves thought there was a clear case of inhuman and unusual treatement, and an arguable case for torture.
Got that? The Judges are being told they can’t explain their own judgement!
This is far from over. The judges now clearly feel that the Foreign Secretary told them there was a threat. They decided on the basis entirely of his Certificate to that effect, and reluctantly at that. Then he said in Parliament there was no threat. That starts to sound as if he has a choice. He lied to Parliament or he perjured himself in his Certificate. Both of these, in this country.
Well he already HAS em on a military base- and EVERY general is looking for promotion aren’t they?
OK, that ABC report was depressing – but there is an update – that Holder is about to begin a review of all “state secrets” assertions – which implies that there’s been no review, and maybe – they’re just doing status quo on the current lawsuit with a possibility of change after review?
Yes, I guess I’m leaning over backward -
I’m not ready yet to give up my optimism, such as it is.
Mary, I’ve read 2 versions of how those “thanks” were communicated: (1) that an aide of Hillary’s took the word; (2) That the London based hold-over aide of Bush/Co communicated it because he had not yet been replaced.
Do you have the real scoop?
If Obama o.k.s this, he has lost me.
That’s my reading too — whether American and/or British (or Canadian, or any other) agents were present is next to irrelevant, and with renditions to Morocco or Egypt or Syria, we have no reason to think they were there. They knew they didn’t need to be — they just passed on the questions.
The CIA black sites would be a different situation.
Bmaz is up next door with his take on the State Secret claims case in SF.
Holder said what he needed to say to get through confirmation. I think he’s got plenty of wiggle room to prosecute should he choose to. I don’t know if he’s inclined to make use of it though. I frankly doubt it.
BMAZ has the state secrets piece up
But that’s the whole probelm. The Britsh High Court just agreed to help with the cover up–so what we have is the London Daily Telegraph reporting
Get some Media on this story I want the GOP to explain this and they will have to if there is enough public out cry please stay on this story LHP.
Perris has a Diary on this too
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/3548
I would like everyone to cover this 24/7 even if its only a comment or a digg it all adds up people.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit…..nistr.html
I do not think that it is necessary or appropriate I would love to hear an argument why anyone would think so.
Then I want pictures of what was done to this poor person flashed right after that argument is made. No face pictures of the victim of course.
And just like Blackwater is part of the domestic law enforcement (See Katrina), the perverts responsible for this sadistic behavior are going to enter civilian life, possibly already are civilian contractors. Thank you, George Bush, for what you have done to my country.
But Obama is NOT taking the same stand as Bush. He is prohibiting extraordinary rendition, but keeping the legal kind such as extradition.
81/85 – LHP, I think you are confusing Pakistan (where he alleges strappado and other torture, but by guys who couldn’t even communicate with him, so they didn’t questions him) He does allege FBI questioning and threats of more torture in Pakistan
Here is some background from reprieve, which is supplying the lawyer who has been defending him and so keep in mind the bias, and also that the FBI has claimed that CIA agents impersonated FBI at various times in dealings with detainees – fwiw –
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/doc…..lMedia.pdf
In any event, Mohamed’s lawyer has indicated several times that his client was being prepped to be a corroboration of Zubaydah’s testimony. It was a kind of bootstrapping of not just info (torturing more than one person to say the same thing, then calling it ‘corroboration’) but also boostrapping justification for torture with more torture (it was OK to torture crazy Zubaydah bc we got him to tell us about a ticking bucketswinging bomb, and we know we should have tortured him bc the ticking bucketswinging bomb story has to be the truth bc we tortured it out of another guy too – and so it goes)
How did the FBI get the info for the warrants without knowing about the torture? It couldn’t have. And at least by the time the DOJ was giving it’s Padilla presser, it knew.
88 – and as a follow up to that, under the torture conventions, you don’t have to be The Torturer to be liable – you need to have conspired to get someone into a torturer’s hands and known about the torture.
Mary, both Panetta and Obama have made it clear that this is NOT what they are going to continue. The extraordinary rendition part is out. The only thing that is continued is normal rendition that has been going on as long as there have been international agreements.
78 – and that lawsuit is about, in part, the Mohamed rendition.
91 – I’ll try to see if I can find a link, but my rememberance is that while there were state dept tsk tsks about “oh, pshaw, we don’t threaten our allies” (which I can see coming from either or both of the sources you mentioned as possibles) the actual THANK YOU came from the WH.
Vibe.
I’ll get to BMAZ in a bit. But youv’e got it wrong LHP. The judges did as much as thy could. They made it as clear as they could, without breaking a law by which they are themselves bound, that they were shown evidence amounting to at least cruel and unusual treatment and likely torture. Please go read the actual published judgement. There can be no doubt they wanted to include the redacted paragraphs. You would understand it all too clearly LHP. If only I understood how to link!
Tex
Today the Obama DOJ invoked sttes secrets in court to protect information about extrodinary rendition. To protect the airplane comapany that provided the flights
Not being an expert on Britsh law. I don’t know if they British judges were bound to keep the redacted info a secret.
Someone has pointed out that the foreign minister said one thing in a sworn certification to the court and another thing in Parliment.
He has apparently perjured himself somewhere.
I think the Britsh High COurt was trying to thread a needle. to put out enough info that public outcry would force the political arm of the gov’t to release the info.
Hopefully, their gamble will work
104 – no, you are wrong. Panetta did say in the first day of his hearing that there would only be rendition to the US to face criminal proceedings, and there would not be renditions to hand off people to third party countries for interrogations. On the second day of his hearings, he walked that cat all the way back and said YEs, we will continue to render to third party countries for “interrogation” Uh, but ya know, we’ll get assurances they wont torture. THat is exactly what Rice’s position/statements were and why the hell would you go kidnap someone in one country for the sole purpose of handing them off to a third party country, but for torture interrogations?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..ia_panetta
So after first saying no extraordinary renditions, he is now saying that they are just going to be closing down black sites where the US does the torture directly, but will still get “Riceian” assurances and hand off to third party countries for interrogation.
It IS EXTRAORDINARY rendition to take someone outside of extradition except to bring them to your country to face charges in your court system under an outstanding warrant.
91 – This isn’t the link I had in mind, but it is one:
http://www.vanityfair.com/poli…..ture200902
This is one of the ones I did see earlier:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_…..870896.stm
109 – the high court has definitely forced this issue and done a great job of backing Miliband into a corner.
The original motions before the court were only for Mohamed’s lawyers who have classified clearances to get access to the info for use in the GITMO proceedings, subject to the classificaitions there. The court kept trying to get the US to agree to turnover the info itself so the britich court wouldn’t be involved, but when the US were pretty much assholes, the court began to have some hearings and they ruled that those hearings would be sealed from the press while they made determinations.
That’s when Miliband began the song and dance of not being able to turn the info over to Mohamed’s LAWYERS even, bc the US was threateing to cut off cooperation. So the court upped the ante. They “invited” the media to ask the court to “reconsider” it’s earlier ruling sealing the hearings (yes, the court went out to the media and said, ’scuse me, you wanna ask me to release the info -wink wink) and they set it for hearing after Obama would be sworn in.
Miliband then came to the court again and said that they couldn’t release bc the US would stop sharing info, and the court then issued its ruling that it felt the info showed crimes and cruel, inhuman etc. treatment which Britain was REQUIRED to pursue under the torture Conventions, but bc of Miliband’s reps on national security, they would not release.
Someone elsewhere indicated that the House of Lords is actually a court of appeals from this ruling, but I have no idea whether that is how it works or not. In any even, the MPs have jumped on this, Miliband has now said to Parliament that he never meant to represent that the US would withdraw cooperation, although um, yeah, they might not be as sharing and caring; and lawyers have re-filed with the high court, saying in light of Miliband’s reps to Parliament – that there is no national security threat or issue – the court is free to revisit it’s ruling.
Not the kind of thing we see from American courts.
Also from the David Rose “you be the judge” update in Vanity Fair,
http://www.vanityfair.com/poli…..ture200902
he quotes the court’s reference to receiving a direct communication from Bellinger to STFU or face consequences:
However, the court “redacted” these paragraphs after Miliband argued that to publish them could damage Britain’s national security.
(Does Steve Clemons still think Bellinger is a “good guy?”)
Rose also points out another flashpoint for Miliband:
The someone was me. The Court actually invited the press to explain why they should release the paragraphs. Again at the risk of being boring, in the judgement they make it entirely clear why they felt bound to accept the Certificate and imply how much they hated it. Obiter, as they say over here, I have spent quite a lot of fascinating time reading pleadings and judgements on matters you guys deal with at the Lake and trying to understand US process. I swear LHP you would love to read this one from Britain. Queens Bench Division CO /4242/2008. It is 75 pages, but they’re all fascinating.
This I can help with . . .
Type in your comment here at FDL as you usually do, but before you hit “submit comment,” here’s how you add a link.
(1) Open a new tab/window to the item to which you want to link.
(2) Copy the URL of that item into your clipboard
(3) Go back to the tab/window with FDL, and highlight the text of your comment that you want to be the link.
(4) In the bar above the box where you type the comment, there are a bunch of little icons. Between the big quotation marks and the “ABC-checkmark” icon, there is a little icon that looks like a chain — click on that. (chain link; get it?)
(5) This brings up a popup box, where you should paste the URL you copied at step 2 above, then hit OK.
(6) Before you hit “submit comment,” click on “preview” to check your work. Preview is your friend. Edit as needed, and recheck if necessary.
(7) Now you’ve made your link — time to share with the world and hit “submit comment”
Good luck!
The London Telegraph, affectionately the London Torygraph, is among the most rightwing of London’s daily, “quality” papers. Its backers oppose the sitting Labour government and are unlikely to hesitate embarrassing it. They win by claiming Blair didn’t have the guts to stand up to Bush, or by “outing” secrets already out. That “British” questions were also asked of a British national imprisoned by the coalition of the billing is normal and reveals nothing, unless the Brits knowingly cooperated in applying torture to get answers to them.
The British intelligence services, no doubt, have their own skeletons to hide and might welcome a chance to blame Bush for keeping them hidden. At the same time, it’s not credible that hiding Bush’s secrets isn’t an important, possibly the most important, aspect of this affair.
Thank you, Mary, for all your fine work, explanations and links. You’ve answered my questions.
I think you deserve The Fire Dog # 1 award! You go into the toughest places, pull out the facts, then patiently teach us puppies to see the truth of the matter.
You are beautiful!
Senate Report Links Bush to Detainee Homicides: Media Yawns, by Glenn Greenwald (includes ACLU FOIA link to military’s own autopsy findings, some attributing manner of death to “homicide”)