andrew


CIA chief sacked for opposing torture

By Sarah Baxter and Michael Smith, in The Times Online

The CIA’s top counter-terrorism official was fired last week because he opposed detaining Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation and using forms of torture such as ‘water boarding’, intelligence sources have claimed.

Robert Grenier, head of the CIA counter-terrorism centre, was relieved of his post after a year in the job. One intelligence official said he was ‘not quite as aggressive as he might have been’ in pursuing Al-Qaeda leaders and networks.

Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counter-terrorism at the agency, said: ‘It is not that Grenier wasn’t aggressive enough, it is that he wasn’t ‘with the programme’. He expressed misgivings about the secret prisons in Europe and the rendition of terrorists.’

Grenier also opposed ‘excessive’ interrogation, such as strapping suspects to boards and dunking them in water, according to Cannistraro.

(more…)

View with comments

Italy may put CIA agents on trial in absentia

By Phil Stewart from Reuters

Milan prosecutors expect to launch procedures within a month that could put 22 CIA agents accused of kidnapping a Muslim cleric in Milan on trial in absentia, a senior judicial source said.

The source, who asked not to be named, said prosecutors were growing tired of perceived foot-dragging by Washington and Rome over requests that would advance their investigation — one of several European probes into suspected U.S. covert operations.

(more…)

View with comments

EU justice commissioner addresses new committe on extraordinary rendition

From the EU Observer

EU justice commissioner Franco Frattini will on Monday (13 February) in Strasbourg address a new, temporary parliamentary committee assigned to investigate allegations of CIA illegal “extraordinary rendition” and European governments’ complicity.

The temporary committee was set up following accusations from a Council of Europe (CoE) special investigator, Swiss lawyer Dick Marty, saying it was “highly credible” that European governments condoned CIA abduction of suspected terrorists for transportation from European airports to countries in which torture is used.

The Marty report also stated that governments in Eastern European countries may have let the CIA use camps in to interrogate terrorist suspects.

Justice commissioner Frattini has earlier indicated that EU member states as well as candidate countries such as Romania could face sanctions if the allegations are found to be true.

View with comments

House Committee Kills Torture Inquiries

By Brendan Coyne in The New Standard

Feb. 10 ‘ A key House of Representatives committee Wednesday put a quick stop to three resolutions to investigate the US government’s tactical use and support of torture in the “war on terror.” In a party line vote, the International Relations Committee turned back three proposals to demand information on extraordinary renditions and abusive treatment of detainees from the Executive Branch.

The resolutions called for the Bush administration to release unspecified documents pertaining to the use of extraordinary rendition, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s December trip to Europe, and current US policy relating international law.

(more…)

View with comments

Murder in Samarkand – and other books that may be of Interest

Online Collection of Supporting Documents

Synopsis

Craig Murray was the United Kingdom’s Ambassador to Uzbekistan until he was removed from his post in October 2004 after exposing appalling human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of President Islam Karimov. In this candid and at times shocking memoir, he lays bare the dark and dirty underside of the War on Terror. In Uzbekistan, the land of Alexander the Great and Tamburlaine, lurks one of the most hideous tyrannies on earth – one founded on cotton slavery and brutal torture. As neighbouring ‘liberated’ Afghanistan produces record levels of heroin, the Uzbek rulers cash in on massive trafficking. They are even involved in trafficking their own women to prostitution in the West. But this did not prevent Karimov being viewed as a key US ally in the War on Terror. When Craig Murray arrived in Uzbekistan, he was a young Ambassador with a brilliant career and a taste for whisky and women. But after hearing accounts of dissident prisoners being boiled to death and innocent people being raped and murdered by agents of the state, he started to question both his role and that of his country in so-called ‘democratising’ states. When Murray decided to go public with his shocking findings, Washington and 10 Downing Street reached the conclusion that he had to go. But Uzbekistan had changed the high-living diplomat and there was no way he was going to go quietly.

Synopsis

On December 28th 2000, Charlotte Wilson, a 27-year-old VSO worker, was killed when her bus, the inauspiciously named Titanic Express, was ambushed in war-torn Burundi. The attackers were members of the Hutu-extremist FNL, a faction linked to those responsible for the Rwandan genocide. Twenty others died with Charlotte, including her Burundian fiance. One of the few survivors was given a chilling message for the Burundian government: “We’re going to kill them all and there’s nothing you can do”. In “Titanic Express”, Charlotte’s brother Richard charts his painful struggle to unravel what happened that day, to understand the complex and brutal history that lay behind it. Cutting through the obfuscations of the authorities, he uncovers a story of violence, fanaticism and neglect that exposes the self-interest and double standards at the heart of our supposed commitment to human rights and the fight against terror. As the facts begin to emerge, the family’s deep personal grief is compounded by the realisation that this murder is just one among thousands, in a war fuelled as much by western cynicism and African greed as by ethnic divisions. “Titanic Express” is a political detective story, a memoir of grief and a moving portrait of an extraordinary woman who died at the very moment she had found fulfilment. In gripping detail it shows the human reality of lives torn apart by the machinations of war and diplomatic expediency, where competing versions of the truth can be as deadly as bullets and machetes.


Synopsis

International lawyer Philippe Sands has a unique insider’s view of the elites who govern our lives. His sensational revelations in Lawless World changed the political agenda overnight, forcing Tony Blair to publish damning material that he’d tried to hide. Now, in this updated edition with a shocking new chapter, you can get the full story of how the US and UK governments are riding roughshod over international agreements on human rights, war, torture and the environment – the very laws they put in place. Here sands looks at why global rules matter for all of us. And he powerfully makes the case for preserving them …before justice becomes history.


Synopsis

The Caspian Region, lying south of Russia, west of China and north of Afghanistan, contains the world’s largest untapped oil and gas resources. As much as 100 billion barrels of crude oil and 40 per cent of the world’s global gas reserves can be found in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Since the fall of communism, politicians and multi-national companies have struggled to possess and develop these resources.

In his penetrating new book, Lutz Kleveman reveals that there is a new ‘Great Game’ being played out in the region, a modern variant of the nineteenth-century clash of imperial ambitions between Britain and Russia, but with higher stakes. Desperate to wean itself from dependence on the OPEC cartel, the United States is now pitted in a struggle with Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Iran ‘ most of which are nuclear powers ‘ for dominance of the Caspian’s fabulous energy reserves and its pipeline routes.

Lutz Kleveman researched and travelled extensively in the Caucasus, the Caspian and Central Asia, meeting with oil barons, generals, diplomats and warlords from Kabul to Moscow. The New Great Game is a revelatory and extremely timely account of the perilous game to dominate the crucial resources ‘ one that mixes religion and oil to explosive effect.


From Scotland’s best traditional music outfit.

Includes the original track ‘Ambassador Craig Murray’s Reel’.

Synopsis

In one breathtaking, breathless volume Fitzroy Maclean tells of his career as diplomat and soldier from 1937-45.

The first part of the book deals with his diplomatic career in the USSR. Maclean quickly tires of the endless cycle of diplomatic receptions and the restrictions upon travel, and decides to see more of the USSR, particularly the Central Asian republics that were still being assimilated into the Union. He sets off on a series of enlightening journeys (with little or no official approval!) that take him far from Moscow to the legendary cities of Samarkand and Bokhara. This is fine travel writing indeed, Maclean giving a very powerful sense of what the Stalinist era was like and also of the exoticism of Central Asia. There are also powerful descriptions of the Stalist purges of 1938 and the accompanying “show trials”.

The second part of the book covers Maclean’s exploits with the SAS in the North African deserts and the Middle East. Resigning from his diplomatic post to join the Army (using the convenient excuse of becoming an MP!) Maclean serves as a private in a Scottish regiment for some time before being commmissioned and sent to the Middle East. Here he falls in with David Stirling and becomes an early member of the SAS – his stories of their training, tactics and raids are powerful indeed, matched by evocative descriptions of the African landscapes. Maclean moves on to form SAS units in the Middle East, but before long is summoned to go behind enemy lines as Churchill’s military representative to Tito’s Yugoslav partisans.

The final third of the book mixes military action and politics, with Maclean organising the support for the Partisans and representing them to the Allies. The political agenda here is a little blurred – Maclean is obviously a Conservative who has instinctive support for the return of the Yugoslav monarchy, and yet he admires Tito for what he has achieved in the liberation of his own country, while still maintaining a personal anti-Communist agenda… This section of the book makes the sheer scale of the Partisan operations very apparent, and hints at the confusion between the Western allies over the future fate of Yugoslavia.

This is a splendidly readable book, full of incident and description, with vividly drawn characters. It is told with occasional gentle humour, modesty, and genuine insight.

Maclean’s adventures arguably span the end of the “Great Game” – political influence won by adventurers – and the beginning of the Cold War, and his memoirs of this historical crossroads are thought-provoking and highly entertaining.

Synopsis

Fisk’s first hand accounts of (in particular) the Iran-Iraq conflict, Operation Desert Storm, his meetings with Bin Laden, Lebanon, the gruelling iniquities of life in the occupied territories, the idiocy of the Bush administration and its arrogant and misguided lapdogs in Downing Street, the effects of depleted uranium weapons ‘ to name just a few — are all fabulous bits of journalism placed within a sound historical context.

Synopsis

‘one of the best books about secret intelligence work ever written’ – Peter Hopkirk.

Colonel F. M. Bailey, whose extraordinary adventures are told here, was long accused by Moscow of being a British master-spy sent in 1918 to overthrow the Bolsheviks in Central Asia. As a result, he enjoyed many years after his death an almost legendary reputation there – that of half-hero, half-villain. In this remarkable book he tells of the perilous game of cat-and-mouse, lasting sixteen months, which he played with the Bolshevik secret police, the dreaded Cheka. At one point, using a false identity, he actually joined the ranks of the latter, who unsuspectingly sent him to Bokhara to arrest himself. Told with almost breathtaking understatement, Bailey’s narrative – set in a region once more back in the headlines – reads like vintage Buchan.

Review By Craig Murray

I would argue this is the World’s most unjustly neglected book. One of the greatest books of political analysis ever written, unjustly neglected. Heavily plagiarised by Lenin, the work still cited as the best evidence of Lenin’s intellectual credentials was in fact Hobson’s, a British Liberal in the tradition of Cobden and Bright.

Hobson argued that an Empire impoverishes the ordinary citizens of the Imperial nation, while funnelling money to small governing elites and what we would now call the military-industrial complex. His profound insight is backed by the statistical analysis of the first class economist that Hobson was.

Of course, this analysis is still valid today as the US taxpayer has spent, so far, $350 billion on the invasion and occupation of Iraq, while Exxon, Halliburton and the like make profits in unimaginable sums.

I have often been asked why I gave up a brilliant and highly rewarding career to fight the new imperialism. Partly it was simply that no decent human being could go along with the things I saw. And partly it was because I understood the processes I was witnessing. In very large part, I understood those processes because, as a young man, I had read Hobson. He really ought to be required reading for anyone who wishes to take a view on what is behind the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the next one, be it Iran or elsewhere.

Craig

View with comments

Murder in Samarkand: The FCO prepares for legal action

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office seem determined to stop me publishing my book. They are threatening four grounds of legal action:

a) Libel

b) Crown Copyright

c) Breach of Confidence

d) Official Secrets Act

The first point is that plainly this is an attempt to suppress the book and prevent publication by scaring me (and the publishers) with the threat of legal action. This will not work, as neither of us scare easily.

Let us then consider each of these proposed legal actions in turn ‘

Libel

I am confident that the book is entirely true, and thus does not libel anybody. The FCO is likely nonetheless to try to run a vexatious libel action by one of its staff named in the book. The book cannot be sold in the UK during such action, and this is the most likely way they will attempt to in effect ban the book by using millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money in an endless court process

Crown Copyright

Following the publication of Christopher Meyer’s book, Jack Straw said that in future the government would actively consider the use of Crown copyright to prevent such further publications. This is a stretching of the copyright law, and the argument goes like this:

When I was in Uzbekistan, I was employed by the Crown, so the intellectual property in anything I learnt belongs to the Crown, just as the copyright of anything created by a Microsoft software designer belongs to Microsoft.

There are three problems in this. First, I don’t think my contract said any of that, while I bet the Microsoft contract does.

The second problem is that they are claiming by book is untrue and inaccurate. They are lying, but that is their claim. If they want to maintain that claim, how can they possibly argues that the Crown has copyright over things which are fictitious and did not happen while I was in their employ? The notion is absurd.

The third problem is much more fundamental. If this applies to me, it would also apply to every other employee of the crown, including not just Christopher Meyer but also, for example, Tony Blair. Now we know that Tony Blair has obtained a huge mortgage on a house based on a guaranteed advance for his memoirs of his time as Prime Minister. Now under the government’s new argument, Blair has sold something that didn’t belong to him at all, but belonged to the Crown.

The FCO will argue that it is for the Crown Prerogative to decide when to exercise Crown Copyright and when to let it go. In other words, they would sue me and not Tony Blair. And who exercises the Crown Prerogative? Why, the Prime Minister, of course.

So let us be clear about this. By delving about in the most remote and arcane backwaters of Britain’s unwritten constitution, the government is seeking to undermine freedom of speech and claim the power arbitrarily to ban books. If this argument were accepted by the courts, the government could ban books under Crown Prerogative without having to give any explanation or reason as to why they decided to ban a ‘Dissident’ book but allow their own propaganda.

It is essential to fight this completely undemocratic development.

Breach of Confidence

The FCO attempted to frame me with false disciplinary allegations, and leaked the details of those allegations to the press. Plainly they had broken the relationship of confidence between us. Furthermore I believe I am revealing illegal action by the government, breaking both international and domestic law by being complicit in torture.

In these circumstances a ‘whistleblower’ is protected from this kind of legal harassment. There is no way that the government would win this before the European Court.

Official Secrets Act

This is, of course, the ultimate attempt to scare us by threatening prison against free speech. The large majority of official documents quoted in this book were released to me under the Data Protection Act. There are no other official documents which have not already been released all over the web. I am confident this is bluster ‘ to ask a jury to convict someone for revealing government malpractice is not sensible, and I would love to see Jack Straw in that witness box.

This is an important fight. We have a government committed to illegal war abroad and an attack across the whole spectrum of civil liberties at home. After banning books comes burning books. If at some stage of the fight they want to send me to prison, I am prepared. We have to show that we will not be cowed, and that the truth cannot be suppressed. Frankly, if the government think they can bury this book, they are even barmier than I thought.

Craig

View with comments

Declaration and Publication: The Stagg Letter and The Final Rejoinder

Click here to view the a PDF file of the original letter

9 February 2006

Mr Richard Stagg

Director General Corporate Affairs

Foreign & Commonwealth Office

London

Dear Dickie,

Thank you for your letter of 8 February about my forthcoming book, Murder in Samarkand. Let me respond to the points which you have made.

Firstly, allow me to note that, over a period of many months, you have consulted exhaustively with all the FCO staff, past and present, named in the book.

Let me then relate that to the question of libel. In your letter you state that you are ‘Also advised that there are a number of passages in your book which could well ground actions for defamation.’

Let me be quite plain. I have no desire to libel or defame anybody. So I urge you now to disclose to me those passages in the book which you have been advised may be defamatory, so that I may consider if I believe there is that danger, and remove or amend any accidental defamation.

I make this offer in all good faith, that we may avoid the publication of defamation. If you choose not to take up this fair offer, and subsequently the FCO or its employees attempt to block publication through court actions for defamation, it will be evident that this is not an attempt to avoid defamation, but a ruse to block publication of the book as a whole through vexatious and unnecessary litigation.

I repeat I have the strongest desire not to defame anybody. I know the terrible mental anguish that unjust defamation can cause. You will recall that I was myself outrageously defamed and accused, quite groundlessly, of appalling things like being an alcoholic and offering visas in exchange for sex. Of course, in my case it was the FCO which was defaming me. The complete story of why and how this happened is in fact the substance of my book. Which is why you are so keen to identify and reserve possible legal avenues for the government to block publication.

It is not falsehood which scares you, but truth.

It is plain from your letter that you object to the whole concept of my publishing this account. Nowhere in the months of negotiation between us to date did you propose any such fundamental objections as now surface in your letter. Rather you asked for a series of specific amendments, the vast majority of which I made. I am sadly reinforced in my view that this lengthy process was an effort on your part to stall publication, rather than a discussion in good faith.

On the specific points you raise, you claim that the publication on my website of material in September caused operational damage to Research Analysts. There has been numerous and frequent correspondence and personal contact between us since September. I am puzzled as to why you mention this now and have not done so before. The material in question featured on my website for 24 hours and has not done so since.

You requested me to remove material from the book which you believed was misleading on the role of Research Analysts and could cause operational difficulty. I immediately removed that passage from the text in its entirety. The only point still at dispute, is that I have in the text that a member of Research Analysts told me that people in that Department were in tears over pressure put on them to go along with claims of Iraqi WMD. You tell me that the officer, still in your employ, now denies telling me this. I have noted in the book that I say he told me this, and he apparently says he did not tell me this. People can draw their own conclusions. I cannot see why this is such a huge problem for you, or would lead you to want to ban a book.

Similarly, I formed a strong impression that the British Embassy in Tashkent was pretty inactive before my arrival. You say that is not your impression. Well, fine. That seems to me well within the range of views that should be able freely to be published in a democracy without political suppression.

I note your point on Crown Copyright. Again, I am genuinely concerned to act in a legal fashin and I should be most grateful if you would explain to me how my book differs from Christopher Meyer’s in this regard.

You told me that you had personally played a major role within the FCO in supervising the preparation of the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction. I am afraid that one consequence is, that when you try to lecture me on truth, I am sorely tempted to laugh at you. I have lost my livelihood through all this. You have lost something infinitely more precious.

Finally, you threaten me with the Official Secrets Act. I am confident I am not breaking it. And if you really want to ask a jury of twelve honest citizens to send me to prison for campaigning against torture, good luck to you.

Yours Sincerely,

Craig J Murray

View with comments

ACLU call for release of torture documents by the Bush administration

From American Civil Liberties Union

The American Civil Liberties Union have urged the House International Relations Committee to adopt three resolutions of inquiry directing the Bush administration to provide all documents on the development and implementation of its torture and extraordinary rendition policies.

“America cannot hold itself as a moral beacon to the world if we violate the rule of law by engaging in torture and extraordinary rendition,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “The federal government should not be kidnapping people and sending them to countries that engage in torture. These resolutions will shine a bright light into a dark hole by requiring the federal government to disclose its activities to Congress.”

For the full press release go here

View with comments

Siddiqui urges Muslims to embrace freedom of speech

From the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain

Commenting on the over-reaction of Muslims over the anti-Islamic cartoons published by the Danish newspaper, Jyllands Posten, Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, leader of the Muslim Parliament and Director of the Muslim Institute, London, has said Muslims are now having to pay the price of a knowledge-deficit that exists in all Muslim societies.

He asked them to pursue a culture of excellence and come out as a confident people who embrace ‘freedom of speech’. This, he feels, will help them change their fortunes. In their hey-days Muslims pursued diversity of thought and freedom of speech which inspired the Renaissance in Europe. It is pity that today’s Muslims show such a negative attitude towards ‘freedom of speech’. Without realising that by embracing ‘freedom of speech’ they have nothing to lose except their isolation. They do not appear to realise what they are missing in life as a result. All Muslim societies today are oppressive. They can only liberate themselves from oppression and obscurantism through debate and dialogue and becoming part of civil societies. ‘Join the club and engage with the civil society in defining the rules of the game. Staying outside and throwing stones until the rules are changed is not the option’, he said.

Dr Siddiqui called the cartoons abusive and designed to create hatred against Muslims. He said that, Muslims were right to express their abhorrence over their publication because of Europe’s history of turning on its minorities. It was through such cartoons, in Nazi Germany during the 1930’s, a climate of hate against the Jews was created leading up to the Holocaust in which over six million Jews and others died. Dr Siddiqui said that these cartoons also provided oxygen to extremist groups on both sides. Fascist groups within the Muslim community, who were marginalized after 7/7, have found a cause on which to make a come back.

The West should learn to respect the sensitivity of others. This is the logic of living in a globalised world. Muslims on the other hand should begin an open debate about the dangers of salafism and jihadism spreading within their midst.

‘Salafism and jihadism, originating from Saudi Arabia, was globalised and militarised in Afghanistan, in the wake of the Soviet invasion of the country, is now engulfing Muslim societies. When the Saudis become involved with any Islamic project I get worried. With salafist taking lead over the anti-Islamic cartoons we need to make sure we are not moving towards Huntington’s prophecy of ‘Clash of Civilisation’, fulfilling neocons dream of ‘full spectrum dominance’.

It is also noteworthy that while Muslims highlight double-standards of other societies, they have never protested against the destruction of Prophet Muhammed’s history in Saudi Arabia which has gone on during the last several decades.

View with comments

“24” in the real world: What’s a little torture between enemies?

By Mark Rahner from the Seattle Times

It’s hard not to get sentimental when you hear comforting words from someone you trust.

“You are going to tell me what I want to know. It’s just a question of how much you want it to hurt.”

That’s not Hallmark, it’s Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) making a heartfelt appeal to a bad guy on Fox’s “24,” which counts as inspirational programming.

Now that “24” is back on the air for a fifth torturific season (with the new twist that the bad guys are the ones who think Jack died last season, when in fact his death was faked), it’ll put the issue ‘ what the White House calls “not-torturing” ‘ into perspective. Why do people get all uptight when the U.S. roughs up detainees who wouldn’t deserve it if they hadn’t been detained in the first place? And is white phosphorous a faux pas after Labor Day?

(more…)

View with comments

John Reid calls for the use of “implacable force”

The UK Defense Secretary was on BBC radio this morning making some comments on the future of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and involvement of British forces. Was his call for the use of implacable force and the apparent toleration of questionable British tactics justified? Comment and a link to the interview can be found here.

View with comments

Battle Plans for Iran?

By Mike Whitney in OpEd News

In less than 24 hours the Bush administration won impressive victories on both domestic and foreign policy fronts. At home, the far-right Federalist Society alum, Sam Alito, has overcome the feeble resistance from Democratic senators; ensuring his confirmation to the Supreme Court sometime late on Tuesday. Equally astonishing, the administration has coerced both Russia and China into bringing Iran before the United Nations Security Council although (as Mohamed ElBaradei says) ‘There’s no evidence of a nuclear weapons program.’ The surprising capitulation of Russia and China has forced Iran to abandon its efforts for further negotiations; cutting off dialogue that might diffuse the volatile situation.

‘We consider any referral or report of Iran to the Security Council as the end of diplomacy,’ Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, told state television.

The administration’s success with Iran ends the diplomatic charade and paves the way for war.

(more…)

View with comments

Preliminary findings from the Bush Crimes Commissions

The International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration has released its preliminary findings following a series of hearings in October and January.

Wars of Aggression

The evidence is overwhelming that the Bush Administration authorized and is conducting a war of aggression against Iraq in violation of international law, including The Nuremberg Principles, Geneva Conventions of 1949, the United Nations Charter, and the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights. In doing so, the Bush Administration has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Torture, Rendition, Illegal Detention and Murder Indictment

There was substantial evidence submitted through testimony and documents that the Bush Administration committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in conducting its ‘War Against Terror.’ It did this by developing and implementing policies and practices that violated international law and international human rights to force information from detainees and to punish those whom it believes may be ‘enemy combatants.’ It has engaged in a systematic process of denials and specious reconfigurations of international and domestic law to justify its actions.

The full report and covering letter can be read here

View with comments

Foreign Affairs Committee: Will the FCO Release the Requested Documents on Torture?

Blairwatch provides an excellent summary of some of the recent proceedings of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

But time marches on and it is still not clear whether the FAC will follow through on their undertaking to obtain crucial minutes and documentation of meetings that discussed the British use of information obtained via torture?

View with comments

Commission of inquiry into Bush war crimes and crimes against humanity to release preliminary findings

From Not in our name

WHERE: National Press Club, Washington, DC

WHEN: February 2 at Noon

The International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration met in New York City the weekend of January 20th through the 22nd to work towards fulfilling its mandate: “When the possibility of far-reaching war crimes and crimes against humanity exists, people of conscience have a solemn responsibility to inquire into the nature and scope of these acts, and to determine if they do in fact rise to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

View with comments

The McCain Amendment and Other Stories

By Phillip Watts in Revolution Online

The McCain/Graham-Levin Amendment Legalizes Torture

In December the infamous McCain “anti-torture” amendment was signed in to law as part of a Defense Appropriations bill. But in reality “anti-torture” amendment and the negotiations behind it – ends up legalizing torture ‘ including setting new legal precedent. It not only makes it more possible for the US to utilize torture ‘ it insures prisoners at Guant’namo have no habeas rights ‘ the right to come before a court to determine the lawfulness of their imprisonment.

In the media John McCain was painted as standing up to Bush and bringing “reason” to the issue of torture. While McCain has voiced differences with the Bush Administration on torture, when the amendment was finally signed into law what was brought to light was the unity McCain ultimately has with the Bush torture program. As previously pointed out in Revolution, “McCain and Bush announced that they made a deal that gave both of them what they wanted: torture without worry about prosecution, and with deniability.”

(more…)

View with comments

What Degree of UK Complicity? Martin Scheinin on Extraordinary Rendition

Martin Scheinin

Martin Scheinin is the UN Human Rights Commission’s special rapporteur on human rights and counter terrorism. He was interviewed on BBC radio on Monday regarding UK involvement in the CIA extraordinary rendition flights scandal and the misleading of parliament by a Foreign Office minister. Encouragingly, he thinks that the ongoing investigations by the Council of Europe and the EU parliament will lead to the full truth gradually emerging.

You can listen to the interview here Radio interview

View with comments

Amnesty International: ‘The issue now is what will be done about it’

From Amnesty International

Amnesty International’s reaction to the Council of Europe’s report on renditions and black sites:

Publication of the Council of Europe’s interim report on the issue of extraordinary renditions and secret detention centres in Europe is a step towards uncovering the truth about the extent to which US agents are carrying out renditions and related practices in Europe. However it makes clear that serious questions still need to be answered by a number of European governments.

The report recognizes that there is ‘a great deal of coherent, convergent evidence pointing to the existence of a system of ‘relocation’ or ‘outsourcing’ of torture’ ‘. What is needed now is the cooperation of all countries to ensure that they actively look at what is happening within their territory which may facilitate torture and take appropriate action.

‘European countries have the duty to fully collaborate in the investigations of gross human rights violations committed in their own territory. Not cooperating with those investigations is tantamount to collaborating with the abuses,’ said Claudio Cordone, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Regional Programmes.

Amnesty International supports the call of Dick Marty, the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly Rapporteur, for a full committee of inquiry, with extensive investigatory powers.

‘The allegations that secret detention centres have existed in Europe, as Dick Marty has pointed out, come from varied and credible sources. Not even the US government has denied their existence. The issue now is what will be done about it,’ said Claudio Cordone.

View with comments

UK Parliamentary Group on Rendition Meets to Discuss the Next Move

By Hannah Strange from UPI

Politicians and human rights groups are ratcheting up the pressure on the British government to investigate reports of U.S. rendition flights passing through its territory, after the Council of Europe said European governments almost certainly knew of the “illegal” practice.

Members of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Rendition met with representatives from leading human rights groups in Westminster Wednesday to discuss what steps to take to force an investigation, to which the government has so far been resistant.

(more…)

View with comments

Secret Memo on British Involvolment in CIA Flights Now Available

The Newstatesman has published the full version of the secret Foreign Office memo on British involvement in US rendition flights.

As Tony Blair prepared to face Commons questions about British involvement in early December, his officials asked the Foreign Office for a briefing document. The resulting memo, signed by Irfan Siddiq, a private secretary at the Foreign Office, and addressed to Grace Cassy, assistant private secretary at No 10 Downing Street, paints an astonishing picture.

Extraordinary rendition, it declares bluntly, “is almost certainly illegal”, and if Britain co-operated with an illegal act of this kind, “such an act would also be illegal”.

The PDF file of the memo can be read here

View with comments