CIA torture and Britain

This video says about itself:

12 May 2016

The Extraordinary Rendition Of Mamdouh Habib (2005): Australian Madouh Habib gives a first hand of account of his illegal detention at Guantanamo Bay and his torture at the hands of American and Egyptian authorities.

By Jeremy Corbyn in Britain:

Curbing rights does not stop terrorism

Wednesday 17th November 2014

The CIA torture report should be a warning as yet another security Bill comes before Parliament this week, says JEREMY CORBYN

“What really hurt me was the treatment Chelsea received in Quantico two years before the trial — stripped naked, kept in solitary confinement, made to stand in a corner, everything taken away.”

That’s what Sharon Staples, Chelsea Manning’s aunt, said about the treatment her niece had received. Manning ought to be seen as something of a hero for telling the world about the reality of the activities of the CIA in its intelligence gathering exercises around the world.

For her pains, she has been jailed for 35 years because she told the world about CIA rendition.

Last weekend, the CIA itself revealed that it had systematically misled the US Congress, and showed that US administrations dating back to George Bush and the war on terror did have knowledge of extraordinary rendition and did support it.

Britain cannot escape complicity in all of this.

Next year Britain will begin negotiations with the US on its renewal of the lease of Diego Garcia, the huge US military base in the British Indian Ocean Territory.

This territory was reputedly used for extraordinary rendition by the US, and the question remains whether the then British government knew of this, or whether this was done secretly by the US despite there being a small British military observation of the activities of the base ever since its establishment.

The role of Tony Blair’s government in extraordinary rendition has yet to be uncovered but what is clear is that ever since the launch of the war on terror in 2001 there has been systematic undermining of international human rights law by the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq and the treatment of prisoners.

The British were willing accomplices of the invasions of both countries. The appalling treatment of prisoners at Bagram airbase and extraordinary renditions conducted by CIA flights still dogs Blair, and his foreign secretaries Jack Straw and David Miliband.

Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, who is handling a number of claims of people who were ill-treated in Iraq said, “these cases involving the most serious human rights violations imaginable pose immensely difficult questions. The British mindset in Iraq appeared to be one of savage brutality and a sadistic inhumanity irrespective of whether it was women, children or old men being tortured, abused or callously subjected to lethal force.”

British complicity extended to an extraordinary alliance with Colonel Gadaffi in Libya, to the extent that Mark Allen, a former director of counter-terrorism at MI6, sent a message to Colonel Gadaffi: “I congratulate you on the safe arrival of Abu Abd Allah Sadiq Bel Hadj. This was the least we could do for you and for Libya to demonstrate the remarkable relationship we have built over the years.”

Straw rubbished any questions about the use of Diego Garcia in 2005 when he claimed we would have to “start to believe in conspiracy theories and that the officials are lying, that I am lying and that behind this there is some kind of secret state which is in league with some dark forces in the United States.”

Straw’s denial, Blair’s denials and later David Miliband’s denials have never been accepted by the victims of extraordinary rendition, or those with a seriously inquiring mind in the British Parliament or indeed some in the US Congress.

The Chilcott inquiry has still not reported on Iraq. If and when it ever does, it will show the way in which the obsession with supporting the US war on terror rode over every humanitarian consideration and British law.

Beyond that there has been significant damage done to civil liberties in this country through successive pieces of anti-terror legislation where terrorist suspects can be detained indefinitely under immigration law, and successive governments have given themselves executive powers to either detain people or limit their movements or virtually place them under house arrest.

Ministers always defend these measures as being of a necessary and urgent nature, whereas in reality they are an extremely dangerous departure from all norms of justice.

On Monday the House of Commons was debating the first stage of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill, which includes powers to exclude British nationals from returning to Britain if the Home Office believes they’ve been involved in terrorist activities or supporting Isis.

The Bill also empowers the Home Secretary to remove passports using her powers under the Royal Prerogative, and additionally, to peremptorily cease passports and travel documents at the point of departure of British nationals. These powers are due to be reviewed after 18 months in operation.

Having observed anti-terror legislation through successive parliaments, the pattern is quite simple: any piece of legislation that is brought in temporarily rapidly becomes permanent, and the dominant themes are firstly to give greater executive powers over the individual, and second, to protect operatives in the security services from being effectively questioned, either in Parliament or, more importantly, in the courts.

Britain prides itself on having a permanent narrative of supporting human rights and democracy around the world. While there is no debate about the vile brutality of Isis in its operations in Syria and Iraq, it is not the first and sadly probably not the last brutal army around the world.

Western countries, including the US and Britain have often been very selective in their concerns for human rights.

In the 1950s the British army committed the most abominable violations of human rights in the wars in Malaya and Kenya.

But this disregard for human rights was not restricted to British colonial interests, as the truth commission in Brazil revealed last week via a 2,000-page report on the abuse of human rights during the 1970s. Britain and the US trained Brazilian interrogators in torture techniques.

Perhaps in retrospect we need to think a bit more about our foreign policy objectives and whether or not sending British troops back into Iraq and building a new base in the human-rights-abusing state of Bahrain is not just a continuation of the same disastrous policy.

Jeremy Corbyn is Labour MP for Islington North.

UK links to torture go beyond complicity to active involvement. After the Senate report on thje CIA, what is needed now is a judicial inquiry in Britain – and the MoD must be forced to come clean: here.

UK must probe its role in CIA torture, says UN legal expert. UN’s former special rapporteur on torture says claims such as sanctioned use of Diego Garcia as ‘black site’ to render Libyans must be examined: here.

The CIA’s Phony Defense: here.

The “special relationship” with the United States has been seen by British governments of all political stripes as a counterweight to the challenge it faces from its major European rivals, particularly Germany—enabling the UK to punch above its weight in world politics. Growing conflicts around the globe over trade, resources, transit routes and geo-political hegemony are now placing such long-standing political relations of the post-war era under enormous strain. A report prepared by the Congressional Research Service concludes, “The UK may not be viewed as centrally relevant to the United States in all of the issues and relations considered a priority on the US agenda”: here.

7 thoughts on “CIA torture and Britain

  1. To think, all those involved with the torture program are well educated in the formal sense, what this article exposes is how spiritually retarded you can be to belong to this depraved group.


    • I think the CIA psychologists, lawyers, etc. ‘are well educated in the formal sense’. However, I am not so sure about many CIA people, or contractors, who did the torture ‘handwork’:

      “The Senate Intelligence Committee noted that individuals who were selected by the CIA as torturers included “inexperienced, marginal, underperforming” officers from other assignments and “individuals who, among other issues, had engaged in inappropriate detainee interrogations, had workplace anger management issues, and had reportedly admitted to sexual assault.”

      In other words, the CIA was deliberately seeking out, cultivating, and advancing psychopaths within its ranks.”


      • Your comment confirms the idea I have stated, the management of this practice chose the the depraved, they being well educated, many police are chosen who are bullies and misfits, that given the badge and uniform cannot wait to crack the skull of who ever, unable to comprehend the issues, same thing the educated choose the idiots to control at basis the 1%.


  2. Pingback: CIA torture and European governments | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  3. Pingback: CIA torture and Britain, update | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. Pingback: Diego Garcia, Bush’s and Blair’s torture island | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.