civil liberties

The Chinese are, in my view on a PR disaster trail, with the Olympic torch. Today will not be remembered for the torch, but for the 20 35 or so people arrested. The free Tibet campaigner and the 'China is Great' counter campaigners.

One of the main stories I heard from from the 'China is Great' lot, is this, The Tibetans have killed my brothers and family, the thing is, I heard the very same story from far to many of the Chinese contingent. So I can only guess that it's the 'story' to tell any westerner who comes to the protests. Oh and that the BBC tells lies, to that, well, I can agree to at times.

So, here's some photo's of the demo at Trafalgar Square.

click for more image.

The BBC's view on the story here

Some History on the 'torch'  here. Something about a certain Carl Diem. Some link there with the past trying to tell us something. It's just a costly show with no benefit for anyone.

Once again the British government responds to allegations of torture - This time by a former SAS soldier by a serious investigation issuing a gagging order against him.

In this move we turn from being a modern state and debase ourselves down to the standards of a tinpot dictator.

This is not the action of a govenrment with nothing to hide.

*UPDATE* Full Statement

This statement was prepared and read by Ben Griffin, ex-SAS soldier, at a press conference on Monday 25 February 2008.

Our government would have us believe that our involvement in the process known as Extraordinary Rendition is limited to two occasions on which planes carrying detainees landed to refuel on the British Indian Ocean Territory, Diego Garcia. David Miliband has stated that the British Government expects the Government of the United States to “seek permission to render detainees via UK territory and airspace, including Overseas Territories; that we will grant that permission only if we are satisfied that the rendition would accord with UK law and our international obligations; and how we understand our obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture¹.” (Taken from a statement given to the House of Commons by the Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Thursday 21 February 2008)

The use of British Territory and airspace pales into insignificance in light of the fact that it has been British soldiers detaining the victims of Extraordinary Rendition in the first place. Since the invasion of Afghanistan in the autumn of 2001 UKSF has operated within a joint US/UK Task Force. This Task Force has been responsible for the detention of hundreds if not thousands of individuals in Afghanistan and Iraq. Individuals detained by British soldiers within this Task force have ended up in Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp, Bagram Theatre Internment Facility, Balad Special Forces Base, Camp Nama BIAP and Abu Ghraib Prison.

Whilst the government has stated its desire that the Guantanamo Bay detention camp be closed, it has remained silent over these other secretive prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan. These secretive prisons are part of a global network in which individuals face torture and are held indefinately without charge. All of this is in direct contravention of the Geneva Conventions, International Law and the UN Convention Against Torture.

Early involvement of UKSF in the process of Extraordinary Rendition centres around operations carried out in Afghanistan in late 2001. Of note is an incident at the Qalai Janghi fortress, near Mazar-i-Sharif. UKSF fought alongside their US counterparts to put down a bloody revolt by captured Taliban fighters. The surviving Taliban fighters were then rendered to Guantanamo Bay.

After the invasion of Iraq in 2003 this joint US/UK task force appeared. Its primary mission was to kill or capture high value targets. Individuals detained by this Task Force often included non-combatants caught up in the search for high value targets. The use of secret detention centres within Iraq has negated the need to use Guantanamo Bay whilst allowing similar practice to go unnoticed.

I have here an account taken from an interpreter interviewed by the organisation Human Rights Watch (http://hrw.org/reports/2006/us0706/2.htm). He was based at the detention and interrogation facility within Camp Nama at Baghdad International Airport during 2004. This facility was used to interrogate individuals captured by the joint US/UK Task Force. In it are the details of numerous breaches of the Geneva Convention and accounts of torture. These breaches were not the actions of rogue elements the abuse was systematic and sanctioned through the chain of command. This account is corroborated by an investigation carried out by NYT reporters into Camp Nama and the US/UK Task Force, which appeared in the New York Times on March 19 2006. Throughout my time in Iraq I was in no doubt that individuals detained by UKSF and handed over to our American colleagues would be tortured. During my time as member of the US/UK Task Force, three soldiers recounted to me an incident in which they had witnessed the brutal interrogation of two detainees. Partial drowning and an electric cattle prod were used during this interrogation and this amounted to torture. It was the widely held assumption that this would be the fate of any individuals handed over to our America colleagues. My commanding officer at the time expressed his concern to the whole squadron that we were becoming “the secret police of Baghdad”.

As UK soldiers within this Task Force a policy that we would detain individuals but not arrest them was continually enforced. Since it was commonly assumed by my colleagues that anyone we detained would subsequently be tortured this policy of detention and not arrest was regarded as a clumsy legal tool used to distance British soldiers from the whole process.

During the many operations conducted to apprehend high value targets numerous non-combatants were detained and interrogated in direct contravention of the Geneva Convention regarding the treatment of civilians in occupied territories. I have no doubt in my mind that non-combatants I personally detained were handed over to the Americans and subsequently tortured.

The joint US/UK Task Force has broken International Law, contravened The Geneva Conventions and disregarded the UN Convention Against Torture. British soldiers are intimately involved in the actions of this Task Force. Jack Straw, Margaret Beckett David Miliband, Geoff Hoon, Des Browne, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown. In their respective positions over the last five years they must know that British soldiers have been operating within this joint US/UK task force. They must have been briefed on the actions of this unit.

As the occupiers of Iraq we have a duty to uphold the law, to abide by the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention Against Torture. We are also responsible for securing the borders of Iraq on all counts we have failed. The British Army once had a reputation for playing by the rules. That reputation has been tarnished over the last seven years. We have accepted illegality as the norm. I have no doubt that over the coming months and years increasing amounts of information concerning the actions of British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will be become public.

Whilst the majority of British Forces have been withdrawn from Iraq, UKSF remain within the US/UK Task Force.

¹Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession.”

Ben Griffin
25 February 2008

POLICE are investigating the discovery of a confidential Home Office disc by computer technicians - which was reportedly in a laptop bought on eBay. Source

From the 'You couldn't make this up' Dept:

The British tax authorities have paid an informant for the bank details of scores of wealthy Britons. The records were stolen from one of the world’s most secretive tax havens.

HM Revenue & Customs paid £100,000 for data that it is using to launch investigations of up to 100 British citizens who have accounts at Liechtenstein’s biggest bank. - Source

More details here. Not a bad deal, the Germans paid 3.2 million quid, the UK handed over 100k and the US an undisclosed amount. Not bad for one DVD.

Just a quick update to the previous buggers story - Nick Robinson is claiming that it was Thames Valley Plod, not the Met, who bugged Mr. Khan and Mr. Ahmad.  Probably reasonable given the location of the prison, so apologies to the incompetent murderous mendacious bastards at the Yard.

However, given that it seems to have been initiated by a TVP copper acting on his own initiative, it's quite possible the Met and indeed every other force in the country is happily reaching for the RIPA 2000 and bugging anyone and everyone without bothering to inform a judge or the Cabinet.  This leads to the following bit of speculation:

If you or I went round blabbing details of anti-terror surveillance operations we'd be in Paddington Green trying to remember Gareth Peirce's phone number* before too long.  Doesn't seem to apply to the Sunday Times and the Tories, however, who evidently both received this information, so who leaked it?  Whose noses would be put out of joint by a lot of ordinary coppers getting in on the domestic surveillance game?  Whose paper is the Sunday Times?  Answers on a postcard (left in a dead letter drop in the Brompton Road) and addressed to 'MI5, Thames House, London'.

OK, so what would the spooky calculation be?  Let slip that the fuzz are bugging MPs and suddenly Straw and the boys (and the Tories, hence the leak to them) are put on the back foot, realise what a monster they've created in allowing the police unchecked surveillance powers, put uppity Plod and his Acme Listening Kit back in his box and go running back to the professionals.  Perhaps.  All seems rather neat, really, but there's a plausible case here to say that genuine MI5 anti-terror surveillance operations (which I'm certainly not opposed to, see Shami Chakrabarti's comments) could easily be badly compromised if there's a police operation unknown to them going on.  If that's the case, the leaker's done us all a favour.

The only unanswered question is what on earth TVP thought they'd pick up - Sadiq Khan MP isn't a terrorist, he's Jack Straw's PPS FFS.  I suggest they did it because they could and because there's no accountability *at all*.  Thus are police states run, you don't have to have a reason to be arbitrary.

Talking of which, Olbermann is in fine form (via ChickYog).  There's more from SpyBlog too, and Tony Benn makes the obvious, if paranoid, point that the Wilson Doctrine never meant that much anyway.

Now for some light relief.  The Metropolitan Police clearly concluded long ago that their job was to enforce the law, but not to follow it.  What other construction can we put on this?

Gordon Brown was drawn into a dispute yesterday over a claim that police secretly bugged one of his MPs during meetings with a man suspected of links to terror groups.

An inquiry was ordered into the allegation that Sadiq Khan, now a government whip, was covertly recorded during two visits he made to Babar Ahmad in the prison where he is being held. The Conservatives said that they had given warning to Mr Brown six weeks ago that an MP had been subjected to surveillance, in breach of a convention against bugging MPs, and accused him of doing nothing.

Now, I'm not sure what's the more laughable suggestion here, that Sadiq Khan is a prominent campaigner for civil liberties (he *was*, but his voting record since being elected to Parliament hardly does him credit on this, backing ID cards, anti-terror laws and Trident but opposing investigating Iraq), that the Met decide who to bug without asking anyone or that Gordon Brown's administration apparently lose letters from senior opposition politicians (hint: try asking top government couriers TNT).  Possibly none of them are quite as laughable as the case against Mr. Ahmad, a beneficiary of David Blunkett's enlightened attitude to justice and democracy as demonstrated by the 2003 Extradition Act.  In case anyone's not following the Register coverage of the associated trial in the USA, here's a taster:

Abu-jihaad has been charged with e-mailing information on the transit of his naval battle group through the Straits of Hormuz to Babar Ahmad and Azzam Publications in London in 2001. At the time he was serving on the destroyer Benfold. For the purpose of the case, Babar Ahmad - now awaiting a court decision in February on whether or not he is to be extradited to the States - is considered by the US government to be a terrorist. The government alleges Abu-jihaad's communications with Ahmad and the purchase of Chechen resistance videotapes from the Azzam website to be aiding terror, with the defendant an agent of a foreign power.

A glaring problem with the government's case against Abu-jihaad is that the evidence against him is thin. Although the US has submitted e-mails to Azzam which they have claimed are from Abu-jihaad, prosecutors admitted in pre-trial filings this month that "the Government had no recorded statements or testimony personally linking Abu-jihaad to the e-mail account from which [the communications to Azzam in question] were sent."

Of course, SpyBlog have been on the case from the start, in usual exhaustive detail, plus the bugging story.  Useful to correct some bias and poor details in the original Sunday Times story.  Also, remember the old rule, the Sunday Times is MI5's paper, the Sunday Telegraph is MI6's.

Why do they do it? Why are they so inisitent on extending detention? Even in a 'Government of all the Untalent' Jacqui Smith stands out as being particuly undistinguished and has recently been touring the media being completely unconvincing.

Watching her press her case - which amounts to "We might possibly need to do this at some point in the future. Maybe. So it would be perfectly rational to have it in place now, just in case" - under questioning is fascinating. She gives the impression that she's about to break down in tears and desperately sob at the cameras saying "It's not my fault, Gordon's making me do this".

Future crime. How very Orwellian.

There is a possibility that at some point in the future people might steal people's jet packs and use them to frighten ducks. Shouldn't we put in legislation now to prevent this?

Don't we have a pressing need to legislate launching private space rockets? There will come a time when unregulated space launches will cause a serious hazard to aircraft. We MUST legislate now so that we are prepared.

The Police have chosen today to announce a new initiative to fight crime, taken from Minority Report:

Young people who are believed to be at risk of becoming offenders are to be targeted in a new police initiative.

The move is part of a strategy for reducing youth crime in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, unveiled by the Association of Chief Police Officers.

Acpo says identifying potential young offenders early on could have a dramatic impact on cutting youth crime.

Efforts include sharing information with other services and extending a police presence in some schools.

New Labour: Fighting Tomorrow's Crimes Today. Today's crimes can wait.

The New Yorker has a very interesting podcast interview with Lawrence Wright, author of the highly reccomended The Looming Tower (review).

In this interview he discusses the US Director of National Intelligence's priorities and reforms. He also tells of how he was monitored whilst writing his book and how an basic error in intelligence gathering resulted in his daughter being listed as an al Qaeda contact.

Well, it was fun while it lasted.  Louise 'I'm the Respect Czar and I'll get totally pissed if I want to' Casey and her Blairite crew have been disbanded after it someone realised it was all tabloid-headline-grabbing bullshit:

Ms Casey, who was regarded highly by Mr Blair as a “can do” official, has been commissioned to carry out a cross-departmental review on how best to engage communities in the fight against crime.

That's a pretty tough punishment for being regarded highly by Blair.

Via the Magistrate's Blog

It has just been discovered that the CIA has quietly destroyed all it's tapes of torture (or enhanced interrogation with water sports if you're on message) including the use of waterboarding.

I'm willing to wager that someone in the organisation has copied a couple for their own private enjoyment. But it is yet another reminder of the moral black hole New Labour has sucked us into.

Meanwhile we're going for 42 days imprisonment without charge. apparently we must do this right away because there may be a case at some point in the future that may require it.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Why not 40? 45? 100?

No, all this has started because Gordon wants to look big and tough after being outed as a dithering wimp with too many people around him grabbing illicit cash from brown paper bags. Thus is terrorism and security policy written.

In the meantime an article, from a Russian dissident on the effect torture has on the practicing institution is worth reading.

Andy Hayman, who put his imprimatur on the 7 page document that didn't really prove the case for 90 days detention, has resigned, ostensibly for the usual personal reasons, but I suspect for the usual reasons anyone in high office resigns - the feeling of immunity led him to take more and more cavalier risks - misleading the press post-Stockwell, running up expenses and taking a female officer on foreign trips.  It's never for the actual crimes and misdemeanors, of course.

Onions all round.  It's usually the case that someone higher up than the resignee is actually behind such sudden departures (particularly given leaks - notice the marvellous irony that a senior Met officer complains about such tactics), and I do suspect that this might be the price of Killer of the Yard staying on - a scapegoat had to be found.  It's been fairly proven by Alex Harrowell that the MPA is a useless bunch of rubber stampers, which leaves Blair as the only suspect.  Perhaps we should send CO19 out to haul him in for questioning.  On second thoughts, maybe not.

We're going to have to do something about this Government backing down in the face of pressure.  Weaklings.  Cowards.  Lack of will.

:)

Well, that is good news - the prospect of a pair of old geezers (Walter Wolfgang and Tony Benn) being bundled into police vans when Gordon is trying to wrest back control of the media agenda is  evidently not welcome to the PM's media people.  And they're perfectly correct, in this instance.  Indeed, they can take it further - the spirit of compromise is so quintessentially British that Gordon can use it in his next Conference speech, if there's a next Conference speech.

Rich, fat slimeball (and friend of dissident-boiling Uzbek dictator) Alisher Usmanov, who's trying to take control of the finest football club in the country, is behind the removal of the web presence of those fine defenders of freedom of speech, Tim Ireland, Craig Murray, Bob Piper and, er, Boris Johnson.  Sledgehammer, meet nut.  Usmanov, meet internet opprobrium.  What with Bob being the Oldest of Old Labour, Craig's links to the Daily Mail, Boris' links to the Telegraph, Spectator and any right-wing Tory going  (not to mention being generally well-liked on all sides)and Tim's knack for getting up the nose of anyone, I sincerely hope the bastard quickly finds out what happens when you poke a wasp's nest with a stick.  Please spread the word if you have a blog or anyone's email address who can get this publicised.

[via Chicken Yoghurt]

Excellent news from across the pond - Bush's personal smokescreen, Alberto Gonzales, a man for whom the list of offences to be taken into consideration extends into treble figures, has resigned.  It seems that the old rule about the cover up being more damaging than the crime still holds true.  You'd think an Administration that started on its life of crime at the knee of Tricky Dicky would know that, but apparently not.  Trebles all round!  Personally, I think this is more significant than Rove, as Gonzales was effectively
stuffed by the Senate justice committee and Patrick Leahy in particular.  Some of the footage of Alberto's performance under examination is quite laughably crass.  The vultures are circling in force.

Welcome news, and a bit more weight on the good side of the ledger when we try to work out if Gordon Brown's any different.  Watch the hands, we said, watch what he does, not what he says.  Well, here's another policy reversal:

The next thing to watch is the response to the response, which will tell us whether this was spin or substance.  If it's spin, the question is who it was aimed at, since the British press isn't exactly full of people ready to lay out the welcome mat for non-British Muslims with a suspicion of terrorism hanging over them.  The Sun won't like it, but the Mail might, it's been anti-Guantanamo for a while.  Could it be that Daily Mail Island is an *improvement* over Blair's Britain?  World Turns Upside Down Shock - See Page 4 For Full Story.  Mind you, they haven't changed that much - from today's Mail:

Oh dear.