Two British High Court judges have released a very disturbing decision that finds that ormer detainee Binyam Mohamed was offered his freedom by the United States in exchange for his promise not to reveal his own torture at Guantanamo Bay. Equally disturbing is the statement from the English government that it cannot release proof of the torture because of objections from the United States government. If the Obama Administration is continuing this position, it is not only blocking prosecution of war crimes but the release of evidence of such war crimes to other nations. I discussed this and other developments on this segment of Rachel Maddow’s show.
Mohamed is an Ethiopian who moved to Britain as a teenager and was arrested in Pakistan in 2002. He claims he was tortured Pakistan and in Morocco. He was then transferred to the United States, which also tortured him.
All charges against him were dropped last year. He refused our Faustian bargain.
Lord Justice John Thomas and Mr. Justice David Lloyd Jones said that there was evidence to show Mohamed was tortured, but that the documents could not be made public because of the objections by the United States. Presumably, if the Obama Administration lifted such objections publicly, the British government would not have a basis to withhold the material.
47 thoughts on “Court: United States Offered to Release Detainee If He Would Not Reveal His Own Torture”
Could you help me. I have been through some terrible things in my life, some of which actually happened. Help me! I can not find sites on the: Oily hair treatment. I found only this – coarse hair treatment. What is the hedgehog behind it, and what are the other tools about the warm others and cycles for assassination resistance? Some of these extracted melanocytic patches of non-medical reasons, measure hair organs with first banner, comment bleached data and a due many and tethered caused hair, hair treatment. Thank 🙂 Valencia from Faso.
I trust that your neck-of-the-woods are currently fresh out of GOP husband abusing, toy guitar-wielding diminutive wives; for the time being, at least.
Yeah, I once considered the ACLU to be a bunch of ‘bears’ (actually much worse).
Nice job. Thanks!
Jill, thank you.
FFLEO, the Bruins lol.
The Bush/Cheney et al. war crimes make for strange bedfellows:
A conservative, 30-year registered Republican and the ACLU…
Good link Jill. I also read the letter the ACLU sent to AG Holder.
Prior to Bush/Cheney, the closest I would get to even admitting the ACLU existed was a rearrangement of the letters: UCLA
I read this in the ACLU blog section. I think because JT spoke so strongly that it made a deep impression on many people. I’ve seen him quoted all over the place for what he said:
“Last night, George Washington University constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley delivered some refreshing straight-talk on the Rachel Maddow Show. Noting that conducting a criminal investigation into the authorization of torture and abuse of detainees by Bush administration officials is not only about values but is about enforcing the law, the good professor called for the appointment of a special prosecutor — just like we did:
When we talk about values, the most important one is that the president has to enforce the laws. He can‘t pick and choose who would be popular to prosecute.
… He should be appointing a special prosecutor. There is no question about that. This is the most well-defined and publicly known crime I have seen in my lifetime. There is no debate about it. There is no ambiguity. It is well known.
You‘ve got people involved who have basically admitted the elements of a war crime that we are committed to prosecuting.
…The easiest thing [for President Obama] to do is get out of the way, say, “You know what, this is not about values. This is about the law. I took an oath to God to enforce the law. And you know what, fellow? You are going to be a target of an investigation. And maybe you are not guilty. Maybe you are. But it is not for me to decide it. It‘s for a special prosecutor.”
Turley is right, and the last week we wrote to Attorney General Holder renewing our call for him to appoint an independent prosecutor. There is more than enough evidence already in the public domain to warrant a criminal investigation. And after eight years of weak oversight, Congress must do its part, too, and form its own select committee to investigate these wrongs. As Dr. Turley says, this isn’t about politics. It’s about the law.”
I don’t see how Obama can keep pretending there’s nothing for him to do here except try to stall and hide information from the American people. Information on torture is coming out in Britain directly implicating our govt. in torture and its cover up. We must follow the rule of law to restore any credibility the US can claw back after the last 8 years. Today Obama claimed his highest responsibility was to keep the American people safe. (I have problems with that statement but if he means that, then he needs to allow an independent prosecutor to go forward with a no holes barred war crimes investigation. Our failure to act in the case of overwhelming evidence, evidence that is spreading around the world like wildfire, is putting our public directly at risk. The way to stop our wrongdoing from being the best terrorist recruiting tool ever is to renounce it and clean up our mess. If that statement was anything other than a cynical appeal as a “father figure” to a fearful populace then he will allow an independent investigation to proceed.
“The attorney general, Lady Scotland, announced the unprecedented move in light of damning evidence that Britain’s security and intelligence agencies colluded with the CIA in Mohamed’s inhuman treatment and secret rendition.
She said the police inquiry would look into “possible criminal wrongdoing” in what the high court described as Mohamed’s unlawful questioning.”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/ (from the Guardian)
Comments are closed.