How low can we go?
It's quite quickly becoming apparent why the government has been so desperate to prevent the full details coming out regarding the torture of Binyam Mohamed, with it attempting to pass the buck onto the United States, claiming that to release the documents would threaten our intelligence links with that country - the truth now appears to be that we have been directly complicit in the torture of British citizens in Pakistan since after 9/11.Allegations really don't come much more serious than those being made in today's Guardian, based on the testimony of an MI5 officer during the court case concerning the release of the documents last year. In what appears to amount to a "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" approach, MI5 officers questioned detainees that had been at the least ruffed up and at the worst tortured without expressing any concern for their well-being or bothering with such slight concerns as whether their detention itself was legal. This doesn't seem to have been an ad hoc approach, but rather one which was actively discussed and decided upon by security service lawyers and Whitehall officials. Moreover, in Mohamed's case it appears that MI5 actively cooperated with his rendition to Morocco, or at least knew it was going to happen, where he was brutally tortured, something which it has always denied, although it has previously admitted to giving information to the Americians which was subsequently used during his torture. To top all of this off, David Miliband actively solicited a letter from the US state department which confirmed his claim made to the judges in the case that if the documents were released, the US would stop intelligence cooperation. Miliband then in parliament directly contradicted himself, claiming that the US authorities had done nothing of the sort, which has itself prompted the case to be re-examined.
We did already know that our own intelligence services had been involved in the US programme of "extraordinary rendition", when the CIA helpfully temporarily disposed of Bisher al-Rawi and Jamil el-Banna, former associates of Abu Qutada, who were arrested and taken to Guantanamo after they left the UK for Gambia. We knew from Craig Murray that our government had no qualms whatsoever about using "intelligence" which had its source in the torture of opposition figures in Uzbekistan, and that the same practice was doubtless in place across the globe. These latest revelations though go beyond all that, into direct complicity with the active torture of British subjects and citizens in a third country, with MI5 and the government directly collaborating and discussing how such information should be used and whether it was legal or not. It's little wonder then just how far the government has gone in trying to stop these allegations from coming out: they are the kind which ought to result in instant sackings and resignations, in investigations and inquiries into how and why we decided that torture was fine as long a third party was doing it and those being abused were thought to be involved in terrorist activities. They are due to be investigated by both the parliamentary committee on human rights and the toothless and spineless intelligence and security committee, but neither is likely to get fully to the bottom of what seems to have gone on, and the latter especially has already been involved in a despicable whitewash of our role in rendition.
All this has come at the same time as an interview with the former MI5 head Stella Rimington, in which she warned that the government was directly exploiting and manipulating the terrorist threat in order to restrict civil liberties, a definitive report from the International Committee of Jurists, which investigates how post-9/11 human rights have been abused and sacrified in the name of security and finding terror, as well as making recommendations on how to recover from the current low ebb, and as the government seems to be determined to paint not just Muslims, but anyone with even slightly radical or controversial opinions as potential extremists, not to mention the retrial of the liquid bomb suspects. Anything Rimington says should be treated with caution, not just as an ex-spook but also because she was personally involved in the surveillance and infiltrating of any vaguely radical group during the 1980s, something which was never even close to being justified when most posed about as much threat to the British state as Timmy Mallett, but when a former agent denounces the way civil liberties are being abused, many do pay attention. Likewise, the ICJ report ruthlessly exposes just how low we have sunk in such a short space of time, while the government's latest "counter-terrorism strategy" illustrates vividly New Labour's apparent addiction to demonising those opposed to its own moral and political values rather than engaging and challenging them.
As the Heresiarch argues, we shouldn't kid ourselves that it's only in times of tension that governments and other state organisations try to exert their powers to the limit; it's what they do naturally. It's therefore ludicrous to imagine that an opposition party, however pure their values might be while out of power, would not do much the same once in it in order both to satisfy the traditional demands of the authoritarians and reactionaries in the press and to stay in government itself. It is however equally difficult to believe that the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats could possibly be any worse than Labour has been. How far, after all, does this rabbit hole go? We've had illegal war, complicity in torture and the suspension of habeas corpus. The only thing left for them to do seems to be to go in for targeted assassinations. After all, we've got to get on a level playing field with the Israelis somehow.
Labels: Binyam Mohamed, civil liberties, David Miliband, death of Labour, extraordinary rendition, rendition, security services, terror, terror suspects, torture
| Permalink
Thanks for another insightful post Sceptic
You ask "How far, after all, does this rabbit hole go?"
I think you have more insight than most into just how far it does go. Me? I think that in senior government circles it is very very clearly understood (and a sine qua non for Privy Council level office) that anything and everything is subordinate to the Anglo-American Imperial Project. The only consideration in matters like this is how to construct a narrative for public consumption that is plausible and will keep the general population sufficiently docile as to not pose a threat to the Project. Truth and the interests (or life) of ANY individual or group simply does not enter into it at all.
The Boy Milliband reminds me more and more of Pinocchio every day. The strings are clearly visible; the nose grows and grows; and oh that mouth!
For sure, posts and comments like these are pretty much guaranteed to raise their authors a few notches higher up the 'Interesting' scale of our ubiquitous security services surveillance apparatus. And to think we used to consider the STASI efficient - Scary isn't it?
Posted by
Sabretache |
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:02:00 AM
Great image, great post.
Thank you.
Posted by
Daniel Hoffmann-Gill |
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:37:00 AM
How far, after all, does this rabbit hole go? We've had illegal war, complicity in torture and the suspension of habeas corpus.
I'm rather eerily reminded of a Yes Minister episode, where the Chief Whip admits that they can't possibly investigate one crime because who knows how many crimes it would reveal!
Posted by
BenSix |
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 1:43:00 PM
directly exploiting and manipulating the terrorist threat in order to restrict civil liberties
Given that at least one major dictionary defines 'terrorism' as: "the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear", then surely this government's actions constitute a form of terrorism in and of itself?
(My emphasis)
Posted by
Robert |
Monday, February 23, 2009 4:23:00 PM