“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” Abraham Lincoln

Archive for February 13th, 2010

Buzz Off.

leave a comment »

I find Gmail to be good, but Buzz is very annoying, here’s how to switch it off.

Written by modernityblog

13/02/2010 at 17:32

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , ,

Sacked, Eventually, Unrepentant Tonge.

with 2 comments

Baroness Tonge, the Lib Dem peer and GP has been sacked as LibDem health spokesperson, which give them the sensitivity of this topic is probably just as well.

According to the BBC, the LibDem leader Nick Clegg is still in denial about her attitude:

“In a statement released on Friday evening, Nick Clegg said the allegations were “highly offensive”.

“The comments were wrong, distasteful and provocative and I recognise the deep and understandable distress they have caused to the Jewish community,” he said.

“While I do not believe that Jenny Tonge is anti-semitic or racist, I regard her comments as wholly unacceptable.

“Jenny Tonge apologises unreservedly for the offence she has caused.” “

Perhaps it would be better if Baroness Tonge went on one of those training courses that the Metropolitan police run, on sensitivity to racial issues?

It seems fairly clear to me Baroness Tonge has some very strong “issues” and I’m just wondering when we will hear the next bigoted outburst from her?

My bet, it’s just a matter of time.

Update 1: The JC has more on Clegg’s comments.

Update 2: Stephanie Gutmann at the Torygraph took the trouble to ask Tonge where she got this nonsense from:

“But what on YouTube exactly? I asked Tonge how she had come to her conclusions. It turned that she had been inspired by an article on a website of a guy she called “a highly respected Jewish researcher” — an “opinion piece” she hastened to add (they are always opinion pieces). I had never heard of this highly respected researcher, named Steve Lendman, so I looked at his website and his article alleging IDF organ harvesting in Haiti.

Lendman as anti-fascists and older readers will remember is an ally of various Far Right loons, I covered him years back.

Lendman hasn’t changed much he’s still a fan of Rense, Ziopedia the neo-nazis and other Far Right material.

Update 3: Adam Holland covered these issues last month.

Written by modernityblog

13/02/2010 at 02:42

156 Pages.

leave a comment »

I should have written more after those seven paragraphs that the British government wanted to suppress concerning the treatment of Binyam Mohamed.

I was just reading the judgement, it is 156 pages and you can see why the British government didn’t want the appalling treatment inflicted on Binyam Mohamed to come out.

The judgement is viewable on the web or downloadable as a RTF file.

This is just a small extract:

“23. The problem in this case is not that Mr Mohamed was tortured in the UK. He was, however, subjected to torture. In Farhi Saeed Bin Mohamed, it is publicly recorded that “the Government does not challenge or deny the accuracy of Binyam Mohamed’s story of brutal treatment (p58)…the account in Binyam Mohamed’s diary bears several indicia of reliability (p61).” Note is taken of his “willingness to test the truth of his version of events in both the courts of law as well as the court of public opinion” (p62). Towards the end of its judgment two specific matters are recorded:

“(a)…[Mr Mohamed’s] trauma lasted for 2 long years. During that time, he was physically and psychologically tortured. His genitals were mutilated. He was deprived of sleep and food. He was summarily transported from one foreign prison to another. Captors held him in stress positions for days at a time. He was forced to listen to piercingly loud music and the screams of other prisoners while locked in a pitch-black cell. All the while, he was forced to inculpate himself and others in various plots to imperil Americans. The Government does not dispute this evidence.”(p64)

“(b) In this case, even though the identity of the individual interrogator changed (from nameless Pakistanis, to Moroccans, to Americans, and to special agent (the identity is redacted)), there is no question that throughout his ordeal Binyam Mohamed was being held at the behest of the United States (p68)…The court finds that [Mr Mohamed’s] will was overborne by his lengthy prior torture, and therefore his confessions to special agent…do not represent reliable evidence to detain petitioner”.

It gets worse for HMG:

“24. True to our shared traditions the District Court of Columbia made its findings publicly available. The courts in the United States, upholding the principles of open justice, have publicly revealed the essence of Mr Mohamed’s complaint and the circumstances of his detention. This provides an important aspect of my examination of the Foreign Secretary’s reliance on public interest immunity based on the control principle. Although Mr Mohamed is now discharged from the danger of proceedings in the USA, whether capital, or otherwise, there was a time when he was exposed to a genuine and serious risk that if convicted he would be executed. It was to address the risk of his conviction for a capital offence that the present proceedings were launched in this country against the Foreign Secretary. The redacted paragraphs formed part of the reasons of the court in a judgment which vindicated Mr Mohamed’s assertion that UK authorities had been involved in and facilitated the ill-treatment and torture to which he was subjected while under the control of USA authorities. “

So basically, he was tortured on behalf of the American government by various operatives from foreign powers, including an American, and the redacted name of a special agent clearly implies that HMG might have had a hand in it. At the very least, as the judgement suggests, all of this vindicates Binyam Mohamed claim that HMG were involved in and facilitating his ill-treatment and torture.

I have only skimmed the first 40 pages, but I’m sure there is more material in there to indict HMG. Clearly the actual judgement is much worse than those seven paragraphs.