UK: Intelligence sharing with the US threatened

[sabra]

Source: AP

LONDON — The United States will restrict intelligence-sharing with the U.K. if a British court reveals portions of a ruling detailing a former Guantanamo Bay detainee's treatment, a government lawyer said Wednesday.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told her British counterpart, David Miliband, that intelligence cooperation would be damaged if judges overturn a decision to withhold sections of their ruling on the alleged torture of Binyam Mohamed, according to Karen Steyn, a lawyer for Britain's government.

Mohamed, an Ethiopian who moved to Britain as a teenager, was arrested in 2002 in Pakistan. He alleges he was tortured there and in Morocco before he was transferred to Guantanamo in 2004.

Mohamed was accused of plotting to explode a "dirty bomb" in the U.S., but was freed in February without charge and returned to Britain.

The British court case was originally launched by Mohamed's lawyers, who have demanded full disclosure of what Britain's government knew about his treatment in detention.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5junnlo64ITDwX7j8laiUSbOIYtIgD99O8PA83

[Captain Hilts]

1. This is NOT good. Highly-classified stuff often reads: "US/UK eyes only."

[dipsydoodle]

2. Oh ! Threats now is it.

Cankles should recognise we have our own laws.

The court noted..........that keeping it secret amounted to concealing "evidence of serious wrongdoing by the United States."

[Cass]

33. Cankles? nt

[Zhade]

67. "Change"

NT!

[frylock]

3. so we're going to jeopardize our own "security" out of spite..

because we don't want it to be revealed that we illegally detained and tortured this guy. fucking brilliant strategy. right out the GWB playbook.

[The Stranger]

4. The Battle of Britain all over again.

They must get sick of fighting Nazism.

[HiyaEmerald Eyes]

5. Clinton moved to halt disclosure of CIA torture evidence, court told

Source: Guardian



• Miliband claims relations with US would suffer
• Judge doubts alleged harm to intelligence sharing


Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday 29 July 2009


Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, personally intervened to suppress evidence of CIA collusion in the torture of a British resident, the high court heard today.

The dramatic turn emerged as lawyers for Binyam Mohamed, the UK resident abused in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Morocco and Guantánamo Bay, joined by lawyers for the Guardian and other media groups, asked the court to order the disclosure of CIA material.

It consists of a seven-paragraph summary of what the CIA knew, and what it told MI5 and MI6, about the treatment of Mohamed. Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones, the judges hearing the case, have said that the summary contains nothing that could possibly be described as "highly sensitive classified US intelligence".

However, David Miliband, the foreign secretary, has repeatedly told the court that the US would stop sharing intelligence with the UK if the CIA material was published. The judges, as well as lawyers for Mohamed and the media, have challenged that assertion.

"Is it remotely credible that would stop intelligence-sharing?" Thomas asked yesterday, referring to Obama's recent decision to publish CIA torture documents in the US. "The judgment of the foreign secretary is the key," he added.

The court has heard how the Foreign Office and Miliband have solicited US help in keeping the CIA material secret. Today, it heard how Miliband met Clinton in Washington on 12 May this year.

In a written statement proposing a gagging order, Miliband told the court that she "indicated" that the disclosure of CIA evidence "would affect intelligence sharing". Pressed repeatedly by the judges on the claim yesterday, Karen Steyn, Miliband's counsel, insisted that Clinton was indeed saying that if the seven-paragraph summary of CIA material was disclosed, the US would "reassess" its intelligence relationship with the UK, a move that "would put lives at risk".

.....

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/29/binyam-mohamed-cia-torture

[xultar]

6. People will hate her for this. But doing her job would suck if those images had been

released.

[ThomCat]

7. It doesn't matter if her job would suck.

Those images are evidence of crimes. Suppressing evidence of crimes is itself a crime. It is covering up the crimes and protecting the criminals from prosecution. That's a war crime in this case.

If the US really stood for the rule of law then those images would have been released already.

[xultar]

10. You are right. We're trying to mend fences...and how Obama would look

not prosecuting those bastards.

Shit would hit the fan.

I don't think Obama would be invited to anything until he prosecuted the CIA Bush/Cheney...

[shadowknows69]

17. Good, maybe he shouldn't be.

If we don't prosecute our war criminals our country is a joke.

[Alamuti Lotus]

30. Sorry, but don't expect anything other than 'Protect Status Quo' on the docket

protection can be expected, not prosecution.

[irislake]

24. Here's an outside perspective

if you do nothing about the torture it looks like business as usual for the U.S. As if we outsiders haven't seen absolutely horrifying stuff. I still feel sick after watching a film of your soldiers' behaviour in Iraq. A few bad apples? Please. They were bad enough to make me hate your entire country and everyone in it for the rest of my life!

Except for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Bill Maher. Dennis Kucinich and on and on and on and on. I have to remind myself sometimes that Noam Chomsky has said time after time that there is a complete disconnect between what the American people want and what they get from their crooked bloody corporate owned politicians in both parties.

You need to remember to see your country as others see you. We get to see stuff that your MSM "protects" you from. Never forget that the rest of us get to see it. How do you think the ordinary Iraqi people feel about you?

Obama needs to clean up after the Bush Administration and prove he has completely changed the direction of American foreign policy.

That's what I think anyway. But who am I? Just an old lady who has started to get disillusioned with it all.

[Ghost Dog]

34. Yes. It is about preventing the average US citizen knowing

what most of the rest of us know. And the intensity of their lock-down and propaganda regime is likely only to increase.

[Larry Ogg]

45. Americans wanted a change of direction…

And as usual, all they got was a change of face…

But unfortunately we have the corporately owned conservative biased fraud propaganda fake news entertainment machine, aka the M$M; and that’s how they keep us effectively divided, dumb downed, ready to kill, entertained and believing that we have the best two party system money can buy within our fake democracy.

I guess now I’m supposed to say :sarcasm:

And here’s a testimony too our corporately owned two party system.

[No Elephants]

59. I would never dream of joining a Canadian board to dump on Canada.

[Eric J in MN]

8. "It consists of a seven-paragraph summary of what the CIA knew,"

The lawsuit isn't over photos.

[xultar]

9. You are correct. I apologize but it still would have made mending fences with

other countries harder.

[Downwinder]

13. Change -- More open and transparent? n/t

[No Elephants]

48. And you know that how? " Other countries" already know more about what we do abroad than

you or I do. Six years in Iraq and Afghanistan and even more of Gitmo/rendition/torture--and you seriously think a 7 paragraph summary is going to turn the tide, one way or the other?

[The Stranger]

11. Fuck her and fuck her job. This is much, much bigger than her.

Let the truth come out. It is every person's right to know.

[xultar]

14. You are right. I don't think she made the decision on her own.

Because then how would Obama look not prosecuting them?and Bush/Cheney...

[No Elephants]

49. How does not prosecuting Bushco look now? I agree that

she did not make this decision on her own, but so what? Is this about Hillary v. Obama again?

Even if she made the decision after consulting with Obama, she made and put her name on it. Principled people have been known to resign before doing something that goes against the law and/or their conscience.

[flyarm]

58. like Colin Powell? Like General Colin Powell who sent his fellow soldiers into a war ??

based on Plagerism and lies ...oh there is a very long list of people in our government that have shown that principle...hahahahahaa..yeahhhhhhhhhhh

They are all owned by the same people..

but still the buck stops at the head of the food chain..

eom

[No Elephants]

60. If Powell was guilty-and he was-how is Hillary not guilty again?.

Powell sent our troops into war knowing he was not comfortable with the evidence. No only that, but Powell knew that his credibilty with the American people was being used to sell the invasion to the American people even more so than to the UN. In my mind, that made Powell guilty; and I have been very vocal on this board about that, whenever Powell comes up.

I am not quite sure why Powell is being brought up in this thread, but I'll say it again. Powell was and continues to be, a POS, IMO. However, Powell's guilt does not cancel out Bush's guilt, or vice versa. Similarly, Hillary's guilt does cancel out Obama's or vice vera.

The buck stops at the head of the food chain,and, if you read Reply 49 and my posts to you, you will see I never tried to exonerate Obama. To the contrary, I agreed with you that Obama bore responsibity. However, while the buck stops with Obama, it certainly did not skip over Hillary in this matter. It's one thing not to exonerate Obama, which I don't. It is quite another to try to pretend she is not to blame.

I'd love to hear your rationale for exonerating her. And, as I posted to someone else, this is not about Hillary v. Obama. It's so much bigger than that.

[flyarm]

61. she is not..I am not disagreeing with you..but the real one to blame is the head of the

administration..she should be held accountable ..but only when her boss is !!!!!!!!

[No Elephants]

62. Um, no. They are both the real ones to blame. If you tell me to kill someone, and I do, how

on earth are you MORE to blame for what I do than I am?

[flyarm]

65. I am not exonerating her..get that..I AM NOT EXONERATING HER!!!

I HAVE SAID THAT REPEATEDLY..

But she is not in this alone..got that??????

She was sent to do her dirty shit ...she is accountable..

But so are her bosses who sent her to do their dirty work!

[flyarm]

46. and who do you "think" gave her her marching orders what to tell the Brits?

do you honestly think she is working on this by herself???? Honestly..do some thinking here ..who ordered her to go "TALK" to the Brits and send them that warning..do you think she did that independently??????? Is anyone "that" naive????????? Or do some here have the blinders on so tightly their brains can't think???????

What part of she represents this administration do people here not get???????????

Or don't want to "get"..........

[No Elephants]

51. Yes, but please see Reply 49. Despite everyone's best efforts, this is still a free

country. Free enough, anyway, that people are free to resign.

[flyarm]

52. Scott Horton has the story posted now..read it!

yes she could have resigned..but it seems the dem party and the Obama administration would have done this no matter who had to deliver the message!
Put the blame where it really lays!!


http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005452

Clinton Intervened to Keep Lid on Torture Account
By Scott Horton

The Daily Telegraph reports the same exchange:

Mrs Clinton personally told the Foreign Secretary that the US government would consider the dramatic step if a short summary of the treatment of Binyam Mohamed is placed in the public domain, the High Court was told. A hearing was told that the move could cause “serious harm” to Britain’s national security and potentially put the lives of British citizens at risk.

Binyam Mohamed is an Ethiopian national who was granted protected status in Britain. He was arrested in April 2002 when he attempted to board a plane in Karachi, Pakistan, to fly back to Britain. Pakistani authorities turned him over to the CIA, and he was held in the CIA’s extraordinary renditions program until 2004, when he was transferred to Guantánamo. His accounts of torture at the hand of captors in Pakistan and Morocco were previously validated by British courts, which noted the involvement of the CIA and British intelligence in the process.

Miliband explains Clinton’s objection in terms of the “principle” that intelligence furnished should not be disclosed, even in court proceedings. However, it is fairly obvious that the American State Department is acting as a proxy for American intelligence services in this process. And there is a far more powerful principle in play. The torture practiced on Binyam Mohamed was a serious crime. Evidence is being suppressed to preclude the full investigation of that crime and to block possible criminal prosecutions of those involved. That’s called obstruction of justice, and it’s also a crime. This case well exemplifies how the Obama Administration is using claims of national security interests to preclude serious investigations of criminal conduct and accountability of those involved.

[No Elephants]

54. Um, I have.

[flyarm]

36. who's her boss???????? ever hear that saying...

who's your daddy?????????

who sent her there to give that warning,..and who does she have to report back to?? enough of the excuses!!!!!!

Heck if you are done blaming her for doing what she was ordered to do ..maybe there is a flock of birds somewhere you can blame the FISA stuff on and all the rest of the Bush business that is being carried out by the Obama administration.

[grahamhgreen]

44. R U serious?

[HiyaEmerald Eyes]

12. Jeppesen's UK unit to cooperate in CIA torture case

http://www.examiner.com/x-13426-CIA-Examiner~y2009m7d28-Jeppesens-UK-unit-to-cooperate-in-CIA-torture-case


Jeppesen's UK unit to cooperate in CIA torture case
July 28, 5:49 PM

Jeppesen UK, the Sussex, United Kingdom-based division of Jeppesen Dataplan, has agreed to cooperate with a UK court by releasing internal documents containing flight data allegedly showing how CIA aircraft transported Binyam Mohamed, a UK national, to clandestine 'black site' prisons, reported The Guardian on Sunday.

The UK legal charity Reprieve brought the suit against Jeppesen UK, accusing the firm of complicity in torturing Mohamed.

"Jeppesen," writes The Guardian's Jamie Doward, "is alleged to have provided flight planning services, secured permits for travel, arranged fuel provision and filed flight plans for the clients in the knowledge that the planes were being used for extraordinary rendition."

Jeppesen Dataplan is currently involved in a separate US court case, Mohamed v. Jeppesen, in which the American Civil Liberties Union asserts on behalf of Mohamed and four other complainants that Jeppesen played an instrumental role in their torture. A ruling is currently pending on an Obama administration move to exert the 'state secret' privilege and have Mohamed v. Jeppesen dismissed.

Disclosure of Jeppesen's internal information in an open UK court contradicts the Obama administration's rationale for protecting Jeppesen Dataplan's internal data and business relations with the US Government from courtroom discovery in the US case.

[frylock]

15. Rice moved to halt disclosure of CIA torture evidence, court told

imagine if that were the headline. this place would be on fire.

[fascisthunter]

18. excellent point

[Hell Hath No Fury]

21. Some of us are.

:mad:

[frylock]

22. i'm right there with ya!

[BunkerHill24]

26. Spot on!

K&R

[flyarm]

56. Exactly..the anger should go to the top of the food chain..

seems this administration is playing the same game as Bush..let others do the dirty work and play like they are not involved at the top of the food chain..the good cop, bad cop bullshit!..and many are willing to except this crap..once again...seems some things never change..and people "willingly" get duped...but not all of us..

how pathetic..

[No Elephants]

63. You seem stuck in the primaries. Obama is not disassociating himself from this or

claiming he'd love to make the info available, but Hillary won't let him. So, he is not playing "good cop, bad cop" in the least. And the only ones who don't realize that the SOS answers to and is responsible to the POTUS (along with everyone else in the administration) are not in reality. However, claiming that he is more to blame for this than she is is also out of reality. No one has a gun to her head.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Wouldn't want to allow anything that might upset 'The Family'. nt

[fascisthunter]

19. this government is no good anymore...

when "We the People" are not allowed to see what is done in our names with our tax dollars, it is time to change a lot of things, and these people, are part of the problem.

[KansDem]

25. But what I find amazing is these folks still call the shots and still pull in the paychecks...

Many of us outside DC are scrimping and scraping to get by. Some of us are losing our jobs and our homes. But these DCers still pull this crap and still get paid for it! They think they're "the best and the brightest."

Man, what I wouldn't do for a six-digit salary! (or, in this case, what I wouldn't do...).

[No Elephants]

53. Big gubbamint jobs are not about 6 figure salaries anymore. They are about the book deals and

consulting fees that come later. Salaries for the Governor of Arkansas and the POTUS are not what made Bubb'a net worth well in excess fo $100 million.

[cascadiance]

20. Michael Scheurer who headed the rendition program under Clinton says it was WORSE then!

A lot of this posturing from Clinton and other Clintonites is likely to cover up the Clinton administration's torture programs too, which might make many of them open to indictment investigation/charges as well... Michael Scheurer, no friend to us on the progressive side (see Glen Beck's interview with him earlier), himself says that the program was worse under him (and Clinton) than it was under Bush.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/rights/139356/architect_of_cia_rendition_program:_if_torture_prosecutions_go_ahead,_indict_clinton_too/

On Fault Lines, Scheurer talks about it at 6:30 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3EFe6WG1_Y

Now, I wouldn't only take Scheurer's word for it, as his politics seems to want to work against progressives, and he probably is trying to inflate the program being worse under his direction than other presidents before or after Clinton to go after Clinton and "mute" anyone's desires to go after the other administrations, but I think there's probably a lot of guilt to go around in many places, and that's probably why we have a real resistance in Washington to prosecute this past administration appropriately, afraid that too many closet doors will become opened. The Bush administration, in its efforts to legally support torture of course in my book is still worse than the others before him, but nevertheless, there's been lawbreaking for many years in this area.

[24601]

23. Well, it that's true, he shouldn't be immune either. I believe Serbia

would like him extradited - they convicted him, in absentia, for war crimes.

[Senator]

27. Trouble is, Sheuer lies a lot.

He started out his TV author career -- after years as a happy bushie -- saying "I told you so" and whining that Clinton refused to follow his unlawful suggestions. (Which may have had something to do with his 1999 change from "chief" of the OBL unit to "special advisor to chief.")

Clinton did bounty-like (legal?) rendition of "criminals" to lawful authorities, pursuant to some existing legal process (conviction, arrest warrant) -- not "911 changed everything" (war crime) kidnap, pursuant to bushcheney paranoia, then rendition to covert locations for the purpose of "enhanced interrogation."

Sadly, there is no shortage of people eager to cast blame around or assume "both sides" are identical in all ways. The war criminals -- like Scheuer -- count on this obfuscation to make their getaway.

--

[cascadiance]

28. I'm not saying Scheuer is being truthful...

But a man like him in charge of the CIA renditions when Clinton was in office is perhaps something that might be covered up, no matter what the real truth is. When you see Clinton and others also participate in the coverups along with the Obama administration in allowing State Secrets privilege to still help silence lawsuits, there are things that the Dems are covering up too. Scheuer is trying to make it sound like the Dems are worse, which they are likely not, but as long as they play along to his diatribes and cover up for the Bush administration, they can be made to look just as bad by the likes of Scheuer and many will swallow his "explanations" as truth too.

[Senator]

32. I understand. But the real irony...

...is that in their fear of where the chips may fall; Obama, Clinton, and the DC-Dems wind up actually being worse. A few criminals, even as bad as bushcheney, are a small problem compared to an entirely corrupt police force.

As long as Obama continues to drive the torture getaway car, he'll have no other legacy.

--

[flyarm]

47. and our "GOVERNMENT" doesn't lie much?? your point is what???

that our government is above board and this lowly writer is a liar...why is the messenger always the liar and those in our government are not..as long as they are on "our side" they would never lie...no no no..they would never ever ever lie to us....isn't that what the repubs always thought about Bush..for 8 years?????????

pot meet kettle.

[Senator]

68. This is no "lowly writer"

Scheuer is the "lying gov't" personified. He was (is?) career CIA.

That is the point.

---

[No Elephants]

57. The fact that one party is "worse" than the other does not exonerate anyone.

No matter how bad Dummya was/is, Bubba is still guilty of what Bubba did and failed to do and Obama is still guilty of what Obama did/is doing and failed to do.

The fact that Dahmer murdered many does not make the guy who murdered "only" two people a saint.

[Senator]

69. And "Bubba is still guilty of ..." what, exactly?

I've simply pointed out that Scheuer is an unreliable source of information. If you know of something Clinton "did or failed to do" of a (war) criminal nature, do describe and support it.

But the DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy spent the entire Clinton presidency panty-twisted about "scandals" that never seemed to amount to anything substantive, let alone proved damaging to the nation. So, sweeping accusations against him have lost a good bit of credibility -- particularly from paranoid patrions like Scheuer.

---

[No Elephants]

64. Rendtiton may have been worse under Clinton because Clinton was not

torturing at Gitmo or Bagram. But this thread is not about rendition, or the comparative vices and virtues of the Clintons vs. Obama. It's about our country.

[Solly Mack]

29. K&R

[thedeanpeople]

31. k&r

[Ghost Dog]

35. All law-abiding nations should cease intelligence cooperation with the US,

(and the UK and others...) they could well be advised, for very serious legal reasons.

[grahamhgreen]

37. "Personally intervened' to prevent an investigation into torture...!!!???

[kpete]

38. Clinton moved to halt disclosure of CIA torture evidence, court told

Source: The Guardian

Clinton moved to halt disclosure of CIA torture evidence, court told

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, personally intervened to suppress evidence of CIA collusion in the torture of a British resident, the high court heard today.

The dramatic turn emerged as lawyers for Binyam Mohamed, the UK resident abused in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Morocco and Guantánamo Bay, joined by lawyers for the Guardian and other media groups, asked the court to order the disclosure of CIA material.

It consists of a seven-paragraph summary of what the CIA knew, and what it told MI5 and MI6, about the treatment of Mohamed. Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones, the judges hearing the case, have said that the summary contains nothing that could possibly be described as "highly sensitive classified US intelligence".

However, David Miliband, the foreign secretary, has repeatedly told the court that the US would stop sharing intelligence with the UK if the CIA material was published. The judges, as well as lawyers for Mohamed and the media, have challenged that assertion.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/29/binyam-mohamed-cia-torture

[tekisui]

39. Our leaders are obstructionists to justice.

[Larry Ogg]

43. Well that’s putting it nicely; it even has the affect of giving them the benefit of the doubt?

But then, what would we be looking at if we were really cynical and pissed off at what these people are doing in our name, while claiming it is for our benefit? Well I guess we could say something like; these criminals are conspiring to commit and conceal crimes against humanity, and the only questions we need to ask before deciding their punishment is… Are they accessories before the fact, or are they accessories after the fact?

Of course none of this really maters does it; after all, when and if predators find themselves the lawmakers amongst a superpower empire, they can deem such activities selectively legal, and the prerogative of those who represent the State, i.e. themselves, this way such things become legal for some while remaining illegal for most! After all, this is what a pretend democracy is all about! Right?

[flyarm]

55. Scott Horton Just posted that at Harpers...read it..

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005452

Clinton Intervened to Keep Lid on Torture Account
By Scott HortonThe Daily Telegraph reports the same exchange:

Mrs Clinton personally told the Foreign Secretary that the US government would consider the dramatic step if a short summary of the treatment of Binyam Mohamed is placed in the public domain, the High Court was told. A hearing was told that the move could cause “serious harm” to Britain’s national security and potentially put the lives of British citizens at risk.

Binyam Mohamed is an Ethiopian national who was granted protected status in Britain. He was arrested in April 2002 when he attempted to board a plane in Karachi, Pakistan, to fly back to Britain. Pakistani authorities turned him over to the CIA, and he was held in the CIA’s extraordinary renditions program until 2004, when he was transferred to Guantánamo. His accounts of torture at the hand of captors in Pakistan and Morocco were previously validated by British courts, which noted the involvement of the CIA and British intelligence in the process.

Miliband explains Clinton’s objection in terms of the “principle” that intelligence furnished should not be disclosed, even in court proceedings. However, it is fairly obvious that the American State Department is acting as a proxy for American intelligence services in this process. And there is a far more powerful principle in play. The torture practiced on Binyam Mohamed was a serious crime. Evidence is being suppressed to preclude the full investigation of that crime and to block possible criminal prosecutions of those involved. That’s called obstruction of justice, and it’s also a crime. This case well exemplifies how the Obama Administration is using claims of national security interests to preclude serious investigations of criminal conduct and accountability of those involved.

[saigon68]

40. Not surprising

[onehandle]

41. Dupe. And this Guardian version was posted last night and combined with Sabra's thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3991831

[NewAgeThinker]

42. It's unfortunate i'm not surprised

I wish I was surprised but i'm not

same droppings, different toilet
that's all

[totodeinhere]

50. This is really sad.

The whole truth about the torture crimes needs to come out. Let the chips fall where they may. It's the only way that we can ever move past this. Oh, and of course the perpetrators and those higher ups who ordered the torture need to be brought to justice.

[Vidar]

66. I was very supportive of Hillary as SOS, but her ties with the Family,

and Latin American fascist types as well as her participation in Bush style coverups definitely cast her in another light.