Rendition: the cover-up (new secret memo) ..."try to move the debate on"

[phoebe]

http://www.newstatesman.com/200601230005

January 23, 2006

Exclusive: A secret memo reveals the truth: the government knows rendition is illegal but it has no idea what it has been letting the CIA get away with on our soil. By Martin Bright

snip

This blustering response was entirely disingenuous, the New Statesman can now demonstrate. It does not begin to describe the reality, which is set out in a secret, high- level memo - obtained by this magazine - that passed from the Foreign Office to Downing Street last month. For the truth is that the government is involved in a cover-up, not so much of what it knows about this shady business, but what it doesn't know. The one thing it is pretty sure about, however, is that if it has happened, and if Britain had a role, then the government has broken the law.

snip

The document addresses the specific question: "How do we know whether those our armed forces have helped to capture in Iraq or Afghanistan have subsequently been sent to interrogation centres?" And the answer is: "We have no mechanism for establishing this, though we would not ourselves question such detainees while they were in such facilities."

Against this background of ignorance and a distinct possibility that the law has been broken, the memo offers advice to Blair on how to deal with the issue in public. "We should try to avoid getting drawn on detail," it says, and "try to move the debate on . . . underlining all the time the strong counter-terrorist rationale for close co-operation with the US".

And the memo places revealing stress on the need to follow the precise wording of statements by the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, who admitted rendition was US policy but denied that the US practised or permitted torture. When she used the word "torture", the memo makes clear, she probably had in mind a particular definition of the term which did not include cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

and more..
apologies if already posted

[NanceGreggs]

1. WTF???????

"When she used the word 'torture', the memo makes clear, she probably had in mind a particular definition of the term which did not include cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment ..."

And what 'definition' would that be? Who uses the word 'torture' in this context to imply something else?

Of course, Condi's idea of 'torture' is her favourite NYC shoe store not having her size in stock ...

[rodeodance]

2. "prabably had in mind" seems like speculation to me. Why?

[phoebe]

3. Precisely..a little more - can't access article in full now but..

snip

At Foreign Office Questions recently the minister responsible for Middle East affairs snapped. MPs from all sides were pressing for answers about "extraordinary rendition" and were unsatisfied with the stock reply from Kim Howells: "We have no knowledge of this and we have received no requests from the Bush government."

Challenged for the umpteenth time, Howells let his righteous indignation show. "The government are opposed to torture," he said. "They do not torture anyone, nor would we ever, ever put up with any other administration torturing individuals."

Blair et al up to this in their eyeballs as well.. monkey see, monkey do..they will do just what the Bush admin. is doing - lie, obfuscate, twist the truth and refuse to engage truthseekers
in any meaningful discourse until they get away with it or find another subject with which to distract us..


Pitiful..

[phoebe]

4. can someone else please post some other salient points made

in this article - can't get back into it.. thanks.

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. It turns out that they do exactly what we think they are doing.

It's unusual to see them write down the plan though.

[cal04]

6. Concerns grow in Ireland over use of Shannon airport

Concerns grow in Ireland over use of Shannon airport as US military stopover
330,000 US troops passed through airport in 2005
State denies knowledge of CIA rendition flights
Irish politicians and human rights activists are voicing growing concern at the US military's use of Shannon airport after it emerged that an average of 900 soldiers a day passed through the commercial west coast airport last year.

Peace campaigners say most soldiers being transported between the US and Iraq now pass through Ireland, making it the favoured European stopover and calling into question Ireland's neutral status.

Until recently, many councillors on Ireland's west coast stressed the economic benefit of the stopovers, which generated an estimated €37m (£25m) for the airport last year. The former Labour mayor of Shannon, Gregg Duff, said those opposed to the presence of GIs had been accused of not caring about local jobs and endangering the US investment which fuelled much of the Celtic Tiger economic boom. In one local radio debate, a Fianna Fáil party activist warned that US businesses would pull out of the west of Ireland if locals were seen as hostile to troops.

But amid new concerns that Shannon may have hosted CIA "rendition" flights carrying prisoners to countries where they could be tortured, local politicians have changed their tone. Town councillors, warning that the region's reputation is being damaged, have unanimously approved a motion calling on the government to inspect US planes at the airport. Clare county council has seen wide support for a motion demanding that the Irish army inspect every CIA-chartered flight. Fine Gael's Martin Conway, who raised the motion at Clare county council, warned that Shannon's international standing was at risk. "I would prefer to see US troops not use Shannon at all," he said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1691630,00.html

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

7. K&R... Keep this at the top and on the front page!

[bonito]

8. Kick

[annabanana]

9. k&r..eom

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

10. Kick

[phoebe]

11. shameless kick

n/t