Categorized | Human Rights, Politics, torture
Hillary And Obama Silence Torture Details
by BeyondGoodAndEvil
Posted on 07 August 2009 | 9:08 am 
Print This Post
From Democracy Now!:
A British court heard evidence last week that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to prevent the disclosure of details regarding the CIA’s role in the alleged torture of former Guantanamo Bay prisoner Binyam Mohamed.
Mohamed is a 30 year old Ethiopian who was granted refugee status in Britain in 1994. He was detained in Pakistan in 2002 on suspicion of involvement in terrorism and then “rendered” to Morocco and Afghanistan.
British government documents show Secretary Of State – Hillary Clinton – threatening British officials with reduction of intelligence sharing, if they reveal any details of the torture claims in Mohamed’s case.
After spending seven years in U.S. custody, Mohamed was released from Guantanamo in late February. He alleges he was repeatedly tortured at Guantanamo Bay and at a secret CIA prison.
More from Democracy Now!
David Davis – British Parliamentarian: We have in Britain at the moment a court case underway about torture. It’s one of, we think, fifteen cases of really serious torture. We’re not talking waterboarding here. We’re talking scalpels and beatings and cutting people in unpleasant places. That case is beginning to show complicity in that torture on the part of British intelligence agencies.The judges want to release some information to the public, very carefully selected information, not detailed security information, and they have not been able to, because the US administration has written to the court, written to the foreign office and then to the court, saying if they release this sort of information, they’ll cut off intelligence cooperation or reduce intelligence cooperation with the United Kingdom. Now, that’s a serious threat.
Click HERE for full transcript.
From salon.com:
At the center of Mohamed’s efforts lie the claims of high British government officials that the Obama administration has repeatedly threatened to cut off intelligence-sharing programs with the U.K. if the British High Court discloses information which British intelligence officials learned from the CIA about how Mohamed was tortured. New statements from the British Foreign Secretary yesterday — claiming that Hillary Clinton personally re-iterated those threats in a May meeting — highlight how extreme is this joint American/British effort to cover-up proof of Mohamed’s torture.
Click HERE for full article.
From the UK telegraph:
Mrs Clinton personally told the British Foreign Secretary (David Milibrand) 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.The high level intervention follows a protracted legal wrangle over whether a seven-paragraph summary of Mr Mohamed’s treatment at the controversial camp on Cuba, drafted for inclusion in a High Court judgment last year, could undermine national security if it were to be published.
Click HERE for full article.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I want to know every detail on the torture that was carried out on prisoners and detainees – in Guantanamo and elsewhere – in the name of America.
Related posts:
If you liked this article,
This post was written by:
 |
BeyondGoodAndEvil - who has written 158 posts on Free Range Talk.
|
Submit your own article via this simple form and we will format it for you for publishing.
Jump to Leave New Comment 
Comments
Recent Comments
- on MOD Thursdayyou have another virus? yikes! I'm obviously hyper-alarmed due to experience with Littlegrrrl this...
- X 2
- It's time to take away their tax exempt status. That'll get rid of a lot of them.
- on MOD ThursdayUgh. You broke arm? Get better soon
- on MOD ThursdayUgh, I've got some kind of virus that my guy gave me, but besides that I'm well thanks.
- 51% insane -- hmmmm. That could be. but of the remaining 49%, how many are barely hanging on? I was...
- Never, because the greedy and fake Christians who like them, are just like them. And burning the Qur...
Posts
Tags
Authors
Categories
© 2009 Free Range Talk. Powered by your Donations.
242,005 Comments Since March 2009 
-->
(Report comment)
Discussions such as that between Beyond and Esprit make me wish I lived in a different time zone!
This Kucinich supporter’s thinking is very much in synch with what you both write. A brilliant man was marginalized, NOT because he saw UFOs but because he was/is a reality seeing, truth telling politician who can NEVER, it seems, get close to the levers of power in this day and age.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
(Report comment)
btw, Dugg this, Beyond.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
(Report comment)
Thanks WTS.
I am more aligned with Kucinich’s vision than most other members of Congress.
However, both parties have moved so far to the right in the last 30 years, the left has unfortunately, been relegated to fringe status by the MSM.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
(Report comment)
May I ask you a question? Do you really that someone like Kucinich would have made a difference? Do you truly believe that he would have gotten any legislative wins? Do you really believe that Congress would not have shut down any of his programs? As I mention, the US would never be another Europe or Canada. Its simply not predispose to be
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
(Report comment)
Probably not, but then I don’t believe he ever had a chance to win a primary, let alone a general election, because the country has moved so far right in the last 30 years.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
(Report comment)
The country is now realizing the nefarious impact of Reagan’s policies. Its going to take a while for this country to move to the left, back to the levels of LBJ
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
(Report comment)
It’s irritating the way St. Ronnie is idolized, when he was such a joke of a president.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
The important thing that you are doing here, Beyond, is not the story of torture so much, although it is a very worthy one. It is in your paragraph addressing Esprit: The MSM is NOT covering it. We could have a two party system if the MSM was keeping everybody honest.
In effect, the MSM should act as if it were the third party, an entity with power to check the depravities of the other two. It has become its own self-indulgent agent of depravity interested in keeping the status quo.
This site, and similar ones to FRT, and reporting such as yours, Beyond, are probably the beginnings of a new form of Fourth Estate. One that embraces its original meaning.
The message is now the medium.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
(Report comment)
That’s why I love being able to author posts here, because we can basically address what isn’t being covered wall to wall in the MSM. Topics such as torture or why we go to war and how we treat people from other countries and even our own citizens, should be addressed and debated by the media and the country, rather than just the sensationalistic type of infotainment we generally see from cable news. I often check out Democracy Now because Amy Goodman covers topics that aren’t normally covered in mainstream news, because they don’t generate ratings.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I am way out of the league (re: free markets and socialism) on the discussion by Espirit and MissFrenchy. So I am reading all of your posts with awe. I like both of your points of view in the way they are being put forth. This is what I like to see. Nice to not have trolls, butting in saying stupid stuff.
Thank you for the insight, and great post, Beyondgood. I am still digesting it, trying to figure out what to make of the issue.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I am curious as to why ANYONE would expect Obama to be different from Bush in these matters? Can you really be that naive?
My wife and I voted for Obama, not because we saw him as anything other than a centrist who would continue the status quo, but because we saw him as less likely to expand the theater of operations into Iran.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:44 am
(Report comment)
Speaking purely for myself, I’m covering this issue, because the MSM is not covering it, not because of naivete, or because I’m surprised at the current administration’s stance on foreign policy issues, and their reluctance for disclosure on any of the alleged crimes of the past administration.
As for anyone else being surprised, I can’t possibly guess or gauge others’ reactions.
It seems to me that many liberals simply accept things that have no direct impact on their own lives, when carried out by the administration they voted in, because they are conditioned to be inured to the plight of others, especially overseas.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:02 am
(Report comment)
I, for one, never expected any reversal of previous policy. We voted for Obama simply because there were no candidates who reflected our feelings and he was the most benign opposing our sentiments.
This goes back to my argument that the two party system is a shell game. One party overtly supports the plutocracy of Wall Street while the other covertly supports it pretending to be the opposition.
The dirty little secret about the Islamists is not their opposition to human rights, but their opposition to free market capitalism as we practice it.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:10 am
(Report comment)
Yes, it’s a shell game. But how can we attain viable third party candidates until we pass legislation to mandate public financing of elections and limit terms in Congress?
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:15 am
(Report comment)
Good luck with this
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
(Report comment)
I have to disagree with you on one point. Myself, and all of the people that I know, voted for Obama because we wanted to, not because he was the last one standing. In fact, voting for Obama was the first time that I voted for a candidate, and not just for the one I thought would do the least amount of damage.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:19 am
(Report comment)
We liked Obama, but did not actually expect a lot from him other than not being a saber rattling jingo.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:51 am
(Report comment)
Careful with some of your terms. Jingo is not viewed well within the black community
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:54 am
(Report comment)
Jingo means belligerent nationalist, which is what Obama is NOT and that is the primary reason we like him.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
(Report comment)
Your system will never allow for a viable third party to play a major role. The single district system basically discourages third party from really making a difference. Moreover, most Americans are moderates and do no like extremes, whether liberal or conservatives. To be honest, I much rather have this system than have proportional representation where far-right candidates can actually be elected. I find this scary
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:26 am
(Report comment)
Personally, I am sick of not EVER having any candidates who reflect our actual philosophy.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:37 am
(Report comment)
Disillusionment of the electorate is one of their goals. Wedge issues are what’s used to get out the vote.
Nixonland was an interesting exploration of the differences in class struggles and perceptions between the “Orthogonians and the Franklins”
Anyway, the philosophy of America has changed over time. It changed most with the invention of television and the building up of the military industrial complex after the second world war.
Television was created to sell soap, and now it sells the products of major multinational corporations, as well as the agenda of these corporations, which is corporate welfare for them on the taxpayer dime.
The Pentagon has a huge amount of control over the government and Chalmers Johnson makes it very clear in his book – Blowback – how American foreign policy objectives are nothing more than elaborate ways to funnel taxpayer money to the military industrial complex.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:42 am
(Report comment)
We are not removed from the process. We gave (and continue to give) more money to Obama than any other candidate in our lifetime.
Still, we ARE socialists whereas he is not. No matter how you present him, he is not what we would prefer only better than the opposition.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
(Report comment)
That’s the way I see it too, but I still find it a little disheartening, especially when I compare the politics currently in the U.S., with the politics and policies of other Western nations who have socialism and their citizens simply wouldn’t stand for a system so obviously corrupt and morally bankrupt.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:52 am
(Report comment)
Push your country towards a more leftist path and perhaps you will, but I highly doubt it would ever happen
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
(Report comment)
Sadly, I believe you may be correct.
However most of Europe is socialist because of high unemployment. Since I don’t foresee the employment situation here returning to previous levels anytime soon because the previous “prosperity” was based upon borrowing and inflated property values only time will tell.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
(Report comment)
I don’t know if Europe is socialist because of high unemployment. In fact, it has moved to the right ever since the implementation of the EU. Moreover, there is a vast difference between the US and Europe in terms of characteristics. The US is far more individualistic compare to Europe which tends to be more collectivists. Moreover, most of Europe is feminine, which means that tend to be more egalitarian. This explain why they have great maternity leaves laws and workers have more rights. Geez, for example, Belgium unions work closely with employers and the government to ensure that workers are well compensated. To see this happening in the US? The United States have embraced the ideology of free market like its a fucking religion.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
(Report comment)
You are supporting my argument while at the same time saying it could not happen here.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
(Report comment)
Have you ever seen the unions working closely with their employers for collective bargaining? Except for the UK and some Central European countrie, no European nations embrace the free market ideology the way the United States does. Moreover, the up yours attitude that we are seeing displayed in those astroturfs protests prove that the United States is not a collective nation and may never be. Moreover, I have pointed out why your country will always be stuck in the middle inching a little bit to the right or the left.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
(Report comment)
http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_united_states.shtml
This is what I am referring to
[Reply]
(Report comment)
and I notice nobody wants to talk about the icky little fact that Blackwater is STILL getting Fed contract money
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 9:58 am
(Report comment)
That needs to stop. We’ve got healthcare to deal with now, but the Blackwater issue will come up again.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:48 am
(Report comment)
Yes, that’s something I would like to cover. Jeremy Scahill is now writing for The Nation, which is great news. Perhaps the Blackwater issue will gain some traction as operations in Afghanistan get more coverage, and/or if anything comes from the Prince murder allegations.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I’m tortured every day because when I lost my healthcare insurance I lost my ability to pay for my pain specialist. Where’s the outrage for my torture?
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 9:44 am
(Report comment)
Your outrage is here and on more than one blog, isn’t it?
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:18 am
(Report comment)
That’s not enough
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:33 am
(Report comment)
While I sympathize with the plight of anyone who is ill and also anyone who has no health insurance, I think outrage regarding having to pay for one’s own pain medication, is not relevant to the media largely ignoring the issue of torture.
The healthcare debate and the need to reform is the number one issue in America right now, both in terms of importance, and being covered in the MSM and the administration.
However, there is a need for other issues to be covered by the MSM and issues like torture by America speak to the very core of any claim to moral superiority and the transparency of government that was promised by the Obama administration.
We need to know what acts of torture and abuse that were undertaken, or may still be underway, on behalf of the American people.
With all the money being spent on the war machine, and the U.S. run prison in Bagram, Afghanistan being expanded and modernized, these issues are part and parcel of the debate on how and what we spend taxpayer dollars on, and why – when we are spending 60 million on a prison in Afghanistan, and 515 billion this year for the Pentagon and it’s crooked contractors – can’t we have healthcare coverage for ALL in America?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hANsHv2AK0cZPe0qrV7 viZ2VSz4A
These issues are linked and deserve exploration and debate, as are all foreign policy/domestic issues and government expenditure.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I don’t know if Britain is in any position to accuse the US of torture when they were the first to encourage Junior to go forth with the Iraq War. I demand an apology from Britain for being cheerleaders
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 9:36 am
(Report comment)
Agreed. But that doesn’t excuse the US of trying to cover up the details about what went on at Gitmo.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 9:42 am
(Report comment)
Of course not, but I would prefer it be any other countries beside UK. I am not comfortable with these cheerleaders asking for government secrets. Clean up your Parliement Britain and then we shall talk
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 9:46 am
(Report comment)
If you read the article, they’re only asking for one paragraph to be made public about the details of torture carried out by the CIA given as testimony by this one particular detainee.
They’re not asking for secrets or classified intelligence to be exposed.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:20 am
(Report comment)
My main point of contention is with Britain acting like it has washed away their guilt from this whole debacle. I would not have a problem with countries such as Spain or Germany or France demanding this, but not the UK. Did Tony Blair apologize for cheering Bush JR on? Not as far as I am concerned. This whole sad affair would never have happened if it wasn’t for Britain supporting Jr
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 10:52 am
(Report comment)
I don’t think that’s what’s happening.
It’s the opposition party in Britain that is wanting the details exposed, as well as the details of any complicity between Britain and the U.S. regarding the torture.
The current British government wants to keep the torture details as quiet as the current U.S. administration.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:14 am
(Report comment)
Well good for the Tories
[Reply]
August 7th, 2009 at 11:20 am
(Report comment)
If you ask me, it’s just for political point scoring and not because they care about torture. The Labor Party in the U.K. is quite unpopular at the moment.
[Reply]