Comments on: Britain’s insane secret terror evidence

By: Calling Time On The Use Of Secret Evidence In The UK by Andy Worthington « Dandelion Salad

Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:19:19 +0000

[...] I explained in an article in March, “Britain’s insane secret terror evidence,” these suspicions appeared to be confirmed when, in the portion of U’s bail-stripping hearing [...]

By: Britain’s Guantánamo: Fact or Fiction? by Andy Worthington « Dandelion Salad

Sat, 04 Apr 2009 09:44:43 +0000

[...] ignores Court decision, kidnaps bailed men and imprisons them in Belmarsh (February 2009), Britain’s insane secret terror evidence (March [...]

By: foursgiant

foursgiant — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:11:15 +0000

secret britain.
The electoral registers for Sunderland contains incorrect voter registration numbers printed in the columns alongside voters names.
Sometimes the Registers are printed with the same error numbers year after year, one particular period from 1958 to 1961 shows that these numbers cannot be common human error as during this period the housing
estate was covered by two separate electoral wards and both of these wards show the same and also similar errors for this one particular
housing estate. Some people have even received a wrong electoral number more than once in their voting lifetime and nearly all of the electoral registers that I have looked at dating from about 1950 to 1972 contain errors, errors placed in such a way that they can only have been put there for a reason or purpose beyond their normal intended use. I suspect
that the error numbers continue into the early 1990’s. These electoral registers can be found in the records section of the public library
fawcett street Sunderland Tyne and Wear. except the register for 1973 which for some unknown reason was not printed or it is kept hidden from the public, this must have been planned as early as 1970 or 1971 hence
the change in the way the registers are dated, ie. the electoral registers are dated yearly as follows 1969, 1970 etc. then change to being dated 1971-72 and then 1972-73 then 1974 then 1975 missing out an electoral register for one year. Dates in other parts of the registers such as in force dates and the qualifying dates indicates that the missing register is for 1973. Anyway whatever the excuse is for being a register short it must have been known about a long time in advance that one register was
not going to be made available to the public.

By: Andy Worthington

Andy Worthington — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:36:49 +0000

And my reply:

Great to hear from you, and thanks for your courage in being on the frontline of Kafka’s Britain. It’s disturbing to realize that the overused adjective “Kafkaesque” is actually so appropriate for what ‘s happening here and now.
As you may know, I’ve spent three years writing almost incessantly about the iniquities of Guantánamo, but am now determined to find more time to write about the situation in the UK, which is, of course, barely reported, and far less openly challenged than Bush’s legacy.

By: Andy Worthington

Andy Worthington — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:36:22 +0000

A friend of U’s wrote to say:

Hi Andy,
Thanks so much for this impressive article. Ref: the kidnapping, I have been rereading The Trial by Franz Kafka (1925) page 176 Penguin Ed: “I have been speaking on the assumption that a long time elapses between the ostensible acquittal and the new arrest; that is possible and I have known of such cases, but it is just as possible for the acquitted man to go straight home from the Court and find officers already waiting to arrest him again. Then of course all his freedom is at an end.” Just one of many uncanny similarities in the course of my experience of the Home Office.

By: Nikolas Karman

Nikolas Karman — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 09:02:07 +0000

Thanks for this Eleanor, another example of fear creation by using the word terrorism and to use this fear to remove more of our rights and to justify the illegal activities of governments kowtowing to the American NWO.
The so called terrorist organisations are a figment of imagination and creation by loose elements in government who are the real terrorist.
People need to understand what is really happening and we need more people like you to expose this.

By: Andy Worthington

Andy Worthington — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:22:50 +0000

Thanks, Eleanor. And thanks also for posting it on Care2, whose members are very engaged in human rights issues:
http://www.care2.com/news/member/932990365/1086256

By: Eleanor Boyd

Eleanor Boyd — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:17:27 +0000

Thanks, Andy, for this great article and, Ann, for your great comment. It really is time that this treatment of these innocent men stops. The behaviour of this government is the behaviour of dictators – people who want their own way, insist on having it and refuse to listen to reason. It’s as if they are carrying out a personal vendetta and they seem to encourage the gutter press to vilify people who have not had the chance to fight for justice.

By: Andy Worthington

Andy Worthington — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:14:42 +0000

Thank you so much, Ann, for highlighting the criticism in the UN’s recent report. I completely agree about the need to be able to test the government’s so-called evidence, as obtained by the intelligence services, and hope to be able to write more in the near future about how we’re allowing our leaders to torment these men with impunity, even though some of the so-called evidence was clearly extracted through torture.
Thanks also for mentioning the letter written by Q and SIAC’s lame and inappropriate response. The Law Lords took a similar view a month ago, and I dissected the weaknesses in their argument here:
http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2009/02/22/abu-qatada-law-lords-and-government-endorse-torture/
Best,
Andy

By: Ann Alexander

Ann Alexander — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:54:09 +0000

The recent UN report http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/terrorism/rapporteur/docs/A.HRC.10.3.pdf
is very critical of the UK’s way of dealing with these men. It says “States begin preferring to use undisclosed evidence gathered by intelligence agents in administrative proceedings over attempts to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal trial. Seen in the light of the inherent limitations of intelligence information, preventive measures that deprive a person of his or her liberty must not be based solely on intelligence. In these cases, intelligence has to be turned into concrete evidence and proof after a period of time so that the affected person can challenge the evidence against him or her. If intelligence cannot be transformed into evidence over time, or the State fails to obtain new evidence, the preventive measures need to cease.”
Considering the political court, SIAC, had actually decided not to revoke the bail on RB, U, VV, Z and Y and sent them home whereby they were kidnapped on the authority of the Home Secretary and held overnight until an emergency hearing the next day makes one wonder about the authority of the Judge.
Someone had to be made a scapegoat to appease the Home Secretary and U was the person chosen by SIAC.
Now the men await their fate with the extremely worrying prospect that their wives could be left again on their own to cope with the children without any support.
Claims by the Algerians’ solicitors that they would face inhumane treatment and perhaps torture if returned to their home countries has been ignored by SIAC with evidence of previous returnees being abused, totally ignored and in fact discredited. One of the returnees, Detainee Q, who eventually was given an 8 year prison sentence bravely wrote to Judge Ousely – “Dear Sir Osliy. To SIAC court my name [Q] former long lartin detainee I rhite you this wourd to let you no that my life here in Algeria in danger first I wastorture betaine humilition in police station. Second here in Serkadji prison life here like slave. Algerian otority thay give a garanty but thay brook the agreement. So Mr judj Osly stop deportation to Algeria in end I wont let you no that eneythink happen to ….. here in Algeria Britich otority responssable for life. Thank you, Detainee Q.”
SIAC’s response?
“While the possibility that he was ill-treated cannot wholly be dismissed it is no more than a mere possibility. This new allegation does not persuade us that there exists a real possibility that any of the 4 appellants with whose cases we are concerned will be tortured or ill-treated on return. Put in the language used by the Strasburg Court, this material does not give rise to substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that they would be subjected to treatment which would infringe Article 3 if it were to occur in a Convention state”.
These 4 Algerian men and one Jordanian whose cases are in SIAC at the moment are in a no-win situation unless people start taking notice and the media show an interest. Perhaps they should look in to the possibility that the secret evidence heard in closed sessions in SIAC, considering Binyam Mohamed’s terrible tale, is evidence extracted through torture.
To find the light, we need only remove the darkness which is blocking the light. The fight goes on.