Re: UK role in terrorist rendition
- From: hummingbird <ZYLYDWINUSED@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 22:04:41 +0000
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 20:56:41 -0000, "TD" <tdefries@xxxxxxxxxxx>
mysteriously appeared thru the usenet mist to inform us thus...
>"hummingbird" <ZYLYDWINUSED@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 18:51:43 -0000, "TD" <tdefries@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> mysteriously appeared thru the usenet mist to inform us thus...
>>>"hummingbird" <ZYLYDWINUSED@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>> Channel 4 News tonight 7.00pm:
>>>> "Jonathan Miller reports on the increasingly murky tale of Britain's
>>>> involvement in the transport of American-held terror suspects. This is
>>>> a story that threatens to get very seriously out of hand if the Blair
>>>> government can't hose it down.
>>>> The PM's efforts at PMQs today were not entirely persuasive. Charles
>>>> Kennedy is out of his quarters at the Liberal Democrat parliamentary
>>>> base to pursue the PM with very specific questions. We will be talking
>>>> to Mr Kennedy tonight."
>>>I would like people to ask Mr Blair and Jack Straw what exactly is being
>>>done to the kidnapped^W renditioned that must not be done on US soil, and
>>>when UK authorities are going to inspect the aircraft and passengers that
>>>use this country as a layover.
>> In the case of your first Q, doubtless Blair would deny any knowledge
>> and would rely on US assurances that none are subjected to torture.
>'Given Dr. Rice's assurances yesterday regarding rendition flights, was the
>Prime Minister happy to continue to allow them to use British airports, the
>PMOS said that Dr. Rice had given the assurances she had, the Foreign
>Secretary had responded, and the PMOS had nothing further to add.'
>'Asked if the Prime Minister had anything to add or say about the All Party
>Group set up to investigate whether Britain might have had knowledge of some
>of the CIA flights and extraordinary renditions, the PMOS said that he had
>set out the position, the Foreign Office had set it out and more importantly
>the Foreign Secretary had set it out yesterday following Dr Rice's comments.
>We had nothing further to add.'
>> The second one is more difficult if those kidnapped are not already
>> subjected to torture on the US planes - ie no rules/laws broken.
>I do not know of any legislation that could stop us, but I am ignorant. Of
>course, it might harm the political goodwill between our two nations.
I don't know either but there are some very secretive treaties between
the US and UK going back many years relating to defence, intel and all
the murky things in between. Just guessing but it could easily be the
case that the UK authorities have limited rights to board any official
US plane landing at a UK airport for refuelling.
>surely we have an obligation to ensure that passengers are not being
>transported under duress to jurisdictions where they will not be under the
>protection of human rights legislation.
>Anyway, thank you for the heads up on the news. It was an interesting few
"I fear that the Prime Minister has become unhinged.
He has always tended towards being messianic."
-- Michael Portillo on Blair / Sunday Times:
- Prev by Date: Re: BLIAR STABS BROWN
- Next by Date: Re: "Even if torture works."
- Previous by thread: Re: UK role in terrorist rendition
- Next by thread: I thought orgish.com to be a site one "shouldn't" go to