EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- German Official Warns of Immediate 'Revolution' if EU Adopts US Model
- Think Fracking Is Bad? Wait Until You Hear about the Gas Industry's "Acid Jobs"
- President Obama Uses a Sledgehammer Against Dissent
- Beware Capitalist Tools
- We’re Being Watched: How Corporations and Law Enforcement Are Spying on Environmentalists
- Burning Tulsa: The Legacy of Black Dispossession
- Think Fracking Is Bad? Wait Until You Hear about the Gas Industry's "Acid Jobs"
- We’re Being Watched: How Corporations and Law Enforcement Are Spying on Environmentalists
- German Official Warns of Immediate 'Revolution' if EU Adopts US Model
- President Obama Uses a Sledgehammer Against Dissent
Popular content
Today's Top News
US 'Ignored' UK Rendition Protest
British concerns did not appear to "materially" affect US actions in its "war on terror", the UK's intelligence and security committee has said.
The committee, which reports to the prime minister, was probing possible UK involvement in rendition flights.
It said America's "lack of regard" for UK concerns had "serious implications" for future intelligence relations.In response, the UK government said the countries' intelligence relationship was "close" and "must continue".
The committee said it had found no evidence that the UK was directly involved in rendition flights - the transportation of terror suspects to foreign prisons where they could face torture.
But Britain's security services had "inadvertently" helped in one case after the US ignored caveats placed on supplied information.
'Fundamental liberty'
It said ministerial approval should be required in future in such cases and a complete ban placed on approvals for renditions which could lead to suspects being held in secret prisons.
Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader
The committee also levelled criticism at the government over inadequate record-keeping.
Committee chairman, former Northern Ireland Secretary Paul Murphy, said: "Our inquiry has not been helped by the fact that government departments have had such difficulty in establishing the facts from their own records in relation to requests to conduct renditions through UK airspace.
"This is a matter of fundamental liberty, and we recommend that the government ensure that proper searchable records are kept in the future."
'Strong protests'
The cross-party committee said "routine" evidence sharing in the case of two British residents in Ghana in 2002 "indirectly and inadvertently" led to their rendition.
The rendition program has revealed aspects of this usually close relationship that are surprising and concerning Intelligence and security committee report
Bisher al-Rawi and Jamil el-Banna were flown by the CIA first to Afghanistan and then Guantanamo Bay, where el-Banna is still being held.
The committee said the UK services "used caveats specifically prohibiting any action being taken" when they handed over the intelligence on the men.
It says the UK security services did not foresee that the US authorities would disregard the caveats, given that they had honoured the caveat system for the past 20 years.
"This case shows a lack of regard on the part of the US for UK concerns - despite strong protests - and that has serious implications for the intelligence relationship," the report concluded.
"In fighting international terrorism it is clear that the US will take whatever action it deems is necessary, within US law, to protect its national security," it said.
"Although the US may take note of UK protests and concerns, it does not appear materially to affect their strategy; the rendition program has revealed aspects of this usually close relationship that are surprising and concerning," the report warned.
'Tough talk'
The committee also criticized the UK security services for failing to react quickly enough to the change in American approach and start to use "greater caution".
It said British intelligence had been briefed in November 2001 about new powers enabling the US authorities to arrest and detain suspected terrorists worldwide.
But officers were "skeptical about the supposed new powers because at the time there was a great deal of 'tough talk' being used at many levels of the US administration," the report says.
The report says British intelligence officers "should have noted the significance of these events and reported them to ministers".
Procedures had now been tightened and provided a "reasonable level of confidence" in most cases, the committee concluded.
'Torture risk'
But it recommended two further changes to strengthen safeguards.
"First, where despite the use of caveats and assurances there remains a real possibility that sharing intelligence with foreign liaison services might result in torture or mistreatment...we recommend that ministerial approval should be sought in all such cases.
"Secondly, the Committee considers that 'secret detention', without legal or other representation, is of itself mistreatment.
"Therefore, where there is a real possibility of 'Rendition to Detention' to a secret facility, even if it would be for a limited time, we consider that approval must never be given."
The British government said the report supported its own "repeated assurance that there is no evidence to suggest that renditions have been conducted through the UK without our permission, or in contravention of our obligations under domestic and international law".
The government also stressed the "importance of the UK's international intelligence relationships, particularly with the United States, in countering the threat from international terrorism", a reality that the Committee itself acknowledges.
The government also said that British intelligence staff did inform ministers of exchanges with US counterparts in November 2001 about the US plans to arrest and detain suspected terrorist suspects worldwide.
Inquiry call
Conservative MP Andrew Tyrie attacked Gordon Brown for failing to condemn "extraordinary rendition" - a policy he said was now "being vigorously condemned by many in Washington, both Republican and Democrat".
"This is the price the prime minister of Britain is paying for remaining so wedded to the policy he has inherited of 'hugging the Americans close'," added Mr Tyrie, who co-founded an all-party group on rendition and gave evidence to the committee.
Amnesty International said it welcomed the report's acknowledgment that secret detention amounts to 'mistreatment' and that the UK "must never give approval to measures leading to it".
UK campaigns director Tim Hancock said: "Rendition is the fast track to Guantanamo and we need to see the government unequivocally condemning all renditions and secret detentions.
"Gordon Brown's government should now allow a fully independent inquiry into rendition and also immediately call for all UK residents at Guantanamo to be properly tried or released and returned to the UK."
© BBC MMVII
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

11 Comments so far
Show AllJust another brick in the wall that keeps the USA from being the "leader of the Free World" any longer. The "bully of what used to be the Free World" is more like it, as the UK, Canada, and other countries have found.
Bush's idea of cooperation is kind of like "let's carpool -- I'll drive every day."
Whoever gets elected in '08 will need to be quite a diplomat to heal any major portion of the damage this idiot has done.
"new powers enabling the US authorities to arrest and detain suspected terrorists worldwide."
How can the USA maintain that it can pass laws in other peoples countries, and still maintain that the rights guaranteed in the US constitution do not apply outside it borders, even in areas like Gitmo that are de facto part of the USA, the same as a US embassy?
Newsflash: US laws to not amount to squat outside its borders.
Waaahh! waaahhhhhh! GB had "qualms" about "extraordinary renditions" and then cooperated fully anyway!
We're supposed to feel sorry for GB because of this?
corvo -
First, the UK did not "cooperate fully". It placed a caveat on the use of the info it shared. Had the UK not fully expected the caveat to be honored, it would not have shared the info in the first place.
The downside of this story is that, in future, the UK and other allies will be less willing to trust US assurances, and less willing to share info. US intelligence (CIA, DIA, NIS, etc.) depends significantly on foreign-sourced info -- especially in the Middle East.
In this case, the USA not only cut off its nose to spite its face, it stuck its finger in its own eye.
Feel sorry as you feel fits.
It's beginning to seem as if we should deem an event news worthy when this administration does NOT disregard law, ethics, culture, or people.
Here's what I just read-
We asked the US to play fair but they cheated anyway.
Our political whores should beg them to pretty please listen to us next time but we'll go along with whatever they do because we're nothing without them.
rjmart01: oh, yes, right. GB investigates itself and finds--tadaaaaa!--that its culpability is limited, and its efforts to withstand American pressure heroic.
Well, ba-low me down.
Meanwhile, how many of those rendition flights made use of British air space and facilities?
In her book 'Understanding Empire', Arundhati Roy (author of Children of Lesser God), says when victims refuse to be victimised, they are called terrorists. Well said. People of Iraq and Afghanistan have refused to be victimised by avaricious Western powers out to plunder resources of two countries. In Iraq, Western oil companies siphon off oil, while in Afghanistan, they seek to secure oil routes of Central Asian States. War on terror is only war of oil. And you cannot dig oil without paying a price for it—price in human blood. Rendition flights too are part of war on terror. Vacate Iraq and Afghanistan and the terrorism would settle down like foam.
**War On Terror, Inc**
From the same guy, amongst other, who contributed to the improvement of the quality of life and well being of the whole Humanity by forcing on the FDA the approval of ASPARTAME -
Our egregious Donald Rumsfeld, a Major Champion in the Disgraceful Corporate World - a real WRESTLER for the horror cause
On the EMPIRE issue, let's not forget that what happens today is far more vicious and sick than the **Good** Old Roman Empire - in the lands they occupied, at least, they left amphitheatres, temples, acqueducts, civil works of undisputed value and still existing, visible, and somehow a proof that there are Empires and Empires -
Check now the Britsh Empire and their ONLY goal: barbarian and of buccaneer's ONLY intent PLUNDERING.
Visible and verifiable anywhere you travel..and, to end, NERO, in his full madness, was MORE entertaining than our current WANNA BE KING and his cohorts - dangerous role models, all of them
The Bush government and it's Israeli bosses have flatly refused talks with Iran AGAIN showing that Israel wants the United States at war, rather then peace with Iran.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070725/pl_nm/iran_usa_dc
"Roy,says when victims refuse to be victimised, they are called terrorists. Well said. People of Iraq and Afghanistan have refused to be victimised by avaricious Western powers out to plunder resources of two countries. In Iraq, Western oil companies siphon off oil, while in Afghanistan, they seek to secure oil routes of Central Asian States. War on terror is only war of oil. And you cannot dig oil without paying a price for it—price in human blood. Rendition flights too are part of war on terror. Vacate Iraq and Afghanistan and the terrorism would settle down like foam."
No one could really disagree with anything you've said. But it just isn't realistic. Not one of the Western Powers would ever simply walk away without a fight.
Too much is at stake here : oil being far too critical to the Western way of life - from SUVs and Lear Jets -all the way to the gas-guzzling Chevys and the Harley-Davidsons.
And in the coming decades , these wars will only intensify and become sharper - especially when water too emerges as a scarce resource.