Binyam Mohamed

I read the news of our complicity in torture and cover-up – not believing what I was reading. How can we have come to this terrible place? I am so ashamed of our Goverment.

And because we know that this is a Government that misleads us when it suits them – how can we have any confidence in the Foreign Office’s denial of involvement in rendition and torture of terror suspects?

As Ed Davey (LibDem Shadow Foreign Secretary) said:

“With allegations of complicity in torture coming on top of the Iraq Inquiry’s revelations, it is painfully clear that Labour has left Britain’s reputation in tatters.

“If the Government is so sure it has nothing to hide, it should allow a judicial inquiry into torture allegations to go ahead.”

0 thoughts on “Binyam Mohamed

  1. Lynn
    Should you not be a little more skeptical rather than taking Mr Binyamin at face value? His application for refuge in the UK was rejected. He then decided to go to Afghanistan “for rehabilitation for his heroine habit.” This is the mans own story – surely you have to be somewhat credulous to believe that a person living on minimum wage and a self confessed drug addict had the money to go to Afghanistan for a bit of rehab?
    This man left the UK of his own free will. His leave to remain expired years ago. As the MP for Wood Green should you not be worrying about your constituents problems rather than on those of a non-resident former drug addict who was almost certainly involved with the Taliban. Or do you really believe the story that the only place he could get drug rehab was not in London but on the other side of the world?

  2. Why are all these do-gooders so concerned about the welfare of our murderous enemies? No smoke without fire!

  3. John: I guess you’d better also file the current head of MI5 as a “do-gooder so concerned about the welfare of our murderous enemies” too, given what he’s said:

    “Both the Government and the Opposition in the House of Commons on Wednesday underlined how important it is that Britain lives up to its legal and moral responsibilities in countering terrorism. If we fail to do so, we are giving a propaganda weapon to our opponents. I fully agree with that judgement.”


    “Their freedom to voice extremist views is part of the price we pay for living in a democracy, and it is a price worth paying because in the long term, our democracy underpins our security.”

  4. Mark

    I notice that you commented on John’s comment, but you did not comment on mine.

    I agree that we should live up to our legal rlegal and moral responsibilities in countering terrorism.

    But what we are talking about here is a man who is not a UK citizen and had lost his limited right to live here. On top of this we are expected to believe that he went to Afghanistan for drug rehab rather than to fight against British troops.

    You assume that this man’s allegations are true – and that his actions are not driven by his desire to discredit our government or to get millions in compensation.

  5. Russell: where in what I wrote is there a comment that is based on, in your words, assuming that this man’s allegations are true?

    All I did was quote the head of MI5 – and note that his words apply to people who are guilty of crimes as well as those who are innocent of them. Nor did he restrict them to UK citizens.

  6. Mark – Although you are quoting the head of MI5 in defense of this non-UK resident, you appear to be providing nothing in evidence to suggest A. That this man is what he is said to be. And B. That we need follow his movements and give him compensation. He took his stay in the UK well over the time limit he was given and in doing so has proved that he does not respect UK citizens, or their government. If he remains in this country as every other working class person does, paying his taxes and supporting his home and income, then time should be taken to assure he is treated well. He has however left the country and is no longer anything to do with this country, so why do you feel so compelled to defend him?

    As far as it goes, living in this country without a legal right to is against the law. His legal right to live in this country expired long before he left, so why is he not to be treated as a criminal like any other? I would like to know what makes this man a known “former” drug addict and possible terrorist threat so innocent.

  7. Miles: it doesn’t matter if he is who is says he is or whether or not you view him as “British”.

    Torture is wrong (and ineffective anyway) regardless of whether someone has lived here all their life and can trace relatives back through to King Harold or has only spent 30 seconds passing through an airport.

    As (even) the head of MI5 pointed out, we have legal and moral responsibilities that shouldn’t be abandoned on the excuse of fighting terrorism.