More here.

The former U.S. Attorney General and middle-ranking demon John Ashcroft on mock executions:

When you’re strapped to a bench, there’s a big difference between water being poured and forced into you. I’d quite like to try this ‘waterboarding’ as described by its supporters. Sounds like just the thing for a warm spring day.

We might not like it, we might not condone it, but it’s being done in our name. We give it euphemistic names like ‘waterboarding’ so we don’t have to think about what is really going on. It is a mock execution. It is torture. It is part of our ‘Western values’. Where does it fit in the war on terror’s manichean struggle of good against evil?

Unsubscribe from it.

Nice to see former Olympic swimmer Duncan Goodhew breaking ranks from the other Olympian appeasers and speaking out against China:

It shows how extreme things can get in this country and it’s a great shame. It’s such a bad example for children.

Hang on. Sorry, he was talking about people in Britain who are against murder and torture. My mistake. He went on:

The Olympic Games is about inspiring young people, human excellence and fair play.

And just think - for two weeks this summer some very lucky Chinese people will get to see those values up close.

Here’s something I didn’t know:

The idea of carrying a lit torch from the Temple of Hera in Greece was invented by Hitler.

Indeed, the 1936 Berlin Olympics sounded like a lot of fun:

Although the bid was won before the Nazi Party gained power in Germany, some leaders in the government saw the Olympics as an opportunity to promote their Nazi ideology. Hitler was convinced by Joseph Goebbels to allow the games to take place in Germany. Preparation for the games started in the early 1930s. Hitler used the Olympics as a tool for propaganda.

The Olympics? Used as a tool for propaganda? Shocking. We should be only too glad that no other regime has followed such a disgusting precedent.

Meanwhile: Run, Konnie, Run!

You have to admit, it’s been a very dignified spectacle. A propaganda coup, no doubt.

All those plucky souls running with the Olympic torch today speak with one voice:

The controversial “message” to torchbearers was drawn up by Freud Communications, which represents the London Olympic organisers.

In an email seen by The Mail on Sunday, Freud Communications’ Pippa Rodger wrote: “As discussed, please find below the official statement that torchbearers can use should they receive any interview or media requests on the day.

For an added two degrees of separation bonus, the head of Freud Communications is Matthew Freud who is married to Elizabeth Murdoch whose father Rupert has considerable business interests in China. Nothing like keeping it in the family.

Meanwhile, the celebrity automatons run, only following orders. That well-known sportswoman Denise Van Outen is apparently doing it at the request of a famous soft-drinks company. Kneeling before the Chinese regime and Coca-Cola? Blimey, her soul is going to be in tatters by the end of the day. It’s a shame Fred West is dead as a man of his talents carrying the torch would have fitted right in with the ethos of Chinese political vales.

Gordon Brown is due to welcome the torch to 10 Downing Street. An odd concept to be sure, inviting an inanimate object to your home. It remains to be seen whether the rather more animated Dalai Lama will be afforded the same courtesy, or if Gordon decides to meet him on neutral and less politically honest territory.

As for me and mine, we won’t be watching a bunch of bread and circus artists trotting about in subservience to a gang of liars and killers. There are better things to do. Ooh look, it’s snowing! And is it wrong to feel conflicted about Charlton Heston being dead?

Won’t someone give the argument for 42 days internment some soup or something? It’s looking very sick. I’m worried it won’t last much longer. When you look at the calibre of some its carers, no wonder it’s looking neglected.

Take Home Secretary ‘Jacqui’ Smith for instance, I’m not sure I’d trust her with a goldfish let alone national security. This following is an exchange from yesterday’s the debate on the Counter-Terrorism Bill. It’s also a welcome example of the Opposition doing some, you know, actual opposing.

One of the reasons Smith wants an extension to internment powers is because terrorists encrypt data on their computers which can take time to decrypt…

Jacqui Smith: My hon. Friend has considerable expertise in information technology, and she is right of course—not just in the examples that I have given but in other ways—to say that technology is becoming more sophisticated. Notwithstanding the changes that we have made to the law to help investigators to crack encrypted information, it is becoming more complex, and terrorists are learning lessons and using that technology.

David Davis (Haltemprice and Howden) (Con): To deal with this problem, in 2000, a criminal offence of withholding passwords and encryption keys to hard drives was passed into law. The offence of using such things for terrorism has been increased recently. How often has that offence been used in terrorist cases?

Jacqui Smith: I do not know the answer to that question, but I will make sure that the right hon. Gentleman gets a response. However, what I was saying was that notwithstanding that change in the law, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, South (Margaret Moran) was making an important point about the development of technology. What we know about terrorists and their plots is that they are increasingly making use of those developments in technology.

David Davis: I thank the right hon. Lady for giving way a second time. Her argument is that the terrorists are using more and more complex techniques, which are difficult for the state to deal with, yet she cannot tell us whether the state has used the proper legal apparatus and criminal charges to overcome the problem. If she cannot make that judgment, how on earth can she judge how many days she needs?

Jacqui Smith: I am sorry that I gave way to the right hon. Gentleman again.

Not as sorry as she’s going to be, one hopes. Still, with a level of debating skills like that you can see how she’s risen as far as she has. Sleep easier, Britain. Get well soon, 42 days. You’re in the best hands.

(Via Simon Carr)

While having a click around the web this morning, I found this account of some the tactics the South African police would use during the Apartheid era. It certainly stirs ugly feelings:

Farrah was arrested with her husband, who was also held for allegedly possessing documents connected with terrorism. She was not allowed to speak with her family for four days. Eight days had passed before the police disclosed the reason she was being held.

On the day she was arrested, Farrah was at home with her family. The police came to her house, searched the property for three to four hours then arrested her and removed her family from their home.

…

Exercise consisted of walking around in a circle in a small yard behind the station for five minutes while officers held guard dogs in each corner. Farrah said: “I was frightened of the dogs so rather than getting any exercise, I just found these exercise periods really frightening.”

She became unwell, suffering from diabetes, and a doctor was called on numerous occasions. He confirmed that an existing condition had been exacerbated by the stress of her arrest and detention.

Farrah claimed the guards were constantly rude and aggressive when dealing with her. She was effectively held in solitary confinement and not allowed to communicate with or pass another prisoner when being taken to and from her cell between questioning.

Hang on. Did I say ’some the tactics the South African police would use during the Apartheid era’? What I meant to say was they are some of the tactics the British police use during the The War Against Terror. A school boy error. Sorry.

Say no to 42 days.

What we of the liberal centre-left have done is join Brown, Miliband and all those who so absolutely fail to represent our beliefs in allowing ourselves to be brow-beaten into silent, sullen acquiescence by the unrelenting right-wing propaganda of recent decades. We glow in Sarkozy’s facetious praise when we should shriek in rage about what a nasty, brutal, mean-spirited country our spineless apathy has helped create, and this report on the systematic maltreatment of asylum-seekers shames and diminishes us all.

read the rest

Sign here please.

Well, who knew? I’m shocked. You might need to sit down, I’ve got some terrible, unexpected news:

The UK’s treatment of asylum seekers falls “seriously below” the standards of a civilised society, a report says.

The shock is, of course, that we even needed an Independent Asylum Commission to tell us this.

Any half humane person with an eye on the news could tell you that we hate foreigners if they’re poor and in need and not multi-millionaire tax-dodgers. The stories are legion. Google ‘Yarl’s Wood‘. Google ‘home office dawn raid’. Google ‘home office iraq waiver‘. Spend five minutes on the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns website.

Only those who’ve made that sociopathic leap that allows them to regard human beings as merely figures in newspaper headlines or in focus group polls need beating over the head with a copy of the Independent Asylum Commission’s report.

‘We are a country with a basic instinct of fair play - the system denies fair play to asylum seekers not out of malice but because of a lack of resources,’ says Sir John Waite, co-chairman of the Commission. It’s cock-up rather than conspiracy then, to coin the cliche. ‘Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice’ is another aphorism.

It’s just that, we’ve created an atmosphere in which we regard anyone needing help - whether it be refugees or benefit claimants - as suspect and worthy of our hate. And that’s what it is - it is hate. Contempt. An urge to regard and treat these people as less than human, unlike us.

With that in mind, the above ‘excuses’ don’t convince. When we have a system where our wounded soldiers have to catalogue their bodes like slaughtered livestock, literally having to choose their choicest cuts, those designated less worthy of our empathy by our ‘basic instinct of fair play’ have no chance.

Via the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns

There are known to be 39 refused asylum seekers from Iraq in detention and facing forced removal to Iraq tomorrow Thursday 27th March; 30 in Campsfield, 5 in Colnbrook and 4 in Oakington. We suspect the actual number detained is much higher.

5 years on from the invasion of Iraq, at a time when violence is rising in Baghdad and “heavy fighting” is being reported in Basra, the UK’s Home Office is making plans for a very special anniversary present for one group of Iraqis - an ‘Ethnic Charter flight’ to return refused asylum seekers to a country now deemed ’safe’.

NCADC has been reliably informed that an “Ethnic Charter Flight” to Iraq is planned for 19:00hrs on Thursday of this week (27th March 2008). We now know of 39 people in Campsfield, Colnbrook and Oakington, who are likely passengers on this flight.

What you can do:
1) Send urgent faxes/emails immediately to Rt. Hon. Jacqui Smith, Secretary of State for the Home Office asking that all those Iraqi’s currently detained are released and granted protection in the UK. Attached is a model letter Iraqi’sJS.doc which you can copy/amend/write your own version.

Fax: 020 8760 3132 If you are faxing from outside UK - Fax: 20 8760 3132
Email: jacqui.smith@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

2) As this is a general issue, you should also contact your local MP

Please notify campaign of any faxes/emails sent:
Swansea Campaign for Asylum Justice
C/o Flat 4 Brockley Court
103 St Helen’s Avenue
Swansea
SA1 4NW
Tel No: 0845 345 5768
keithmalcolm@ntlworld.com

Here’s something I learned today via the estimable RickB.

In 1987, Saddam Hussein passed Law 150, outlawing trade unions in the public sector and preventing ‘public sector workers organising or going on strike. Law 150 also changed the status of employees in state-owned enterprises to civil servants, depriving public sector workers of the right to organise.’ Iraq having a small private sector, the law affected 80 per cent of the workforce.

The law has never been repealed.

The US State Department’s Iraq Country Reports on Human Rights Practices has this to say about workers’ rights in the newly liberated and democratized country:

The exercise of labor rights remained limited, largely due to insurgent and sectarian?driven violence, high unemployment, and maladapted labor organizational structures and laws. Union activity is also inhibited by the 2005 Decree 8750, which cancelled unions’ leadership boards, froze their assets, and formed an interministerial committee to administer unions’ assets and assess their capacity to resume activity.

No mention of Law 150 that was left in place in 2003 by US viceroy Paul Bremer when he reverted the Iraqi legal system to that of the pre-Saddam years.

Two thoughts after reading this:

The Chinese government has defied international anger at its crackdown on Tibetan independence protests, accusing the Dalai Lama and his “splittist clique” of being out to destroy the Olympics and damage China’s international reputation.

a) You’ll never go broke appealing to the lowest common denominator. ‘Hey, you in the decadent West. The Dalai Lama wants to ruin your running and jumping about, the bastard,’ says China.

b) What international reputation? We know they’re bastards but we’re addicted to cheap tat. They could build a Death Star in high orbit if they like, we’re not going to rock the boat. It’s why we’re not seeing wider outrage. If it was Cuba doing this, people would be going ballistic.

Following on from the news that the Home Office is looking to send more than a 1,000 Zimbabwean refugees back to the Mugabe regime, you have to wonder what’s next. I supposed we should be grateful that the Home Office are showing consistency in sending people back to failed states, even if it’s not the kind of consistency we’d hope for.

The Zimbabweans are being sent back because the Home Office say they face ‘no general risk’ back home. If you’re going to be that vague we might as well say they’d face ‘no general risk’ if we made them swim home. As long as they take regular breaks and keep away from the sharks and larger waves.

But one more time, let’s do it by the numbers. Here’s the Home Office’s colleagues at the Foreign Office:

Torture occurs regularly and there is a general culture of impunity, whereby perpetrators of abuses are not prosecuted or even encouraged. ZANU-PF organised youth and war veteran groups have been used to intimidate the opposition. There are credible reports of politicisation of government food distributions. Many of the victims of Operation Murambatavina in 2005 remain homeless or destitute.

I suppose it’s less general risk the returnees will have to worry about and more the specific torture and starvation. I’d like to suggest contacting the Home Secretary but would it do any good? What’s the anti-negative approach to take on this? Any positivists out there wanting to give us the benefit of their wisdom?

I take it that this is a rhetorical question.

Our political establishment has been convulsed by a debate about whether suspected terrorists can be detained for 28 or 42 days without charge. How is it, then, that this young girl, who no one has suggested has ever committed any crime, gets more than 80 days with no outcry?

You could tell her how but then we’d be here all day and there’s horsey racing today apparently. Let’s not spoil it. I’m putting my money on ‘Sociopathic Inertia’. It wins every time.

A thought struck me when reading about the latest crackdown in Tibet that we’re going to turn a blind eye to so as not to spoil the running and jumping about in Beijing this summer.

The monks from the Sera monastery were surrounded by more than 1,000 armed police who fired tear gas into the crowd and used electric prods to disperse the protesters.

If Tibet were permitted to enter a team this year they’d clean up. You’ve never seen anyone do the 100 metre dash like a Tibetan monk with a Chinese riot cop after him.

We should borrow the tactics. Chase Dwayne Chambers with an electric prod. That’ll make the bugger run. Every time our hockey team miss the goal, tear gas them. That’ll focus minds. Drag our gymnasts about by their arms. They’ll be extra limber. That way, we might even win a medal or two.

I know it sounds harsh, but we must tolerate all manner of abuses to make sure this year’s Olympics goes off without a hitch. Running and jumping and our national honour demand it.

The US State Department’s 2007 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices is out.

In it there are both brickbats and bouquets for those at the sharp end of The War Against Terror. A feedback sandwich you might say.

“Despite President Musharraf’s stated commitment to democratic transition, Pakistan’s human rights situation deteriorated during much of 2007,” said the annual report released on Tuesday.

‘Six of of ten, see me’, in other words.

The US itself doesn’t feature in the State Department’s list. I think it’s like the Eurovision Song Contest where you’re not allowed to give points to your own side.

So, it’s down to others to judge the US government on its human rights record. How’s it getting on? Well, it’s a little hard to say.

The U.N. investigator on torture said on Tuesday the United States had denied his request to visit U.S.-run jails in Iraq and insisted a visit could help clear its legacy of the prison abuse scandal in Abu Ghraib.

It’s a canny tactic and one that Andy Abraham should adopt in Belgrade later this year. He could refuse to perform his soulless, insulting piece of dreck. That way nobody can judge if it’s any good and he can declare himself winner at the end.

In summary then, here’s the Foreign Secretary on the subject of the US government using a UK territory for the purposes of kidnapping people and flying them to God-knows-where:

Like the matter of the UK being used as a stop-over point for missiles on their way to Israel, it’s not so much what is happening, as how it’s being done. By all means the US should keep on kidnapping and delivering weapons for use on civilians. It would just be nice if they could give some thought to finding a way of not ‘embarrassing’ the British government while doing it.

Because that’s exactly how you’d feel if a so-called close friend used your house as a rest stop for a kidnapping, isn’t it? Embarrassed. Picture your appearance at the subsequent press conference. ‘Yes, my friend did bring that missing girl to my house. I honestly never thought to ask just where he might be taking her. I’m so frightfully embarrassed.’

Update: More, more, more, more, more, more, more, more and… more.

Here’s something to bear in mind should the bombs eventually hit the fan.

The United Nations Security Council’s five permanent members and Germany are due to discuss remaining differences on further UN sanctions against Iran.

There are already two UN resolutions demanding that Iran cease uranium enrichment - 1696 and 1747.

The thing is, with everybody running around screaming over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, certain other factors get overlooked. Have gander through those resolutions and see if you can see the words ‘human rights’. Take your time.

Anything? No. Indeed, the UN’s Human Rights Council saw fit last year to ‘discontinue the consideration of the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran’. And apart from those of one or two bloggers, no one turned a hair, at least not the coiffures of the men meeting in Berlin today.

(I wrote about the Human Rights Council’s predecessor, the tawdry Commission on Human Rights, back in the day. Time to catch up with the less than sparkling offspring, I think.)

The thing is, as we’re probably all aware by now, human rights only really come in to play in high politics via expediency and the need to manipulate. When Saddam gassed the Kurds at Halabja in 1988, Tony Blair, Geoff Hoon and Jack Straw weren’t interested in signing the Early Day Motions condemning the atrocity. Fifteen years later, when needing to build a case for war, they wasted no time in waving the corpses at us.

So, remember when the time comes and we’re asked to give a toss about the human rights situation in Iran to make us all feel better about bombing the place. Keep an eye out for the emotional appeals to our decency.

Remember that Gordon and George and the rest didn’t give a sod until the the time was right and they needed another page in the dossier against Iran. We’re not too bothered about the Iranian government enriching its society as long as its not enriching uranium.

Those of us who do give a sod should probably be doing something right now. If it has to take Gordon Brown or George Bush appealing to our consciences on such matters, it’s probably already too late.

There’s no denying that the Beijing National Stadium is an impressive building. Gordon Brown certainly seemed to enjoy his press conference there over the weekend.

The thing is, I can’t say I’m taken with the colour of the stadium as it is. It’s a sort of dirty grey. How did they get it like that? Was it Beijing’s smog (that Gordon mentioned it in passing during his photo opportunity)? Maybe the builders mixed into the concrete the ashes of their colleagues who’ve been killed (that Gordon didn’t mention in passing during his photo opportunity) during construction?

I don’t know about you, but dead builders seem quite a high price to pay for a bit of running and jumping about. The Chinese regime obviously think it’s a price worth paying to help rehabilitate its international reputation.

I suppose Peter Hain is too old to start digging up sports pitches again?

Speaking of shared values, how have things been in Libya since 2004 when we clasped her to our bosom as a partner in T.W.A.T.?

Not that great, as it happens:

Despite some improvements in recent years, in Libya serious rights abuses persist. The absence of a free press, the ban on independent organizations, the torture of detainees, and the continued incarceration of political prisoners, some of them “disappeared,” remain matters of deep concern. To date, international engagement with the oil-rich country has focused on counter-terrorism and business ties. Human Rights Watch welcomes improved relations between Libya and other governments, but not at the expense of human rights and the rule of law.

Counter-terrorism and business ties. Hands up who’s feeling safer and richer? Put your hands down, you arms dealers, you don’t count.

Here:

I was told that there is an official order from a high-ranking official in the Ministry of the Interior to investigate me. They will pick me up anytime in the next 2 weeks.

The issue that caused all of this is because I wrote about the political prisoners here in Saudi Arabia and they think I’m running a online campaign promoting their issue. All what I did is wrote some pieces and put side banners and asked other bloggers to do the same.
he asked me to comply with him and sign an apology. I’m not sure if I’m ready to do that. An apology for what? Apologizing because I said the government is liar when they accused those guys to be supporting terrorism?

To expect the worst which is to be jailed for 3 days till we write good feedback about you and let u go

there may be no jial and only apologizing letter. But, if it’s more than three days, it should be out. I don’t want to be forgotten in jail.

The Saudi authorities came for Fouad al-Farhan, a blogger, on December 10:

The Saudi interior ministry said Mr Farhan was being held for “interrogation for violating non-security regulations” and declined all further comment.

Let’s hope that they’re affording Fouad the same right to silence. Somehow, I doubt it. But let’s hope that, him being an unusual case, he’s not getting the usual treatment from his jailers. When the British government talk about sharing values with the House of Saud, let’s also hope they’re not taking notes on this occasion.

Fouad’s blog is here. The ‘Free Fouad’ blog is here. The contact details (including email address) for the Saudi Arabian embassy in London are here.

There are many stories from this great nation of ours. Here’s another one to make your heart swell with something or other.

Let me tell you the Ballad of Beatrice Guessie.

They came for young Beatrice in the dead of the night
Taking her back to Cameroon on the next available flight
The immigration officer, three guards and the doctor
They hadn’t got far before they’d threatened to clock her.

Still bruised and still bleeding, they put her back in Yarl’s Wood
There’s an Early Day Motion for the great and the good
Nineteen have signed, condemning the thuggery
That’s one sixth of the number celebrating the rugby.

Write to the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

Update: But it’s all going to be ok, hopefully some time next year:

The Home Office says it will change the way abuse allegations against immigration staff are handled following criticisms from a government watchdog.

The Border and Immigration Agency’s Complaints Audit Committee said immigrants’ and asylum seekers’ complaints were often not followed up.

It found just 8% of complainants were interviewed and 89% of investigations were “neither balanced nor thorough”.