I haven’t suggested he be “stripped” of any civil rights.
I merely marvel at your continued substitution of random speculation for fact, your perpetual jumping on the latest Guardian bandwagon of anti-American rhetoric to the exclusion of independent thought, and your single-mindedness in ignoring the potential for any life-saving information to be derived from an admitted close associate of bin Laden.
I suggest that you strive harder to separate fact from rhetoric.
And the British authorities deny any involvement of this man in the London bombings. So subway passengers in London needn’t fear him being allowed his human rights:
"Is there a “mastermind” behind the bombings?
Senior counter-terrorist officials insist there is no evidence of a single mastermind responsible for the July 7 bombings in London and July 21’s failed attacks. They dismiss reports that Haroon Rashid Aswat, held in Zambia, was behind the attacks. Aswat grew up in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, the home of Mohammad Sidique Khan, one of the July 7 bombers."
And this sort of story is why I am extremely twitched by any possible extra-legal action by the Us- either transfer to Guantanamo or extraordinary rendition to another country for torture:
"Benyam Mohammed travelled from London to Afghanistan in July 2001, but after September 11 he fled to Pakistan. He was arrested at Karachi airport on April 10 2002, and describes being flown by a US government plane to a prison in Morocco. "
"A former London schoolboy accused of being a dedicated al-Qaida terrorist has given the first full account of the interrogation and alleged torture endured by so-called ghost detainees held at secret prisons around the world.
For two and a half years US authorities moved Benyam Mohammed around a series of prisons in Pakistan, Morocco and Afghanistan, before he was sent to Guantánamo Bay in September last year."
“In a statement given to his newly appointed lawyer, Mohammed has given an account of how he was tortured for more than two years after being questioned by US and British officials who he believes were from the FBI and MI6. As well as being beaten and subjected to loud music for long periods, he claims his genitals were sliced with scalpels.”
"One of them made cuts in my penis. I was in agony’
They cut off my clothes with some kind of doctor’s scalpel. I was naked. I tried to put on a brave face. But maybe I was going to be raped. Maybe they’d electrocute me. Maybe castrate me.
They took the scalpel to my right chest. It was only a small cut. Maybe an inch. At first I just screamed … I was just shocked, I wasn’t expecting … Then they cut my left chest. This time I didn’t want to scream because I knew it was coming.
One of them took my penis in his hand and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood still for maybe a minute, watching my reaction. I was in agony. They must have done this 20 to 30 times, in maybe two hours. There was blood all over. “I told you I was going to teach you who’s the man,” [one] eventually said.
They cut all over my private parts. One of them said it would be better just to cut it off, as I would only breed terrorists. I asked for a doctor."
"Recruits to some groups connected to al-Qaida are thought to be instructed to make allegations of torture after capture, and most of Mohammed’s claims cannot be independently verified. But his description of a prison near Rabat closely resembles the Temara torture centre identified in a report by the US-based Human Rights Watch last October.
Furthermore, this newspaper has obtained flight records showing executive jets operated by the CIA flew in and out of Morocco on July 22 2002 and January 22 2004, the dates he says he was taken to and from the country."
"If true, his account adds weight to concerns that the US authorities are torturing by proxy. It also highlights the dilemma of British authorities when they seek information from detainees overseas who they know, or suspect, are tortured.
The lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, says: "This is outsourcing of torture, plain and simple. America knows torture is wrong but gets others to do its unconscionable dirty work.
“It’s clear from the evidence that UK officials knew about this rendition to Morocco before it happened. Our government’s responsibility must be to actively prevent the torture of our residents.”"
From today’s Guardian:
*"The Zambian president, Levy Mwanawasa, said yesterday that Mr Aswat had been arrested for allegedly violating the immigration laws of Zambia. He added: “Once we were holding him we realised he was an alleged terrorist. It was agreed between the American and British governments that he should be deported to the United Kingdom.”
Article continues
Mr Aswat was visited yesterday by British consular officials. The Foreign Office has been in touch with his estranged family in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, the home of Mohammed Sidique Khan, one of the July 7 London suicide bombers.
But senior counter-terrorist officials insist there is no evidence that he was the “mastermind” behind the July 7 bombings. There is also no evidence, the officials add, that Mr Aswat was aware of the July 7 bombings or of the failed attacks of July 21.
British security and intelligence agencies want to question Mr Aswat about whether he had known the four suicide bombers or the four men arrested under suspicion of involvement in the July 21 attempts. “Aswat is of interest in his own right,” an official said.
British officials were concerned that Mr Aswat would be deported to the US and become a “ghost detainee”, preventing them from questioning him, or even knowing his whereabouts."*
The phrase
“British officials were concerned that Mr Aswat would be deported to the US and become a “ghost detainee”, preventing them from questioning him, or even knowing his whereabouts.”
means in the arcane sytem of British reportage that middle level officials below minister rank have confirmed to the Guardian reporter that they were afraid that he would be rendered to another country.
It also confirms the British government view that the US intended to render him abroad or to Guantanamo.
The fact that he will return to the UK first and probably be deported through our unfair Extradition Treaty does mean however that if found guilty of a capital offence, the US state will not be able to kill him.
Be thankful for small mercies.
So, in summry, the picture is as I originally stated- the US wanted to render him, the UK objected, but the UK will probably acquiesce in his deportation from the UK to the US under the rule of law.
Original Post
*So the British Government and the Bush Administration are at loggerheads over the fate of a British Citizen:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/internati...1539369,00.html
The British position is that he is a British Citizen and any extra-legal action against him (transfer to Gitmo or rendition to another country for interrogation under rules that would not be respected by the US (let alone an International Law-abiding nation ) would be unacceptable.
The US position seems to be that he is an International Terrorist and therefore the US can place pressure on the Zambian Government to render him to another authority for torture or worse.
Who is going to win this struggle over a British Citizen?
Would Bush even try this if it were an American Citizen?*
So persistent international pressure has limited the scope of the US in its extraordinary renditions- it now seems that if a sufficiently friendly state finds out that one of its citizens is subject to this extra-legal procedure, the US will not insist on judicial kidnapping any more- compare this case with the parallel but historic case of Martin Mubanga:
Given that Martin Mubanga
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_n...1406987,00.html
who was rendered from Zambia to Guantanamo.
And, from today’s Guardian:
This is what could have happened to Aswat:
Two men in a Yemeni prison were held at a US secret detention centre in solitary confinement for more than one and a half years without seeing daylight, according to Amnesty International.
Salah Nasser Salim 'Ali, and Muhammad Faraj Ahmed Bashmilah say they were flown to unknown underground jails in 2003 where they were held by US guards for more than 18 months without charge.
They were mostly shackled and handcuffed, and could not communicate with their families, lawyers, or humanitarian organisations.
Article continues
In May 2005, the men were transferred to Yemen, where they remain in prison. According to Amnesty, Yemeni officials said they were being held at the request of the US.
The BBC is reporting that Aswat has been brought before the magistrates at Belmarsh under an extradition charge.
They imply that his return from ZAmbia was a ploy to ensure that he would not go directly to the USA or be rendered to a fourth state.
So, as I indicated in the original post, this was about ensuring his human rights (including his right not to be tortured or his right not to be executed.)
So it looks like a score draw-
US wins custody and can charge, try and punish him, but cannot use Guantanamo, torture or judicial murder.
UK upholds the rights of a British subject to a certain extent but allows him to be sent without real evidence to be tried in a foreign court.
The report also pointed out that the extradition would probably be appealed to the European Court of Human Rights (via the High Court, and the Lords). So it’s probable that he won’t be on US soil for some time.