Binyam Mohamed Vs Milliband & The Government

Well there doesn't seem to be a great choice of things to get upset about today except for one. So far the news on TV is dominated by the Oscars and of course the arrival or rather the return of Binyam Mohamed after 4 years in prison without charge or trial at Guantanamo Bay with a further 3 years incarcerated at the hands of the US.

In case there is any confusion about who this chap is, this is the chap who David Milliband tried to cover up and silence. This is the man who was tortured whilst in captivity with the full knowledge, cooperation of and exploitation by the British government. Mohamed said of his ordeal:

"For myself, the very worst moment came when I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence."

He added: "I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.

"I am not asking for vengeance; only that the truth should be made known, so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured."

I hope that his legal team and both Amnesty International and Reprieve who are involved in this issue advise him strongly to reconsider his position and go absolutely for out and out vengeance. The only way to get any kind satisfactory outcome from this situation is to make it as personal as his abusers made it with him. I'm not suggesting of course that he exacts like for like revenge and not for obvious practical reasons, but because it's important to take the moral high ground and that shouldn't be too difficult anyway against the UK government. It is vital that everyone knows the detail of his ordeal, what happened to him, who was responsible for his treatment and who sanctioned it. I'm not just talking about the people on the ground, but the politicians, the decision makers who were ultimately responsible for this appalling breach of human rights.

Torture is and should always be morally unacceptable and its prohibition is in fact an absolute legal right under the government's own Human Rights Act 1998. This means that any British officials or government departments that are responsible for or have a hand in the prolonged imprisonment and torture of this unfortunate individual are on the wrong side of the law. This presents an interesting choice. Either those acting unlawfully need to be sacked and made accountable in court for their actions or the government will accept that their own legislation is not worth the paper it is written on.

In reality, what will happen is the government will order an enquiry and will be long gone by the time it reports. Those responsible will be off working in Europe or in the Lords by that time and will never be made to scoop their political poop on this issue, which as an issue will probably ultimately achieve nothing...and that drives me to lunacy.

Milliband Cements Place in Rogues Gallery

Over my 35 years there are probably only a handful of people who I have taken an instant dislike to. I don't just mean a bad feeling or a suspicion that something might not be quite right, but I mean an absolute loathing from day one to the point of utter revulsion. I have never had these feelings about people I have met personally (although there were a few that came close). Rather, they have always been reserved it seems for people on the tele or in the news. Amongst them are the following; Davina (go to the bloody toilet if you need to woman and speak in sentences not just bloody words) McCall, Tony (& Cherie)(where are the celebrities? where are the cameras? where's my mirror & where's my cash) Blair, Gwenith (please don't get me started on her) Paltrow, Opera Winfrey, Delia Smith, Mr & Mrs Beckham, Shane Warne, Roman Abramovich, Kate Moss, Liam and Noel, Lilly Allen and lastly but by no means leastly Jonathan Ross.

A very worthy and recent addition to my rogues gallery is of course David Milliband. I haven't been able to give any rational reasons for my burning hatred of this politician until now. Ask me and I can justify the reasons in detail why I believe that all of the others with the possible exception of Warne have contributed negatively on society, but until recently, I have only been able to say that my dislike for Milliband is based on instinct. However I feel that my instincts have been confirmed via the recent attempt by Milliband's office to cover up the British government's involvement in the torture of a terrorist suspect held at Guantanamo Bay. The reports in the papers seem to suggest that the man is not only deceitful and a bully but also professionally incompetent.

So...I think my instincts have been fairly accurate on this one all along although if I'm not mistaken, these seem to be the very qualities that New Labour was built and run on by its original architects. This means that Milliband is just a product of his environment. Does it mean I dislike him any less...not really!

Lord Ahmed is in Danger of Inciting More than Hate

I was just watching the news about the Home Office's bizarre refusal to allow dutch politician Geert Wilders entry to the country when a strange but disturbing debate developed between Lord Pearson & Lord Ahmed on Sky News hosted by TV's third nipple Kay Burley. Wilders recently made a film called Fitna which shows images of terrorist attacks associated with Muslim terrorists like 9/11 and the Spannish train bombings in context to parts of the Koran which apparently justify them. He was invited to screen the film in the UK by Lord Pearson but was refused entry at Heathrow because the Home office backed up by the Foreign Office felt that this would incite racial hatred or violence.

Pearson and Ahmed were pitted against each other and what developed was quite wrong. Ahmed attacked Pearson from the start and bullied his way through the whole of the debate. Pearson sounded like the voice of reason and in actual fact I fail to see anything wrong in what he was saying. He was basically saying that there is an imbalance in society where the the majority in the UK and people with public responsibility are scared to say boo! to anyone from the Muslim faith. Not only that but this has in fact been in well publicised instances to the detriment of the Christian majority who have been discriminated against in favour of a loud-mouthed aggressive minority like Lord Ahmed.

Now I have Muslim blood in me and I can say without reservation that that part of me in no way accepts Lord Ahmed or his type as my mouth piece. Further more, I think that it is exactly people like Ahmed who perpetuate violence and hatred against the Muslim Community. What Pearson says is correct. The passive Muslim majority should have a debate about how they allow Islam to by represented or there is a great danger that people will assume that Lord Ahmed is in fact representative of the Muslim population in the UK and in turn assume that all Muslims are aggressive bullies or worse, terrorists.

It should be remembered that it was during severe economic depression that the Nazi party convinced the German people that it was Jewish bankers and politicians who were to blame for their hardships. It was not long after this that over 6 million Jews were murdered across Europe, the overwhelming majority of whom were neither bankers nor politicians. The world has reminded the German people of their part in the Holocaust since the end of the second world war 'til now and will probably continue to do so for years. The German people however have accepted their wrongs and done everything in their power to repair the damage as much as it ever could be. What people like Ahmed suggest is that it is somehow an insult to them that we choose to associate terrorism with Islam. They seem to suggest that somehow they are the victims in the situation and that somehow we need to apologise to them for the absolutely logical association that has been made of Islam with violence. Instead of accepting responsibility for a sick minority within their religion and working to remove that sickness, they are trying to capitalise on the fact that people have a genuine and justifiable suspicion of them and are attacking that insecurity with great vigour and total ruthlessness.

Now that really makes me mad. What makes me laugh though is that not one person who has vehimentally criticised Wilders' film on the news today, including the arse Milliband, has actually been able to say that they have seen it. Not one!!! How I wonder than have they all come to the conclusions that they have about it and stand to defend them so forcefully? It's just not credible, is it?