THOUSANDS OF FREE BLOGGER TEMPLATES �

Monday, August 4, 2008

Held Hostage For Six Years In Guantanamo

Held Hostage For Six Years In Guantanamo

Sami El Haj, Al Jazeera Journalist, Tells His Story

By Silvia Cattori

02/08/08 "ICH" - -- - Standing straight and tall, an impressive and deeply introspective man, Sami El Haj walks with a limp and the help of a walking stick. Neither laughter nor smiles light up the refined face of this man, old before his time. A deep sadness pervades him. He was 32 years old when, in December 2001, his life, like that of tens of thousands of other Muslims, became a horrific nightmare.

He endured horrendous suffering. Weakened by a hunger strike which lasted 438 days, set free on the 1st May 2008, he greets you attentively and with a gentle manner. He calmly tells you of a world whose paralyzing, suffocating horror is beyond your comprehension.

He is the first of the released detainees from the camps built by the Bush administration at the Guantánamo Bay naval base to be authorised to travel.

“I came to Geneva, the city of the United Nations and freedom, [1] to ask for the law to be respected, to demand the closure of the Guantánamo camp and secret prisons, and to demand that this illegal situation be brought to an end”, he says calmly. The word has been uttered. Everything is “illegal”; everything is false, manipulated, absurd and Kafka-esque in this war waged essentially against those of the Muslim faith.

We now know many things; most notably that many of the terrorist attacks since 1996 which have been attributed to Muslims were financed and manipulated by secret agents of MI6, the CIA and Mossad. It was brave witnesses like the former German minister, Andreas Von Bülow [2] in particular, who discovered and denounced this kind of criminal activity, practiced by the superpowers. Apart from the new media, which journalist has ever spoken of the revelations made by this great man, Andreas Von Bülow?

In Guantánamo, spurred on by his passion for justice and his conviction that every journalist’s mission is to bear witness to what he sees, Sami El Haj had the psychological strength to carry on, resisting the worse abuses and putting his own suffering to one side. His experiences were extremely painful but he was able, even in the worst moments, to cling to the hope that he would get out alive. And knowing that he had to observe everything in order to be able to tell the world helped him to bear the unbearable.

Moreover, it was through viewing this horrific place which could have been his tomb, created by President Bush, with the objective eye of the journalist that Sami El Haj was able to survive and remain sane. Others, who were not as lucky as he was, died or became insane, and so were unable to recount their experience.

With neither pencil nor paper, Sami El Haj forced himself to memorise everything in order, even in a cage, to carry on his work as “an Al Jazeera journalist covering a story”, as he put it.

Today he is driven by the idea of bringing to the world’s attention these tens of thousands of prisoners who are still suffering inhuman treatment in the prisons of Guantánamo, Bagram and Kandahar. He replies tirelessly and with good humour to all the journalists who interview him, hoping that his words will allow those who no longer have a voice to be heard.

His account is crucial. Like the other detainees, also wrongly labelled as “terrorists”, Sami El Haj was never tried and was never informed of the charges against him. Which demonstrates that President Bush, and the journalists who supported his theories, must have invented the “Islamic terrorists”. Human beings like Sami El Haj could never have been arrested or remained hostages of this barbarism, for the simple reason that they are Muslims, without the complicity of European governments and those Islamophobic propagandists under the orders of Tel Aviv and Washington who, for decades, have been misinforming public opinion and influencing the powers that be with their lies.

Silvia Cattori : How do you feel, just a few short weeks after your liberation?

Sami El Haj : I feel fine, thank you. When I see people committing themselves to saving human beings and fighting to defend their rights, it gives me great comfort. Of course, when I left Guantánamo, two months ago, I was in a very bad way. But now I feel better, discovering that people outside are fighting and not losing sight of the main goal – achieving peace and freedom for everyone.

Silvia Cattori : After those painful years spent in the camps, what are your strongest feelings and greatest hopes?

Sami El Haj : Of course, I am happy to be free again. I have been reunited with my family, my wife and my son. For six and a half years he did not see me, and had to go to school without me. He waited for me and said,“ Dad, I have missed you for so long! I was so unhappy, especially when I saw my school friends, with their fathers, and they asked me where my father was. I had no answer to give them. That’s why I asked my mum to take me to school in the car, because I didn’t want them to keep asking me that question”.

I said to my son, “Now, I could take you to school, but you must understand that I have a message to give, a just cause to defend. I want to fight for the cause of human rights, for those who have been deprived of their freedom. I do not want to fight alone. There are thousands of people who are standing up and fighting wherever human dignity is attacked. Do not forget that we are fighting for peace, to defend rights whenever they are denied, for a better future for you. Perhaps one day we will achieve this, and then I will be able to stay with you and take you to school”.

I do not know if he understood, because he is still very young, but he smiled at me. My wife did not want me to leave again either. But when I reminded her of the horrific situation those imprisoned in Guantánamo find themselves, and that they also have a family, sons, daughters, a wife whom they miss terribly, and that if I do not fight these people will remain imprisoned even longer, she understood that I must carry on travelling, adding my voice to all the other voices, so that the detainees can return home as soon as possible. She gave me her full support. On the way to the airport she said to me, “I will pray for you”.

Silvia Cattori : So, by going to Afghanistan to film the massacres of civilians, victims of President Bush’s war, you yourself became one of his victims? Are you not afraid of what could happen to you again?

Sami El Haj : For me, there is no question - I will continue my work as a journalist. I must continue carrying a message of peace, no matter what. For my part, I have spent six years and six months in prison, far from my family, but for others it was so much worse. I lost a very dear friend, a journalist with Al Jazeera: he died in Baghdad, killed when the hotel where he was staying was bombed. I also lost a colleague who was working with me at Al Jazeera, whom I consider a sister: she too died in Baghdad.

Many people have lost their lives because of this war. You must know that the Bush administration wanted to prevent coverage by the free media, like Al Jazeera, in the Middle East. The Al Jazeera offices in Kabul and Baghdad were bombed.

In 2001, when I left my son and my wife to film the war initiated by the USA against Afghanistan, I had to expect finding death during a bombing raid. I went there fully aware of the risks. Every journalist knows that he is carrying out a mission and must be ready to sacrifice himself in order to bear witness to what is happening, through his films and writing. And to help people understand that war brings nothing but the death of the innocent, destruction and suffering. It is on the basis of this conviction that my colleagues and I went to countries at war.

Now, after all these years in captivity, I can once again do something to help bring about peace. I am going to commit myself to this goal, until it is achieved. I am sure that one day, even if I do not personally reap the fruits, we will succeed in achieving peace and the respect of human rights, as well as the protection of journalists throughout the world. I am sure that we will see the day when journalists are no longer tortured or injured doing their job, defending people’s rights to information and highlighting human rights abuses.

Silvia Cattori : You said at the beginning that you are feeling fine. But after such a terrible experience, and given that you were released with no apology whatsoever from your torturers, how are you able to talk about all this without resentment or bitterness?

Sami El Haj : Of course, what happened to me was very hard and my personal situation is difficult. But when I think of those who are still in Guantánamo, and their families that they miss very much and who have no news at all of them, I tell myself that my situation, as difficult as it is, is better than theirs.

I cannot forget that in Guantánamo I have left behind brothers who have been crushed, who have gone mad. I am thinking in particular of a Yemeni doctor who now lives naked in his cell because he has lost his mind.

Silvia Cattori : What kind of torture did they subject you to?

Sami El Haj : All kinds of physical and psychological torture. As all the detainees were Muslim, the camp administration subjected them to many forms of harassment and humiliation linked to religion. With my own eyes I saw soldiers tearing up the Qur’an and throwing it in the toilet. I saw them, during interrogation sessions, sitting on the Qur’an until their questions were answered. They insulted our families and our religion. They made fun of us by pretending to ring our God, asking him to come and save us. The only Imam at the camp was accused of complicity with the detainees and was sent away, in 2005, for refusing to tell visitors that the camp respected religious freedom.

They beat us up. They taunted us with racist insults. They locked us in cold rooms, below zero, with one cold meal a day. They hung us up by our hands. They deprived us of sleep, and when we started to fall asleep, they beat us on the head. They showed us films of the most horrendous torture sessions. They showed us photographs of torture victims – dead, swollen, covered in blood. They kept us under constant threat of being moved elsewhere to be tortured even more. They doused us with cold water. They forced us to do the military salute to the American national anthem. They forced us to wear women’s clothes. They forced us to look at pornographic images. They threatened us with rape. They would strip us naked and make us walk like donkeys, ordering us around. They made us sit down and stand up five hundred times in a row. They humiliated the detainees by wrapping them up in the Israeli and American flags, which was their way of telling us that we were imprisoned because of a religious war.

When a detainee, filthy and riddled with fleas, is taken out of his cell to be submitted to more torture sessions in an attempt to make him collaborate, he ends up not knowing what he is saying or even who he is any more.

I was interrogated and tortured more than two hundred times. 95% of the questions were about Al Jazeera. They wanted me to work as a spy within Al Jazeera. In exchange, they offered American citizenship for myself and my family, and payment based on results. I refused. I told them repeatedly that my job is a journalist, not a spy, and that it was my duty to make the truth known and to work for the respect of human rights.

Silvia Cattori : Today, can you find it within yourself to pardon your torturers?

Sami El Haj : Of course I will pardon them if they close Guantánamo. But if they continue to cause suffering, I will go to the courts and take action against them.

Although I know that the Bush administration has done so much harm, I still think that it’s not too late for these people to make up for their mistakes.

A distinction must be made between the administration and the people. The Guantánamo detainees know that they have friends in America, like the lawyer who came to Guantánamo and fought for my case.

Silvia Cattori : Am I right in thinking that they were not able to break you?

Sami El Haj : Because I am not alone, and there are people supporting me, this feeling gives me strength. In prison, I drew my strength from the belief that no free man can accept being in this position of inferiority and dehumanization. You feel pain and sorrow but you are determined to keep alive the hope that there will be an end to it; and the idea that even in prison, it is possible to carry on your work as journalist, makes suffering easier to bear.

Silvia Cattori : When you were in Guantánamo, did you know that outside there where people who were fighting for you to be released?

Sami El Haj : In fact I didn’t know about them, because in prison it is very difficult to receive news, even if you have a lawyer, because he is not allowed to tell you anything. Now I do know those who work for human rights, and those who do not agree with the Bush administration. I think that every day their voice becomes stronger.

Silvia Cattori : Your brother, when he saw you again, said that you looked like an old man. Is that how you feel?

Sami El Haj : Personally, it is my heart that counts, and not my face or my body. I feel that my heart is as young as ever, and stronger than before.

Silvia Cattori : So it was a very painful experience, but in fact you have emerged from it with unforeseen benefits?

Sami El Haj : That’s right. I have been able to reap some benefits from my time spent in Guantánamo. Before going there, I only had a small family. Now I have a large family as I have gained hundreds of friends from around the world. This is very positive: I may have lost six and a half years but now, I have more friends.

Silvia Cattori : Are you still considered an “enemy combatant” [3]?

Sami El Haj : I don’t know, but when they released me, they said: ”Now you are no longer a danger to America”.

Silvia Cattori : And your name is not on the “terrorist list” any more?

Sami El Haj : I don’t know. I think that for them, all the people they labeled as “terrorists” will remain so. And that now they are afraid of us because they made us suffer for no reason.

Silvia Cattori : Do you think CIA agents will still spy on you?

Sami El Haj : Yes. The truth is that I have nothing against the country and its people. If the Bush administration makes amends for its errors, I will have nothing to complain about.

Silvia Cattori : Were you surprised when, as you were leaving, an officer from the Pentagon who saw you with a walking stick accused you of being manipulative?

Sami El Haj : The Pentagon officials claim that the Guantánamo detainees were criminals, but in fact five hundred of them have now returned home. How could they have been allowed to leave if they really were criminals? They are still lying.

Silvia Cattori : Two other Sudanese men were released at the same time as you – Amir Yacoub Mohamed al Amin and Walid Mohamed. How are they now?

Sami El Haj : The Sudanese government has treated them very well. They greeted all three of us personally at the airport. Despite the fact that the Americans had taken my passport, I was given a new one within two hours, and they did not prevent me from travelling outside Sudan.

Silvia Cattori : In Guantánamo, did the soldiers call you by your name or by your detainee number, “number 345”?

Sami El Haj : They never called me by my name, just “three, four, five”, my prison number. Towards the end they called me “Al Jazeera”. Only the Red Cross officials called me by my name.

Silvia Cattori : Did these officials visit you often?

Sami El Haj : When they were authorized to visit us, every two or three months. I talked to them and they brought me letters from my family.

Silvia Cattori : The Bush administration and the officers who had the job of torturing you knew that you were a good man, a journalist merely trying to expose the brutality with which they were treating the Afghan people, not a “terrorist”. Do you know why they treated you so badly?

Sami El Haj : Most of the soldiers there were following orders from their superiors. They carried out torture with no conscience. But to be true to what happened I must say that some of them were good men. Some soldiers did use their brains.

Silvia Cattori : The CIA agents wrote a report on the torture in Guantánamo. When they were torturing you, did you feel that they were observing you, carrying out experiments on you?

Sami El Haj : We were under the constant supervision of military psychologists. They were not there to treat us, but to take part in the interrogations, observing the tortured prisoners so that no detail of their behaviour would escape them. The interrogations were the responsibility of Colonel Morgan, a specialist psychiatric doctor. This colonel was stationed in Guantánamo from March 2002. He had served at the Afghan prison in Bagram from November 2001. He gave instructions to the officers who were torturing us, studied our reactions, then noted every detail in order to be able to adapt the torture techniques to each detainee, which had profound psychological consequences.

I spoke to them. I told them that the mission of a doctor is an honourable one, to help people, not torture them. They replied, “We are military personnel and we must follow the rules. When an officer gives me an order, it is my duty to carry it out; otherwise I will be imprisoned just like you. When I signed a contract with the army, I realised at the time that I must obey all orders”.

Silvia Cattori : Amongst the torture techniques used at Guantánamo, I see similarities with those used in Israel on Palestinian political prisoners. Sleep deprivation, for example, is their speciality.

Sami El Haj : I think that most of the world’s intelligence services came to Guantánamo. I saw British and Canadians. They came to find out about the interrogation techniques, and also to supply the CIA and FBI with advice on how to torture and interrogate from what they had learned.

Silvia Cattori : Are you able to sleep easily?

Sami El Haj : Not like before Guantánamo. I only sleep 3 to 4 hours now. Today, when I met people from the Red Cross, I asked them to help me to overcome my problems and recommend a doctor who could help me. Seven years is not a short period of time.

Silvia Cattori : Wasn’t going on hunger stick a kind of self-inflicted torture? Why did you do it for such long periods, while your jailers took advantage of it to inflict even more suffering and humiliation on you?

Sami El Haj : Because we felt we couldn’t stay silent – we had to do something. That is the only way we had of making our voices heard. Going on hunger strike is of course a very painful way of taking action and is difficult to endure. But when your freedom is taken away you have to fight to restore it. It was our last resort for telling the Bush administration that a detainee has dignity that he cannot live on bread alone and that freedom is more important.

Silvia Cattori : What was it like when they force-fed you?

Sami El Haj : When there were more than forty detainees on hunger strike, the administration of the camp tried to break our resistance by subjecting us to more torture. We were locked in cold rooms, stripped naked, and prevented from sleeping for long periods. Twice a day the soldiers tied us to a special chair. They put a mask over our faces and inserted a large tube into our noses, not into the stomach. The normal ration was two cans but they punished us by injecting twenty four cans and six bottles of water. Having shrunk through long hunger strikes, the stomach cannot hold such quantities. They added products which induce diarrhoea. The detainee, now sitting on that chair for more than three hours, would vomit continuously. They left us in the vomit and excrement. When the session was over they would rip the tube out violently, and when they saw the blood flowing they laughed at us. As they use infected tubes which are never cleaned, the detainees suffer from untreated illnesses.

Silvia Cattori : Is it thanks to that long hunger strike that you were released?

Sami El Haj : Not only because of that, but it was one of the factors that led the administration to release me.

Silvia Cattori : What should one make of Khaled Sheik Mohamed’s confessions [4], where he admits to organising more than thirty terrorist attacks in seventeen countries?

Sami El Haj : It is possible that they tortured him to the point where he was no longer himself. I never met him because they put him in a special camp. An officer told me that he was very badly injured. I’m sure you can imagine – they subjected him to horrific torture.

Silvia Cattori : When America says that he is the “number 3 Al Qaida terrorist”, does that bear any resemblance to the truth?

Sami El Haj : Quite honestly I believe nothing that comes from the Bush administration. Because I was also accused of being a “terrorist”. And I know better than anyone what the truth is. Those people lie too much. I never believe a single word coming from that government. I know a prisoner who was tortured so much that in the end he said, “I am Osama Bin Laden”. He said what they wanted to hear so that the torture would end.

Silvia Cattori : So, is Al Qaida a creation of the western intelligence agencies?

Sami El Haj : As far as I’m concerned, I have never in my life met anyone who has said to me, “I belong to Al Qaida”.

In Guantánamo, I met most of the detainees because the policy of the guards was not to allow the prisoners to live together for a long time in the same cell. They transferred us every week. So we got to know other people. The men I met there are all peaceful people.

Since I left, I have spoken to over a hundred of them. Those who were married have picked up their lives again and the others have got married.

Silvia Cattori : Do those who draw strength from prayer have a better chance of escaping madness?

Sami El Haj : Of course! If you feel that someone is there with you, especially God, you will be patient and always aware that God is more powerful than human beings. I must pray to God and thank him. I must also thank all those who supported me. I think that even if I spent my whole life saying thank you, I would not manage to thank them all. Now, through my work concentrating on human rights, perhaps I will be able to contribute to making other people’s lives happier.

Silvia Cattori : I feel that the media and the NGO’s in this country have not given the importance that was due to defending the rights of these Muslim prisoners [5]. For a long time denouncing the abuses committed against them was seen as a sign of sympathy for the “terrorists”. Did you know that the leaders of “Reporters without borders”, for example, whose mission is to protect journalists, were criticised for waiting five years before talking about your case [6]?

Sami El Haj : Unfortunately people believed whatever the Bush government told them Now they know this wasn’t true, they will put the record straight. As I have already said, if someone makes a mistake, it’s not a problem: the problem lies in pursuing the mistake.

If journalists do not feel concerned when other journalists are imprisoned carrying out their job, perhaps one day those very journalists will find themselves in prison and there will be nobody to defend them. We must work together, taking up each and every case. So if we find out that a journalist has been imprisoned it is our duty to support them, no matter what their colour or religion.

As a journalist, I want to commit myself to supporting journalists who work to defend rights and freedom. There is an enormous amount of work to do. We must stop at nothing to ensure the liberation of those who are locked away in Guantánamo and the countless secret prisons where the Bush government is depriving tens of thousands of others of their rights.

That experience in Guantánamo affected us profoundly. What I want to focus on is the need for and the importance of the defence of human rights. After all the damage that has been done, everyone now feels more concerned, I think. It is not acceptable to abandon these people who are suffering. We have an urgent responsibility to show solidarity with them.

Al Jazeera hopes to work with the free media to gather information relating to human rights and freedoms. I ask all journalists to cooperate with us in this. There were more than fifty nationalities in Guantánamo - it is a worldwide issue, and not just about individual detainees.

It is shameful that in our society, innocent people who have been sold find themselves locked in cages, and that this violation of basic rights should be the doing of a country which claims to be the guarantor of rights and freedoms.

I feel no hatred. We respect the citizens of the USA. It is their present government which should take responsibility for the consequences of these actions.

Human rights and security are inseparable – there can be no security without the respect of fundamental rights.

Silvia Cattori : You are right to call on decent people and journalists not to accept the violation of international laws and the cruel and degrading treatment of human beings. But this policy could not have lasted if it had not had the tacit support of the superpower governments – it was with their consent that those labelled “enemy combatants” were tortured [7]. The “Patriot Act”, for example, passed after the 11th September in the US, was supported by all the European countries. It was within the framework of these secret agreements that CIA and FBI agents were able to kidnap and torture thousands of innocent men like you in Europe.

Sami El Haj : I want to say this to you: I do not believe in the actions of governments. Because any government, in any country, prefers to govern without confronting the people’s real problems. It may, at times, speak out in support of a certain cause, but in reality it does not support it. It is only for opportunistic political reasons that governments speak out. And they may even, through political expediency; claim to support something in which they do not believe. Forget governments, because they have their own agenda. Yes, we must keep working hard to defend the rights and freedoms of everyone.

Silvia Cattori : Is it fair to conclude that the “terrorists” as presented to us by the Bush administration and the media do not exist?

Sami El Haj : I can assure you that the Guantánamo detainees that I met are not “terrorists”. I had the opportunity to talk to them and get to know them – they are pacifists.

Silvia Cattori : So you were arrested then, because it had to be proven to the other European countries that the Muslim “terrorists” really existed?

Sami El Haj : We were arrested after the attacks of the 11th September, for which no one has yet been able to find those responsible. President Bush did not want to say: “I have made mistakes; I was not able to maintain national security”. He said: “We are going to start a war against terror”. The outcome is that he has brought security to no one.

He bombed Afghanistan, sent soldiers to wage war against whole nations, but did not arrest the people that he set out to arrest. He paid the Pakistanis in return for starting to arrest people and hand them over to his administration.

89% of the prisoners in Guantánamo were bought, for hard currency, from the Pakistani authorities. Where did they find them? They found them in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.

Silvia Cattori : These prisoners were then tortured with the promise that it would end if they accepted becoming spies for the CIA!? What a terrifying system!

Sami El Haj : Yes. Let’s wait for President Bush to leave power. When he has left his seat, I am sure that many people will have something to say about his wrongdoing.

Silvia Cattori : Your testimony is very important. Your youth has been destroyed. And yet you have the magnanimity to transform this disaster into something constructive. You refuse to see yourself as a victim. You are truly amazing! So many prisoners must be hoping for help from people like you.

Sami El Haj : We must work hard, so that all those who continue to support the Bush administration feel ashamed of their actions. At that point, no one will help them. And when no one helps them, they will stop.

The whole Guantánamo episode is a huge black stain. The Bush administration tried to deceive the public by saying we were terrorists. But the great majority of those men, who were imprisoned, are innocent, like me.

Silvia Cattori : Thank you for giving us this interview.

Silvia Cattori

Translation from French for Cageprisoners by Sue Bingham:
http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=25632

Original in French: http://www.silviacattori.net/article469.html


[1] Sami El Haj was invited to Geneva by the “Alkarama for Human Rights” Foundation. See “Sami El Haj achève une intense visite à Genève” (“Sami El Hajj successfully ends his visit to Geneva”), Alkarama for Human Rights, 1 July 2008.

[2] See “Andreas von Bülow: “Our priority should be the fight against manipulation” ”, Red Voltaire, 15 January 2006.

[3] According to Dick Marty, rapporteur of the Commission for Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe charged with investigating the existence of secret CIA prisons in Europe, a “secret agreement, drawn up in October 2001 between the US and their NATO allies, set up the framework which allowed the CIA to incarcerate high profile detainees in Europe. It is this agreement which authorises grave violations of rights, including torture”.

[4] Khalid Cheikh Mohammed was arrested in Pakistan in 2003. Accused of being number 3 in Al Qaida, he was detained in various secret sites before being placed in isolation and brutally tortured from 2006 in Guantánamo. His farcical trial before a military tribunal, along with 14 other Al Qaida members, took place in June 2008.

[5] The “Arab Commission for Human Rights ” fought from the start for the closure of Guantánamo. See http://www.achr.nu/

[6] See “Reporters without Borders remembers (lately) Sami Al Haj” Red Voltaire, 2 March 2006.

[7] The status of “enemy combatant” and “illegal combatant”, allowing the US government to detain detainees categorised as such indefinitely and without civilian jurisdiction emanates from the “Patriot Act”, a law of exception designed to “unite and strengthen America by supplying the tools necessary to seek out and oppose terrorism” voted by US Congress and signed by George W. Bush, on 26 October 2001.

[8] The daily newspaper “24 Heures” wrote on 27 June 2008, “Sami El Haj is in Geneva to denounce the senseless blunder of the huge American antiterrorist machine”.

[9] See “Why did they treat me like that?”, by Gideon Levy, Haaretz, 6 July 2008.

See also “Full account of Muhammed Omer’s hair-raising encounter with the Shin Beth”, by Khalid Amayreh, 1 July 2008.

[10] On his internet site, Youssef Nada reveals the role played by some journalists in his destruction based on lies. See: http://www.youssefnada.ch/

Afghan drug profits endanger NATO troops: expert

I find this to be quite interesting since the Taliban had destroyed all the poppy fields. Now if I remember correctly, it was after the US invaded they were replanted. Strange isn't it?

Updated Sun. Aug. 3 2008 2:35 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

A former U.S. counternarcotics official is calling on Canada and NATO countries to push Afghanistan to eradicate the country's opium poppy production.

Thomas Schweich, who was a top official in the U.S. Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs and had an extensive article published in last weekend's New York Times magazine, told CTV's Question Period the poppy trade is endangering the lives of Canadian troops.

He said the heroin and opium produced from poppies and sold around the world is funding not just corrupt officials but insurgent activities. Schweich claimed the drug trade is funding the weapons that are killing Canadian soldiers.

"If I were in Canada, I would be hopping mad about the lack of ability to crack down on these corrupt people who are involved in this trade and on the farmers who are growing the opium," he said.

"They are clearly financing the people who are attacking your troops, attacking the British troops in Helmand (province) and attacking the Americans throughout, as well."

Eighty-eight Canadian military personnel and one diplomat have died serving in Afghanistan since 2002.

It's estimated Afghanistan supplies 90 per cent of the world's heroin. According to the CIA's "World Factbook" website, the opium trade brings in about US$4 billion into the Afghan economy each year.

Schweich, who went to Afghanistan in 2006, said top officials in the Afghan government and influential citizens are getting rich off the poppy trade. He said he has no evidence President Hamid Karzai is personally involved or profiting, but he said the Afghan president may not be taking effective action for fear of losing political support in key regions of the country.

"His power base is in Helmand and Kandahar (provinces). That's where 70 to 80 per cent of the opium is grown and he does not want to crack down on the people there because he needs their support for re-election," Schweich said.

He said NATO countries should confront Karzai with a united front and say, "'Look, we cannot support your government anymore if you're protecting narco-traffickers."'

"'You (Karzai) need to hit the trade at all levels. You need to eradicate the poppy fields. You need to close down the labs. You need to arrest the corrupt officials who are supporting it, and you need to arrest the people who are transiting these drugs."'

Karzai has traditionally said eradicating will hurt poor farmers.

Schweich said the drug trade in Afghanistan has changed and poor farmers are no longer the primary source of poppies. Instead, he claimed wealthy landowners in Helmand and Kandahar provinces are now the key beneficiaries, although he noted that they are not necessarily supporting insurgents with drug money. He said some of them are merely lining their own pockets and work with the government.

Emerson questions strategy

The U.S. has been pushing Canada to support a poppy eradication program, but Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson questioned the strategy.

He said Sunday on Question Period that he agreed the drug trade is injecting resources into the Afghan insurgency. But Emerson said he doesn't support a strategy that goes after poppy farmers directly.

"We all agree with the fundamental need to deal with the problem," he said. "I know that Canada is prepared to set up and be part of the solution. Does it necessarily mean going out and burning crops or whatever the latest technique is? I'm not sure about that."

Emerson said a better strategy may be to break the chain funnelling money to the Taliban and other insurgent fighters "downstream."

"It may well be better to focus on interdiction, to break down the downstream supply chain that creates the value as opposed to alienating the farmers whose support you ultimately need as you build democracy in Afghanistan."

Emerson also restated Canada's support for Karzai.

"There are authors (and) there are speculators out there who will say all kinds of things about Karzai, about the various players in Afghanistan. Frankly, President Karzai is the president (and) he was elected. We support him. We want to see elections," he said.

Texas set to defy World Court with execution

By Ed Stoddard

DALLAS (Reuters) - Texas is set to defy the World Court and anger Mexico on Tuesday by executing a Mexican national who was not informed of his right to consular services after his arrest.

Texas, by far America's most active death penalty state, condemned Jose Medellin for the 1993 rape and murder of 16-year-old Elizabeth Pena in Houston. Another girl was killed in the vicious gang-related assault but Medellin was convicted only of Pena's murder.

The World Court last month ordered the U.S. government to "take all measures necessary" to halt the upcoming execution of five Mexicans until it makes a final judgment in a dispute over suspects' rights.

Medellin is the first of those scheduled to be put to death and the only one so far with a 2008 execution date, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Alison Castle, a spokeswoman for Republican Gov. Rick Perry, said the state's Board of Pardons and Paroles was considering the case and the governor would most likely make his decision based on its recommendation on Tuesday.

She emphasized the brutal nature of the crime.

"It's very important for the citizens of Texas to remember that Jose Medellin ... brutally and viciously gang raped, stomped, kicked, slashed, strangled and murdered two teenage girls in Houston," Castle said.

"The World Court has no jurisdiction here in Texas. We're concerned about following Texas law and that's what we're doing."

The row, which has strained relations between the United States and Mexico, centers on the fact that the United States failed to inform 51 Mexican citizens sentenced to die in U.S. jails of their right to consular assistance.

"The impact of ignoring this endangers Americans traveling abroad," said Victoria Palacios, a professor at Southern Methodist University's Dedman School of Law in Dallas.

AMERICANS ABROAD ENDANGERED?

"If the world sees us ignoring the rights of foreign nationals arrested here, there is very little reason for them to recognize the rights of U.S. citizens."

She said the case also underscores the gulf between U.S. views of the death penalty and those elsewhere.

Capital punishment has wide political support in America, especially in Texas, which has executed more than 400 prisoners since the Supreme Court lifted a ban on the practice in 1976.

Political fall-out from the Medellin and related cases has reached the White House and the U.S. Supreme Court.

President George W. Bush directed Texas to comply with a World Court ruling in 2004 mandating review of the cases of Medellin and other Mexicans in U.S. prisons awaiting execution. The U.S. Supreme Court said in March Bush's action had exceeded his authority.

Support for the death penalty may be strong in Texas but opinion on the issue is by no means uniform. In a recent editorial, The Dallas Morning News urged the governor to halt Medellin's execution.

"Mr. Perry can flex the state's judicial muscle and show the world that Texans don't bow to the whims of some distant, obscure international court," it said. "But it would send an unequivocal message to all foreign governments -- especially Mexico -- that this country doesn't stand by its promises."

The June 1993 crime for which Medellin was condemned was chilling. According to the Texas Attorney General's office, Pena and her 14-year-old companion, Jennifer Ertman, were walking home when they encountered a gang initiation.

Medellin and his fellow gang members sexually assaulted, beat and strangled the two girls. When their badly decomposed bodies were finally recovered, they could only be identified by dental records.

(Additional reporting by Jim Forsyth in San Antonio; Editing by Todd Eastham)


'Tell us who the terrorists are if you want the doctor'

By Donald Macintyre in Gaza City
Monday, 4 August 2008

A police sapper removes a Qassam rocket launched by militants in Gaza. The Israeli intelligence service was accused of pressuring Palestinian patients seeking treatment to act as spies to find out who is launching the missiles and where

DAVID SILVERMAN/GETTY IMAGES

A police sapper removes a Qassam rocket launched by militants in Gaza. The Israeli intelligence service was accused of pressuring Palestinian patients seeking treatment to act as spies to find out who is launching the missiles and where

Seriously ill Palestinian patients are being pressured to collaborate with Israeli intelligence by informing on militant and other activities in return for being allowed out of Gaza for medical treatment a report says today.

Israel's domestic intelligence agency, Shin Bet, is playing an increasingly important role in determining whether patients should be allowed to keep hospital appointments in Israel or the West Bank, Physicians for Human Rights Israel [PHR] will claim.

PHR has collected testimony from more than 30 patients with serious illnesses, including cancer, who describe being pressured by interrogators at the main Erez terminal between Israel and Gaza. They include a 38-year-old man due for treatment at Tel Aviv's Ichilov hospital who says he was told: "You have cancer, and it will spread to your brain. As long as you don't help us, wait for Rafah crossing [the rarely open exit to Egypt]."

The report, which charges Shin Bet with "coercion" and "extortion" of patients, says this comes against a background of a sharp rise in the proportion of patients being denied permission to enter Israel for medical treatment since Hamas's takeover of Gaza, in June 2007.

The rise in refusals from 10 per cent in the first half of 2007 to 35 per cent in the first half of 2008 coincided with what PHR says is increasing restrictions in the supply of medical spare parts, fuel and electricity as part of an Israeli blockade of all but essential humanitarian supplies. This in turn has increased the number of referrals for treatment of patients outside Gaza.

The report says that, according to Shin Bet, the goal of the interrogations is "to estimate the degree of danger posed by the applicant". It adds: "In practice [the agency] collects intelligence on what it defines as security issues."

Most of those who have testified declined to give their names for fear that it could jeopardise any further chance of leaving Gaza for treatment. But one who has, journalist Bassam Al Wahidi, 28, said he was interrogated in late August 2007 during over six hours of detention at Erez, missing his appointment at St John's Hospital in East Jerusalem to save the sight in his right eye from retina damage.

He said that after arriving on the Israeli side, he was led to an interrogation room where a man speaking perfect Arabic introduced himself as Moshe. Moshe told him: "I want you to do me a favour. I will talk to the big leaders in the Israel Defence Forces and say he's a good guy. We have to help him."

He said that Moshe asked him to use his job as a journalist to go to border areas and see who was launching rockets and where, and to attend press conferences of factional military wings. He would be given an Israeli mobile chip and asked to call a number with information. If he proved himself over 10 days, he would be allowed to go through Erez "with no permit" and be allowed through for treatment at the Ichilov hospital in Tel Aviv. Moshe also hinted he would get financial and other help.

Mr Al Wahidi – who had previously been given an exit permit – says he made clear that he would not co-operate, and that he would go to human rights organisations, the Red Cross and the press. He claims that Moshe, who had earlier said he was losing his patience, laughed and added: "What you are talking about does not exist in the dictionary of the IDF."

Mr Al Wahidi says that when he invited Moshe to arrest him or allow him out for medical treatment, he replied: "I will send you back to Gaza and let you live the rest of your life blind because you are stupid."

Mr Al Wahidi was indeed sent back to Gaza and has not been allowed out for treatment since. He says he has now lost the sight in his right eye and needs urgent treatment to save his left eye, and that doctors told him a month ago to stop reading or writing to ease the pressure on his left eye.

Shin Bet told PHR that three would-be suicide bombers since 2005 had posed as medical patients and denied that permits are contingent on the supply of information by a patient "except for reliable information on his medical condition." The military says that the number of those exiting the Strip for medical treatment rose from 8,325 to 15,148 in 2007. It says that the Supreme Court has ruled that "it is the state's sovereign right to determine who enters its gates and that the extent of discretion granted to the authorities is ... very broad."

Saturday, August 2, 2008

More than 56,000 in U.S. infected with AIDS each year

 

 This is an Update on this story. I now know that they used PCR testing and it is worthless. Many who tested positive did not have HIV at all. 

This is what happened then and in 2020

 

Covid 19 tests are not reliable


This will be rather long. It will also involve information about HIV tests as they are the same PCR tests being used for Covid 19.

There were about 70 reasons one could test positive for HIV.  If you tested positive you were given AZT A chemo drug. That would make it look like you had AIDS.

It destroys your immune system.

 https://shadowsbearsoutlook.blogspot.com/2020/09/pcr-covic-19-tests-are-worthless.html


 

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - At least 56,000 people become infected with the AIDS virus every year in the United States -- 40 percent more than previous estimates, according to a report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC stressed that actual infection rates have not risen but said better methods of measuring new diagnosed infections and then extrapolating this to the general population led to the fresh estimates.

"CDC's first estimates from this system reveal that the HIV epidemic is -- and has been -- worse than previously known. Results indicate that approximately 56,300 new HIV infections occurred in the United States in 2006," the CDC said in a statement.

"This figure is roughly 40 percent higher than CDC's former estimate of 40,000 infections per year, which was based on limited data and less precise methods."

Globally, 33 million people are infected with the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS and 2 million die of it each year.

The CDC estimates roughly 1 million Americans are infected with the virus. Dr. Kevin Fenton, who heads CDC's AIDS branch, said 15,000 to 18,000 Americans die every year of AIDS.

"The data really confirm that there is a severe impact of this epidemic among gay and bisexual men in the United States ... as well as black men and women," Fenton said in a telephone interview.

More than 28,000 of the new infections are among men who have sex with men, the new estimates show. Close to 17,000 are among heterosexuals -- and 15,000 of these are women.

"These data are confirming what we had known before," Fenton said. "It also mirrors what we see about sexually transmitted diseases and changes in risk behavior among men who have sex with men."

RISKY SEX

Many recent studies have shown gay and bisexual men are having risky, unprotected sex more often than before, perhaps emboldened by the knowledge that the disease can be treated.

But AIDS remains incurable and is fatal if not treated. There is no vaccine and the drugs stop working if people do not take them precisely as directed.

The numbers, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, also confirm that black Americans are seven times more likely to be infected than whites.

"The reality is that it is a wake-up call for all of us," Fenton said. "There are things that you and I can do to stop the disease -- encourage others to use condoms consistently and correctly, abstain from sex."

AIDS spreads rampantly in prisons, he added.

Communities need to provide better education and testing services, Fenton said.

Fears of being stigmatized have stopped people from being tested -- 25 percent of those infected do not know it and can pass along the virus.

But there was some comfort in the numbers.

"It is important to note that the new estimate does not represent an actual increase in the annual number of new HIV infections," CDC said.

"In fact, CDC's analysis suggests that the epidemic has been roughly stable since the late 1990s, though the number of new HIV infections remains unacceptably high," it said.

"The analysis shows that new infections peaked in the mid-1980s at approximately 130,000 infections per year and reached a low of about 50,000 in the early 1990s."

Cocktails of HIV drugs can keep patients alive and healthy but not everyone gets them, Fenton said.

Too many Americans are diagnosed late, after the virus has already damaged the immune system beyond repair, he said.

Friday, August 1, 2008

The NRA’s Dirty Tricks Revealed

This is the story of two Marys. Both are in their early 60s, heavyset, with curly reddish hair. But for years they have worked on opposite ends of the same issues. Mary McFate is an advocate of environmental causes and a prominent activist within the gun control movement. For more than a decade, she volunteered for various gun violence prevention organizations, serving on the boards of anti-gun outfits, helping state groups coordinate their activities, lobbying in Washington for gun control legislation, and regularly attending strategy and organizing meetings.

Mary Lou Sapone, by contrast, is a self-described "research consultant," who for decades has covertly infiltrated citizens groups for private security firms hired by corporations that are targeted by activist campaigns. For some time, Sapone also worked for the National Rifle Association.

But these two Marys share a lot in common—a Mother Jones investigation has found that McFate and Sapone are, in fact, the same person. And this discovery has caused the leaders of gun violence prevention organizations to conclude that for years they have been penetrated—at the highest levels—by the NRA or other pro-gun parties. "It raises the question," says Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, "of what did she find out and what did they want her to find out."

Using her maiden name, McFate, Sapone began posing as a gun control activist in the mid-1990s. Bryan Miller, the executive director of Ceasefire New Jersey, a grassroots gun control group, recalls first meeting her in the summer of 1998. The NRA was holding its annual convention in downtown Philadelphia, and the event drew the usual bevy of protesters. Among them was a middle-aged woman then living in Pennsylvania who made a point of introducing herself to Miller. In the following years, Miller would remember this encounter well, as he watched McFate rise from a street protester to a figure known nationally within his movement. She became a leader of Pennsylvanians Against Handgun Violence and later a board member of Ceasefire Pennsylvania. According to staffers at several gun violence prevention groups, she worked on the Million Mom March in 2000, when hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated in Washington, DC, to demand stricter gun laws. She joined the board of Freedom States Alliance, a network of nine state-based gun control organizations. At States United to Prevent Gun Violence, a nationwide coalition of anti-gun groups, she was the director of federal legislation, an unpaid position that placed her in charge of the outfit's lobbying efforts in Washington. In that role, she collaborated with national organizations including the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center.

In 2005, McFate ran for a board position at the Brady Campaign, which would have placed her in the inner sanctum of the nation's most prominent gun control group. On her ballot statement, she described herself as a "community activist and motivational speaker," "a former presidential scholar," and a recipient of the "Public Service Council's Community Champion Award in 1999." And she pitched her credentials for the position: "I believe my volunteerism over 30 years to nonprofit organizations with disparate program goals has given me practical insights on what strategies are most effective…My experience with broad coalitions working together for societal change has proven to me that our organization is on the right track to make our neighborhoods safer and to give our children their full life potential."

McFate lost the election, but she did not give up. Several months ago, she told Paul Helmke that she was interested in an appointed board position for the Brady Campaign. (Helmke recalls that he was concerned about placing her on his board because she was already deeply connected to other groups. "I didn't push the idea," he says.) In 2007, she attended a summit convened by the International Association of Chiefs of Police that aimed to develop a strategy for reducing gun violence. As an advocate working with both state and national groups, she was privy to the gun control movement's community's internal deliberations and in a position to know what was happening throughout the movement. "She's been active in everything and involved in every single major gun violence prevention organization," says Barbara Hohlt, executive director of States United to Prevent Gun Violence.

Despite her supposed commitment to the cause, her friends and colleagues in the gun control community considered McFate something of a curiosity. Among other things, she had a tendency to drop in and out of contact, explaining away her absences by saying she had been vacationing aboard luxury cruise liners. When the Brady Campaign's communications director, Paul Hamm, occasionally asked her to talk to the media about gun issues, she adamantly refused. "I would say, 'Please, Mary.' She would say, 'No, no, no, I don't want to.'"

Looking back, gun control advocates who worked with McFate can now see what might have been faint warning signs. A few weeks ago, Hohlt says, she had what she considered an odd encounter with McFate when the pair was making preparations to take part in a conference call with other gun control advocates. Rather than face a long-distance charge for the call, McFate, who lives in Florida but was in New York City at the time, insisted on dropping by the offices of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence to participate in the discussion. Given that McFate appeared to be well off financially—she was always offering to travel to meetings and conferences, including NRA conferences, with no concern for cost—Hohlt couldn't understand why she was demanding to come to this office for the call just to save a few bucks. Nor could she fathom why McFate often pushed to share a hotel room with other gun control advocates at conferences and events when she seemed able to afford accommodations of her own. Hohlt also thought it unusual that McFate served on the boards of several organizations simultaneously, since there was, as Hohlt puts it, "a certain amount of competition between all the groups." But she never doubted McFate's devotion to gun control.


Though McFate's colleagues viewed her as a friend, some found it strange that they knew virtually nothing about her life outside the movement. She never explained the source of her personal wealth. And Toby Hoover, the executive director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence and an activist who worked with McFate since the mid-1990s, says, "She never talked about what she had done prior to this work. I didn't even know if she had a husband or kids." Ceasefire New Jersey's Bryan Miller adds, "She doesn't talk about her family. I know nothing about her personal life other than that she lives in Sarasota, Florida. For my closest friends in this movement, who also know Mary, it was a matter of low-level discussion that we didn't know anything about her."

There was good reason for that.

Outside the gun control world, Mary Lou Sapone was, as Mother Jones has previously reported, a for-hire operative who spied on citizens' groups for corporate clients. Property and phone records indicate that the two names belong to the same person. Last week, a reporter for Mother Jones called the Sarasota phone number that McFate had given her gun control allies and asked the woman who answered if she was Mary Lou Sapone. "Yes," she responded. But Sapone then refused to answer any questions about Mary McFate or her work for gun control. She quickly hung up—and did not respond to subsequent calls and emails.

During Sapone's ascent through the ranks of the gun control movement, she worked for the NRA, according to a business associate. In a 2003 deposition, Tim Ward, who had been president of the Maryland-based security firm Beckett Brown International, said that the NRA had been "a client" of Sapone's. (As a subcontractor for BBI, Sapone had planted an operative within an environmental group in Lake Charles, Louisiana.) According to Ward, at his request Sapone had introduced BBI to the NRA in early 1999. And that introduction quickly paid off. Billing records obtained by Mother Jones indicate that between May 1999 and April 2000, the NRA paid BBI nearly $80,000 for various services.

In another 2003 deposition, Jay Bly, a former Secret Service officer who worked for BBI, was asked what type of work the security firm had done for the NRA, and he responded, "Those are very sensitive issues, and I'm just not comfortable going into it. I'm really not." Later in the deposition, Bly said, "I did a number of different things for the NRA in the area of investigation, the area of personal protection, in the area of event security, in the area of intelligence gathering, okay?"

Ward, during his own deposition, explained what a typical BBI intelligence-gathering operation would entail: "We used informants that we would send to public rallies that these people were holding, public demonstrations. These informants developed relationships where they could pick up a phone up and call in to find out where the next event was, where it was going to be held…They are usually very eager to have somebody come and tote banners and scream and shout." According to Bly's testimony, he and Ward continued their intelligence-gathering operations for the NRA after BBI acrimoniously disbanded around 2001 and Ward opened his own security firm, Chesapeake Strategies. (These depositions were taken during a lawsuit filed against former BBI officials by John Dodd, the firm's primary investor.)

In his deposition, Ward identified Sapone's contact at the NRA as Patrick O'Malley. From the late 1990s until 2002, O'Malley was the deputy executive director of the Institute for Legislative Action, the NRA's political arm. And according to billing records from BBI (which in 2000 changed its name to S2I Corporation), O'Malley was BBI's liaison at the NRA. Recent emails indicate that in 2007 and 2008 Sapone was working with O'Malley, who lobbied for the NRA after leaving the ILA and went on to work for a government relations firm retained by his former employer. In recent years, O'Malley has served as the executive director of the Ballot Issues Coalition, an organization composed of hunting-rights groups, including the NRA.

O'Malley did not respond to numerous messages left at his office and home. Asked about Sapone, James Jay Baker, who was executive director of the NRA's ILA when O'Malley was its deputy executive director, says, "I don't have anything to say about any vendors at the NRA." Baker notes, "We got information from whatever sources we can," but he maintains that he was not aware of any infiltration of the gun control movement. Baker, now managing director of Ogilvy Government Relations, a high-powered lobbying shop, is currently registered as a lobbyist for the NRA. (After leaving the NRA in 2002, both O'Malley and Baker joined the Federalist Group, a lobbying firm that was acquired by Ogilvy in 2005.) Contacted repeatedly, the NRA declined to comment on its past or present relationship with Sapone, BBI, or Chesapeake Strategies.

Informed of McFate's true identity, her friends and associates in the gun control community expressed shock and anger. "That astounds me," says Barbara Hohlt. Of McFate's ability to maintain her cover, she adds, "She was very, very good. Everybody knew her for years and trusted her." Brian Malte, director of state legislation at the Brady Campaign, says, "Oh my…Of all the people." Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, remarks, "This is totally bizarre." And she adds, "I would find it hardest to believe this about her. She comes across as kind of dense—or she's putting on a good act."

McFate's (now former) colleagues note that she was well-positioned for many years to provide the NRA—or any other gun rights groups—the plans, secrets, and inside gossip of practically the entire gun violence prevention movement. "She had access to all the legislative strategy for every major issue for years," says Rand. Another gun control advocate who worked with McFate and asked not to be identified recalls, "She was one of those rare people. As a volunteer, she wanted to know more and more about what people were working on." With intelligence gathered by McFate, Ceasefire New Jersey's Miller says, the gun lobby could "learn a lot: what the grassroots of the gun violence prevention movement intended; where our priorities are shifting; which legislation we would be promoting or fighting against and what sort of effort we would be putting into that; who our targeted legislators would be; what states and districts we deemed important enough to put an effort into; our messaging, what our messaging would be before we put it out there."

Hohlt recalled several recent episodes in which McFate maneuvered to place herself in the middle of issues important to the NRA and others in the gun lobby. One occurred this spring, when the London-based International Action Network on Small Arms was trying to persuade American gun control groups to attend a July meeting at the United Nations on small-arms control. (A 2001 UN conference ended up establishing a program weaker than gun control advocates had desired, thanks to the intervention of the Bush administration, which had been lobbied by the NRA.) States United to Prevent Gun Violence had never before been involved with international gun control issues. And to participate in the UN meeting, it had to apply for credentials. Hohlt says McFate pushed her to file for them. Hohlt did so, and McFate ended up being able to learn what the anti-gun forces were planning for the UN session—including the delegates they intended to lobby, and the arguments they would highlight.

McFate also took a keen interest in a gun matter currently under consideration by the Department of the Interior, Hohlt says. At the urging of the gun lobby, the agency has been mulling whether to change its regulations to allow people to carry loaded and concealed guns into national parks under certain circumstances. (At the moment, a gun carried into a national park must be unloaded and kept apart from ammunition.) The National Parks Conservation Association and current and former National Park Service officials have been fighting the proposed rule change. "When Mary heard about this," Hohlt recalls, "she immediately asked to be on the email list [of the opponents] and she also got on the phone calls. So she now knows the strategy of the people trying to fight this." Similarly, when Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group organized by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, mounted a campaign against the NRA-backed Tiahrt amendment—legislation advanced by Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) and first passed by Congress in 2003 that prevents the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives from sharing gun-tracing data—McFate, according to Hohlt, made certain to participate in conference calls during which strategy for beating back the bill was discussed. "Whenever an issue comes up, she manages to get on the email list," Hohlt says.

The McFate operation, says Miller, "would confirm for me the way that the gun lobby works, which is no rules, no question of fairness or honesty. Anything that they can do they will do to protect the profits of the gun industry." He notes that his organization has experienced low-level attempts at penetration in the past—a pro-gun advocate once posed as a would-be volunteer to get on his group's mailing list—but nothing on this scale.

Shocked to learn that McFate was a spy, gun control advocates have pondered the obvious questions: How did she manage to fool everyone for so long? How much money did she earn for being a mole? To whom in the gun lobby did she report? The NRA? The firearms manufacturing industry? Did her covert effort extend beyond mere intelligence gathering? Did she manage to shape the decisions and actions of anti-gun groups to the gun lobby's liking? And was she the only one?

While Sapone was a spy with a big secret, as McFate she led a relatively high-profile life. In Sarasota, Florida, McFate heads the local chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution. She has served as a substitute teacher at a local military academy, and once joined a coalition of residents who fought to save a 112-acre forest from development. Several years ago, McFate cofounded an organization called Lead Our Leaders, which boasted the "audacious mission" of changing "the way politics is done in America" by creating "a mechanism for the American electorate to effectively communicate their policy instructions to our elected leaders." A 2005 profile of her in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune began, "Mary McFate wants to save the world." (She told the paper, "I'm an optimist by nature.") During a short-lived attempt at blogging, she wrote a small number of postings using the handle "SolutionGal" and touted her Lead Our Leaders effort. (She stopped blogging in February 2006, and the website of Lead Our Leaders is no longer active.)

Sapone's earliest known private intelligence operation occurred in the mid-1980s, when she served as an operative for Perceptions International, a Connecticut-based security firm. Working for Perceptions, which has since been shuttered, she infiltrated the animal rights community for US Surgical Corporation, a target of activists who objected to its testing on dogs. According to a 1989 article in New England Business, Sapone appeared on the animal rights scene in 1986 and quickly became "involved in at least a half dozen animal rights groups." She "made a point of getting to know all of the key people in the movement," and "traveled around the country to most protests, meetings and conferences." At meetings, activists would later say, Sapone advocated taking illegal or violent action to advance the movement. She befriended a 33-year-old activist named Fran Trutt, who in November 1988 would be arrested for planting a remote-controlled pipe bomb near the parking space of US Surgical chairman Leon Hirsch. According to Trutt, on her way to carry out the bombing she lost her nerve and placed a call to Sapone, who convinced her to follow through with the plan—a fact that prompted activists to accuse Sapone of acting as an agent provocateur. (Another Perceptions International operative, Marcus Mead, drove Trutt to US Surgical on the day of the attempted bombing.)

In the 1990s—while working within the gun control community as McFate—Sapone formed her own intelligence-gathering business. And she enlisted family members for its operations. "In our business, it's my daughter-in-law, Montgomery Sapone [who] does all the analytic reports, forecasting, and white papers," Sapone wrote to a client in an August 1999 email obtained by Mother Jones. "She produces a very professional product." Sapone continued, "We are warning our clients that activist groups are moving towards ballot initiatives…And it's easy for groups like Greenpeace to emotionally shape a looming crisis in a 10 second TV spot 2 days before a referenda election. My daughter Shelley specializes in that aspect of our business. We are doing a lot of work now to help clients in the 2000 election."

A resume that Montgomery Sapone used around 1999 describes her role within Mary Lou's business: "Collect and analyze intelligence on European activities of major international environmental organization for a company specializing in domestic and internal opposition research, special investigations, issues management and threat assessment. Write weekly intelligence update on European animal rights and eco-terrorist activity. Assist in confidential litigation support research." Sapone's son Sean, a Brown- and Harvard-educated paratrooper who served with the 82nd Airborne Division, was managing director of this firm, which at one point was called Strategic Solutions Group LLC and maintained an office in Washington, DC. According to a Strategic Solutions Group invoice sent to BBI in November 2000, Montgomery Sapone—a Harvard law school grad and Yale-trained anthropologist—once billed the security firm $400 for four hours of her time, which included a "visit to target's office."

Sapone made her gun control work a family affair as well. Around 2003, Montgomery volunteered at the Brady Campaign, according to Becca Knox, the group's research director. Occasionally, Montgomery would also sit in for her mother-in-law at Washington strategy meetings attended by officials of the gun control movement, according to the Violence Policy Center's Kristen Rand. And Sean Sapone once offered to help Rand's group on a campaign against the civilian use of .50 caliber rifles, Rand recalls. But after attending one meeting, Sean Sapone never followed through.

These days, Sean and Montgomery Sapone are better known as Sean and Montgomery McFate, a successful Washington couple whose current bios make no mention of any past intelligence-gathering or opposition-research work. Sean is currently the program director of the national security initiative at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank boasting an advisory board composed of four former Senate majority leaders: Howard Baker, Bob Dole, George Mitchell, and Tom Daschle. An expert on military affairs, he previously worked for Amnesty International and for military contractor DynCorp. According to an online biography, he helped to organize "the first major legal arms shipment to Liberia in 15 years." Montgomery has made a name for herself as one of the primary architects of the US military's human terrain program, which teams social scientists with military units in Iraq and Afghanistan to help soldiers better understand the local culture. (The controversial program has been sharply criticized by the American Anthropological Association, which fears it may cross an ethical line, and has been described by detractors as "mercenary anthropology.") Now a top Pentagon adviser, Montgomery also contributed to the Army's Counterinsurgency Field Manual drafted under the guidance of General David Petraeus.

Montgomery McFate did not respond to an email request for comment. Nor did Mary Lou Sapone's daughter, Shelley McGonnigal. During a brief phone call, Sean McFate told Mother Jones, "I'm familiar with what you are doing. But I don't want to talk to the media." Asked to explain his mother's double life as Mary McFate and Mary Lou Sapone, he said, "You have to talk to Mary Lou." Then he hung up.

When the National Rifle Association asks its members for their next contribution, they might want to disclose how much of that money will be spent to spy on gun violence victims and their families.

Mother Jones Magazine today reported that someone the gun violence prevention movement believed was a committed gun control activist was, in fact, a gun lobby spy.

Mother Jones focused on the activity of Mary McFate, also known as Mary Lou Sapone, a woman who has apparently led a double life for over twenty years, performing industrial espionage services for a variety of anti-environmental and gun lobby organizations – including the National Rifle Association.

A bizarre development to be sure, yet today’s report speaks for itself:

… During Sapone’s ascent through the ranks of the gun control movement, she worked for the NRA, according to a business associate. In a 2003 deposition, Tim Ward, who had been president of the Maryland-based security firm Beckett Brown International, said that the NRA had been “a client” of Sapone’s. (As a subcontractor for BBI, Sapone had planted an operative within an environmental group in Lake Charles, Louisiana.) According to Ward, at his request Sapone had introduced BBI to the NRA in early 1999. And that introduction quickly paid off. Billing records obtained by Mother Jones indicate that between May 1999 and April 2000, the NRA paid BBI nearly $80,000 for various services….

The article goes on to mention that Sapone was still working for an NRA lobbyist in 2007 and 2008. (Follow developments on Huffington Post here.)

Reading the story, one imagines a group of executives over at NRA headquarters huddled around a copy of The Art of War with a flashlight in a dark basement office, hatching a new cloak-and-dagger plot.

Whatever the case, it’s clear that some over there have too much money and no moral compass.

It is one thing to recognize, as CNN found last month, that 86% of the American people favor a waiting period before buying a gun, while 79% favor the registration of guns with the local government. That’s reason enough for the NRA to feel defensive.

It is another thing entirely to pay a woman to trade on the grief of gun violence victims and their families – to pay someone to pretend to be their friend and confidant – when in reality she was spying on their efforts to strengthen this country’s tragically weak gun laws.

Does this behavior reflect the NRA’s membership? I don’t think so. I think this represents the bunker paranoia of leaders who will resort to any means – by hook or by crook – to get any information they can get about the gun violence prevention movement, and that contradicts every statement they make about being a “civil rights” organization.

I don’t know what the NRA may have learned from Ms. Sapone/McFate’s spying.

Hopefully they were reminded that 32 people are murdered every day in America by gunfire. Another 52 survive a gunshot injury. Every day, 8 children and teens shot and killed, while another 48 survive their wounds.

Every year, 100,000 people are killed or wounded in the United States from gunfire.

But they didn’t need a spy to figure that out.

U.S. federal agents have been given new powers to seize travelers' laptops

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. federal agents have been given new powers to seize travelers' laptops and other electronic devices at the border and hold them for unspecified periods the Washington Post reported on Friday.

Under recently disclosed Department of Homeland Security policies, such seizures may be carried out without suspicion of wrongdoing, the newspaper said, quoting policies issued on July 16 by two DHS agencies.

Agents are empowered to share the contents of seized computers with other agencies and private entities for data decryption and other reasons, the newspaper said.

DHS officials said the policies applied to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens, and were needed to prevent terrorism.

The measures have long been in place but were only disclosed in July, under pressure from civil liberties and business travel groups acting on reports that increasing numbers of international travelers had had their laptops, cellphones and other digital devices removed and examined.

The policies cover hard drives, flash drives, cell phones, iPods, pagers, beepers, and video and audio tapes -- as well as books, pamphlets and other written materials, the report said.

The policies require federal agents to take measures to protect business information and attorney-client privileged material. They stipulate that any copies of the data must be destroyed when a review is completed and no probable cause exists to keep the information.

(Reporting by Paul Eckert, editing by Alan Elsner)

US judge rules White House aides not immune from congressional subpoenas

President George Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled today in an unprecedented dispute between two political branches of the US government.

House Democrats called the ruling a ringing endorsement of the principle that nobody is above the law.

In his ruling, US District Judge John Bates said there is no legal basis for Bush's argument and that his former legal counsel, Harriet Miers, must appear before Congress. If she wants to refuse to testify, he said, she must do so in person. The committee also has sought to force testimony from White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten.

"Harriet Miers is not immune from compelled congressional process; she is legally required to testify pursuant to a duly issued congressional subpoena," Bates wrote.

He said that both Bolten and Miers must give Congress all non-privileged documents related to the firings.

The ruling is a blow to the Bush administration's efforts to bolster the power of the executive branch of the US government at the expense of the legislative branch. Disputes over congressional subpoenas are normally resolved through political compromise, not through the court system.

Had Bush prevailed, it would have dramatically weakened congressional authority in oversight investigations.

The administration can appeal the ruling.

The leader of the House of Representatives, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, called it "very good news for anyone who believes in the Constitution of the United States and the separation of powers, and checks and balances."

Democrats swiftly pledged to call Miers before the House judiciary committee as soon as September to testify about whether the White House played any role in the firings of nine US attorneys last year.

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, a Democrat, said he hoped that Miers and Bolten do not appeal the ruling, but that was far from clear.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto and US justice department spokesman Peter Carr said they were reviewing the opinion and declined immediate comment.

The committee's senior Republican, meanwhile, said he was pleased that the court ruled in Congress' favor. But Representative Lamar Smith added that a continuing showdown in federal court could ultimately curtail Congress' powers, and he urged Democrats and the White House to strike an agreement.

"Unfortunately, today's victory may be short-lived," Smith said in a statement. 'If the administration appeals the ruling, our congressional prerogatives will once again be put at risk."

Conyers signalled election-season hearings will be held on the controversy that scandalised the justice department and led to the resignation of a longtime presidential confidant, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

"We look forward to the White House complying with this ruling and to scheduling future hearings with Ms Miers and other witnesses who have relied on such claims," Conyers said in a statement.

"We hope that the defendants will accept this decision and expect that we will receive relevant documents and call Ms Miers to testify in September."

Bates, who was appointed to the bench by Bush, issued a 93-page opinion that strongly rejected the administration's legal arguments. He noted that the executive branch could not point to a single case in which courts held that White House aides were immune from congressional subpoenas.

"That simple yet critical fact bears repeating: the asserted absolute immunity claim here is entirely unsupported by existing case law," Bates wrote.

US seeking to turn India into a military base

The US wants India to be converted into a military base to facilitate refuelling for its planes and recreation for the soldiers engaged in the Iraq war, Communist Party of India-Marxist politburo member and Rajya Sabha MP Brinda Karat said.

"By initiating the Indo-US nuclear deal, the Americans are aiming at making India a strategic ally and the US pressure was responsible for a deliberate delay in giving effect to the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline," she alleged, addressing a public meeting in Pune on Thursday night.

"The US wants India to be its military base where the American planes can refuel after bombing in Iraq and the soldiers can have recreation," she said.

Brinda, who was in Pune as part of the CPI-M campaign to explain to the people "real nature" of the nuke deal, denied that the Left opposition to the agreement stemmed from its ideological anti-US stance.

"All we want is to protect the sovereignty of people of India and expose the United Progressive Alliance government's hidden agenda of linking the country's foreign policy to the US strategy," she said.

The CPI-M leader accused the UPA government of slashing the budget allocation to the Atomic Energy Department by Rs 188 crore and neglecting the country's indigenous nuclear development programme while pursuing the deal with the US, which would be able to meet just eight per cent of the domestic power demand.

Referring to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's remark in Parliament during the trust vote debate that the Left parties wanted to treat him as a bonded slave, Karat said, "By making this allegation Dr Singh has degraded the office of the prime minister of India."

"Our support and its withdrawal was based on a principled stand and we had no personal considerations about the prime minister," Brinda Karat said adding, "If he was so uncomfortable, why did he not resign?"

Brinda Karat said the ad blitz launched by the UPA government was an "eyewash" to "mislead" the people on the nuke deal.

On the Ahmedabad terror attack, she said the government was answerable to the people on the failure of central intelligence agencies.

AUGUST IS NUCLEAR-FREE FUTURE MONTH!

AUGUST IS NUCLEAR-FREE FUTURE MONTH!

The purpose of Nuclear-Free Future Month is to take action and raise awareness about the ever-increasing threat from nuclear weapons and the environmental and proliferation dangers posed by the global nuclear power “renaissance.”

STOP NUCLEAR MADNESS!

United for Peace and Justice has declared August "Nuclear-Free Future Month". The specter of nuclear weapons in the hands of "rogue" states has become one of the top US excuses for waging war, yet the United States continues to rely on the threatened first use of nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of its national security policy. Now is the time to take action and raise awareness about the ever-increasing threat from nuclear weapons and the environmental and proliferation dangers posed by the global nuclear power "renaissance".

August 6th and 9th mark the 63rd anniversaries of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Through popular education, video screenings, art exhibitions, protests, vigils and more, we are working to build stronger ties between the nuclear abolition, antiwar, and climate justice movements. We are working in solidarity with these fundamentally connected movements to create a safe, just future.

We encourage you to organize and participate in a variety of anti-nuclear activities this month, including efforts to encourage the Presidential and Congressional candidates to make both the abolition of nuclear weapons, and immediate steps to achieve that goal a central campaign priority, as we demand clean, sustainable, non-nuclear energy alternatives.

Seek peace, be part of the solution! No nukes! No war!

Nuclear energy: Pressure on government to act as it ponders its options

An EDF bid for British Energy may have been the favourite means to further the government's nuclear ambitions but it is not the only option.

Britain generates just under 20% of its electricity from its existing nuclear power stations but much of that capacity is ageing and will have to be replaced. The government regards new nuclear plants as clean, secure and affordable and argues that it should have an integral role in its plan to reduce Britain's dependence on costly - and increasingly imported - fossil fuels and to cut the country's carbon footprint.

A merger of EDF and British Energy would have brought together two companies with nuclear expertise; one with the ideal UK sites for new nuclear generation because they are already licensed and connected to the national grid; the other with the means and experience to build new plants.

The combination was also likely to have drawn in Britain's Centrica, which is keen to be involved in the nuclear industry and which is thought to have looked at making its own bid for British Energy. That option was ruled out some months ago but Centrica is said to be keen on taking a minority holding in British Energy, after an EDF acquisition.

The French and British nuclear generators may still get together. Yesterday EDF's executives were tied up in the announcement of the company's first-half profits and are unlikely to refocus on British Energy until next week. "It will take a few days for the dust to settle," said a source yesterday.

Both companies have a plan B. Though British Energy is seen as too small to build Britain's next nuclear generation on its own, it has the alternative of working with other companies on a site-by-site basis.

It is unlikely to be short of offers: a number of companies, including Germany's RWE, Spain's Iberdrola and France's Suez have all looked at a possible bid for British Energy and may be willing to take part on a project-by-project basis.

Many in Europe's energy industry are keen to see new nuclear plants built in Britain, not least because it would strengthen the case for its continuation or expansion elsewhere.

EDF's plan B involves building its own portfolio of UK sites. British Energy is not the only organisation with nuclear assets. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has the responsibility for decommissioning Britain's Magnox reactors, among other sites, and at least some of these - particularly Wylfa in Anglesey - could be used.

Even if EDF walks away from a bid for British Energy, its negotiations may have set a benchmark against which other energy companies can judge whether to make an offer themselves.

In the meantime, the government is coming under pressure to act directly, rather than maintain its stance as a minority, if powerful, shareholder in British Energy.

The unions in the industry are already pushing for action. Dougie Rooney, national officer at Unite, said yesterday: "The government must force British Energy to make available their sites in order that international consortiums can build the next generation of [nuclear] power stations."

Paul Noon, general secretary of Prospect union, said the government needed to act quickly to ensure that, if it was not going to build new nuclear plants itself, it provided the right framework for the private sector to invest. "We do not have the luxury of time. Failure to act now will result in huge problems over the next 10 years, with the UK reliant on imported gas and oil - a situation that would be an environmental, economic and political disaster."

There are those who argue that nuclear should not be an option at all and that pressing ahead with new nuclear plants would squeeze out renewable capacity. Nathan Argent, head of Greenpeace's nuclear campaign, said: "A push for more nuclear power would scupper the UK renewable energy industry, and, by doing so, cancel out the prospect of creating hundreds of thousands of British green-collar jobs."

Arnold Schwarzenegger lays off 10,000 California workers to ease budget crisis

Arnold Schwarzenegger

'I have a responsibility to make sure that our state has enough money to pay the bills,' said Arnold Schwarzenegger. Photograph: KPA/Zuma / Rex Features

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the governor of California, delivered on his threat to lay off thousands of state employees on Thursday when he signed an executive order in an attempt to solve the state's budget crisis.

The move, dismissed by critics as a gesture to force legislators to reach a compromise on how to resolve the state's $15bn budget deficit, left more than 10,000 part-time and temporary employees without work yesterday. The order also reduced the pay of up to 200,000 state employees to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour, below California's minimum.

"I have a responsibility to make sure that our state has enough money to pay its bills," the Republican governor said as he signed the order at a press conference in the state capital, Sacramento. "It is a terrible situation to be in. I don't think any governor wants to be in this situation ... But this is really the only way out at this point."

Critics, including the state controller John Chiang, a Democrat, disagree. Chiang, the state official who issues pay cheques, has said he will pay employees normally, arguing that Schwarzenegger does not have the legal authority to summarily reduce employees' pay.

Referring to the employees as "the innocent victims of a political struggle", Chiang declared: "The state of California, the elected leadership, cannot put the important public servants of California in harm's way. We put people first, we make sure we protect their interests, and that's why I have to tell the governor, with all due respect, I am not going to comply with this order."

Unions also declared their intention to challenge the order in court.

California, the nation's largest state and one of the world's largest economies, regularly fails to agree a budget by the annual July 1 deadline. Officials from the governor's office claimed the lay-offs could save the state up to $100m a month, while the pay cuts would save up to $1.2bn a month if applied to all 200,000 eligible workers.

Climate change activists at Kingsnorth protest prepare for jail

This year's climate camp will be set up after protesters arrive having set off from last year's site at Heathrow. Peter Macdiarmid/Getty

A group of environmental campaigners will risk jail next week when they breach a court ruling to join thousands of activists at this year's climate camp.

The five, who could become the first environmental protesters to be jailed in the UK according to activists, say they are prepared to break the law to highlight the severe threat posed by climate change.

"I have written letters and gone on marches but it isn't working," said ­Mooness Dararian, 24, from Lincolnshire. "The prospect of going to prison is very scary but the government is not ­listening to us and time is running out. They are defending the corporations and profit rather than the needs of the citizens so … I don't feel like I have a choice."

The group were among the more than 20 protesters arrested in June when they helped stop a train outside Drax, Britain's biggest power station. Their bail conditions prevent them from attending next week's climate camp at Kingsnorth, Kent – the proposed site for Britain's first coal-fired power station in 30 years. But the three men and two women say although they realise the seriousness of breaching bail they have a duty to stand up for their beliefs, and the right to protest.

Paul Morozzo, 41, said: "I have kids so of course this is not something that I take lightly at all. But we are at a really crucial junction: the threat from climate change is profoundly serious."

He said the government and public had to be prepared to make sacrifices. "If that involves going to prison – and I really, really do not want to go – then that is what I am prepared to do."

The group say they will turn themselves over to the police on Monday afternoon and lawyer Phil McLeish, who is working for the group, said it was "very likely" they would be remanded in prison until their hearing in mid-August.

Today, a report from the New ­Economics Foundation said there may be just 100 months left before greenhouse gas emissions pass a tipping point, triggering runaway global warming. Greenpeace predicted that the increasing urgency of climate change would mean more people would be prepared to go to jail to draw attention to environmental issues.

Sarah North, from Greenpeace, said: "I think many more people will now follow in the footsteps of these five and be prepared to go prison to get the message about climate change across."

The climate camp protests started last Sunday when environmentalists gathered at Heathrow airport before travelling across London in a "green caravan", stopping off each night to highlight their objections to the proposed power station. The caravan is expected to arrive at Kingsnorth on Sunday along with hundreds of other protesters.

There will be about 200 workshops and protesters at the Kingsnorth site next week where activists say there will be a "rolling programme" of action. One group says it aims to infiltrate the existing power station by digging under fences, or dropping in by air. Another, dubbing itself the Great Rebel Raft Regatta, is planning to enter the site on pirate ships and boats.

Last year's event at Heathrow was accompanied by other protests across the country which saw activists chain themselves to the Department for Transport in London and hijack a wing of a jumbo jet at a factory in north Wales.

Organisers of this year's event say they expect similar protests. "Last year the focus was air travel. This year it is coal, so I think we can expect a lot of activities around the country drawing attention to the issues around energy," said one.

The £1bn plant, which has been proposed by the German-owned gas and electricity provider E.ON, has already been given approved by Medway council. The final decision rests with the business secretary, John Hutton, who is expected to make an announcement later this year.

E.ON argues the plant will produce power from coal more cleanly than ever before in Britain, leading to a cut in CO2 of almost 2m tonnes a year.The project has received the backing of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, which said Medway council had made a "commonsense" decision. But green groups are oppose the plans, arguing they are at odds with the government's commitment to reduce emissions by 60% by 2050.

Arthur Scargill, the former leader of the National Union of Mineworkers will join the camp to discuss the coal industry's impact. He will give a speech at an event on Monday afternoon.The camp has also attracted a number of politicians including Labour's John McDonnell and the Green Party's MEP Caroline Lucas. Among the messages of support is one from Chris Davies a Lib Dem MEP who said: "It is my job as a parliamentarian to help make law but in this instance I welcome the fact that there are people prepared to break the law."

MI5 misled MPs over Briton's secret rendition, court told

MI5 misled MPs about what it knew of the whereabouts of Binyam Mohamed, a British resident who says he was tortured before being secretly rendered to Guantánamo Bay, the high court was told yesterday.

Mohamed's lawyers also accused MI5 of not looking "too hard" at what was being done to him. The claims were made as the government came under renewed pressure after a former senior American official told Time magazine that the US imprisoned and interrogated at least one terrorist suspect on Diego Garcia, the UK territory in the Indian Ocean, contradicting repeated assurances by David Miliband, the foreign secretary.

Lawyers for Mohamed yesterday demanded the release of information in the government's hands which, they say, shows he was subject to extraordinary rendition, held incommunicado, and tortured. The government argues that disclosing the information would jeopardise Britain's diplomatic and intelligence relationship with the US.

Ben Jaffey, counsel for Mohamed, told the court that in his witness statement an MI5 officer in the case said Britain's security and intelligence agences "did not know where he [Mohamed] was" after he was flown out of Pakistan in 2002.

Yet MI5 suggested to parliament's intelligence and security committee that it believed Mohamed was in US custody, Jaffey said. That was why in its report on the case last year, the committee concluded it was "understandable" MI5 did not seek assurances about Mohamed's treatment. The committee was "not given the full picture", Jaffey told the high court. MI5 suggested then that Mohamed was in US custody, yet it now conceded that he was in a "location unknown", he said.

It has emerged since that Mohamed was rendered to Morocco, where he says he was brutally treated, and that the US was aware of that at the time.

"The security service did not look too hard at what was going on", Jaffey told Lord Justice Thomas. The former Kensington caretaker alleges he was repeatedly slashed in the genitals with a razor blade while being held in Morocco.

The judge said the case raised "many and very troublesome issues". The court will deliver its ruling later this month.

Time magazine's anonymous source said that a CIA counter-terrorism official twice said "high-value prisoners" had been held and questioned on Diego Garcia. Reprieve, the legal action charity, said that the source proved British territory had been used for "kidnapping, extraordinary rendition, illegal imprisonment and possibly torture".

In February, the US administration admitted that, contrary to previous assurances, two CIA "rendition" flights carrying terrorist suspects seized abroad had landed on Diego Garcia in 2002.

Last month Mr Miliband said the US had pledged no further US intelligence flights had since landed on British territory.

A Foreign Office spokesman said yesterday: "Our intelligence and counter-terrorism relationship with the US is vital to the national security of the United Kingdom.

"We accept US assurances on rendition in good faith. But if others have definitive evidence of rendition through the UK or our overseas territories, including Diego Garcia, then we will raise it with the US authorities."