The American government tried to force a British resident held at Guantanamo Bay to drop allegations of torture in return for his release, court documents published yesterday revealed.


Binyam Mohamed, 30, held by the US for nearly seven years, was told by the American military that he could win his freedom if he pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, ended his High Court case to prove his claims of torture and agreed not to speak to the media about his ordeal. He rejected the deal.

Details of the extraordinary plea bargain were seized on by Mr Mohamed's lawyers as further evidence to support his allegations that he was illegally detained and brutally tortured after his capture by Pakistani and US security agents in 2002.

The document released by the High Court in London reveals that the plea bargain was offered last year while Mr Mohamed was held in the US naval base in Cuba, but after terrorism allegations against him had been dropped. Mr Mohamed was eventually released from Guantanamo Bay this year and allowed to return home.

Clive Stafford Smith, the director of the legal group Reprieve who has represented Mr Mohamed for four years, said: "The facts reflect the way the US government has consistently tried to cover up the truth of Binyam Mohamed's torture. He was being told he would never leave Guantanamo Bay unless he promised never to discuss his torture, and never sue either the Americans or the British to force disclosure of his mistreatment ... Gradually the truth is leaking out, and the governments on both sides of the Atlantic should pause to consider whether they should continue to fight to keep this torture evidence secret."

Last year, Mr Mohamed's lawyers became engaged in a series of High Captive told he would be freed if he pleaded guilty and agreed not to speak to media

Court battles to obtain access to 42 documents which they argued supported his case against the US authorities. He claims he was flown to Morocco by the CIA where he was held for 18 months. During this detention he says he suffered barbaric abuse, including repeated razor cuts to his genitals. Last October, Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones ruled at the High Court in London that there was a "clear evidential basis" for accusations that the US government was doing "all it could" to avoid disclosing the documents. They referred to "delays and unexplained changes of course" by the American authorities, and the judges said the documents were "essential" for Mr Mohamed's defence. But they concluded that it was for the US courts to resolve the issues raised.

But yesterday it was disclosed that the judges had heard evidence that the US had drafted a plea bargain for Mr Mohamed to sign. The details could not be included in the judges' October judgment for reasons of confidentiality. They said it was now "appropriate" to reveal details of the agreement in an annex to the judgment consistent with "principles of open justice and the rule of law".

The judges said Clause 7 of the draft agreement required Mr Mohamed, in return for a lighter sentence, to plead guilty to two charges. He also had to agree not to take part in any legal challenge relating to his "capture, detention, prosecution" and detainee combatant status. In return, the maximum period of imprisonment for pleading guilty to the two charges would be 10 years, nine of which would be suspended.

The judges said Mr Mohamed had "wanted it to be made clear to the world what had happened and how he had been treated by the US government since April 2002".


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/us-tried-to-gag-british-man-tortured-in-guantanamo-1652593.html

Court battles to obtain access to 42 documents which they argued supported his case against the US authorities. He claims he was flown to Morocco by the CIA where he was held for 18 months. During this detention he says he suffered barbaric abuse, including repeated razor cuts to his genitals. Last October, Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Lloyd Jones ruled at the High Court in London that there was a "clear evidential basis" for accusations that the US government was doing "all it could" to avoid disclosing the documents. They referred to "delays and unexplained changes of course" by the American authorities, and the judges said the documents were "essential" for Mr Mohamed's defence. But they concluded that it was for the US courts to resolve the issues raised.


????
repeated razor cuts to his genitals?

I once heard the Japanese did similar things.

There is no shortage of "monsters" in america willing to adminsiter torture.

This is true

Judging from the lengths the Bush Admin was willing to go to cover their mess up.
It seems obvious that they knew they were breaking the law.

After careful consideration on my part, I wish we would have just followed previous protocols, and shot anyone not in uniform holding a rifle. It would have been so much easier.

Wouldn't that be civilians?

That law is meant for spys,
not militias.

If you shoot at someone, you are no longer a civilian.

hmmmmmmmm

What if you are a civilian just defending your home?

If you are caught firing a weapon, and you are not in a uniform and among civilians, you were shot.

That's a fact!

If you fire a weapon at a cop, does it really matter that you are a civilian defending your house? Or are you going to get shot and the cop be justified?

Many of these who were tortured were freed years later having never been charged!

I'm not defending torture. We may differ on what constitutes torture, but if there was a program put in place to really torture detainees then I support bringing them to justice. I feel that most of these people being mentioned for prosecution proves its a political move.

If????

Did you see this invictus?


Two psychologists are responsible for designing the CIA's program of waterboarding suspected terrorists and for assuring the government the program was safe, according to an ABC News report.

Former military officers Bruce Jessen and Jim Mitchell had an "important role in developing what became the CIA's torture program," Jameel Jaffer, an attorney with the ACLU, told ABC News.

Jessen and Mitchell were previously involved in the U.S. military program to train pilots how to resist brutal tactics if captured -- but Col. Steven Kleinman, an Air Force interrogator, told ABC News that the two never had experience conducting actual interrogations before the CIA hired them.

"They went to two individuals who had no interrogation experience," Col. Kleinman told ABC News.

Associates say Jessen and Mitchell were paid up to $1,000 a day by the CIA to oversee the techniques used against high-profile detainees to extract information in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York City and the Pentagon.

The revelation comes as Congressional Democrats turn up the pressure on the Obama administration to appoint a special counsel to start a criminal investigation into harsh interrogations of terror suspects and who authorized them. The debate was sparked by the Obama administration this month releasing four Bush-era memos outlining legal guidelines for the CIA's interrogation methods.

Obama has said it would be up to Attorney General Eric Holder to determine whether "those who formulated those legal decisions" should be prosecuted. The methods, described in the Bush-era memos, included slamming detainees against walls and subjecting them to simulated drowning, known as waterboarding.

The president said he would not seek to punish CIA officers and others who carried out interrogations

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/30/report-psychologists-responsible-devising-cia-torture-program/

Again with the mercs.

Bush and Cheney loved to work the mercs didnt they?

Blackwater anyone?

so BHO wouldn't seek to punish thos that did these things?

Are you really rose?
brb,,,,,,,,,,,,