WAARSCHUWING, DEZE PAGINA BEVAT SCHOKKENDE BEELDEN EN TEKST!!
| |
WARNING, THIS PAGE CONTAINS SHOCKING PICTURES AND TEXT!!
|
Index
Nederland
Democracy Now!
The Carlyle Group & Iraq
USA & Geneva convention
Outfoxed
Forum
De mens koopt mooie kleren,
om zijn intelligentie te kunnen verbergen.
Het dicht doen van de grenzen voor arme mensen, zal de multinationals niet tegen houden om hun fabriek naar het buitenland te verplaatsen
Fatsoen moet je doen:
* De Nederlandse regering blijft de USA steunen, ondanks bewezen mensenrechten schendingen en het gebruik van verboden chemische wapens, ogenschijnlijk weet de Nederlandse Regering meer dan ze toegeeft over het ontvoeren en martellen van gevangenen, het zogenaamde 'extraordinary rendition' programma, wat ondanks de huidige aandacht al tientalle jaren aan de gang is.
* De politieke activist Louis Sévèke word onder verdachte omstandigheden bruut neergeknald in de Van Welderenstraat in het centrum van Nijmegen, Louis Sévèke stelde o.a. mistanden van de Nederlandse geheimedienst aan de kaak.
* Elf doden bij brand in gevangenis op schiphol, slachtoffers worden door de overheid in de kou gezet.
* In Nederland mogen rechters oordelen over bedrijven waar ze zelf voor werken, gerenomeerde advocaten nemen geen zaken meer aan tegen de overheid, omdat Nederlandse rechters zwaar bevooroordeeld zo niet corrupt zijn.
* Minister Verdonk van Vreemdelingenzaken verstrekt dodelijke informatie en nieuwe uniformen aan Congolese martel-dienst.
* Als het aan de minister van Justitie ligt zal binnenkort het telefoon, internet en al het andre data verkeer permanent van iedereen worden opgeslagen. De grofste schending van de privacy ooit gezien!!
* De Nederlandse regering stopt nu ook baby's en kleuters in de gevangenis.
* Nederlandse Politici en bekende TV persoonlijkheden, vinden dat Nederland de Geneefse Conventie (herformulering van 1949, gemaakt naar aanleiding van de Nazi misdaden) en het Internationaal recht maar aan hun laars zouden moeten lappen in navolging van de Amerikanen, blijkbaar hebben we nog niet veel geleerd van WWII.
* Terwijl de Regering het salaris van gewone burgers bevriest gaat het eigen salaris van de ministers met 30 procent omhoog, waar in Belgie een minister 65000 euro verdient gaat een Nederlandse minister straks 147600 euro verdienen.
* De Overheid (en nu ook de Rechter) heeft lak aan de internationale wetten en tapt gewoon vertrouwlijke telefoon gesprekken tussen advocaten en hun klanten af, ook fotografeert de Overheid mensen die advocaten kantoren binnen lopen.
* Er zijn tegenwoordig permanente veiligheidsgebieden waar preventief gefouilleerd kan worden zo als Schiphol, ook kan iedereen een verbod op gelegd krijgen voor bepaalde beroepsmatige activiteiten, tevens is het mogelijk dat je verplicht word om je periodiek te melden of dat je een verbod krijgt op het zich bevinden in de nabijheid van bepaalde personen of objecten dit alles zonder dat je ooit iets strafbaars gedaan hebt.
* De Nederlandse overheid (AIVD) beschermd tegenwoordig ook mensen die verdacht worden van medeplichtigheid aan volkerenmoord en die staan op de lijst van Amerika's meest gezochte misdadigers.
* Eén Januari 2005, de identificatieplicht is volledig ingevoerd, net als in WWII. Als het aan het Leger ligt, zullen ze zich ook overal in het openbaar gaan vertonen. Nederland word langzaam aan een Bananen-Republiek.
* De moord op Theo van Gogh en Pim Fortuyn, brandende kerken, moskeen en scholen, haat is een krachtig wapen om iedereen gek te krijgen.
* Tegenwoordig kan je in Nederland, net als in een land met een dictator, zonder overleg van bewijs zomaar worden opgepakt.
* 100 Miljoen Euro die opgelost is in de Rotterdamse Haven
* De half aangelegde Betuwelijn en de HSL
* De Bouwfraude (Gearresteerd - Klokkenluiders = 100% / Bouwbedrijven = 0%)
* Balkons die spontaan naar beneden komen, van der Valk restaurants die kompleet instorten
* De vuurwerk ramp in Enschede
* Srebrenica
* We stemmen al decennia met 'Electronische Stem-machine's' zonder papieren kontrole (Geen audit trail/ Proprietary software), die de rest van de wereld weigerd te gebruiken (Wie weet of de uitslagen klopen?!)
* Miljoenen Overheids geld dat aan nutteloze dingen word verkwist, zoals failliete voetbalclubs
* Als het juist invullen van een papier, omdat anders de computer het niet meer vat, belangrijker is geworden dan de mensen zelf
* Het Land met de meeste telefoon-taps per hoofd van de bevolking (Levenslang traceren/volgen van je SIM/IMEI)
* Brieven worden geopend en gelezen, Internet verkeer word getapt
* Natuurlijk hangt op elke hoek van de straat een gezicht herkenende nummerbord lezende camera (George we have arrived), en mogelijk gaan we in Zoutkamp (Gro) de grootste afluisterpost van Europa bouwen (20+ schotels)
* Onze excuses voor Nederlands 'beruchte' koloniale verleden
* De IRT affaire, de Schipholtunnel, en zo kunnen we nog een tijdje doorgaan
* En de grootste blunder ooit, het gratis weg geven van atoom-geheimen aan dictators (Infantieldebielisme van het ergste soort)
Mensen verwarren vooruitgang in techniek met het maken van vrije keuzes, onze kinderen zullen merken dat eenmaal afgestanen vrijheden niet zomaar weer worden terug gegeven, zonder slag of stoot!!
Grappig detail is dat de Nederlandse Overheid wel klaagd over het gebruik van privee online-webcams (Zoals die van ons) , maar dat weinig nederlanders klagen over Overheids spionnen camera's
Democracy Now!
|
1 uur Onafhankelijk Nieuws uit het hart van Amerika, elke werkdag. Het nieuws dat CNN & Fox niet vertellen.
| |
1 hour of independent news from the hart of America, evry workday. The news which CNN & Fox won't tell.
| |
(DemocracyNow!) Preventive Warriors
Een documentaire over de in September 2002 door het 'Witte Huis'(USA) geïntroduceerde buitenlands beleidsdocument. Over de 'nieuwe' Amerikaanse doctrine van preventieve oorlogsvoering
'The National Security Strategy of the United States'
|
|
(DemocracyNow!) Preventive Warriors
A documentary about a foreign policy document introduced in September 2002 by the white House (USA). Concerning the 'new' American doctrine of preventive war
'The National Security Strategy of the United States'
|
(DemocracyNow!) Noam Chomsky, Taalkunde Professor aan de Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Sprak op een forum in Sante Fe, New Mexico over imperialisme, mensenrechten, atoomwapens, de verkiezingen in Irak en nog veel meer.
Noam Chomsky word gezien als één van de belangrijkste dissidenten en geleerde in de Verenigde Staten.
|
|
(DemocracyNow!) Noam Chomsky, Linguistics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Spoke on a forum in Sante Fe, New Mexico concerning imperialisme, human rights, nuclear weapons, the elections in Iraq and much more. Noam Chomsky is considered one of the most important dissidents and scholars in the United States.
|
(DemocracyNow!) Een interview met de Britse mensen rechten advocaat, Gareth Pierce.
Zij is de advocaat van twee van de vier Britse burgers die recent zijn vrij gelaten uit Guantanamo Bay en was de advocaat van de 'Birmingham Six' en 'Guilford Four'.
Actrice Emma Thompson speelde haar in de film 'In the Name of the Father'. In een zeldzaam interview door Emy Goodman, zegt Pierce dat Guantanamo Bay het bewijs is van een verschrikkelijke afgrond... waar de gehele maatschappij moreel is ingevallen.
Ook zegt ze dat het Bush Regerings beleid, van het negeren van de Conventie van Genève en het goed keuren van martelingen is geslaagd en dat de gehele wereld oogluikend zijn goedkeuring heeft verleend voor de misdragingen.
|
|
(DemocracyNow!) An interview with British human rights lawyer, Gareth Pierce.
She is the lawyer of two of the four British citizens who have been recently released from Guantanamo Bay and she was the lawyer of the 'Birmingham Six' and 'Guilford Four'.
Actress Emma Thompson played her in the movie 'In the Name of the Father'. In a rare interview by Emy Goodman, Pierce says that Guantanamo Bay is the proof of a horrible abyss... where the whole society moraly has fallen into.
She also says that the Bush government policy of ignoring the Genèva convention and the aproval of torture has succeeded and that the whole world has sillently granted approval for the misbehaviors.
|
(DemocracyNow!) Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
John Perkins, een voormalige gerespecteerd lid van de internationale bankwereld. Praat over zijn boek 'Confessions of an Economic Hit Man'. Daarin verteld hij, hoe hij als goed betaalde werknemer, de U.S.A. hielp arme landen over de gehele planeet triljoenen Euro's lichter te maken, door hen meer geld te lenen dan dat zij ooit zouden kunnen terugbetalen om daarna dan hun economie over te nemen.
|
|
(DemocracyNow!) Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
John Perkins, a former respected member of the international banking world. Talks about his book 'Confessions of an Economic Hit Man'. In wich he tells how he as a well paid employee, helped the U.S.A. to cheat poor countries out of trillions of Euro's, by lending them more money then that they could ever pay back and then to take over their economy.
|
(DemocracyNow!) Hoe ziet moderne propaganda er uit ?
Bedrijven en regeringen produceren veel voorgebakken nieuws segmenten, die door vooral TV zenders worden gebruikt om goedkoop zendtijd mee te vullen.
Ook in Nederland is er steeds meer druk om zo goedkoop mogelijk TV te maken, want niet het maken van nieuws, maar de winst marge per aandeel is het belangrijkste streven voor een commerciele zender zoals RTL en SBS. Dat doe je niet door peper dure reporters er op uit te sturen, maar door hapklare nieuws feiten gemaakt door anderen, achter elkaar te monteren.
De New York Times is er achter gekomen dat de Amerikaanse regering zelf ook al jaren nieuws fragmenten maakt, die worden gebruikt door lokale zenders als echt nieuws, vaak alsof het hun eigen reportage is met een voice-over, zonder te vermelden dat de bron de regering is.
|
|
(DemocracyNow!) What does modern propaganda look like ?
Companies and governments produce lots of scripted news segments, that are especially used by TV broadcasters to fill up airtime in a cheap way.
Also in the Netherlands there is more and more pressure to make TV as cheap as possible, because not producing news, but the profit margin per share is the most important pursuit for commercial broadcasters such as RTL and SBS. You don't acomplice that by sending out exspensive reporters, but by assembling prepackaged news facts that are made by others.
The New York Times found out that the USA governement is also producing such news fragments already for years, these are used by local broadcasters as real news, they make it look like it's there own report doing there own voice-over, without mentioning that the source is the government.
|
Van een Interview van Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!)
Arundhati Roy uit India, auteur van, God of Small Things.
Haar laatste boek, The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire.
Arundhati Roy:
Ik wilde zeggen, toen je die vraag stelde over dat iemand zei of iedereen op Aarde zou moeten stemmen voor de Amerikaanse president, Ik denk dat ik niet goed word vertegenwoordigd als ik dacht dat ik in Amerika in een uitzending was zeggende dat, voor mij, om bij de Republikeinse Conventie te zijn is als de hel op aarde, maar ik denk niet dat ik me veel anders had gevoeld bij de Democratische Conventie.
Het feit is dat voor de rest van de Wereld, voor die van ons die zich in India en Zuid-Afrika bevinden en zo verder, is het vrij beangstigend als je je Kerry voorsteld als president, die komt en de penetratie van de multinationals in India verergerd weet je, of Bill Clinton regerent over Africa met Oprah Winfrey die opgevuld speelgoed gooit naar mensen terwijl de privatizering aan de gang is, terwijl er pijpleidingen worden gelegd, terwijl het water en de electriciteit worden afgesloten, het is eigenlijk erg beangstigend, het idee van deze consensus.
Dus, de keus tussen een onzinnige Keizer of een Keizer met grootsheidswaanzin of een vriendelijke of zachtere persoon is geen makkelijke keuze voor ons.
Dus het is eigenlijk een belachelijk idee voor ons om in de Amerikaanse verkiezingen te stemmen omdat we tegen het Amerikaanse Wereldrijk zijn, we willen er niet door worden geassumeerd. (assumeren: naar eigen keuze aan zich zelf toevoegen)
| |
From an Interview with Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!)
Arundhati Roy from India, author of, God of Small Things.
Her last book, The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire.
Arundhati Roy:
I wanted to say, when you asked that question about somebody saying whether everybody on earth should vote for the American president, I think, you know, I would -- I would feel misrepresented if I thought that I had gone on air in America saying that the -- to me, being in the Republican Convention was like being in hell on earth, because I don't think I would feel that different at the Democratic Convention.
The fact is that the -- for the rest of the world, for those of us who are in India and South Africa and so on, it is quite frightening that if you think of Kerry as president coming and deepening the penetration of the American multinationals in India you know, or Bill Clinton ruling across Africa with Oprah Winfrey throwing stuffed toys at people while your privatization is happening, while pipelines are being laid, while water and electricity is being cut, it's -- it's actually very frightening, the idea of this kind of consensus.
So, the choice between a stupid emperor or a megalomaniac emperor or a suaver or gentle one is not an easy choice for us. It is not -- I mean -- so, for us to vote in the American elections is either a ridiculous idea because we are opposing the American empire, not wanting to be co-opted into it.
|
(1984)
'And it's not a matter of whether the war is not real or if it is.'
'Victory is not possible.'
'The war is not ment to be won, it is ment to be continuous.'
'A hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance.'
'This new version is the past, and no different past can ever have existed.'
'In principal the war effort is always plant to keep society on the brink of starvation.'
'The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects.'
'And its object is not the victory over either EurAzia or EastAzia.'
'But to keep the very structure of society intact.'
Iraq dosier [Twee Vandaag]
Pacifica Radio USA (Live Radio)
De toestand in Iraq April 2005, door onafhankelijke unemebedded journalist Dahr Jamail.
| |
The situation in Iraq April 2005, by independent unemebedded reporter Dahr Jamail.
|
Begrijp jij de Grap ?
| |
You get the Joke ?
|
Hier beneden een paar voorbeelden van 'fatsoen moet je doen' door vrienden van de Nederlandse regering.
| |
Here below a few examples of 'decency you must do' (a CDA party slogan*) by friends of the Dutch governement.
(*CDA is the biggest party of the current rightwing coalition governement in power)
|
De soldaten op de films en foto's handelen in opdracht van hun meerderen, al hoewel de individuele daden van de soldaten niet zijn goed te praten, achten wij de opdrachtgevers als de echte verantwoordelijken voor deze misdaden tegen de menselijkheid.
| |
The soldiers on the movies and photographs are under orders from their superiors, although the individual acts of the soldiers can't be condoned, we think that the real responsibility for these crimes against humanity is with the people who gave the orders.
|
Amerikaanse soldaten hebben geen enkele moeite om slapende ongewapende mensen in het hoofd te schieten.
| |
American soldiers don't have any problem with shooting unarmed sleeping people in the head.
|
USA Apache dood gewonde soldaat
| |
USA Apache kills wounded soldier
|
Verduidelijking van het bovenstaande filmpje:
Aan het einde, zien de Apache piloten de 3de soldaat, nadat hij al liggend onder een vrachtwagen is beschoten, er gewond onder uit rollen.
De Amerikaanse piloot zegt dan letterlijk tegen zijn boordschutter: 'Hij is GEWOND, schiet hem neer'
De boordschutter twijfelt, de piloot versterkt zijn bevel: 'Schiet niet op de vrachtauto, schiet meer naar voren, schiet op de man'
De conventie van Geneve (Ondertekent door de USA) verbied het ten alle tijden om gewonden soldaten en burgers zomaar neer te knallen!
De piloot gaf zelf aan, dat hij zag dat de man gewond was. Dat hij dat ziet op een tv-scherm, doet er natuurlijk niet toe.
| |
Explanation of the movie above:
At the end, the Apache pilots see the 3th soldier, while he's been shot at and wounded before, rolling from under a truck.
The American pilot then says litteraly against its copilot: 'roger he is WOUNDED hit him'
The copilot doubts, the pilot then reinforces his command: 'Dont hit the truck, go forward of it and hit him'
The convention of Geneva (Signed by the USA) prohibits at all times to shoot at wounded soldiers and citizens!
The pilot indicated himself, that he saw that the man was wounded. That he's seing that on TV-screen, does not do.
|
Meer voorbeelden hoe de USA haar gevangenen behandeld.
| |
More examples of how the USA treats prisoners.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Van een raport van Majoor Generaal Antonio Taguba (USA 3 Maart 2004)
Tussen Oktober en December in 2003, hebben er in de Abu Ghuraib Gevangenis vele incidenten van sadistise,
openlijke en moedwillige criminele misbruik van meerdere gevangenen plaats gevonden.
Deze systematise en illegale misbruik van gevangenen was opzettelijk uitgevoerd door
verschillende leden van de Militaire Politie (Guard Force).
(372nd Military Police Company, 320th Military Police Battalion, 800th MP Brigade, sectie 1-A van de Abu Ghuraib Gevangenis)
Details van de martelingen:
• Het Breken van een Chemisch Licht en de fosforescerende vloeistof vervolgens uitgieten over de gedetineerde.
• Het slaan van een gedetineerde met een Stoel of een Bezemsteel.
• Sodomie/Verkrachting van een gedetineerde met een Chemisch Licht of een Bezemsteel.
• Het schikken van naakte mannelijke gedetineerde op een hoop en er dan vervolgens op springen.
• Het gedwongen ontkleden van gedetineerde, die vervolgens enkele dagen naakt (in hun cel) moeten blijven.
• Het dwingen van mannelijke gedetineerde, die zich verplicht in een groep.
moeten masturberen terwijl ze gefotografeerd en gefilmd worden
| |
From a raport from Major General Antonio Taguba (USAS 3 March 2004)
Between October and December in 2003, there have been manny incidents in the Abu Ghuraib prison, of sadistic, openly and wilful criminal abuse of several prisoners. This systematic and illegal abuse of prisoners has been carried out deliberately by several members of the military police force (Guard Force).
(372nd military Police Company, 320th military Police Battalion, 800th MP brigade, section 1-A of the Abu Ghuraib prison)
Details of the tortures:
• Breaking a phosphorus light stick and pouring the phosphorus fluid over the prisoners.
• Beating a prisoner with a chair or a broomstick.
• Rape of a prisoner with a chemicallight or a broomstick.
• Arranging naked prisoner on a heap and then jumping on them.
• Prisoners are undressed, and have to stay naked for days.(in their cell)
• Forcing prisoners to masturbate in a group while taking pictures.
|
Britse soldaten willen natuurlijk niet onderdoen voor hun Amerikaanse collega's
| |
British soldiers of course, do not want to look inferior to their American colleague's.
|
Information Clearing House
Een reconstructie van de verhoormethoden die worden toegepast op Guantánamo Bay
| |
A reconstruction of the interrogation methodes used at Guantánamo Bay.
Click on [smalband=low-bitrate] or [breedband=high-bitrate] to watch the video stream, Intro in Dutch, main docu in English.
|
Sommige van de foto's hier onder zijn het gevolg van het gebruik van verboden massa vernietegings wapens door het Amerikaanse leger, zoals Napalm en Witte Fosfor.(Verboden door de VN in 1980)
De Amerikanen gebruiken ook kluster bommen en verarmt uranium, heel Iraq ligt nu bezaait met radioaktief matriaal.
| |
Some of the picture's below are the result of the use of illegal weapons of mass destruction by the American army, such as Napalm and White Phosphorus.(Banned by the UN in 1980)
The Americans also make use of clusterbombs and depleted uranium, the whole of Iraq is now laced with radioactive materials.
|
This website can translate dutch webpages to english! [FreeTranslation.com]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Als je je extreem verveeld kan je je plop op stopper uitzetten, alle belangrijke documenten opslaan, en op de onderstaande link klikken. Indien je niet weet waar je mee bezig bent kan je het beter laten.
DON'T CLICK ME!!
If you are a Fortune 500 Compagny
Please Click the DON'T CLICK ME!! link
Thank You
Outfoxed ( English/Dutch subtitles - VPRO Tegenlicht )
100 kb/s videostream
500 kb/s videostream
Bill O’Reilly (Fox News):
It is our duty as local Americans to shut up once the fighting begins.
Once the war against Saddam begins,we expect every American to support our military, and if they can't do that is to shut up.
December 29, 2005
Help us beat the British government's gagging order by mirroring this information on your own site or blog!
Constituent: "This question is for Mr Straw; Have you ever read any
documents where the intelligence has been procured through torturous means?"
Jack Straw: "Not to the best of my knowledge... let me make this
clear... the British government does not support torture in any
circumstances. Full stop. We do not support the obtaining of
intelligence by torture, or its use." - Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, election hustings, Blackburn, April 2005
I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael
Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to
use intelligence acquired by torture... On behalf of the intelligence
services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very
useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda
Duffield said that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of
conscience were respected and understood. - Ambassador Craig Murray, memo to the Foreign Office, July 2004
With Tony Blair and Jack Straw cornered on extraordinary rendition,
the UK government is particularly anxious to suppress all evidence of
our complicity in obtaining intelligence extracted by foreign torturers.
The British Foreign Office is now seeking to block publication of
Craig Murray's forthcoming book, which documents his time as Ambassador
to Uzbekistan. The Foreign Office has demanded that Craig Murray remove
all references to two especially damning British government documents,
indicating that our government was knowingly receiving information
extracted by the Uzbeks through torture, and return every copy that he
has in his possession.
Craig Murray is refusing to do this. Instead, the documents are today being published simultaneously on blogs all around the world.
The first document contains the text of several telegrams that Craig
Murray sent back to London from 2002 to 2004, warning that the
information being passed on by the Uzbek security services was
torture-tainted, and challenging MI6 claims that the information was
nonetheless "useful".
The second document is the text of a legal opinion from the Foreign
Office's Michael Wood, arguing that the use by intelligence services of
information extracted through torture does not constitute a violation
of the UN Convention Against Torture.
Craig Murray says:
In March 2003 I was summoned back to London from Tashkent
specifically for a meeting at which I was told to stop protesting. I
was told specifically that it was perfectly legal for us to obtain and
to use intelligence from the Uzbek torture chambers.
After this meeting Sir Michael Wood, the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office's legal adviser, wrote to confirm this position. This minute
from Michael Wood is perhaps the most important document that has
become public about extraordinary rendition. It is irrefutable evidence
of the government's use of torture material, and that I was attempting
to stop it. It is no wonder that the government is trying to suppress
this.
First document: Confidential letters from Uzbekistan
Letter #1
Confidential
FM Tashkent
TO FCO, Cabinet Office, DFID, MODUK, OSCE Posts, Security Council Posts
16 September 02
SUBJECT: US/Uzbekistan: Promoting Terrorism
SUMMARY
US plays down human rights situation in Uzbekistan. A dangerous
policy: increasing repression combined with poverty will promote
Islamic terrorism. Support to Karimov regime a bankrupt and cynical
policy.
DETAIL
The Economist of 7 September states: "Uzbekistan, in particular, has
jailed many thousands of moderate Islamists, an excellent way of
converting their families and friends to extremism." The Economist also
spoke of "the growing despotism of Mr Karimov" and judged that "the
past year has seen a further deterioration of an already grim human
rights record". I agree.
Between 7,000 and 10,000 political and religious prisoners are
currently detained, many after trials before kangaroo courts with no
representation. Terrible torture is commonplace: the EU is currently
considering a demarche over the terrible case of two Muslims tortured
to death in jail apparently with boiling water. Two leading dissidents,
Elena Urlaeva and Larissa Vdovna, were two weeks ago committed to a
lunatic asylum, where they are being drugged, for demonstrating on
human rights. Opposition political parties remain banned. There is no
doubt that September 11 gave the pretext to crack down still harder on
dissent under the guise of counter-terrorism.
Yet on 8 September the US State Department certified that Uzbekistan
was improving in both human rights and democracy, thus fulfilling a
constitutional requirement and allowing the continuing disbursement of
$140 million of US aid to Uzbekistan this year. Human Rights Watch
immediately published a commendably sober and balanced rebuttal of the
State Department claim.
Again we are back in the area of the US accepting sham reform [a
reference to my previous telegram on the economy]. In August media
censorship was abolished, and theoretically there are independent media
outlets, but in practice there is absolutely no criticism of President
Karimov or the central government in any Uzbek media. State Department
call this self-censorship: I am not sure that is a fair way to describe
an unwillingness to experience the brutal methods of the security
services.
Similarly, following US pressure when Karimov visited Washington, a
human rights NGO has been permitted to register. This is an advance,
but they have little impact given that no media are prepared to cover
any of their activities or carry any of their statements.
The final improvement State quote is that in one case of murder of a
prisoner the police involved have been prosecuted. That is an
improvement, but again related to the Karimov visit and does not appear
to presage a general change of policy. On the latest cases of torture
deaths the Uzbeks have given the OSCE an incredible explanation, given
the nature of the injuries, that the victims died in a fight between
prisoners.
But allowing a single NGO, a token prosecution of police officers
and a fake press freedom cannot possibly outweigh the huge scale of
detentions, the torture and the secret executions. President Karimov
has admitted to 100 executions a year but human rights groups believe
there are more. Added to this, all opposition parties remain banned
(the President got a 98% vote) and the Internet is strictly controlled.
All Internet providers must go through a single government server and
access is barred to many sites including all dissident and opposition
sites and much international media (including, ironically,
waronterrorism.com). This is in essence still a totalitarian state:
there is far less freedom than still prevails, for example, in Mugabe's
Zimbabwe. A Movement for Democratic Change or any judicial independence
would be impossible here.
Karimov is a dictator who is committed to neither political nor
economic reform. The purpose of his regime is not the development of
his country but the diversion of economic rent to his oligarchic
supporters through government controls. As a senior Uzbek academic told
me privately, there is more repression here now than in Brezhnev's
time. The US are trying to prop up Karimov economically and to justify
this support they need to claim that a process of economic and
political reform is underway. That they do so claim is either cynicism
or self-delusion.
This policy is doomed to failure. Karimov is driving this
resource-rich country towards economic ruin like an Abacha. And the
policy of increasing repression aimed indiscriminately at pious
Muslims, combined with a deepening poverty, is the most certain way to
ensure continuing support for the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. They
have certainly been decimated and disorganised in Afghanistan, and
Karimov's repression may keep the lid on for years – but pressure is
building and could ultimately explode.
I quite understand the interest of the US in strategic airbases and
why they back Karimov, but I believe US policy is misconceived. In the
short term it may help fight terrorism but in the medium term it will
promote it, as the Economist points out. And it can never be right to
lower our standards on human rights. There is a complex situation in
Central Asia and it is wrong to look at it only through a prism picked
up on September 12. Worst of all is what appears to be the philosophy
underlying the current US view of Uzbekistan: that September 11 divided
the World into two camps in the "War against Terrorism" and that
Karimov is on "our" side.
If Karimov is on "our" side, then this war cannot be simply between
the forces of good and evil. It must be about more complex things, like
securing the long-term US military presence in Uzbekistan. I silently
wept at the 11 September commemoration here. The right words on New
York have all been said. But last week was also another anniversary –
the US-led overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile. The subsequent
dictatorship killed, dare I say it, rather more people than died on
September 11. Should we not remember then also, and learn from that
too? I fear that we are heading down the same path of US-sponsored
dictatorship here. It is ironic that the beneficiary is perhaps the
most unreformed of the World's old communist leaders.
We need to think much more deeply about Central Asia. It is easy to
place Uzbekistan in the "too difficult" tray and let the US run with
it, but I think they are running in the wrong direction. We should tell
them of the dangers we see. Our policy is theoretically one of
engagement, but in practice this has not meant much. Engagement makes
sense, but it must mean grappling with the problems, not mute
collaboration. We need to start actively to state a distinctive
position on democracy and human rights, and press for a realistic view
to be taken in the IMF. We should continue to resist pressures to start
a bilateral DFID programme, unless channelled non-governmentally, and
not restore ECGD cover despite the constant lobbying. We should not
invite Karimov to the UK. We should step up our public diplomacy
effort, stressing democratic values, including more resources from the
British Council. We should increase support to human rights activists,
and strive for contact with non-official Islamic groups.
Above all we need to care about the 22 million Uzbek people,
suffering from poverty and lack of freedom. They are not just pawns in
the new Great Game.
MURRAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #2
Confidential
Fm Tashkent
To FCO
18 March 2003
SUBJECT: US FOREIGN POLICY
SUMMARY
1. As seen from Tashkent, US policy is not much focussed on
democracy or freedom. It is about oil, gas and hegemony. In Uzbekistan
the US pursues those ends through supporting a ruthless dictatorship.
We must not close our eyes to uncomfortable truth.
DETAIL
2. Last year the US gave half a billion dollars in aid to
Uzbekistan, about a quarter of it military aid. Bush and Powell
repeatedly hail Karimov as a friend and ally. Yet this regime has at
least seven thousand prisoners of conscience; it is a one party state
without freedom of speech, without freedom of media, without freedom of
movement, without freedom of assembly, without freedom of religion. It
practices, systematically, the most hideous tortures on thousands. Most
of the population live in conditions precisely analogous with medieval
serfdom.
3. Uzbekistan's geo-strategic position is crucial. It has half the
population of the whole of Central Asia. It alone borders all the other
states in a region which is important to future Western oil and gas
supplies. It is the regional military power. That is why the US is
here, and here to stay. Contractors at the US military bases are
extending the design life of the buildings from ten to twenty five
years.
4. Democracy and human rights are, despite their protestations to
the contrary, in practice a long way down the US agenda here. Aid this
year will be slightly less, but there is no intention to introduce any
meaningful conditionality. Nobody can believe this level of aid – more
than US aid to all of West Africa – is related to comparative
developmental need as opposed to political support for Karimov. While
the US makes token and low-level references to human rights to appease
domestic opinion, they view Karimov's vicious regime as a bastion
against fundamentalism. He – and they – are in fact creating
fundamentalism. When the US gives this much support to a regime that
tortures people to death for having a beard or praying five times a
day, is it any surprise that Muslims come to hate the West?
5. I was stunned to hear that the US had pressured the EU to
withdraw a motion on Human Rights in Uzbekistan which the EU was
tabling at the UN Commission for Human Rights in Geneva. I was most
unhappy to find that we are helping the US in what I can only call this
cover-up. I am saddened when the US constantly quote fake improvements
in human rights in Uzbekistan, such as the abolition of censorship and
Internet freedom, which quite simply have not happened (I see these are
quoted in the draft EBRD strategy for Uzbekistan, again I understand at
American urging).
6. From Tashkent it is difficult to agree that we and the US are
activated by shared values. Here we have a brutal US sponsored
dictatorship reminiscent of Central and South American policy under
previous US Republican administrations. I watched George Bush talk
today of Iraq and "dismantling the apparatus of terror… removing the
torture chambers and the rape rooms". Yet when it comes to the Karimov
regime, systematic torture and rape appear to be treated as
peccadilloes, not to affect the relationship and to be downplayed in
international fora. Double standards? Yes.
7. I hope that once the present crisis is over we will make plain to
the US, at senior level, our serious concern over their policy in
Uzbekistan.
MURRAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #3
CONFIDENTIAL
FM TASHKENT
TO IMMEDIATE FCO
TELNO 63
OF 220939 JULY 04
INFO IMMEDIATE DFID, ISLAMIC POSTS, MOD, OSCE POSTS UKDEL EBRD LONDON, UKMIS GENEVA, UKMIS MEW YORK
SUBJECT: RECEIPT OF INTELLIGENCE OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE
SUMMARY
1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek
intelligence services, via the US. We should stop. It is bad
information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions
showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that
they and we are fighting the same war against terror.
2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the
question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is
morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as hypocritical our
post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral
standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop
torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the
results.
3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services
they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence
here, but not as in a friendly state.
DETAIL
4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times
the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services
which was obtained under torture and passed to us via the CIA. I
queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.
5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael
Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to
use intelligence acquired by torture. He said the only legal limitation
on its use was that it could not be used in legal proceedings, under
Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.
6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that
they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct
bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said that she had been
asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and
understood.
7. Sir Michael Jay's circular of 26 May stated that there was a
reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have been
instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the context of the war on
terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I believe
heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I had in the
light of this decided to return to this question and to highlight an
apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as much to the
Head of Eastern Department.
8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing
me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting,
a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department
and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of Uzbek
intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I was
in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I still
have only gleaned that it happened.
9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the
Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument
deployed was that the intelligence material disguises the precise
source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual who
is tortured. Indeed this is true – the material is marked with a
euphemism such as "From detainee debriefing." The argument runs that if
the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.
10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry,
nor my shame that I work in and organisation where colleagues would
resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of
individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan, and
I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN
convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question with
the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily acknowledged torture
was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there is any
doubt as to the fact
11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly
be more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable
grounds for believing the material is obtained under torture. There is
helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN Convention;
"The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant
considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state
concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations
of human rights." While this article forbids extradition or deportation
to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present question also.
12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant.
Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be
plainer:
"No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or
a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public
emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."
13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless – we are
selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is
designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to hear. It
exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and
its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the
Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe, that they should keep the
assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they
should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic
reform.
14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was
valuable. Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the
area of intelligence assessment. But post Butler we know, not only that
they can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues,
but that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which
exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the Uzbeks give them.
Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a thousand miles of me and
certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this
assessment.
15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two
of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a
confession on the family's links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming
down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin
Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.
16. I have been considering Michael Wood's legal view, which he
kindly gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated
only on Article 15 of the Convention. This certainly bans the use of
material obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does
not state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.
17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of
complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be
at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a
different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I
talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof
Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the
Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of the
Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be grateful
to hear Michael's views on this.
18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt,
but being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are
other factors. Plainly it was a breach of Article 3 of the Convention
for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it
has been done. That seems plainly complicit.
19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and
increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young
people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek government are thus
creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens
anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not
as partners of the Uzbek Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts
them beyond the pale.
MURRAY
Second Document - summary of legal opinion from Michael Wood
arguing that it is legal to use information extracted under torture:
From: Michael Wood, Legal Advisor
Date: 13 March 2003
CC: PS/PUS; Matthew Kidd, WLD
Linda Duffield
UZBEKISTAN: INTELLIGENCE POSSIBLY OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE
1. Your record of our meeting with HMA Tashkent recorded that Craig
had said that his understanding was that it was also an offence under
the UN Convention on Torture to receive or possess information under
torture. I said that I did not believe that this was the case, but
undertook to re-read the Convention.
2. I have done so. There is nothing in the Convention to this effect. The nearest thing is article 15 which provides:
"Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is
established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be
invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused
of torture as evidence that the statement was made."
3. This does not create any offence. I would expect that under UK
law any statement established to have been made as a result of torture
would not be admissible as evidence.
[signed]
M C Wood
Legal Adviser