British intelligence pushes for more CIA torture info

British intelligence agencies have requested access to yet-unpublished parts of the CIA torture report, for information on Britain's in post-9/11 torture.

Inform
A powerful British parliamentary committee chairman said on Sunday, the committee will ask the United States to hand over blacked out parts of a report into the CIA, to try to establish whether British spies were complicit in torture or rendition.

A U.K. parliamentary panel wants access to information not made public in a U.S. Senate report that may pertain to Britain's role in the interrogation and rendition of terror suspects following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Malcolm Rifkind, chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, told the BBC on Sunday that the panel investigating allegations of British involvement in torture would request access to the Senate's findings related to Britain.

Prime Minister David Cameron's office has acknowledged that some parts of the report were blacked out for national security reasons, but says none of it related to any alleged British involvement that in "activity that would be unlawful in the U.K." The requests for the material to be omitted from the executive summary published last week was made by British intelligence agencies to the CIA, rather than the government.

The U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee's report on CIA interrogations exposed years of misrepresentations that seem designed to boost the case for the effectiveness of brutal interrogations.

When asked whether he was hopeful he'd get the information, Rifkind replied, "I do not say I would be confident."

The CIA report has led to demands that Britain halt negotiations with the United States over the use of Diego Garcia, a British atoll in the Indian Ocean where the Americans have a military base. Britain has previously acknowledged that Diego Garcia was twice used by the U.S. as a refueling stop during the 2002 secret transfers of two terrorism suspects.

The 50-year agreement allowing the Americans to use the island runs out in 2016.

"The negotiations on the lease can focus minds on establishing the scope and limits of Britain's involvement, direct or indirect, in extraordinary rendition," Andrew Tyrie, chair of the all-party group on rendition, told The Observer.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.