Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

laurejon

Jacqui Smith Colluded In Torture

Recommended Posts

Having long had the repution for being Jack Boots Jacqui for her attitude to the public she represents, and her likeness to the leaders in Germany during WW2, Jacqui Smith now faces charges along with Browns Labour Party for their collusion in Torture and war crimes.

She should be ashamed to call herself a British Citizen.

Jacqui Smith faces legal action over claims that MI5 colluded in the torture of a former civil servant suspected of terrorism.

Lawyers for Briton Jamil Rahman have written to the Home Secretary claiming that she colluded in assault, unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and breaches of human rights legislation.

Mr Rahman claims that he was tortured intermittently over a two-year period in Bangladesh and that two MI5 officers turned a blind eye to his treatment.

He claims that the two men would leave the room where he was being interrogated whenever he refused to answer their questions and that he was severely beaten. He said the MI5 officers would then return to the room to resume the interrogation.

He also said his wife was held in an adjacent room and Bangladeshi officers threatened to rape her. And he claimed that during his interrogation in Bangladesh he was shown hundreds of photographs, including surveillance photographs of friends in the UK, whom he was asked to identify. He also said he was accused of “masterminding” the July 2005 suicide bomb attacks in London.

Under the threat of violence, he claims he made a false confession and said that when he told the two men, who said they were MI5 officers, what had happened they replied: “They haven't done a very good job on you.”

Mr Rahman's lawyers said that there is a wealth of evidence to support his allegations, including eyewitness testimony and medical evidence.

His lawyer, Imran Khan, wrote to Jaqui Smith last week telling her of the intention to start legal proceedings against her.

Mr Rahman said he remains deeply traumatised and is receiving treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.

The latest claims follow accusations by former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, who said he was tortured in Pakistan and Morocco with the knowledge of MI5.

And last month Scotland Yard said it was investigating reports that the security services were complicit in the abuse of 29 prisoners, including Britons, abroad.

Mr Rahman, 31, a British citizen who grew up in south Wales, settled in Bangladesh in 2005 after marrying a woman he met while travelling in the country.

He returned to the UK last year and embarked upon legal action once his wife and child were able to join him earlier this month.

He has not been questioned by police since his return, no attempt has been made to arrest him and he has not been subjected to a control order.

Jaqui Smith and MI5 both declined to comment on the allegations.

A Home Office spokeswoman said Mr Rahman's legal team had written to the Home Secretary and said the Government would respond “in due course”.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/art...tion/article.do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having long had the repution for being Jack Boots Jacqui for her attitude to the public she represents, and her likeness to the leaders in Germany during WW2, Jacqui Smith now faces charges along with Browns Labour Party for their collusion in Torture and war crimes.

She should be ashamed to call herself a British Citizen.

Jacqui Smith faces legal action over claims that MI5 colluded in the torture of a former civil servant suspected of terrorism.

Lawyers for Briton Jamil Rahman have written to the Home Secretary claiming that she colluded in assault, unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and breaches of human rights legislation.

Mr Rahman claims that he was tortured intermittently over a two-year period in Bangladesh and that two MI5 officers turned a blind eye to his treatment.

He claims that the two men would leave the room where he was being interrogated whenever he refused to answer their questions and that he was severely beaten. He said the MI5 officers would then return to the room to resume the interrogation.

He also said his wife was held in an adjacent room and Bangladeshi officers threatened to rape her. And he claimed that during his interrogation in Bangladesh he was shown hundreds of photographs, including surveillance photographs of friends in the UK, whom he was asked to identify. He also said he was accused of “masterminding” the July 2005 suicide bomb attacks in London.

Under the threat of violence, he claims he made a false confession and said that when he told the two men, who said they were MI5 officers, what had happened they replied: “They haven't done a very good job on you.”

Mr Rahman's lawyers said that there is a wealth of evidence to support his allegations, including eyewitness testimony and medical evidence.

His lawyer, Imran Khan, wrote to Jaqui Smith last week telling her of the intention to start legal proceedings against her.

Mr Rahman said he remains deeply traumatised and is receiving treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.

The latest claims follow accusations by former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, who said he was tortured in Pakistan and Morocco with the knowledge of MI5.

And last month Scotland Yard said it was investigating reports that the security services were complicit in the abuse of 29 prisoners, including Britons, abroad.

Mr Rahman, 31, a British citizen who grew up in south Wales, settled in Bangladesh in 2005 after marrying a woman he met while travelling in the country.

He returned to the UK last year and embarked upon legal action once his wife and child were able to join him earlier this month.

He has not been questioned by police since his return, no attempt has been made to arrest him and he has not been subjected to a control order.

Jaqui Smith and MI5 both declined to comment on the allegations.

A Home Office spokeswoman said Mr Rahman's legal team had written to the Home Secretary and said the Government would respond “in due course”.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/art...tion/article.do

Two words: Raghead,Compo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
No, and I'm not a supporter of Islamic terrorists or a traitor to my people. Are you?

Being concerned about our government's complicity in the torture of prisoners is supporting Islamic terrorism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
I do agree everyone should be treated fairly and humanely

So you say, but you seem quite keen for Islamic terrorist suspects to be treated otherwise. One rule for one, one for another?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you say, but you seem quite keen for Islamic terrorist suspects to be treated otherwise. One rule for one, one for another?

If proof were needed that these people's stated principles are at variance with what they actually do we need look no further than the convicted son's of Abu Hamza.All good Muslim lads who have made a business of robbing luxury cars. These boys should not even be looking at a Merc or a Beemer,they should be riocking themselves into a frenzy in the praise of Allah in some school for religious crackpots.They seem to want to pick n'mix from Western society,taking the bits they desire for their personal comfort,then hypocritically fighting the system.Personally I think Guantanimo is too good for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
I don't want them living here with us

Who, Muslims in general?

If you mean terror suspects, they'll be dealt with and imprisoned if found guilty, so no longer "living here with us".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We hear a lot about rights, but without individuals recognising their responsiblities we have had a fools charter hoisted on us and I for one am sick of the liberal types trying to destroy and pervert the sound principles that people used to live their lives by.

Would that be the principles of bowing down to an imaginary sky daddy while burning peasants at the stake for witchcraft or the principles of state above everything and using the peasants as canon fodder?

Perhaps the principle that says you are the Queen's subject and exist solely for her pleasure?

Liberalism is damn sight better, perhaps you should broaden your horizons a bit and look at how other countries work before pinning after a non existent golden age. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
Personally I think Guantanimo is too good for them.

Just for clarity, you mean British Muslims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
What do you think should be done with Islamic terrorists X-QUORK? I see Tony Benn is your avatar. You're not him are you?

Answering a question with another question?

I'm trying to understand your statement: "you don't want them living here". Who do you mean?

I'll let you know more about my view on the matter once you kindly answer the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
Mr Benn, some of my posts aren't appearing (mods or the board?) and what with that and the flood control it's a bit difficult to conduct a proper conversation here. Why don't you shut the discussion down by screaming rascist? That's the usual tactic isn't it?

You seem to be getting a bit hot under the collar, have a cup of tea and calm down.

We're in agreement, convicted terrorists should serve time and then be deported if they're foreign nationals. I was just trying to get you to clarify that you didn't mean all Muslims because your posts tend to rant without being very specific.

Where I think we differ is that I believe the use of torture to be not only immoral, but also any information gained from it to be wholly unreliable. I get the impression you might disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
As regards the deporting terrorists I'm glad we agree. I really am in another quandary about all Muslims. I used to think that the civilisations were compatible and could learn from one another. I now think I was wrong, and the concept of multiculturalism has been a disaster, but am not sure of what to do about it. The spread of Wahhabism may mean that there is no option other than restricting future immigration to non-Muslims only. We'll just have to see how things turn out.

It's a really difficult one. I sincerely believe that the vast majority of Muslims in the UK are law-abiding and as peaceful as the next man, however as with Jews, their culture is not inclusive and doesn't lend itself to multiculturalism, which as you say, has been a failure if we're honest. I'd like to see religion of all shades become much less intrusive, especially in education where it can only serve to divide communities.

That said, I'm far happier with the current situation than a future under some BNP Whites-Only State.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
I thought the reason why religion is included in education was to make children actually understand about religion as they grow up? :unsure:

Personally I don't have a problem with the subject RE (Religious Education), provided it gives all religions, and atheism, a fair crack of the whip. What I do object to is Faith Schools i.e. CofE, Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, etc. Schools should be secular places of learning, not churches where kids learn maths as a side line, especially as my taxes pay for them.

Back on the original thread, I have no idea what the answer is, other than promoting inclusion and at the same time tightening future immigration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, wholeheartedly. Like everyone I face a moral quandary when faced with the dilemma "This suspect has information that could save the lives of thousands. He isn't talking boss, and the clock is ticking what do we do?"

You wouldn't be human if you didn't tussell with that one!

Certainly there should be different rules. I don't want them living here with us - they've forfeited that right for a start, let alone rights to legal aid, benefits etc etc etc.

Without even covering the 'he _has_ information' statement, that may or may not be true.

Have you watched any of the old films where torture was used to extract/create information? Usually involving Germans, Japanese or Eastern Bloc.

Even something as recent as 3 Kings?

You might also want to read the Taguba report, and let us know why it's ok to sodomise an adolescent male with a broomhandle.

For decades torture was anathema in this country - in a mere 12 years the labour government has turned it around, and people like you think it's fine.

Do some research into it, read about the witchhunters, read about the manner in which neighbours have used the US forces to displace their business competitors - and seperate husbands from their wives for their own gains.

It doesn't work, never has, and totally removes any moral high ground you may have had, and will ensure equally horrible treatment by the enemy.

You cannot simultaneously support the brutal rape and murder of someones family by an occupying force and feel disgust at freedom fighters beheading occupying soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a believer in the old saying, "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander"

First gather Jacqui Smith during a dawn raid.

Secondly fly her by Lear jet to a remote airstrip.

Thirdly water board until the required information is gained.

This would also make question time on the BBC far more entertaining if extended to live TV.

"would anyone from the audience wish to question the home secretary, don't forget the apron, it could get messy"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without even covering the 'he _has_ information' statement, that may or may not be true.

Have you watched any of the old films where torture was used to extract/create information? Usually involving Germans, Japanese or Eastern Bloc.

Even something as recent as 3 Kings?

You might also want to read the Taguba report, and let us know why it's ok to sodomise an adolescent male with a broomhandle.

For decades torture was anathema in this country - in a mere 12 years the labour government has turned it around, and people like you think it's fine.

Do some research into it, read about the witchhunters, read about the manner in which neighbours have used the US forces to displace their business competitors - and seperate husbands from their wives for their own gains.

It doesn't work, never has, and totally removes any moral high ground you may have had, and will ensure equally horrible treatment by the enemy.

You cannot simultaneously support the brutal rape and murder of someones family by an occupying force and feel disgust at freedom fighters beheading occupying soldiers.

+ 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would certainly agree about the inclusion of atheism in RE. I am assuming, currently, it isn't? :unsure:

I'll use that argument when I get asked to attend the head's office that's a great and unsurpassable argument IMVHO! :D

As to your other comment about inclusion, although in theory I agree, in practice it might be a different matter with regards whether those other cultures or faiths want inclusion as to possibly their own agenda.

I must admit that when my teenage son's teacher complained that he had stated during an RE lesson that all religious belief was a manifestation of mental illness I did feel rather proud of the boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

I must admit that when my teenage son's teacher complained that he had stated during an RE lesson that all religious belief was a manifestation of mental illness I did feel rather proud of the boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason I look at Jacqui Smith and just think how much I would want to do her, preferably from behind with her massive titties slapping together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
For some reason I look at Jacqui Smith and just think how much I would want to do her, preferably from behind with her massive titties slapping together.

Bukkake Smith?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I don't have a problem with the subject RE (Religious Education), provided it gives all religions, and atheism, a fair crack of the whip. What I do object to is Faith Schools i.e. CofE, Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, etc. Schools should be secular places of learning, not churches where kids learn maths as a side line, especially as my taxes pay for them.

Have you ever been to a Faith school? The Catholic school I went to had a 1/2 hour RE lesson per week. We learnt about lots of other religions and their beliefs (and before you say it - not just so we could pity them for their ridiculous beliefs and understand why they will go to hell :lol: ). Strange it may seem to you, but we did all of the same sort of subjects that non-faith schools did.

Schools should be secular places of learning? Why? Are you aware that State education was not provided until the early 20th Century. Up until then all schools were faith schools. The State obviously didn't want the great unwashed to be educated.

Your taxes do indeed pay for Faith schools. However they get LESS funding than other schools. They have to find 10% of the running costs / capital improvements to their buildings. Also many of the older buildings would have been entirely funded by the Churches and not a penny was paid by the State.

Still object?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
Still object?

Yes.

If Faith Schools are effectively no different to non-faith schools, why tag them as such? Why do parents have to go to church to pretend to be good little Catholics or whatever to get their kids into school?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   287 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.