Over the past decade, many Americans have been shocked and disturbed about the CIA’s secret program of rendition and torture carried out in numerous secret sites (dubbed “black sites” by the CIA) around the globe. The dimensions of this program for the most part are still classified “Eyes Only” in the intelligence community, but the program’s roots can be clearly discovered in the early 1950′s with the CIA’s Artichoke Project. This article looks at a prominent Artichoke case, and compares it with torture-rendition stories from the past nine years.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency of the Department of Homeland Security tried to pressure undocumented alien informants to provide intel on terrorism. If they didn’t they’d be deported. Now ICE is following through on its demands, and the government frenzy to manufacture terrorist threat appears to be out of control.

That was supposed to be us, right?

The Guardian has the story of a recent British high court decision to release previously withheld details about the torture of Binyam Mohamed:

In a ruling that will cause deep anxiety among the security and intelligence agencies, they rejected [British foreign secretary David] Miliband’s claims, backed by the US government, that disclosure of a seven-paragraph summary of classified CIA information showing what British agents knew of Mohamed’s torture would threaten intelligence sharing between London and Washington, and therefore endanger Britain’s national security.

One of the key paragraphs states that there “could readily be contended to be at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of Binyam Mohamed by the United States authorities“.

One of the reasons I have always argued for a full investigation of the treatment of prisoners by the U.S. government is that the truth is going to come out sooner rather than later. For those who want to hide from accountability under the law later is always the better goal. The longer it takes for the abuses of the Bush Administration torture program to come to light the less likely there is to be an outcry and the more likely those who ordered and carried out torture are to elderly or dead.

“Originally posted at Squarestate.net”

Today the British government lost its appeal and was forced to disclose a new piece of the torture puzzle. In 2002 a British subject by the name of Binyam Mohamed was arrested in Pakistan. He claims he was tortured there, then sent to Morocco where he was also beaten and finally in 2004 sent to Guantanamo Bay. If Mr. Mohamed’s name seems familiar to you, it should. He is the man who claims he was tortured by a scalpel slicing his genitals.

What makes Mr. Mohamed’s case particularly galling (as if genital slicing was not enough) is that he has been released without ever being charged either by the British or the U.S.

Mr. Mohamed is one of seven British subjects who are suing their government for its complicity in torture. This new information came from a summary that a judge wrote after reviewing intelligence reports from the United States.

Here are the seven paragraphs, from the Guardian:

It was reported that a new series of interviews was conducted by the United States authorities prior to 17 May 2002 as part of a new strategy designed by an expert interviewer.

v) It was reported that at some stage during that further interview process by the United States authorities, BM had been intentionally subjected to continuous sleep deprivation. The effects of the sleep deprivation were carefully observed.

vi) It was reported that combined with the sleep deprivation, threats and inducements were made to him. His fears of being removed from United States custody and “disappearing” were played upon.

vii) It was reported that the stress brought about by these deliberate tactics was increased by him being shackled in his interviews

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband lost his final appeal today and was forced to publish seven paragraphs previously redacted from a British High Court opinion on the treatment of Binyam Mohamed. The opinion found US behavior to be “at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”, echoing the language of the UN Convention Against Torture.

Happy Monday and welcome to my weekly letter writing campaign for torture accountability. The basic premise of this series is to write those who can move the issue of torture accountability forward every Monday. The purpose is to keep this issue alive as other major issues like Health Care Reform distract the majority of the public. Here is how it works; I write a letter which you can either cut and paste over your own signature or use as the basis for your own. I also provides the links where you can send the letter. All you have to do is take five minutes to make sure this issue is not swept under the rug because the Obama Administration and the Democratic Leaders in Congress think there is no one looking.

Brit Judges have ruled against the suppression of evidence of torture in the Binyam Mohamed case, stating that the government had not made its case for national security risk involvement, that the rule of law demanded that the facts and evidence be made public in the interest of democracy.

Admiral Patrick Walsh recently offered his assessment regarding Guantanamo prison and compliance with the Geneva Conventions. His conclusion that Gitmo is fully compliant is both flawed and misleading—and the Obama administration designed it to be that way.

Releasing most Gitmo prisoners is a good start on the road to the rule of law.