Craig Murray Needs Your Help

I was told at this meeting that it is not illegal for us to obtain intelligence gained by torture, provided that we did not do the torture ourselves. I was told that it had been decided that as a matter of War on Terror policy we should now obtain intelligence from torture, following discussion between Jack Straw and Richard Dearlove. I was told that we could not exclude receipt of specific material from the CIA without driving a coach and horses through the universality principle of the UK/US intelligence sharing agreement, which would be detrimental to UK interests.

On Tuesday 10 March the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights will discuss whether or not to hear my evidence on the UK government's policy of using intelligence from torture. They discussed whether to hear my evidence on 3 March but failed to reach a conclusion.

The government is lobbying hard for my exclusion. I need everybody to send an email to jchr@parliament.uk to urge that I should be allowed to give evidence. Just a one-liner would be fine. If you are able to add some comment on the import of my evidence, or indicate that you have heard me speak or read my work, that may help. Please copy your email to craigjmurray@tiscali.co.uk.

Please also pass on this plea to anyone you can and urge them to act. Help from other bloggers in posting this appeal would be much appreciated.

The evidence I am trying to give the parliamentary committee is this:

I wish to offer myself as a witness before the Joint Commission on Human Rights on the subject of the UK government's policy on intelligence cooperation with torture abroad.

I appeared as a witness in person before both the European Parliament and European Council's enquiries into extraordinary rendition. My evidence was described by the European Council's Rapporteur, Senator Dick Marty, as "Compelling and valuable".

The key points I wish to make are these:

- I was British Ambassador in Uzbekistan from 2002 to 2004.
- I learned and confirmed that I was regularly seeing intelligence from detainees in the Uzbek torture chambers, sent me by the CIA via MI6.
- British Ministers and officials were seeing the same torture material.
- In October/November 2002 and January/Februray 2003 I sent two Top Secret telegrams to London specifically on the subject of our receipt of intelligence gained under torture. I argued this was illegal, immoral and impractical. The telegrams were speciifically marked for the Secretary of State.
- I was formally summoned back to the FCO for a meeting held on 7 or 8 March 2003 specifically and solely on the subject of intelligence gained under torture. Present were Linda Duffield, Director Wider Europe, FCO, Sir Michael Wood, Chief Legal Adviser, FCO, and Matthew Kydd, Head of Permanent Under-Secretary's Department, FCO.
- This meeting was minuted. I have seen the record, which is classified Top Secret and was sent to Jack Straw. On the top copy are extensive hand-written marginalia giving Jack Straw's views.
- I was told at this meeting that it is not illegal for us to obtain intelligence gained by torture, provided that we did not do the torture ourselves. I was told that it had been decided that as a matter of War on Terror policy we should now obtain intelligence from torture, following discussion between Jack Straw and Richard Dearlove. I was told that we could not exclude receipt of specific material from the CIA without driving a coach and horses through the universality principle of the UK/US intelligence sharing agreement, which would be detrimental to UK interests.
- Sir Michael Wood's legal advice that it was not illegal to receive intelligence got by torture was sent on to me in Tashkent (copy attached).
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/documents/Wood.pdf- On 22 July 2004

I sent one further telegram on intelligence got by torture, with a lower classification, following FCO communications on the subject. Copy attached.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/documents/Telegram.pdf
It was my final communication before being dismissed as Ambassador.

In conclusion, I can testify that beyond any doubt the British government has for at least six years a considered but secret policy of cooperation with torture abroad. This policy legally cleared by government legal advisers and approved by Jack Straw as Secretary of State.

Craig Murray
2 March 2009

Baroness Amos GMC study and corruption

Last night because I had not much to do and because I was feeling in a research type of mood I decided to see how many foreign names were being scuttled by the GMC in their Interim Orders, I even came across when Adam Osbourne was suspended 8th September. I was going through the archives of the GMC.

To my horror virtually every name mentioned apart from a few GPs and a few white names the rest were almost all Subcontinental, or European. There were a few cases in which it was quite clear that female contact was a problem and this was mainly a white issue, however there were loads of subcontinental names where the GMC are intent on seeing where they work and keeping a close eye. Most of these are not international graduates the vast majority graduated here in Britain. BBC article here and another one here

The GMC say that they are on top of this as their text from GMC today sept -oct 2008 below shows but the person who they are involved with is a labour life peer who is mired in corruption. One does wonder how far the rot travels and it seems it is right up there at the top

As part of this initiative, and building on the success of a roundtable meeting last year, the GMC has established an independently chaired forum. The Equality and Diversity Research Forum met for the first time on 10 September 2008 and was chaired by Baroness Amos.

The Forum heard from researchers who are leading work into a wide range of topics including:

* why international medical graduates are over-represented throughout all stages of the GMC’s fitness to practise procedures
* the experiences of UK, EU and non- EU medical graduates making the transition to the UK workplace
* how non-UK qualified doctors and doctors from a variety of cultural backgrounds understand the ethics of medical practice in the UK
* comparing systems of medical regulation between the UK and other countries.

Baroness Amos said: ‘I’m delighted to chair this Forum, and support the GMC’s efforts to better understand the experiences and circumstances of doctors who’ve qualified from outside the UK or are from a minority ethnic background.

I hope that working with other organisations in this way will lay the foundations on which to build our understanding of how equality and diversity issues impact on healthcare regulation.’

The Forum is planning to meet again in six months. Keep a look out for further news in future editions of GMCtoday.

The next bit of text is lifted straight from another website and is quoted below

Third World style nepotism and corruption has reached into the heart of Britain’s ruling elite. The latest shocking example has come with the news that Guyana-born Baroness Valerie Ann Amos has landed a job with a Nigerian company which is funded by the government department she used to head up.

Baroness Amos was created a “life peer” in August 1997, and as such already draws a permanent salary as part of the unelected House of Lords. She served in the cabinet as International Development Secretary.

She has now taken up a lucrative job with Travant Capital Partners which was given a £15 million handout — from her own department.

Travant Capital Partners is a Nigerian private equity firm to plough British taxpayers’ money into Africa and Asia under the guise of “foreign aid.”

She lists the directorship as ‘remunerated’ in the Register of Lords Interests, but there is no indication of how much she is paid.

Writing in his book The Catholic Orangemen of Togo, Britain’s former Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, claims to have been told by a director of Travant that the company “had access to DFID funds because Baroness Amos was a Director.”

It is a significant feature of Baroness Amos' political career that every office held has been an unelected appointment; she has never actually been elected to any public office. ( from Wikipedia)

Frankly it seems like this lady like the other baroness in the labour party has no grip on the reality of her actions and is frankly not someone I would want anywhere near me.


There have been other articles written link here