The UK Courts know. The UK Foreign Office will not ask. Was Britain and the US complicit in torture?

[TheBigotBasher]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7870896.stm

David Miliband has disputed claims by two judges that the US threatened to stop sharing intelligence with the UK over an alleged torture case.

In a ruling, the judges said the US had forced the UK to suppress information about Binyam Mohamed, a former UK resident who claims he was tortured.

But the foreign secretary said there had been "no threat" from the US.

Mr Miliband said confidentiality was key to intelligence sharing, a view later backed by the White House.

In a statement, the White House said it "thanked the UK government for its continued commitment to protect sensitive national security information".

It added that this would "preserve the long-standing intelligence sharing relationship that enables both countries to protect their citizens".

A spokesman at the US Embassy in London added that it did not "threaten allies".

Opposition MPs have said ministers must urgently address claims the UK was "complicit" in the torture of Binyam Mohamed, who has been held at Guantanamo Bay for four years.

The UK is a signatory to the International Criminal Court. If this evidence is revealed there is a very real chance of War Crime prosecutions. Is that why Blair met Obama today? Did the US commit or arrange for torture to be carried out and why will the UK Foreign Office not ask?

[TheBigotBasher]

1. This is what the UK Courts said of Saudi interference.

The judges rejected claims that the inquiry had to be closed down for security reasons because "lives were at risk", and said the success of Saudi blackmail attempts had been unlawful. The judgment named Saudi Prince Bandar as the man behind what they characterised as an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

The judges said: "We fear for the reputation of the administration of justice if it can be perverted by a threat ... No one, whether within this country or outside, is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice. The rule of law is nothing if it fails to constrain overweening power."

Why does this not apply to the US?