PDA

View Full Version : US fears backlash over terror flights



Firetxmi
02-22-2008, 12:28 PM
US fears backlash over terror flights

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer
Thu Feb 21, 7:50 PM ET

The Bush administration is bracing for a diplomatic backlash after conceding it used British territory to transport suspected terrorists on secret rendition flights despite repeated earlier assurances the U.S. had not.

U.S. officials have sought to quell the fallout by apologizing to Britain for what they said was an "administrative error." The admission, however, may reopen a bitter debate between the United States and its allies over how the fight against terrorism should be conducted and compromise future cooperation.

"Mistakes were made in the reporting of the information," said Gordon Johndroe, National Security Council spokesman for President Bush. Johndroe insisted that cooperation between the U.S. and Britain would not be affected.

But as a sign of its concern, the State Department sent its top lawyer, John Bellinger, to London on Thursday on a two-day mission. Bellinger will try to defuse what many expect will be widespread anger that the U.S., when asked in 2004, incorrectly assured its closest ally that neither British soil nor airspace had been used in moving suspected terrorists, officials said.

The CIA used a U.S. military airstrip on the British territory of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to refuel planes carrying two suspects in 2002. That fact was not uncovered until a "self-generated" review by the CIA in late 2007 after persistent media reports, the department said.

"We regret that there was an error in initially providing inaccurate information to a good friend and ally," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. "Unfortunately, even with the best intentions, unfortunately, even with the most rigorous searches and unfortunately with good technology, sometimes administrative errors occur and this was the case."

He took pains to note that the United States had not violated any obligation it had toward Britain in using Diego Garcia for the flights at the time they occurred. Not until 2003 did the two countries start to work out a "final mutual understanding" that now requires the U.S. to seek and get British permission to use the base for renditions, he said.

Still, the disclosure risks replaying the debate over tactics that came to light in 2005 with the revelation that the CIA had operated secret prisons to interrogate prisoners. Until Thursday, the administration had managed to diminish down the furor through intensive diplomacy.

The British government appears to have accepted the "administrative error" explanation. But London has made it clear that it wanted to review logs related to U.S. operations at Diego Garcia.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he "shared the disappointment that everybody has" about the use of Diego Garcia for the refueling stops and that it was important to ensure it would not happen again.

McCormack said he was not aware of any other countries seeking explanations through diplomatic channels. But State Department officials said U.S. diplomats are prepared to answer questions from foreign governments about the situation.

Governments that ask will be told roughly what CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged Thursday: that two rendition flights carrying suspected terrorists did refuel at a U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia, despite what the agency had earlier maintained.

Hayden said in a message to CIA staff that the information previously given to the British "turned out to be wrong."

"The refueling, conducted more than five years ago, lasted just a short time," he said. "But it happened. That we found this mistake ourselves, and that we brought it to the attention of the British government, in no way changes or excuses the reality that we were in the wrong."

Hayden said neither man was tortured. He denied there has ever been a holding facility for CIA prisoners on Diego Garcia. Both men remained on their respective planes during the brief stops, according to a U.S. intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

One of the two prisoners is now jailed at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and the other was released to his home country, where he has since been freed, the official said. Neither man was part of the CIA's interrogation and detention program, according to the official, who said the CIA only moved them from one country to another through Diego Garcia.

Rights groups demanded a full accounting of the CIA's rendition program, under which suspects are transported from one country to another, usually in secrecy, without the benefit of open legal proceedings.

"It's high time the agency is held accountable," said Julia Hall of Human Rights Watch. She also sought an investigation into the British role in the program. "The U.S. flew hundreds of flights across Europe so the only way to have full accountability is for (Britain) to launch a thorough, national investigation."

Hayden delivered the news to the British government last weekend on a previously scheduled trip to London. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke to British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on Wednesday and was told he would announce the discovery in Parliament.

Amid the uproar over the detention program, Rice told reporters in December 2005 that the United States respects the sovereignty of foreign countries when conducting intelligence operations within their borders, suggesting the CIA conducts rendition flights with the permission of the governments involved.

But Rice sidestepped a specific question about the role of Britain in such flights in an interview on Dec. 6, 2005, with British television.

"We have obligations under our international conventions and we are respecting the sovereignty of our allies," she told Sky News. "We are not using the airspace or the airports of any of our partners for activities that would lead renditions to torture. We don't send people to be tortured."



Associated Press writer Pamela Hess contributed to this report.

Link:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080222/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_rendition_fallout;_ylt=ArqNMV2szznLWW61xbF7_ZoD5gcF

2Sheds_Jackson
02-22-2008, 02:23 PM
I have a rather difficult time believing that anything could go on that the host nation would be unaware of...unless they were willfully unaware. For example here in the CONUS at an Air Force base - if a jet (whether it's one of ours, or anybody else's) arrives from outside the country - even our good pal Canada - US customs and the USDA has to go out and check it - before anybody walks off. I'd assume other nations have similar requirements? If they can go inspect for illegal plants and fruit, presumably the chap with the orange jumpsuit and leg irons would get noticed. Or if they were barred from inspecting, they could hardly chalk that up to an administrative error. Who knows - just seems more likely to me that we're falling on our sword as a means of diplomatic cover.

Firetxmi
02-22-2008, 03:19 PM
I have a rather difficult time believing that anything could go on that the host nation would be unaware of...unless they were willfully unaware. For example here in the CONUS at an Air Force base - if a jet (whether it's one of ours, or anybody else's) arrives from outside the country - even our good pal Canada - US customs and the USDA has to go out and check it - before anybody walks off. I'd assume other nations have similar requirements? If they can go inspect for illegal plants and fruit, presumably the chap with the orange jumpsuit and leg irons would get noticed. Or if they were barred from inspecting, they could hardly chalk that up to an administrative error. Who knows - just seems more likely to me that we're falling on our sword as a means of diplomatic cover.

That is a very good point. I didn't even think of that.

Ordie
02-22-2008, 04:06 PM
Having been based in Diego Garcia for 13 months I could see some rationale for oversight.

Diego Garcia is an invisible out of sight / out of mind place. Despite its legal status, everything on the island is American. (Currency, radio, TV, road rules, baseball diamonds, signage etc....) The only symbols of the UK presence is the Brit Club (Pub) and the Union Jack flown alongside the US Ensign.

The local Royal Naval Party are comprised of members of the RN and RM who's secondary duties are to enforce civilian laws, customs, environmental protection, raise the Union Jack and operate the local pub. When I was there, the RN Party had a complement of 12-15 people. The governor to the British Indian Ocean Territories lives in London and has his office in Whitehall not far from 10 Downing. He visits the Island once a year with customary pomp and ceremony, then makes the bee line to the Brit Club wearing flip-flops and Hawaiian shirt.

Many in the UK and the US are unaware of Diego Garcias status and existence since its so far away from anywhere else. This is re-enforced by the fact it is off limits to civilians. Again out of sight, out of mind....

There are an estimatd 4,000 US military and civilian contractors. Depending on the tempo, there are countless of flights in and out of the island the majority are American. The UK customs only checked on incoming flights whos passengers are disembarking at Diego Garcia. They check for orders, search for drugs, give you a speech not the touch the chickens, cats, and especially the donkeys, they also confiscate **** (even though its sold at the local Stars and Stripes bookstore). I don't think they checked for transit and military flights (P-3 / B-52 flying sorties).

The flight in question was probably a routine flight plan that did not give into consideration of the island's UK status and governing laws nor consequences.

2Sheds_Jackson
02-22-2008, 08:56 PM
I suppose anything is possible. But the more of these "gosh we didn't know this was happening now that everybody hates it" stories that I hear, I find it harder to suspend my disbelief that's all.

Hollis
02-22-2008, 09:00 PM
I suppose anything is possible. But the more of these "gosh we didn't know this was happening now that everybody hates it" stories that I hear, I find it harder to suspend my disbelief that's all.


I think that is probably it. Funny people expect the government to know everything especially, how people will react. I think they are just as clueless as the rest of us. I don't see a problem with it. Glad they didn't ask me, I would be on the grill now for it.

Ordie
02-22-2008, 11:00 PM
I recall a CIA/FBI operation to lured a terror suspect off the coast of Lebanon into international waters. He was arrested flown to an aircraft carrier by helicopter. From there, the suspect flew in an S-3 Viking all the way to the US with constant air to air refueling to avoid territorial airspace.

2Sheds_Jackson
02-22-2008, 11:26 PM
Apparently he didn't watch the COPS episode where they told everybody with an outstanding warrant that they'd won the lottery -and to report to a location where there was a nice orderly gathering of cops to process their arrest.

Royal
02-23-2008, 05:14 AM
For example here in the CONUS at an Air Force base - if a jet (whether it's one of ours, or anybody else's) arrives from outside the country - even our good pal Canada - US customs and the USDA has to go out and check it - before anybody walks off.

I've flown into the US on military flights several times and not even seen a customs officer - or any other official outside the military.

I've also flown into Brize Norton (the main UK military airport) more times than I care to remember and seen customs officers there all of twice.

Diego Garicia and Ascencion are both 'British', but the Yanks pretty much have catre blanche to do as they want in their areas. Some parts the Brits aren't even allowed in.

Air Trooper
02-26-2008, 06:57 PM
Hope this doesn't open Pandora's Box but am I the only Brit on this site who is getting pi55ed off in a major way at the fact that Politicians in Britain are complaining that airports were used to ferry these flights? The people on board these flights (not the staff!) would be quite happy to harm those of us who enjoy our freedom and way of life so lets remember that and also remember the fact that these terrorists gave up the right to be treated as human beings after 9/11.

T3ngu
02-26-2008, 06:59 PM
Hope this doesn't open Pandora's Box but am I the only Brit on this site who is getting pi55ed off in a major way at the fact that Politicians in Britain are complaining that airports were used to ferry these flights? The people on board these flights (not the staff!) would be quite happy to harm those of us who enjoy our freedom and way of life so lets remember that and also remember the fact that these terrorists gave up the right to be treated as human beings after 9/11.Some background info may help the rest of us who have NFI.

KoTeMoRe
02-26-2008, 06:59 PM
Welcome to you,

Beware of your assumption on who gave up what after 9/11.

Needless to say that treating them as shyte is quite the way to join'em in their madness.

BTW, again a warm welcome to MP.net.

Air Trooper
02-26-2008, 07:11 PM
Some background info may help the rest of us who have NFI.

Apologies. I haven't any means for a direct link but in a nutshell: Flights have landed in the past both at UK airports and also at Diego Garcia before leaving for the Guantanamo Hilton. Politicians have been demanding to know why this happened and want assurances that it will not happen again. Hope this clarifies it somewhat if not sorry.

OhioSquid
02-26-2008, 07:16 PM
More info on extraordinary rendition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

Ordie
02-26-2008, 07:51 PM
This topic had been discussed. As a former Diego Garcia sailor I offer an explanation of what might had happened.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=129329&highlight=Diego+Garcia

2Sheds_Jackson
02-26-2008, 07:57 PM
I've flown into the US on military flights several times and not even seen a customs officer - or any other official outside the military.

I've also flown into Brize Norton (the main UK military airport) more times than I care to remember and seen customs officers there all of twice.

Diego Garicia and Ascencion are both 'British', but the Yanks pretty much have catre blanche to do as they want in their areas. Some parts the Brits aren't even allowed in.

Well I can't speak for how things are being done recently - but when I worked flight ops in SAC (back when God was still a child), nobody showed up without me calling the Feds. They were a couple of rolly-polly GS-13's who'd been around forever, and inspected every aircraft that arrived from out of the country. They gave the OK for me to call transportation - or else everybody had to walk off the ramp...and would get jacked up by CSC. We had tons of traffic from the UK, Germany, the Azores and Canada...man I hated all the hoops we had to jump through. Who knows, maybe now they have a directive to stand at attention and face the other way.

oldsoak
02-27-2008, 08:55 AM
I've flown into the US on military flights several times and not even seen a customs officer - or any other official outside the military.

I've also flown into Brize Norton (the main UK military airport) more times than I care to remember and seen customs officers there all of twice.

Diego Garicia and Ascencion are both 'British', but the Yanks pretty much have catre blanche to do as they want in their areas. Some parts the Brits aren't even allowed in.

- true - try getting into the PX store in Ascension if your a Brit.

Stonewall71
02-27-2008, 09:04 AM
apparently the Lajes Air Base in the Azores was also used as a plantform lots of times and the portuguese government was never informed either (not that they would bother anyway....:roll:)