Hi everyone! Been away for a few days but have been watching the propagandist drivel from the BBC and notice their excitement concerning our wicked MI5 officers and their poster boy, illegal Ethiopian immigrant Binyam Mohammad.They have seized on Lord Neuberger’s comments and turned them into their running campaign to have this Jihadist canonised. Wonder what you feel about it?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.


  1. George R says:

    The BBC in its ignorant, but pro-Islamic mentality, criticises British justice and security as well as American justice and security in the interests of an Ethiopian Muslim,wit Al Qaeda links, whose track record the BBC censors!

    A non-BBC analysis:

    “Another ‘Torture’ Non-Scandal”



    Q:”How do we know that Mohamed was in fact an al Qaeda recruit?”

    A: “Well, there are good, publicly available sources that detail Mohamed’s dossier. First, both Mohamed and his lawyer have conceded that he trained at al Qaeda’s al Farouq camp in Afghanistan. That is a damning admission because not just anyone was trained at al Farouq. This should have been enough to hold Mohamed, as other al Qaeda recruits who were trained at al Farouq received lengthy prison sentences based on that fact alone. For example, some members of the Lackawanna Six were sentenced to a decade in prison principally because of their time training at al Farouq.
    “Second, Mohamed admitted to his personal representative at Gitmo that he ‘was taught to falsify documents, and received instruction from a senior al Qaeda operative on how to encode telephone numbers before passing them to another individual.’ This means that he admitted to working with at least one senior al Qaeda operative.
    “Third, the U.S. has in its custody a number of senior al Qaeda operatives who either trained Mohamed, or conspired with him. Jose Padilla, of course, would know what Mohamed was up to as well. Therefore, intelligence officials had the necessary witnesses in custody who could piece together the details of Mohamed’s plotting.”

    “Is Binyam Mohamed a martyr?”


  2. Asuka Langley Soryu says:

    I don’t give a shit if this clown was tortured or not, in fact it’d probably make me feel better if I thought we were actually fighting against this war of Koranic Literalism, if he had been tortured, but has it been proved now? The reason I ask is that the BBC isn’t using the word alleged. And like I say, I don’t give that much of a shit, but the Wiki entry on this prick says all the claims of torture are exactly that – claims. Claims made by Mohammed, a Mohammedan who, on at least one occasion has admitted to being an Islamic Terrorist.


    • John Anderson says:

      It has NOT been proved that he was tortured,  either in Pakistan or Morocco.  Part of the BBC’s misreporting is to mix up allegations of outright torture with “mistreatment” – mistreatment is a very flexible word,  some of the BBC namby-pambies would regard solitary confinement or being shouted at as mistreatment.

      For month after month we have had the BBC vilifying our side,  and portraying the terrorist trainee as an innocent abroad.  The guy is evil,  had evil intent – and that is how our national broadcaster should present him – even if it slips in the word “alleged”.


  3. John Anderson says:

    BBC still giving huge coverage of this “tourist”.   Top news at 10 last night,  main item on Newsnight.  On and on it goes – day after day.   But it is NOT top news elsewhere – except for the Guardian and the Indy.

    Is this a measure,  a yardstick of BBC bias – the degree to which the BBC’s choice of “top story” coincides with the Guardian’s choice ?

    And in its reporting the BBC always leaves out the “tourist’s” actual record of activities – to my mind grounds enough to have kept him incarcered as an illegal combatant until the War of Terror ends.  That is – permanently if necessary.   And the phrase “British resident” is forever added – is there such a thing ?  You can be a resident of Britain – but that does not warrant the tag “British”.    When was the last time the BBC mentioned in its headlines that the guy had limited connection to Britain – and that he had effectively left Britain when he was captured.

    Not content with perennial sniping against our armed forces,  and those of the US,  the BBC is now in full flow in its attack on our security services – one big smear job,  inflating the legal findings,  letting pro-Islamist spokespeople get away with exaggerated claims.

    And NEVER any mention that during his training for terrorism this “tourist” will have been told to make false claims about torture if he was captured – it is in the terrorists’ handbook.

    And all this fuss is down to weak-kneed Labour Ministers who were stupid enough to press the Americans for the “tourist’s” return to the UK.


  4. edward bowman says:

    Can anyone tell me how this guy was captured and what he was doing at the time and why the uK is involved with a person who is not a British citizen? All captured “insurgents” are told to claim that they have been tortures. When I listen to the BBC I become convinced that the British are mad


    • John Anderson says:

      The trainee terrorist was in Pakistan and then Afghanistan at a top-level Al Quada camp – see the frontpage link posted by George R above for details.

      He was arrested when trying to fly from Pakistan on a false passport.  It looks like he was being sent back to bomb us – simple as that.   Why he should now be allowed back in the UK defeats imagination.