1. Almost five years ago a Bow Street Magistrate Court judge refused extradition for a pilot held under the terrorism act at the request of the US because there was no evidence. Lofti Raissi had been held in Belmarsh for five months and released in February 2002 on bail because there was no evidence to support detention under the terrorism law at that time. However, he still had to face formal extradition proceedings which failed due to lack of any evidence. He had made two statements on his US pilot's licence application that were deemed false by the US: 1) a previous conviction for stealing a briefcase which was considered a spent conviction under English law; and 2) a knee operation which had been disclosed on an earlier application.
Mr Raissi has sought compensation for unlawful detention when he was detained for five months under the terrorism law at the request of the US when there was no evidence which, as I recall, had been promised at a subsequent hearing. That evidence was not presented and extradition was denied after he had already been released on bail after five months detention at Belmarsh earlier. I have always viewed this case as another one where the US has faked it by claiming that evidence exists when it does not. In the frenzy of the moment after 9/11, the US was able to obtain his detention without any evidence. As noted below, Mr Raissi has been denied compensation in the High Court in a ruling announced today. He said in an interview that he intends to appeal this decision. He claims that his life was ruined by this unlawful detention.
I've always viewed this case as one of the three prime examples where the US has faked it for the glory of the agents involved at the expense of the lives of the suspects. The other two involved Derek Bond and Jessica Lynch. Mr Bond was incarcerated in South Africa in February 2003 at the request of the FBI and left languishing in its prison for three weeks. The UK press publicity created such a storm that this case of mistaken identity was uncovered, and Mr Bond was returned to the UK a free man. In the case of Jessica Lynch the US military faked her medical condition and rescue from a hospital to make her and themselves look like heroes.
The reason that I key on these three examples of deception by those in positions of authority connected with the US is that I have been subjected to similar abuse. Carried out for the past six years this abuse was initiated by former US Marines Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird who started their 24/7 surveillance technology imprisonment and torture interrogation in February 2001 seven months before 9/11 based upon totally false allegations. These were revealed publicly during the seven months before 9/11 and included terrorism following the 4th March 2001 BBC car bomb at 0030 nearby and serious crimes all of which were and are complete and utter nonsense. The IRA terrorists involved in the BBC car and Ealing Broadway bombs have been captured, successfully prosecuted or pleaded guilty and imprisoned. Lt Harry Bird's efforts to fake it only confuse and destroy effective law enforcement and counter terrorism activity thereby helping the criminals and terrorists. ("Get him out. It's my job," said Lt Harry Bird just as I wrote the preceding sentence.)
There are many points of similarity between Lt Harry Bird and Jonathan Kent Idema who operated a private prison and torture activity in Kabul. Each is glory bound and driven by extreme fantasies. A key difference is that Lt Harry Bird uses surveillance technology to imprison and torture. Like Idema, Bird claims authority for his operations derive from those on top with frequent references to Bush, Blair and others at the top of each government. The difference is that Bird has sustained these claims with those who oversee his activity, and he is allowed to continue. Idema was "disowned" after he was caught red-handed with three prisoners hanging upside down. Nobody has confirmed Idema's claims of close contact with the top of the Pentagon as far as I know. Another difference is that Bird can get away with the surveillance technology torture because it and its effects can be hidden. Bird keeps claiming "He can't prove it."
The outrageous personality of the two appear to be the same given the reports about Idema I've read. They are both off-the-wall whackos who will say anything or do anything to further their extreme activities. So far Bird has not had any past indiscretions exposed like the fraud trial for Idema although Bird has admitted killing someone claiming it was self defense. The latter has not been confirmed yet. However, Bird's volatility and violence have been demonstrated on several occasions during these six years, and he continuously makes threats of violence and death. His torture activity is carried out with the relish and verbal expressions of a sadist. Restraint has been constantly needed to curtail excesses. Given the extraordinary rendition activity which has now been disclosed and comprehensively documented representations by Bird about authorisation from on high appear to be solidly grounded. I've always thought that Idema had such authority but was disowned when caught. What will happen when Bird faces trial for this activities? Who will support him then?
By the time Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird arrived in February 2001, I had already been subjected to 24/7 surveillance technology torture abuse for two and one-half years since August 1998 which had caused me serious personal injury, cataracts diagnosed in December 2000, for which I was seeking surgical correction. For this and other reasons I sought the protection of the High Court under the Protection From Harassment Act of 1997 in March 2001 also citing provisions of the Human Rights Act of 1998 which came into effect in the UK in October 2000. These legal proceedings were destroyed by Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird with the use of their surveillance technology introduced in February 2001, and this and other personal injuries including ongoing damages were exacerbated.
During the early months before 9/11 while I was typing notes about all that was happening on my notebook computer and read by those with the surveillance technology, I used to ask in my notes why these people did not process this normally under the law given their allegations instead of carrying out this extralegal imprisonment, torture and experimentation activity? This was also a question frequenlty asked by others with them. Lt Harry Bird always replied that they did not go into the courts because they were afraid I would apply for asylum. This was accepted as a legitimate reason without question by those in authority on behalf of the government although it was clearly an unlawful denial of my legal rights whatever they might be as was the process of the surveillance activity itself. The intention to stay out of the normal law enforcement, legal processing procedures and jurisdiction of the courts meant that I could be so detained, tortured and interrogated indefinitely until death which is exactly what is happening.
The problems which have arose with regard to Mr Raissi's detention and extradition attempt are circumvented this way even though the extradition law in the UK has been controversially changed by treaty agreement with the US as celebrated cases have demonstrated recently with the Nat West Three. These people can have no evidence for allegations about activities which never occurred. They know this and seek ways to maintain their extralegal unlawful and criminal activity. As of now, they have worked themselves and the British and US governments into untenable and intractable positions by maintaining surveillance against me for so many years without any results whatsoever. The only alternative they have from their perspective is to continue until they bring about my death hoping to make it appear as if death was due to natural causes.
In the meantime they make every effort to discredit all that I document and report with every conceivable false allegation they can muster no matter how preposterous. This is why it is incredibly important to process all these issues no matter what they are within the law enforcement and judicial systems with the full participation of the accused so that justice can be done and seen to be done. As it is now, this is being destroyed in so many ways that the British government and its people will be disgraced for decades to come by what has been done to me all these years starting before 9/11 and which continues as of this writing where there is no current prospect of its ever being stopped. I am at the complete mercy of the whim of vigilante rogues who are capable of doing whatever they please with surveillance technology including murder, and this is knowingly and intentionally being allowed to continue by those in authority.
In this atmosphere of terrorism by the US and UK governments themselves, the very least the courts can do is award Mr Raissi his claim for compensation for false imprisonment as provided by the Home Office.
BBC News Thursday, 22 February 2007, 10:47 GMT
Pilot loses compensation battle
 Lotfi Raissi says his life was destroyed by the accusations |
A pilot wrongly accused of training the 9/11 hijackers has lost his fight for compensation for his ordeal.
Lotfi Raissi was detained for nearly five months at London's Belmarsh prison after being arrested following the 2001 attacks in the United States.
Two High Court judges ruled against his challenge to the government's decision to deem him ineligible for a Home Office compensation scheme.
The Algerian said the refusal of bail for him amounted to wrongful detention.
Lord Justice Auld and Mr Justice Wilkie ruled that Mr Raissi's detention was as part of an extradition case that was not "in the domestic criminal process" and thus did not come within the compensation scheme.
Mr Raissi said the ruling was "a body blow".
His lawyer, Edward Fitzgerald QC, had previously told the High Court there was "not a shred of evidence" against his client, and that the sole reason for his detention was a US extradition request.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6385563.stm
BBC News Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 15:38 GMT 16:38 UK
Court rejects US bid to extradite pilot
A court in London has rejected a bid by the American Government to extradite a British-based pilot who they say is a suspect in the 11 September investigation.
US officials had accused Algerian-born Lotfi Raissi, 28, from Colnbrook, Berkshire of training some of the hijackers.
 "There was no deception because it was as if there were no previous convictions
 |
Edward Fitzgerald QC |
Mr Raissi has always denied any terrorist links.
On Wednesday a district judge at Bow Street Magistrates Court said he had seen no evidence to support allegations of terrorism.
Timothy Workman said: "I discharge the defendant on all eight charges.
"Several allegations involving terrorism have been made but I would like to make it clear that I have received no evidence to support that contention."