According to Democracy now (www.democracynow.org) the US radio and TV show:
"New details are emerging in the case of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi -- the detainee whose faulty claims on links between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were used to justify the invasion of Iraq. The New York Times is reporting government officials have acknowledged al-Libi fabricated his claims to avoid harsh punishment while in Egyptian custody. Al-Libi was handed over to Egypt by US agents in January 2002. The Times notes the disclosure provides the first public evidence that bad intelligence on Iraq may have resulted from the administration's heavy reliance on third countries to carry out interrogations of detainees."
Torturing suspects may not give you the truth, but it will give you the answers you want to hear.
Now a simple question. In the 1960s when I joined the Labour Party I did not believe I was signing up to support for torture or imprisonment without trial. I did not believe I was joining a party which would throw an old man out of its conference for daring to object to being called a Nazi for opposing the war in Iraq. What possible moral justification can keep anybody in a party which pursues such authoritarian policies?
Labour is the Party of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, the party of the Fallujah massacre with the blood of 100000 Iraqis on its hands. It is no longer a party a civilised person can support.