John Hutton, as Defence Minister:

"The individuals transferred to Afghanistan are members of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a proscribed organisation with links to al-Qaeda....

...The US government have explained to us that those individuals were moved to Afghanistan because of a lack of relevant linguists to interrogate them effectively in Iraq...

...The US has categorised them as unlawful enemy combatants and continues to review their status on a regular basis...

...We have been assured that the detainees are held in a humane, safe and secure environment that meets international standards that are consistent with cultural and religious norms."

Let's play a game called Spot Everything That Is Wrong With The Above. It's round one in a game called Spot Everything That Is Wrong With UK/US Counter-Terrorism Policies. To highlight a few:

- America pretty much decided their affiliation without a trial. Reprieve (a human rights charity) dispute this status for at least one of the detainees.

- Does "review their status" mean check they are still barely alive? Or check their assumptions weren't wrong?

- The relevant linguists explanation is the weakest explanation for anything ever.

- Perhaps the word "linguists" was a typo. For the word, "violent psychopaths".

- Assurances as to the high quality of conditions of imprisonment from the people you ask to covertly torture suspects don't carry much credibility.

- What do cultural norms mean for secret prisons? Because I'm fairly sure the cultural norm of a secret prison is nothing good.

- Aslo, what do religious norms mean for secret prisons? Muslims are allowed to pray five times a day? I think if I were in a secret prison, I'd be praying a lot more often than that.