Your ‘line’ on this affair appears to be nothing more than ‘Moazzam Begg is a terrorist-sympathiser’ what NONSENSE! Do you know this man? Met him? Read his books, articles? Listen to him go around the country often being the only rational voice of clarity, bringing the guards and inmates of Guantanamo together, talking about solutions to many of the issues that affect us?

Thought not.
I wish people would stop using this ‘event’ to throw everything they have at AI too, so childish and absurd.

This is not the charge being levied against them, as I think you know deep down. The charge is that they voice an assumption that *anyone* imprisoned for jihadist-related offenses in this country – including Abu Hamza – is, ipso facto, virtuous and wrongfully convicted.

>> It is not their job to replicate a functioning justice system.

No-one here is claiming they, or AI should.

Oh yeah, must all be down to be being punjabi. We’re all a bunch of hotheads aren’t we? Yes, please take your low level racism somewhere else. And thanks for your concern about the blog’s readership but I don’t write for fools like yourself. I say what I feel like saying.

I would be interested to know what you think I’m lying about in this case.

You have a real hard time reading don’t you? Read the post above. Again. If you have comprehension problems, perhaps ask your mate Douglas Murray to explain slowly.

But I do find this interesting:

“You don’t have anything substantial to add to the debate, you continously misrepresent what people say and in this case are lying through your teeth like a foolish idiot.”

I would be interested to know what you think I’m lying “through my teeth” about in this case.

Ahh just the usual punjabi hardboy swagger and insults! No answer to the questions though?

This site makes me feel dirty and I will be taking off (like all of your previous co-writers and about 80 percent of your old readership).Only popped in for Sahgal.Done duty. Finished.

Faisal: Sunny Hundal’s breathless endorsement of Cageprisoners

Interesting that, given when I first wrote about this issue Faisal, I said this:

I’m not going to bother defending CP really. I spoke to a (Muslim) friend last night who admitted that he had his own reservations about them because they had gone further than simply trying to agitate for Gitmo to be closed, and to trying to defend other Islamist radicals, even some who had been convicted on terrorism offences.

They should have strongly distanced themselves from Anwar al-Awlaki and other Islamists. They have people like Yvonne Ridley representing her: an apologist for the Taliban and the Iranian regime.

Thing is Faisal – you’ve become a lowly smear merchant who I stopped taking seriously ages ago.

You don’t have anything substantial to add to the debate, you continously misrepresent what people say and in this case are lying through your teeth like a foolish idiot.

You don’t even bother checking your sources to even take a cursory glance at what people have written. Why in the world should I care for what you say? Your credibility is nothing. Meaningless.

I have searched the web assiduously and found …zilch. Begg did wax lyrical while in Malaysia but not on behalf of prisoners of conscience but their jailors. He fellated Mahathir saying that the troofer and vile antisemitic should have won the Nobel Peace Prize instead of Obama. Nice one Begg ! Renounced jihad much?

a. If they had access to the level of resources available to well-functioning systems of justice.

b. Access to all relevant information held about these individuals and the co-operation of authorities around the world to investigate and verify the information.

c. Representations from lawyers with full access to the detainees and confidence of those detainees and access to the information on their clients which is also available to the prosecution.

Until that is available, I think Cageprisoners should stick to using their (probably scarce) resources to campaign and educate on the issues, and provide the detainees with the minimal comfort that they have not been forgotten. It is not their job to replicate a functioning justice system.

I do think there is an issue about their purity on human rights – and Moazzam Begg implicitly accepts this by saying he does not claim to have every answer on human rights. I believe he probably does not want to be pushed to develop more answers, and I would understand why Gita Sahgal might be suspicious about this.

Cageprisoners is, however, free to define their own human rights agenda and keep areas of it undefined if they feel that helps their agenda.

We are all free to be suspicious, and Amnesty is also free to define how much suspicion it should have and what to base it on – but I would be very uncomfortable if they based it on innuendo and selective quotations being put about. They should develop a consistent process and criteria which is independent of media pressure which would marginalise unpopular causes.

Begg doesn’t deny he was involved with what’s coyly called repression during Taleban-controlled Afghanistan (and that he began his road to Guantanamo in the late 90s suggests it was linked to stuff like Kashmir before US foreign policy).

His – and other’s – ex jure imprisonment was wrong, with regards to both commitment to rule of law *and* failing to examine the charges against him. Before anyone says innocent until proven guilty (it’s bound to happen), this does not preclude discussion of the accused’s guilt – just stuff like ex jure imprisonment.

Bueller?

Bueller?

P.

Agreed.

Moazzam, we have looked at your webpage. An appeal to check a webpage is the last refuge of the confused.

It would be far more indecent if we disregarded human rights abuses because we agree to Human Rights being abused provided it is in our name

I’m just curious, but is there _any_ person jailed in the UK related to Islamist terrorism who Cageprisoners don’t claim is innocent?

P.