I think you’ll find the vast majority of al-Qaeda-inspired fanatics and Jamaati cadres agree with you.

Are you seriously suggesting that the vast majority of Muslims , while condemning and opposing what Al qaeda do, dont also oppose US and Israeli terror and slaughtering of Muslims? That might be what you tell your zionist mates/sponsors but everyone else knows its bull.

I think you’ll find the vast majority of al-Qaeda-inspired fanatics and Jamaati cadres agree with you.

You’ve said it many times under many false names. You support al-Qaeda terrorism and you fully back their ideologues like al-Awlaki.

Your words your mouth.

A complete lie. Utterly false. I oppose ALL terrorism be it Al Qaida or far greater State terrorism by the US/Israel etc . I dont agree with Awlaki or his ideas either particularly his support for Al Shabab. Doesnt mean Im going to subscribe to your Muslim/Islam hating agenda and join as you have with people who hate Muslims and Islam.

Think youll find the vast majority of Muslims would agree with me rather than you.

You’ve said it many times under many false names. You support al-Qaeda terrorism and you fully back their ideologues like al-Awlaki.

Your words your mouth.

I should also mention “anti-Muslim bigot” given your hatred of the very poorest of Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims, who you think are expendable as long as some Saudi-bankrolled terrorist can get to an arms depot.

Faisal why do you lie so shamelessly and put words into people’s mouths they never said ?

Give you support the Pakistani armies slaughter of civilians under the guise of the “war on terror” its a bit rich for you to talk about others considering their lives expendable. And the racism that pervades this blog against Arab Muslims (even under the guise of supporting Asian Muslims) is despicable and discredits you further.

deranged paranoid troll

From people who consider Douglas Murray, Baet Yor, Robert Spencer and Harrys Place normal this is surely the highest compliment!

What the Islamist extreme Right craves more than anything else is the opportunity to be pictured, not alongside some sorry raggedy Trots, but with a somebody worthy and mainstream. There’s nothing new in this tactic. It is, after all, precisely what the neo Nazi far right and the revolutionary socialist far Left tries from time to time.

And, with much more success, the Zionist extreme right of which you are allied to

They rant about Awlaki but ignore a supporter of bombing British troops coming to the UK
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article690085.ece

Rest assured if this guy was Muslim not Jewish theyd be all over him

“It was because sane British citizens informed the local authority concerned.”

You mean of course “zionist extremists”

But a prominent top-tier human rights organisation such as Amnesty UK cannot be biased. By partnering with CP, it has trashed it’s ethical objectivity and its position, as David T says, to speak “credibly against abuses where the subjects are unpopular, and the rights at stake poorly understood”. Having done so, it sends out a this signal: “Amnesty does not regard Islamist terrorism a human rights violation”.

2) If it was a mistake, it was a very big one. Too big to be regarded as merely an oversight. It is more likely a tactical decision which amounts to nothing less than insidious “fuck you” to the 22,000+ victims of terrorism in Pakistan every year. Most of the victims are Muslim and the atrocities are almost always perpetrated by Islamists drunk on al-Qaeda ideology. The same kind of ideology promoted directly by Cage Prisoners. Most of those victims of terrorism whom Amnesty neatly avoids giving any due consideration, happen to be the poorest, most disenfranchised people in the world.

“What are your general views on AI?”

I’m glad that I now know where their loyalties lie.

1) Why does Amnesty UK think it is acceptable to form a partnership with Cage Prisoners who are promoters of Anwar al-Awlaki?

I will reiterate what I said previously. CP have a primary purpose of highlighting human rights abuses. This dovetails rather nicely with AI’s own goals and objectives. The idea that AI should alienate a group that does a lot of good work, because said group have vague affiliations with a speaker who holds unsavoury views seems a tad OTT for my liking.

2) Guantanamo prisoners should either be freed or made to face a proper court of law, or in other words, due process. But there is no mention of due process in the Amnesty brochure. All I see is calls to show “solidarity” with Guantanamo detainees. But solidarity with whom? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

I think this is probably an oversight on AI’s part, but an easy mistake to make, dont you think? It might be worthwhile to contact AI to see why no mention of due-process was made? Perhaps it was tacitly implied? I haven’t read the brochure, so I cannot really comment.

–

What are your general views on AI?

Hassan

Once you junk your reputation, who is there to speak up credibly against abuses where the subjects are unpopular, and the rights at stake poorly understood?

What the Islamist extreme Right craves more than anything else is the opportunity to be pictured, not alongside some sorry raggedy Trots, but with a somebody worthy and mainstream. There’s nothing new in this tactic. It is, after all, precisely what the neo Nazi far right and the revolutionary socialist far Left tries from time to time.

The problem with embracing sectarian politics of this sort – apart from its intrinsically vicious nature – is that it simply encourages general sectarianism, as all sides rush to the extremes, in order to get a better deal. The middle is wiped out.

Jack Straw is about to go up against Nick Griffin on Question Time. He is a sensible mainstream social democrat and should be able to wipe the floor with a dolt like Griffin. However, the cosseting of ‘moderate Islamists’ – whose politics are easily as extreme as Griffin’s if not more so – that Straw has practiced in his own constituency and to some extent in office gives scum like Griffin a free kick at goal. Straw will rightly call him an extremist: but Griffin’s constituency will think:

“Yes, but at least he’s OUR extremist”.

This is a hugely dangerous situation. It is ripping our nation apart.

What makes this more absurd is that the Islamist far right has no intention at all of being dragged into the centre. Why do they need to, when they’re getting dialogue, access, and prestige for nothing.

Moreover, it isn’t as if they have doubts about what they believe. These are guys who trade in what they believe are divinely mandated eternal values. The concession they make are strategic only.

You know all this, of course.

I understand the point you’re making but it’s irrelevant to this discussion, isn’t it. Neither McCain nor Blair are in the same category as Irving, Duke or al-Awlaki and as such, make for pretty poor counter-examples.

I think there are two issues here that Amnesty need to address:

1) Why does Amnesty UK think it is acceptable to form a partnership with Cage Prisoners who are promoters of Anwar al-Awlaki?

2) Guantanamo prisoners should either be freed or made to face a proper court of law, or in other words, due process. But there is no mention of due process in the Amnesty brochure. All I see is calls to show “solidarity” with Guantanamo detainees. But solidarity with whom? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

It’s a complex issue. Amnesty have done a fine job to dumb it down and botch it up.

I stand corrected. I was unaware that the speech had been posted on CP.

Faisal,

Furthermore, do you think it would be acceptable for Nick Griffin to be given space in a speech by a group endorsed by AI, as long he banged on about the shoddy treatment he has received at the hands of British authorities?

This is an interesting point. Would you be equally outraged if AI decided to invite John McCain to speak about human rights abuse? Considering that he once had dealings with racist islamophobes? Tony Blair was responsible for an illegal war in Iraq, should he be black listed too?

Many groups/individuals are, directly or otherwise, associated with unsavoury characters. However, in order for progress to be made, it is sometimes worthwhile to engage with groups despite their shortcomings, in the hope that they will learn the error of their ways.

David T,

I actually think you’re all pretty smart.

Hassan.

Precisely how stupid do you think we are?