egafd.com

A great article on what I've been worried about for years.....how the left is letting us all down when it comes to right-wing, authoritarian Islamists. How, in their fear of being seen as bigoted they'll ally with and/or defend people who do not hold the same views on equality, homosexuality, women or freedom of expression. Too many on the left have spent, quite rightly, years defending small minority groups from discrimination and bigotry but now fail to see the intolerance in bigotry of these minority groups themselves.......or the do see it but choose to ignore it.

Anyway......a great read:

I fear a Mumbai style attack in London or another one of our cities soon, or at least a nutcase brandishing a gun like what happened in Canada this week. Because the threat level is very high now I would imagine there's lots of hidden security all over the place that would not be obvious. The SAS are probably on stand-by in various parts of the capital 24 hours a day and security on public buildings is at it's highest. Worrying times, but then governments over recent years and decades decided to let any nutter come and live here and thanks to Tony Blair's Human Rights Act we cant kick them out.

I think you replied to the wrong post, Max! This is about the left's failings when it comes to right-wing Islamists, not terrorism.

I see. Lol.

Islam is a religion, not a political idea.

"The left's support for jihadists"

Did I miss the trade union organised demonstration in London with chants such as "What do we want - jihadists. When do we want them - now!"

What do we want "Beheading of homosexuals, infidels and musicians" When do we want it "Now".

As David is aware, 'support' comes in many forms. What an awful comeback.

"As David is aware, 'support' comes in many forms. What an awful comeback."

Just highlighting the idiocy of your Daily Mail headline "The left's support for Jihadists".

Secondly I find it amusing on the one hand you praise the article on the Left Foot forward site criticising the links between Amnesty International and Moazzam Begg as a "great" read, while defending Syed Talha Ahsan for amongst other things never having been convicted for a terrorist offence.

You clearly have a poorly developed sense of irony in that Moazzam Begg is in the exact same legal position as Ahsan i.e. kept in Guatanamo for a number of years but never found guilty of anything.

PS This is where you use your Robches defence on the forum i.e. where you provide a link to an article, describe it as a great read, then when Robches picks up on the story and criticises it you defend yourself by stating that although the article on guns is a "great" read and backs up your own views, that does not necessarily mean that you agree with anything in the article!

Hilarious as Robches clearly found your approach.

As everyone can see, if they read up about both cases, Moazzam Begg didn't just author a single file on a floppy disc. Moazzam Begg hasn't spent 8 years (3 actually) in jail. Moazzam Begg hasn't been diagnosed with a mental illness.

Moazzam Begg has admitted attending training camps, being acquainted with terrorist groups and buying a rifle and handgun.

I find that there is a difference in supporting someone's release from jail because they are being held without charge, and 'supporting' them generally and turning a blind eye to their more darker views and wishes.

I have no problem defending Moazzam Begg if he'd never been released, like Talha Ahsan. Talha Ahsan is much more of a victim of the system in my eyes and his case a much bigger travesty so I hold no apologies discerning between the two here.

"I find that there is a difference in supporting someone's release from jail because they are being held without charge, and 'supporting' them generally and turning a blind eye to their more darker views and wishes."

This is very fair comment.

"I have no problem defending Moazzam Begg if he'd never been released, like Talha Ahsan. Talha Ahsan is much more of a victim of the system in my eyes and his case a much bigger travesty so I hold no apologies discerning between the two here."

Well I don't think of it, and I suspect neither do you, as being some kind of competition as to who has been subject to the bigger travesty.

However with regard to Begg it is worth pointing out that:

1.He was held in extrajudicial detention by the U.S. government in the Bagram Theater Internment Facility and the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp, in Cuba, for nearly three years after being arrested in Pakistan in February 2002"

2.Begg says that when he was incarcerated at Bagram, he was abused, which the Pentagon denies. He has claimed that he witnessed two detainees being beaten to death while detained at Bagram. After an investigation, in 2005 United States officials concluded the detainees were murdered by American soldiers.

3. The U.K. government intervened on behalf of its citizens including Begg, detained at Guant?namo; most were released in 2004.

4.Begg and other British citizens who had been detained at Guant?namo sued the British government for complicity in their alleged abuse and torture while in the custody of the United States. In November 2010, the British Government announced that it had reached a financial settlement out of court with several men, including Begg.

5. On 25 February 2014, Begg was arrested by the West Midlands police on suspicion of attending a terrorist training camp and facilitating terrorism overseas . On 1 March 2014, Begg was charged with providing terrorist training and funding terrorism overseas, regarding Syria, and appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court, entering a plea of not guilty.

6. On 1 October 2014, It was announced that the seven Syria-related terror charges against him had been dropped, and that he would be released from HMP Belmarsh the same day.

As travesties go, this lot must rate quite highly I would have thought.