the 'slimes glow in the dark!
| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| Amnesty International blasted for 'defensive jihad' comments |
| 2010-04-06 |
| A simmering dispute over collaboration between Amnesty International and a former Guantanamo Bay detainee with Taliban sympathies has heated up after a senior Amnesty official argued that “defensive jihad' is not antithetical to human rights. A trio of South Asian women's rights campaigners expressed dismay at the prospect that Amnesty International would not unequivocally condemn the “defensive jihad' concept. “If this is the official position of the world's leading human rights organization, this would gravely undermine the future of the human rights movement,' said Amrita Chhachhi, Sara Hossain and Sunila Abeysekera in a letter to Amnesty Secretary-General Claudio Cordone. “It is the argument of ‘defensive jihad' that the Taliban uses to legitimize its anti-human rights actions such as the beheading of dissidents, including members of minority communities, and the public lashing of women,' they said. Chhachhi is a senior lecturer in women's and gender studies at the Institute of Social Studies in The Hague, Hossain is a Bangladesh Supreme Court advocate, and Abeysekera is a veteran Sri Lankan human rights campaigner. Their letter to Cordone is the latest development in a controversy, which erupted in February when Amnesty suspended a senior staffer, Gita Sahgal, after she publicly questioned the wisdom of the organization being associated with British Muslim radical, Moazzam Begg. Begg was arrested in Pakistan in early 2002, and Pentagon officials said later he had undergone terrorist training in Afghanistan. He was held at Bagram air base and then at Guantanamo Bay, until President Bush ordered his release in 2005. Through his U.K.-based organization, Cageprisoners, Begg has become a prominent campaigner on behalf of war on terror detainees. Sahgal has described him as “Britain's most famous supporter of the Taliban,' and strongly opposed Amnesty's decision to share campaigning platforms with Cageprisoners. In February she went public with her criticism, telling London's Sunday Times, “As a former Guantanamo detainee it was legitimate to hear [Begg's] experiences, but as a supporter of the Taliban it was absolutely wrong to legitimize him as a partner.' (In a separate statement around the same time, she wrote, “Amnesty has created the impression that Begg is not only a victim of human rights violations but a defender of human rights.') Sahgal was quickly suspended by A.I., a move that prompted Chhachhi,, Hossain and Abeysekera to initiate a petition supporting her and challenging Amnesty's decision to work with Begg. The petition drew support from leading human and women's rights advocates around the world, many of whom would normally fall into the category of Amnesty allies and supporters. In response, Cordone sent the petition drafters a letter defending Amnesty's decision to work with Cageprisoners. As one of the first released Guantanamo Bay detainees, he said, Begg “speaks powerfully from personal experience about the abuses there.' Cordone then added, “Now, Moazzam Begg and others in his group Cageprisoners also hold other views which they have clearly stated, for example on whether one should talk to the Taliban or on the role of jihad in self-defense. Are such views antithetical to human rights? Our answer is no, even if we may disagree with them…' Chhachhi, Hossain and Abeysekera called that assertion “shocking.' “The call for ‘defensive jihad' is a thread running through many fundamentalist and specifically ‘salafi-jihadi' texts. It is mentioned by Abdullah Azzam, mentor of Osama bin Laden, and founder of [Pakistani terror group] Lashkar-e-Toiba,' they said in their reply to him, a copy of which was made available late last week. “It has been shown that ‘defensive jihad' results in indiscriminate attacks on civilians, attacks which are disproportionate and attacks which are targeted for the purpose of discrimination such as those on schools, shrines and religious processions.' |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #7 No peace on earth until all the 'slimes glow in the dark! |
| Posted by: Hotspur666 2010-04-06 23:27 |
| #6 On the other hand, this IS the first time anyone in the "human rights" cabal has admitted people have a right to self defense. Nope. People don't. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-04-06 11:13 |
| #5 On the other hand, this IS the first time anyone in the "human rights" cabal has admitted people have a right to self defense. That is only for their fellow terrorists. You are still scum and should only submit to slavery and/or die. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2010-04-06 10:21 |
#4  |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-04-06 10:19 |
| #3 On the other hand, this IS the first time anyone in the "human rights" cabal has admitted people have a right to self defense. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2010-04-06 09:29 |
| #2 "Just because they're genocidal Nazis, it doesn't mean that it's right to hurt their feelings by putting them in prison." |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-04-06 09:08 |
| #1 That's what we did after 911 when we went into Afghanistan and later Iraq; defensive jihad. No problemo AI? You good with that? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-06 09:03 |