Title: Moazzam Begg - released Guantanamo detainee speaks out Source:
Youtube URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41m5_lmWUMU Published:Mar 9, 2007 Author:adycousins Post Date:2008-01-21 15:39:48 by buckeye Keywords:habeas corpus, ron paul, war Views:345 Comments:26
#1. To: christine, Hayek Fan, Red Jones, iconoclast, Ferret Mike, nobody, FOH, Itisa1mosttoolate, robin, Sparker, TwentyTwelve, Dwornock, wudidiz, Zipporah (#0)(Edited)
I post this thread with a video of Moazzam Begg with great concern that it not be misunderstood. I personally am strongly opposed to unlimited non-western immigration to Europe, the United States, and the former British commonwealth nations. My main concern is massive immigration to the United States, but when one travels in Europe today, one is reminded of their diminishing vitality. In fact, this video and any investigation into Mr. Begg's life and associations would support that view. He is clearly unhappy with the way the Commonwealth has treated his regions of origin and cultural association. His loyalty is not to his new country, or its values, but to a foreign value system.
However, once immigrants come to our nation, I find that I must ask that they be treated fairly under our laws before they were corrupted and misinterpreted by the Bush and Clinton administrations. I ask that the intent of our 800 year-old Habeas Corpus law be extended to all human beings who come to our territories. Furthermore, it seems advisable to me to speak up and ask that captives on our battlefields, wherever they are, be treated fairly under the terms of the Geneva convention.
I do not sympathize with terrorism in any way, and I strongly denounce the views implied and attributed to this man. However, we must strive to be better than our enemies if we are to remain true to our own commitments as human beings comprising a so-called "free" society. We are free to make these observations, and the 4 forum is the best place I know to air them at the moment. Again, none of this should be construed in any way to suggest that I am against the United States and its western allies defeating Islamic terrorism. I endorse Ron Paul's candidacy not because I assume he would be a pacifist, but because he would fight effectively, with a just peace as the result of a just victory. His statements urging America to leave Iraq and Afghanistan and discontinue our military occupations of these lands are solutions that I agree with and hope that our government decides to pursue. A return to our constitutional laws would mean that captives like Begg would be given fair trials instead of never being charged during years of captivity, justified or not.
Moazzam Begg speaks to an audience of around 100 people at Goldsmiths' University London. The meeting was organised by Lewisham Stop The War Coalition.
I love yuh, buddy, you know that .... but I think you mighta stepped in it here.
IMHO, this chap is of the type of the that should have been the LAST of the group to have been released. He is obviously a very, very, intelligent and articulate fellow. He was granted a gift from God .... immigration to Western Civilization where he received good education and exposure to values that go quite beyond honor killings for family members. In other words he chose tribe over good sense.
His answer was to return to Afghanistan and Pakistan to further Jihad. He was arrested, not in Birmingham, England, but in Pakistan (not to preclude his arrests in England as a young thug and activist).
I could perhaps sympathize in the release of some young country schmuck who. if he received any education at all, got memorization of the Koran and Jihad indoctrination.
This guy may well have the intellectual capacity and the charisma to become the next bin Laden. He should have been kept locked up with the key thrown away. His "American rights" are pure BS, he was a prisoner of war.
He pisses and moans about his treatment, but I couldn't help but notice that his mad/intelligent head was still attached to his body.
I tried to make it clear that I didn't like the guy. I guess I'm not strident enough. My concern isn't with his well-being. It's with our system's.
Why was his family allowed into England in the first place? A politically-correct immigration system gone mad. It's actually against the law to express strong dislike for Begg and his community in England, as well.
Why aren't we charging our captives with specific crimes instead of just holding them indefinitely? The legal framework for POWs in our Bush-cabinet system is in chaos.
It is painfully obvious that our military presence and pursuit of combatants in Afghanistan and Iraq will lead to much more of this.
To make all matters worse, we are building a police state that strives not to distinguish between westerners and immigrants. Hence the language of HR 1955. Everyone is a suspect.
Begg is propaganda mechanism, and we're creating thousands more every year that we behave this way. The worst aspect of all this is the loss of our own civil rights as they cast a larger and larger net to catch a few of them.
My concern isn't with his well-being. It's with our system's.
My concern is with our nation's well being.
Why was his family allowed into England in the first place? A politically-correct immigration system gone mad.
Different from ours in what significant way? Besides, his family may be quite normal, so far as I know.
It's actually against the law to express strong dislike for Begg and his community in England, as well.
You mean as in "Islam is a religion of peace"?
Why aren't we charging our captives with specific crimes instead of just holding them indefinitely?
Cuz they're not being held for a carryout heist. They're prisoners of war. The fact that the war was the wrong war is beside the point.
It is painfully obvious that our military presence and pursuit of combatants in Afghanistan and Iraq will lead to much more of this
Not much more. I believe we will close this sorry chapter to one extent or another in November. If we're lucky we will leave this human cesspool of medieval humanity to bleed one another dry of their madness gene.
To make all matters worse, we are building a police state that strives not to distinguish between westerners and immigrants. Hence the language of HR 1955. Everyone is a suspect.
This too will pass.
Unless we are a sicker nation than I think/hope we are, the worst is behind us. Else, it as much on us as them.
I would argue that to a large extent that has been based on our freedom, which was based on shared cultural values and respect for the rule of law. We're breaking it down, and their presence among us is breaking it down. We're burning that candle from both ends. In one sense, Enoch was right. In another, since we've ignored his advice, and continue to ignore it, we need to own up to that fact. How best to do that is an endless debate, but we certainly should not be curtailing our own civil rights because of the hazards they present.
Different from ours in what significant way? Besides, his family may be quite normal, so far as I know.
They are non-western, and they come from a former colony where a certain portion of the population harbors a great deal of hate for their former colonists. We are assumed to be included in that group because we are in the Anglosphere, and during the 20th century we have aided Great Britain. Of course FDR and other presidents pressured them to give up their colonial claims, but that is beside the point.
You mean as in "Islam is a religion of peace"?
Officially yes, and more than that, defamation is forbidden. In other words, carrying on a discussion like we are now is apparently disallowed.
Cuz they're not being held for a carryout heist. They're prisoners of war. The fact that the war was the wrong war is beside the point.
That's the Alberto Gonzales, John Ashcroft, and Donald Rumsfeld view. Unfortunately, it serves as a massive propaganda coup for the opposition. All they have to do is say that our respect for international law and our own constitutional legal framework has dissolved, and they are correct to some extent — when UK and Australian citizens can be held without Habeas Corpus.
My point is that once you let the genie out of the bottle (permitting immigration from the Anglosphere's former colonies, and any sizable amount of non-western immigration to the US or commonwealth at all) you have to treat the people with the same respect that we would be. We have to treat them as we would ourselves no matter how incongruous their behavior is likely to be with our norms and expectations.
With respect to criminal prosecution (or terrorism interdiction, what ever you want to call it), ur supreme court has ruled that Habeas Corpus applies to these "combatants." Right now Bush is ignoring that, I think to our peril.
Not much more. I believe we will close this sorry chapter to one extent or another in November. If we're lucky we will leave this human cesspool of medieval humanity to bleed one another dry of their madness gene.
Only with Ron Paul. I think the others are going to drag this out because it's what the establishment wants, for various reasons.
[HR 1955] too will pass.
Since Ruby Ridge, it gets worse every five years or so. I'd like to see the trend reverse.
I think the most effective way is a massive repudiation of the captured and morally corrupt Republican Party. (We come at this from opposite poles ... I see RP votes as protest, you continue to hold the hope that he has a real chance for election (oh how I wish I could agree)).
Alas, I fear that there is a considerable number of tribal automatons who will turn out for this party that so recently was the "party of ideas" .... but which has turned into the part of God knows what.
I see RP votes as protest, you continue to hold the hope that he has a real chance for election (oh how I wish I could agree)).
What's most important to me as I see Article IV, section 4 going unenforced, McCain winning primaries after his treason, Jane Harman's HR 1955 passing with only four nays, and CFR candidates running for office in both parties, is to say that I oppose all of this, that I'm not agreeing to what I see happening to my country. I will vote in a way that expresses my disapproval, because I do not want my vote to apply to what I see coming. I refuse to be counted among those who will say that they voted for what I expect could happen over the next eight years if Ron Paul does not win.