He's being dealt with under new "fast track" extradition procedures, which haven't proven to be very fast (this has been dragging on for a long time).
There's been quite an active campaign supporting Mr Ahmad and needless to say, they're upset that he's finally being bound over for trial, according to an article in The Telegraph.
A statement on the Free Babar Ahmad campaign website says:
This is a sad day for Britain and an even sadder day for British Muslims. In
effect this sends a message to British Muslims that there is no “legal and
democratic” means to air your concerns: you must use other ways to get
justice.[Emphasis mine]
Is that a threat?
And in Mr Ahmad's own statement:
Babar, speaking from Woodhill Prison in Milton Keynes, said today: “This
decision should only come as a surprise to those who thought that there was
still justice for Muslims in Britain. I entrust my affairs to Allah and His
Words from the Quran, “And when the two armies saw one another, the companions
of Moses said, “Indeed we are finished.” Moses said: “No! Indeed, with me is my
Lord and He will guide me.”’[1] O Allah, You have seen what they have
done to me. O Allah, avenge my injustice. In Allah we put our trust.”
Is that some kind of threat?
Politics, London, terrorism, terror
5 comments:
For atheists like meself, it's as much of a threat as invoking the vengence of Mr. Hanky the Christmas Poo. Your post is a handy segue to a question I wanted to ask you about Ian Blair. Do you think is public debate on the nature of British policing policy is a good idea? On the face of it, it seems a shocking but refreshing expression of anguish at the de Menezes killing. Especially, this passage in The Times:
He believes the police are being left to pick up the pieces from the collapse of traditional society evidenced by the decline in influence of churches, voluntary clubs, trade unions and even park keepers.
He will say: "This has left many people looking – in the absence of anyone else – to the police service for answers to the degradation of communal life – for answers to the neighbours from hell, the smashed bus stop, the lift shaft littered with needles and condoms, the open drugs market, the angry, the aggressive and the obviously disturbed.
"We now have to make some choices. Society is demanding answers and actions to deal with feral children, hoodies and yobs; to the curse of drugs, to date rape and gun crime; to the smuggling of women for sexual slavery; to street robbery; to truancy, graffiti and drunken aggressiveness; to paedophilia, identity theft, organised crime and murder.
"At the same time, those choices must reflect what kind of police service is needed after July. Terror has changed its methods – or, more accurately, brought some existing methods to Britain for the first time.
"Britain remains a target of the highest possible priority to al-Qaeda and its affiliates; we are in a new reality."
Reading that was bracing, like a slap in the face. What do you think?
Well, I'm not really afraid of Allah, either. I'm afraid of those who would serve Allah by helping Mr Ahmad avenge his "injustice".
Funny how like our nice and friendly neighbours you never popped round for a chat to learn that we actually quite an ordinary family. It is sad that you have expressed on your blogs how you would rather not share a neighbourhood with the "terrorist". Unlike you, we are actually quite tolerant people and don't really mind sharing a neighbourhood with narrow minded individuals who harbour such profound feelings of animosity against someone who has yet to have ANY allegations against him proven in court: at home or abroad. If someone tomorrow accused you of being a murderer without any evidence and the chance to defend yourself, I doubt you would be very happy. I guess the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply to Muslims accused of terrorism.
Your answer to the question; "Is that some kind of threat?" is frankly; no. It is a prayer to God (Allah in Arabic, whether you believe in Him or not) to bring forth the justice. No need to panic. His sister narrowly missed the Aldgate East bomb on 7/7 and if you care to look at previous press releases, he does not and never has supported such acts (despite what your President and his friends may like you to believe)
By the way, I don't recall there being such a word as "extradiction" in our English Dictionaries. Is that an American word?
>>I guess the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply to Muslims accused of terrorism.<<
Unfortunately some people seem to think that way, but I hope he gets a fair trial.
Yes, actually, I absolutely hope that he gets a fair trial, for all of our sakes. My understanding is that the agreement will be that he will face regular criminal trial, not a military tribunal. I think that's absolutely the right thing. You probably won't realise it, but I'm against detentions without trial and secret trials and so forth - for everyone. And I'm also against the fast track extradition law on the grounds that it isn't reciprocal and that British people (all English speaking peoples) have the right not to be bound over for trial without prima facie evidence under our Common Law freedoms and traditions, and I wish this applied to everyone in the world.
But in my view, the prima facie requirement has been met in this case, even though it is not required by law. That does not mean Babar Ahmad is guilty, but it does mean that there's enough evidence to pursue a trial.
However, my statement is that "is that a threat" applies even more so to Muslims must seek justice in other ways . That seems to imply that on the one hand he's upset about the outcome of the process, but on the other he's happy to resort to some "other means" for getting what he wants. And we've seen what some of these 'other means' can be.
And thanks for pointing out my spelling error. I just love it when British people get all shirty about the English language. I shall rejoin with my favorite quote from good old Andy Jackson
"It's a small mind that can think of only one way to spell a word."
Post a Comment