I Jerusalem Post intervjuas Claudio Cordone, och han tar där avstånd från “defensive jihad”.
Men han står fast vid sitt uttalande att Moazzam Beggs syn på defensive jihad inte står i konflikt med Amnesty internationals syn på mänskliga rättigheter. Han menar också att det inte finns några bevis för att Moazzam Begg skulle stå för åsikter som står i konflikt med mänskliga rättigheter.
Så här skriver Jerusalem Post:
The fact that Begg is at the very least a controversial figure who is suspected by the US of being a member of al-Qaida, of having recruited individuals to attend al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan, of having trained in al-Qaida camps, and of having provided shelter and support to al-Qaida families and more, does not seem to trouble Cordone. Nor does that fact that Begg strongly supports the Taliban, whose record on human rights violations, past and present, is well-known. […]
it is hard to understand how Begg could so ardently support the Taliban without condoning its policies and actions.
Om det är någon som är sugen på att gräva finns en wikipedia-sida om Moazzam Begg som alltså är Amnesty Internationals partner endast i avseende på Guantanamo, men vars åsikter de ändå försvarar.
Begg har gjort omfattande erkännanden om sin terrorverksamhet, som han sedan har tagit tillbaka. Via Wikipedia kan man enkelt hitta information om hur Moazzam Begg och Cageprisoners ordnat ramadanböner med en Al-Qaedaledare, Anwar al-Awlaki, och även intervjuat denne på youtube.
Gita Sanghal kommenterar i en intervju vad som är fel med Amnesty Internationals agerande på sidan Human rights for all.
Amnesty has said that Moazzem Begg never used a platform he shared with Amnesty to speak against the rights of others. What’s wrong if they get him to share his experiences as a detainee in a campaign against torture?
It seems that no one in Amnesty International has any idea what Begg’s views are, so they would have no idea whether he was using an Amnesty platform to promote his views or not. Secondly, this is a disingenuous statement for two reasons:
One, either Begg has views that should not be promoted from an Amnesty platform, so Amnesty is acknowledging he keeps his detainee experiences separate from his ‘views’. However, Claudio Cordone [senior director of Amnesty International] has also said there is nothing wrong with his views. So which does Amnesty believe? […]
Begg’s organisation Cageprisoners has said that it “never has and never will support the ideology of killing innocent civilians, whether by suicide bombers or B52s”. So what makes you think they support violent jihad?
The key word here is ‘innocent’. Cageprisoners are using an interpretation of the term ‘innocent civilian’ which many of the people whose views they promote, would use to justify individual killings as well as mass killings of particular groups of people. On a BBC World Service programme, Asim Qureshi of Cageprisoners affirmed his support for global jihad, which he claimed was protected under international law, justifying the right to self-determination. Amnesty International has never adopted a policy on self-determination and cannot justify jihad on those grounds.
Claudio Cordones intervju har inte rätat ut några frågetecken i min bok. Det är häpnadsväckande att se hur Amnestys varumärke vittrar sönder.
Detta borde uppmärksammas mer.