There's something bugging me about this Moazzam Begg guy. Part of me wants to instantly conclude he is a terrorist but another part wants to hear his side of the story. Is he really a 'terrorist' because he was willing to support armed resistance in Afghanistan, Iraq which many argue were unjust wars? What was he was he doing in Syria exactly? If he was supporting armed resistance against the Assad regime does that make him a terrorist? Does affiliating yourself and supporting Islamic armed resistance movements automatically rule out the possibility that you are doing anything that can be classed as just or worthwhile in some manner?
If I were to go back in time to apartheid South Africa and form an armed Islamic movement that aimed to topple the apartheid government of South Africa as part of it's aim would my contribution to that cause not be valid or diminished by the fact that my affiliations/goals were also Islamic or even Jihadi in nature?
I'd be interested to hear people's views on this but it may be a day or two before I have the time to read any responses.
Yeah I have the same concerns.
Brief thoughts: IMO it would depend on your end game. If you want to end up with a sharia-based state, I'd say that's close enough to "terrorist". If you want to end up with a liberal democracy, maybe not.
Os does make a good point, but I think the comparison is false. I don't believe it extends to what we want to end up with. I think it ends at thought crimes. eg. Believing bin Laden is a good guy, knock yourself out! It only seems to be validated concern if you believe the narrative of a possible global Islamic take over. I can easily shrug it off and laugh.
Here is my biggest concern: When the US sent weapons to actual Al-Qaeda members in order to topple the Assad regime, the only people who screamed out TERRORISM! were allawites and shias/assad supporters. Suddenly USA was on the same side as terrorists? And the media reports of freedom fighters (AQ members)..
@billy, I feel that the article sets a bad precedent. A few things I thought of when reading it: He was sent to a place where it is well documented that torture happens, and is denied by authorities. Are we going to believe them over him? Not saying he's not lying, but it seems unlikely that he was there for a chat over coffee.
Second thing. oooooh they found a flak jacket? Night goggles? Islamic literature? I'd like a detailed description of the Islamic literature. Was it the same one that the Muslim brotherhood uses to take over America? Maybe is was Quranic analysis/or selected verses.
This part makes me feel like "they came for him, and I didn't say anything, and then they came for me". It's a dangerous precedent. God knows the things they can pin on me if they searched my room.
I wont comment on his whereabouts. bbl
Topic: Hamza Tzortzis the Extreme Islamist