Moazzam Begg On Pulling Out of Amnesty Event

Earlier today I was made aware that the Outside the Law: stories from Guantanamo event while fully booked out, Moazzam Begg was not going to participate, now Sunny @ Pickled Politics has this statement (and promising more tomorrow) by Begg which I think credibly raises the question why this campaign now to discredit him and his wish it does not overshadow the work being done.

Also see Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific Director has responded to the article written by the desperate Richard Kerbaj in yesterday’s Sunday Times. He says Kerbaj- ‘mischaracterizes my views.‘ This would appear to be a not uncommon modus operandi for Kerbaj as I have shown. Gita Sahgal continues her campaign but is yet to meet with Begg, but as she clearly has time for interviews with The Times and as Begg will have some spare time, they could now. In fact a neutral venue with Sunny Hundal as moderator would be ideal, stream it live on the web and let’s see what there is to see.

Update: Report on the event by Andy Worthington.

7 Responses to “Moazzam Begg On Pulling Out of Amnesty Event”

  1. earwicga Says:

    In the meantime we should all get behind the campaign to bring Shaker Aamer home: http://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions_details.asp?ActionID=675

  2. RickB Says:

    Yes indeed, I will be writing more on his case soon, please everyone click that link and take some action.

  3. earwicga Says:

    And for those in the UK – please see if your MP has signed up to this EDM which ‘urges the Government to make renewed representations to the US to secure his release and return to this country.’
    http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=40125&SESSION=903

  4. RickB Says:

    Albert Owen hasn’t, he’s getting a letter! And for all Anglesey peeps please write to him-

    Constituency Office,
    Ty Cledwyn,
    18 Thomas Street,
    Holyhead, Anglesey, LL65 1RR

  5. rina sherman Says:

    In response to “Who Speaks for Human Rights?”, an article by D.D. Guttenplan & Maria Margaronis published in The Nation on March 18, 2010 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100405/guttenplan_margaronis) with regards to the recent Amnesty International controversy opposing the ONG and their employee, Gita Sahgal, head of Amnesty’s gender unit, over the organization’s high profile public association with Moazzam Begg (Cage Prisoners), two things can be said:

    First of all, Amnesty International seems to continue having difficulties in positioning itself in relation to the global problematic of political manipulation and terror in the name of religion.
    Secondly, Amnesty International’s endemic hesitation to deal with criticism is questionable for an organization of its stature and reputation. Amnesty International’s attitude on both scores is comparable to that of other international Human Rights Organizations, such as the Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), in France.

    In somewhat different ways related to cultural expression, and for reasons related to different historical situations and political choices, a fraction of the “Left Wing” or Liberal Cultures in several Western countries, such as France, the UK, the USA, have chosen, on occasion, and at times repeatedly, to whitewash crime executed in the name of religion. That all humans have the right to Human Rights is undisputable and human rights organizations have a mammoth task to bring any form of discrimination to the public’s attention. But that such organizations should align themselves or be associated in public with individuals, events and affiliated organizations that underwrite violence of any kind in the name of religion is unacceptable on all accounts, and also merits to be brought to public attention and especially to the attention of those that provide their funding.

    In the case of Gita Sahgal, Amnesty International should immediately reinstate her in her position and suspend any association with Moazzam Begg, until such time as extensive dialogue and research over the matter has taken place, and then be made public to Amnesty International’s funders and the public at large.

    A similar point in case, illustrates Amnesty International’s general approach and culture in matters regarding crime in the name of religion. In February 2004, Didier Contant, grand reporter, fell from a building in Paris whilst he was doing his third investigation into the kidnapping and the assassination of the Monks of Tibhirine in Algeria in 1996. He had just returned from a month long investigation in Medea and Blida. Upon his return to Paris, a fellow journalist, Jean-Baptiste Rivoire from Canal+ launched a slander campaign against him, accusing him, among others with the editor in chief of Figaro Magazine who was supposed to publish his article, of working for the French and Algerian secret services. Needless to say, based on Rivoire’s information, which they did not deem necessary to check, the Figaro Magazine and several other publications refused Didier Contant’s article.

    In Rivoire’s slander campaign he repeatedly referred to an email from Amnesty International in London confirming his information. When contacted AI London first admitted to having had email exchanges with Rivoire regarding Contant, but then it was denied and turned into verbal conversations of which nobody could remember the content. It soon turned out that the main concern of Rivoire’s slander campaign was to prevent Contant from publishing information about the dubious activities in Algeria of a renegade officer from the Algerian Army, Abdelkader Tigha, in whose interests Amnesty International (and FIDH) acted after he was imprisoned in Taiwan when he was arrested for stealing from tourists. Tigha, in several versions of several statements blamed the Algerian Army for the death of the Monks of Tibhirine. He was an important witness for Canal+ reportages on the question. Contant returned with several hours of recordings of Blida and Medea residents describing his dubious identity. But for a few exceptions, the French press blacked out on the fate of Didier Contant. When contacted, journalists would say, “we need fresh news”, but even when the High Court of Paris condemned Rivoire for voluntary violence against Didier Contant in November 2009, not a single word appeared in the French press. As it turned out, as the storm died, neither Amnesty International nor FIDH continued to be associated with Abdelkader Tigha. For complete information about the death of grand reporter, Didier Contant, please visit: http://8e-mort-tibhirine.blogspot.com/

    Will Amnesty International follow a similar strategy in the case of their association with Moazzam Begg? Time will tell. But it would indeed be a sad loss for the organization to lose someone like Gita Sahgal, who from all accounts, seems to be dedicated human rights defender.

    Rina Sherman
    Paris, 20 March 2010

    Rina Sherman is a writer, ethnographer and filmmaker.
    http://www.rinasherman.com/

  6. RickB Says:

    Rina, the Contant case looks interesting, I will look some more into it, however I would not conflate it with the Sahgal Begg affair which has its own specifics to AI and if anything in comparison Sahgal would play the Rivoire role of presenting innuendo and selective quotes to support her opinion in a fact checking free media. The Contant case would only be weakened and further complicated by such associations. Each on its merits, none should go towards a monolith of Islamist intrigue to build a totality of an Islamophobic narrative.

  7. Rina Sherman Says:

    Rick, hi
    I agree that the two cases are different. But what does correspond is some of the ways in which AI chooses to deal with such issues, through silence, bland official statements instead of dialogue in a transparent manner.
    Amnesty International, or any of the other Human Rights NGO’s have no business taking stances in ideology. Their place and work lies in being neutral, in as much as that is possible.
    In the Didier Contant case, their correspondent first admitted to there having been email exchanges with Rivoire from Canal+ and then retracted to it there only having been telephone exchanges. Very conveniently, since then there would be no trace.
    Also, in their communications with me, they defended their interventions on behalf of renegade sub-officer Tigha who claimed that the Algerian Army was responsible for the death of the Monks. But some months later, and especially once the transcripts of some six hours of interviews Didier Contant had done with residents from Blida, elaborating on the dubious activities of Tigha, neither AI nor FIDH who once had so vehemently defended their victim, any longer tended to his welfare.

    All the best,
    Rina Sherman
    http://www.rinasherman.com


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: