Forgive Us Babar Ahmad :'( :'(

format_quote Originally Posted by nazia

may Allah reward him immensely!

For what?

format_quote Originally Posted by nazia

for what he has been through. are you seriously telling me that he hasnt had injustice done to him?

I do not know if he has had injustice done to him or not as he has not been put in trial yet - he could be if he stopped fighting extradition. What I do know is that if he is guilty he should be in jail. And in the process of sending him to the US I do not see that any special injustice has been done to him in the circumstances.

format_quote Originally Posted by nazia

okay that fact that he had many injuries sustained during the time the police had "fairly" arrested him shows what kinds of injustice had been done! ffended: this was even done in front of his wife! can you even imagine the humility and pain this brother felt??

Well I do not feel that my manhood is quite as threatened by being roughly up by police in front of my wife, but yes I can imagine it. That is not the point. Mr Ahmad was, as far as the police were concerned, a terrorist suspect. How else do you arrest potential suicide bombers?

as a muslimah i am obviously going to feel anger towards this situation. the same anger and sorrow that i will feel for any other person that has had all that done to them

Why as a Muslima? I try to balance my distaste for what has been done with support for what they are trying to prevent. Do you feel nothing for the victims of 7-7? Don't you think, in the circumstances, the police were justified in trying to arrest Mr Ahmad as quickly as possible and before he had a chance to do anything had he been so inclined to do it?

format_quote Originally Posted by Isaac

a potential sucide bomber? oh yeh just like the poor brazilian, who was a potential suicide bomber?

That is another way to arrest a potential suicide bomber. After all you cannot simply let him blow himself up with six police officers sitting on him. A pity they did not get the right person, but if he had been a suicide bomber on his way to the Underground, what else should the police have done?

the government is just digging itself into a deeper whole by all these new laws and legislatiosn, thers gona come a ime, when the genrerla public is gona say enough is enough, adn regardless of colour, religion, creed, they are all gona get up and stand up for what tey belive is a form of opression in 21st century

I agree the government is wasting time. Britain has laws on the books for these crimes - they just don't have the courage to use them. But I think if the bombings continue, the public will say enough is enough but that anger will not be aimed at the government.

Why did this babarahmed get jailed? and who is he

format_quote Originally Posted by nazia

i have a low opinion of what some policemen/women say. after so many lies i dont see how they can be trusted, but khalas they are only following what orders have been prescribed for them."potential suicide bomber?" what just like the brazillian dude that they mercilessly shot down!! ffended: astaghfirullah is this what the world has come to? what has come of the quote "innocent until proven guilty"....or even atleast get some evidence for brother Babar, not just detain him without a grain of proof. :rant:

First of all it is not the police who said he was a suspect suicide bomber. He is wanted in the US for terror-related crimes. This is why they sent the Anti-Terrorist Squad to arrest him. They seem to have thought, with some reason given the charges, there was a risk there. Yes this is what the world has come to. Suicide bombers are dangerous people and they must be stopped. This is one way to stop them. I do not think it is a good way, but it is the only way on offer. If you do not like it perhaps you could suggest an alternative? There is evidence that Babar is guilty of something or a US judge would not have issued a warrant and he would not now be fighting extradition to the US.

unlike some i am able to see the outcome of deaths...and as you should know suicide bombers arent allowed in Islam and neither are those that kill innocent people. rules of combats have been laid out....

What outcomes do you see? I have been told many times that Islam does not allow suicide bombing. And I am perfectly happy to agree with that. But these suicide bombers came out of the Muslim community. They adopted a form of Islam, as wrong as it may have been, that did allow these bombings. I do not think that Islamic rules of war forbid the murder of innocents in all circumstances as it happens, but let's pass over this. The police have an obligation to prevent such incidents occurring again. The government does to. They have a policy of arresting people who are involved in such acts. What is wrong with that?

so of course i feel for those who died...whether it be in the 7/7 attacks or Iraq where they are still suffering.

The Iraq analogy is specious unless, like the bombers, you think there is a connection here that justifies the attack? What is to be done about the 7-7 attacks? Allow people to carry out more of them? The British government has consistently said this is not Islamic and called on the Muslim communities to help prevent more such attacks. They have got very little help so far. Which is fine, but if you do not like this response, what is the alternative?

and do you honestly think that a single man can take on a group of policemen?? i dont see that possible especially when it was a surprise arrest. i dont see that as being justified....

If he has a suicide belt strapped to his body I think he can. If he has chemical or nuclear materials I think he can make a right mess. If he even just has an AK-47 I think he could kill a few policemen and a bunch of other people. Of course it was a surprise arrest - what should they have done? Given him a time and a place and allowed him to come prepared?

Mr Ahmad looks pretty hard done by to me, but the injustice involved is less than the injustice involved in the 7-7 attack. I can tolerate one if it helps prevent the other. What is wrong with that approach?

format_quote Originally Posted by Abdullah4ever

Why did this babarahmed get jailed? and who is he

The battle to banish Babar Ahmad
Home Secretary Charles Clarke has authorised Babar Ahmad's extradition to face terrorism charges in the US.

The decision follows a long fight by the US for his removal and by Mr Ahmad and his supporters against the move.

The 31-year-old computer expert from Tooting, south London, is accused of running websites supporting terrorism and urging Muslims to fight a holy war.

He was arrested under anti-terror laws in August 2004 and charged with terror crimes by a US court two months later.

He was previously arrested under anti-terror laws in December 2003, but was released without charge - a move his supporters say proves his innocence.

His lawyers say Mr Ahmad denies the charges and his father Ashfaq Ahmad, has said his son is "totally innocent" and the case against him "ridiculous".

His lawyers also say Mr Ahmad, who is being held in Woodhill Prison, Milton Keynes, would be at risk of the death penalty if he was sent to the US.

Websites claim

Last autumn a Connecticut court charged Mr Ahmad, a British citizen, with supporting terrorism, conspiring to kill Americans and of money laundering.

The charges were brought in the US as Mr Ahmad allegedly used US-based websites to recruit fighters for causes in Afghanistan and Chechnya.

In claims dating back to 1997, the US government accused Mr Ahmad of "conspiring to support terrorism", saying he "sought, invited and solicited contributions" via websites and e-mails.

The US Department of State has claimed he ran several websites urging Muslims to use "every means at their disposal" to train for jihad, or holy war.

It is also alleged Mr Ahmad tried to set up a terrorist training camp in Arizona.

The websites allegedly encouraged people to train in street combat, land mine operations and sniper combat.

"If you're supporting the Taleban and the Taleban is killing American soldiers, we're alleging you're conspiring to kill American citizens abroad," Connecticut US Attorney Kevin O'Connor said in October 2004.

Mr Ahmad also had classified military documents describing the movements and formations of a Navy battle group and was in e-mail contact with an enlisted man aboard the USS Benfold, a Navy destroyer, US authorities said.

He was also charged with maintaining e-mail contact with a Chechen rebel leader.

John Hardy appeared for the US State department at Mr Ahmad's extradition hearing in March.

He told the hearing that one site, called azzam.com, which operated via US service providers from 1997 to 2003, included a posting reading: "Military training is an Islamic obligation, not an option."

It also carried a declaration of war against US forces in the Arabian peninsular from Osama bin Laden, Mr Hardy said.

He said another site carried an appeal for "tens of thousands" of gas masks and nuclear, chemical and biological warfare suits.

New laws

In May 2005, a District Court judge ruled Mr Ahmed could be extradited and the case was sent to the home secretary for final approval.

The order comes under UK legislation designed to speed up the extradition of suspected terrorists, which came into force in January 2004.

Under the act there is no requirement for US authorities to represent a prima facie case - although UK authorities must do so in seeking extraditions from the US.

Mr Ahmad, his family and supporters, have waged a long fight against his extradition, which has included letters and public campaigns.

His family have already said they would appeal against the extradition order in the High Court.

In August 2004 his father, a retired civil servant, said his son was "an average, law-abiding young man who has never been in trouble".

Mr Ahmad, 69, also told the BBC News website: "I am no match for the resources of the United States, but I will do everything in my power to help my son."

He added: "My son is not a terrorist - he is junior IT support officer."

His campaign has also won support from Martin Mubanga, a British man held in Guantanamo Bay for nearly three years.

He joined protesters outside court at the hearing in March. Mr Mubanga, 32, said Mr Ahmad would not get a fair trial in the US and called for the extradition requests to be denied.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/4441680.stm

Published: 2005/11/16 12:25:01 GMT

Oh jazakallah khier Heigou