We aren't for the other side, but we aren't exactly on your side either
Saad al-Fagih is a leading exiled Saudi dissident and director of the Movement for Islamic Reform in ArabiaSome people take a bit of an exception to such a description, Harry's Place has the run down
Today's Comment piece by Sa’ad al-Fagih [sic] is, I think, a somewhat more worrying example of the Guardian's naiivity in the field of extremist Islamist politics. The essence of the article is that the United Kingdom government needs to change its policies as it is playing into the hands of al-Qaida.There's more but you get the gist.
What concerns me is this.
Sa’ad al-Faqih described in the footnote to the article as “a leading exiled Saudi dissident and director of the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia”.
In fact Sa’ad al-Faqih is a little bit more than that.
Al-Faiqih seems to have bought the satellite phone which was used by one of the Al Qaeda suicide bombers who blew up the US embassy in Nairobi.
Sa'ad al-Faqih, was "designated" by the United States Treasury on December 21, 2004 and on 23 Dec 2004 was named on the United Nations 1267 Committee consolidated list of individuals belonging to or associated with the Al-Qaida organisation.
On 14 July 2005, the US Treasury "designated" al-Faiqih's "Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia" (MIRA), a U.K.-based Saudi oppositionist organization, for providing material support to al Qaida:
So why is the Guardian running opinion pieces from somone who is more than just an al Qaeda cheerleader or playing Devil's advocate? The Guardian of course knows who he is but don't disclose his affiliations, after all bin Laden could be described as a Saudi dissdent. Imagine Lord Haw Haw running his radio programme from inside Britain during WW2.