Sunday 15 July 2007

Haneef's Email

It has now been implied that Mohammed Haneef's story about leaving Australia to be with his wife and child is untrue:
A media report said Haneef sent an email to an associate shortly after the failed UK terror attacks, saying he would have to leave Australia in a hurry and did not mention visiting his ailing wife and child.

Haneef and his family have said he planned to visit his wife and newborn daughter in Bangalore. The police were sceptical. In an affidavit presented before a magistrate Jim Gordon, an AFP officer was quoted as saying he suspected Haneef "has not been entirely truthful" about his departure.

"He said he had to leave in a hurry. He made no mention of his sick wife or child," said an official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

(Source: Times of India)1
The implication being that his story is false, and hard behind this the possibility that he is a despicable terrorist Jihadi who dreams of blood and war.

Some thoughts: is it so unusual to ommit personal details from an email? The receipient is on;y described as 'an associate.' The fact that Haneef didn't wail and gnash his teeth, cybernetically, proves nothing. Perhaps he wanted to maintain his privacy. If so, he must be fairly chagrined at the moment.

Second, even if he was trying to flee from the country, having learned about his Cousin's botched martyrdom, this also proves nothing, beyond the possibility that he panicked and thought, "Gosh, the police will probably want to speak to me, and I have to get home to my wife and child. Let's go now."

Fianlly, if he was actively involved, surely he'd have laid a more obvious trail - booked his ticket weeks out, talked about it loudly about how he was going to go to see his wife and child and bring them back, then announce suddenly that the child was sick and he had to go right now? To paraphrase that renowned friend of human rights, Donald Rumsfeld said, "Sometimes lack of evidence is itself evidence."

So I still don't give any credit to the charges brought agaisnt him. It is a shoddy attempt to kepp him in custody, as the police knew they were unlikely to be allowed to continue to hold him without charge.

1 'Doc had sent an email shortly after failed terror attack,' Time of India, 15 Jul 2007, TIMES NEWS NETWORK & GENCIES. (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Doctor_had_sent_an_email_shortly_after_attack/articleshow/2204291.cms)

No comments:

Unsurprising

 From the Guardian : The  Observer  understands that as well as backing away from its £28bn a year commitment on green investment (while sti...