To take one example of the claims made by Nawaz:
“Khan’s relationships with extremists ran so deep in fact, that he attended events for the jihadist rights group Cage, and wrote a foreword for one of their reports. Cage has since declared ISIS executioner ‘Jihadi-John’ to be a beautiful man live on the BBC.”
If we follow the links, which I’m guessing that Nawaz assumed we would not bother doing, we find …
Sadiq’s Dodgy Dossier Promoted Islamic Extremists
http://web.archive.org/web/20071210192953/www.sadiqkhan.org.uk/key_issues/babar_ahmad.htm
And what Khan actually wrote was:
“The point is not whether Babar is innocent or not, the point is that if he must stand trial it should be in front of his British peers, here in the UK, rather than in the American courts. It is only here that Babar will have his family and friends for support and the ability to mount a proper defence.
At present, as I write this, Babar is still awaiting extradition. He has an uncertain future ahead of him. His family and friends have been united in their support for him and their faith in him. They deserve our utmost respect.
The communities in Tooting have also shown their solidarity with Babar. This is not because of his personality, but because of the principles involved. “
So in other words, from opposing the asymmetric extradition treaty with the US, we are asked to deduce that Khan considers Jihadi John to be a “beautiful man” (though of course even that is a wilful misrepresentation of what CAGE actually said).
I can’t be bothered chasing down the rest of the references – this one alone is enough to show me what is the type of person wrting the article.