MUSLIM HATE IN ENGLAND!
London a Longtime Haven
for Radical Muslim Figures
By Patrick Goodenough
CNSNews.com
International Editor
July 08, 2005
(CNSNews.com) - Terrorism
experts have long warned that Islamists espousing violence enjoy a haven in
London, an assertion that has come into sharp focus again with Thursday's
bombings in the British capital.
For years, Britain tolerated the
presence of high-profile and outspoken Islamic clerics whose fiery sermons
frequently extolled jihad against the West. Since 9/11, however, anti-terror
legislation has been tightened, some groups have been outlawed, terror rings
have been broken and some controversial figures have been arrested.
One
of them, Egyptian-born Abu Hamza al-Masri, went on trial this week at London's
Old Bailey courthouse, where he faces more than a dozen charges include inciting
terrorism and racial hatred.
Al-Masri was formerly the imam at a North
London mosque linked to confessed al-Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui and
Richard Reid, who tried to blow up a U.S.-bound flight from Europe with
explosives hidden in his shoe.
He also is wanted in the United States and
Yemen on terror-related charges.
For years before his May 2004 arrest
al-Masri used the Finsbury Park mosque as a base to speak for what he insisted
were political causes.
Despite his radical rhetoric and close links to a
group that claimed responsibility for attacks including the Oct. 2000 bombing of
the USS Cole in Yemen, it was only in 2003 that the authorities acted against
him, stripping him of his British citizenship and barring him from preaching at
the mosque.
Al-Masri then took to addressing his followers -- mostly
young British- and foreign-born Muslims -- on the street outside the
building.
Britain also detained another London-based extremist cleric,
Abu Qatada, whose sermons were found in the 9/11 hijackers' apartment in
Germany.
But other radical leaders remained free, among them Omar Bakri
Mohammed, a Syrian-born cleric who has promoted and praised violence against
Israel, America and Britain for years.
Yael Shahar of the Israel-based
International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) said that although
London had been a center for Islamic extremism for years, the British security
services only started taking the threat seriously after 9/11.
Before
that, Shahar said, "the firebrand clerics who preached jihad and hatred of the
West were dismissed as 'armchair warriors' by British intelligence."
Even
since 9/11, however, critics have questioned Britain's apparent tolerance for
highly-controversial Muslim figures.
As recently as last year, the
government allowed a visit by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a Egyptian cleric who has
publicly voiced support for suicide bombers. London's leftwing Mayor Ken
Livingstone, who has called al-Qaradawi a "man of peace," welcomed him as an
honored guest.
Exploiting democracy
In 2000, Bakri told
Cybercast News Service in an interview: "We will use your democracy to
destroy your democracy."
Britain's legal system and its willingness late
last century to offer asylum to figures like Bakri, al-Masri and Abu Qatada made
it a magnet for exiled radical organizations.
"In the past decade, the
United Kingdom's undisputed political, economic, and cultural center has also
become a major world center of political Islam and anti-Semitic, anti-Israel,
and anti-American activism," writes Hebrew University of Jerusalem academic
Robert S. Wistrich, in online excerpts of an article to be published
soon.
"Through its Arabic-language newspapers, magazines, and publishing
houses, not to mention its flourishing network of bookshops, mosques, and
community centers, radical Islam has taken full advantage of what British
democracy has to offer for its anti-Western goals, reaping the benefits of
London's significance as a hub of global finance, electronic media, and mass
communications technology."
Osama bin Laden himself laid the groundwork
for a London-based network, according to terrorism researcher Yossef
Bodansky.
In his biography on bin Laden, written before 9/11, Bodansky
wrote that the al-Qaeda leader based himself in the London suburb of Wembley in
1994. By the time he left, after the Saudis began demanding his expulsion, "he
had consolidated a comprehensive system of entities" in the city.
In Nov.
1998, Bakri hosted a conference in London called Western Challenge and Islamic
Response, attended by more than a dozen extremist groups. At the gathering,
Bakri voiced support for Osama bin Laden's jihad and said recent anti-U.S.
attacks such as those in Saudi Arabia and East Africa were "legitimate
acts."
Following 9/11, Bakri was one of the first Islamist figures to
publicly applaud the attacks.
Since then he has spoken often of his
support for violent jihad, even admitting to signing up recruits for Islamist
campaigns in places like Kashmir and Israel.
A number of governments --
including those of India, Algeria, Sri Lanka and Egypt -- have long complained
about the presence in Britain of groups connected to violent campaign in those
countries.
Extremists recruited in Britain for terrorist acts abroad
include "shoe bomber" Reid, eight men involved in kidnappings in Yemen, and two
men who carried out a deadly suicide bombing in Tel Aviv in 2003.
Bakri
insisted that fighters were never recruited to carry out violent acts inside
Britain itself, although he did say it was his dream to see the Islamic banner
flying over Downing Street.
After the fall of the Taliban and its
al-Qaeda allies in Afghanistan in late 2001, a member of Bakri's organization,
Hassan Butt, told the BBC from Pakistan that British Muslim volunteers who had
been fighting in Afghanistan would return to Britain where they would "strike at
the heart of the enemy."
In an interview with a Portuguese magazine in
April 2004, Bakri said attacks on London were "inevitable."
One "very
well organized" group in London called itself al-Qaeda Europe, he said. "I know
that they are ready to launch a big operation."
THE BOMBINGS IN LONDON
Diligent, Tolerant, Targeted
London has a reputation as both a bastion in the war on terrorism and a haven for extremists.
By Greg Miller and Ken Silverstein
Times Staff
Writers
July 10, 2005
LONDON — The bombings in London last
week may mark the first strike by Osama bin Laden's terrorist network on a city
that had already served as a catalyst and crossroads for Al Qaeda operatives
involved in plots targeting the United States and other nations.
Radical
members of London's large Muslim population have been linked to a series of
plots, including the Sept. 11 attacks, the attempted shoe bombing of a
transatlantic flight to Miami in December 2001 and last year's deadly train
bombings in Madrid.
When Washington raised the U.S. threat level last
August, it was after authorities acquired evidence that an Al Qaeda operative
captured in Britain had conducted extensive surveillance of targets in the U.S.,
including Citigroup Center in New York and the World Bank offices in Washington.
One of the suspect's aliases was "Al Britani."
And though Britain has
passed aggressive anti-terrorism measures in recent years, allies have been
frustrated by the country's seeming inability to detain or extradite Islamic
firebrands. Spanish officials, for example, have criticized Britain for its
refusal to extradite an extremist cleric known as Abu Qatada, described by a
Spanish judge as Al Qaeda's spiritual leader in Europe.
As a result,
Britain's counter-terrorism approach is described in somewhat contradictory
terms. U.S. officials and experts praise the country's cooperation and
capabilities, even while describing London as a haven for
extremists.
"It's the paradox of the United Kingdom," said Roger Cressey,
a former White House counter-terrorism official in the Clinton and Bush
administrations. In Britain, Cressey said, "you have some of the most
sophisticated law enforcement and intelligence operations. At the same time,
London is easily the most important jihadist hub in Western Europe."
The
classic trade-off between intelligence work and crime prevention also played a
role in thwarting efforts to combat attacks. Britain's powerful spy agencies
found North London's Finsbury Park Mosque a valuable surveillance post for
watching Al Qaeda's web of contacts despite complaints of investigators in
mainland Europe that London was a headquarters for directing attacks elsewhere,
experts say.
Authorities have not yet determined who was responsible for
Thursday's bombings. A group calling itself the Secret Organization of Al Qaeda
in Europe claimed responsibility on a website. And investigators are
increasingly focused on a theory that the strikes were the work of a homegrown
terrorist cell that, at the least, was inspired by Al Qaeda.
British
authorities disclosed Saturday that the three subway bombs went off within
seconds of one another, suggesting a level of sophistication and coordination
that has become a hallmark of Al Qaeda's attacks.
London's reputation as
a haven for Islamic radicals has emerged over more than a decade, fueled by
policies that included granting asylum to Muslim dissidents who were likely to
be prosecuted in their home countries.
Saad Faqih, the controversial head
of the London-based Saudi opposition group Movement for Islamic Reform in
Arabia, praised the British government and people for being "very, very
tolerant." Faqih is precisely the kind of dissident who has benefited from
London's policies; he would be jailed in Saudi Arabia, and Washington considers
him a terrorist. But in London, he runs a radio station and lives and works
freely.
In an interview, he said the tolerant British were finally
attacked to force them to divorce themselves from Washington. "They [the
attackers] wanted to send a message, not just to England but to all of Europe,
to disassociate itself from America," Faqih said.
Among radicals
tolerated and even granted citizenship in Britain is Abu Hamza al Masri, who
openly celebrated the destruction of the World Trade Center and preached hatred
of the West from Finsbury Park Mosque — all while living on social welfare
payments.
The British government incarcerated him last year and is now
trying to revoke his citizenship, which could lead to his extradition to the
United States, where he is under an 11-count indictment charging him with
terrorism-related crimes.
But other foreign radicals deemed dangerous by
the government were released from prison after Britain's highest court ruled
late last year that foreigners considered a security risk could not be
imprisoned indefinitely without trial, a major setback to an emergency
anti-terrorism law put in place by Prime Minister Tony Blair's government after
Sept. 11.
Lord Leonard Hoffman, one of the judges on the court, said at
the time that the law itself might constitute more of a threat to the British
way of life than terrorism. "It calls into question the very existence of an
ancient liberty of which this country has until now been very proud: freedom
from arbitrary arrest and detention," he wrote.
Even those wanted by
other nations for alleged involvement in terrorist attacks have sought
protection from Britain's legal system. Mohammed Gerbouzi was convicted in
absentia in Morocco for his role in planning the May 2003 suicide bombings that
killed 45 people in Casablanca. But the British government does not have an
extradition treaty with Morocco and has refused to turn over Gerbouzi, who lives
in an apartment in north London.
Britain's approximately 2 million
Muslims represent nearly 4% of the country's population. The vast majority live
in its capital city, earning it the derisive nickname Londonistan. Only a small
fraction of the nation's Muslims are considered radical, but even so, British
counter-terrorism officials say the number of Al Qaeda sympathizers exceeds
10,000.
While France has been more aggressive in deporting imams who
preach violence, Britain has traditionally considered even the most vitriolic
rhetoric protected speech. As a result, the city has been a haven to radical
imams whose mosques were frequented by followers who went on to play key roles
in Al Qaeda plots.
One of those who attended Al Masri's Finsbury Park
Mosque was Zacarias Moussaoui, who faces charges in the United States in
connection with the Sept. 11 attacks.
Another extremist who frequented
the mosque was Richard Reid, convicted in the United States of trying to ignite
a bomb in his shoe on a Paris-to-Miami flight in 2001.
The country's
ability to identify extremists and potential terrorists within its Muslim
population is complicated by extraordinary diversity. Moussaoui is a French
citizen of Moroccan descent. Reid is a British citizen of Jamaican background.
Other disrupted plots have involved operatives from Pakistan, Algeria and
elsewhere.
"You can't even profile the demographic characteristics of the
potential bombers, given the diversity of the network in Britain," said Bruce
Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Rand Corp. in Washington. "You have this wide
array of potential suspects, not just stereotypical Middle
Easterners."
Hoffman said one factor that might help explain why the
United States has escaped attack since Sept. 11 is that "we don't have this
radical infrastructure that has existed in Britain for many years. We don't have
a Finsbury Park Mosque."
Before last week, Britain's accommodation of
radical Muslims had been seen by some as a source of protection — a belief that
radical imams would not encourage violence against a country that allowed them
to live in peace.
But any such balance, tacit or otherwise, may now be
shattered. Muslim officials and experts had suggested that an attack in London
was inevitable, given the building anger among young recruits, especially after
the government's support for Washington's war in Iraq.
"We have been
warning the government for two years that it put the country in danger" by
supporting the Iraq war, said Azzam Tamimi, a senior member of the Muslim Assn.
of Britain. "We hoped nothing like this would happen, but unfortunately it has.
There will always be crazy people who do things like this."
Others have
speculated that the attacks last week were an attempt to shatter any unspoken
arrangement between the British government and radical Muslims. An Italian law
enforcement official said in a telephone interview Saturday that he believed the
bombings might have been carried out by a new generation of homegrown jihadists
who do not respect tacit deals struck by their elders.
British security
agencies have thwarted at least half a dozen plots on Heathrow Airport and other
prominent targets in recent years. And despite Britain's internal threats,
experts said the country in some ways has better defenses than the United States
and other allied nations.
Britain's intelligence and law enforcement
agencies are seen as more integrated than the far-flung federal, state and local
agencies of the U.S., leading to better intelligence-sharing, experts
said.
Britain also has long-standing experience combating terrorism as a
result of its conflict with the Irish Republican Army.
"British
intelligence has a phenomenal track record" of preventing terrorist attacks,
said Daniel Byman, director of the security studies program at Georgetown
University and a former CIA analyst. "But you can't expect
perfection."
Miller reported from Washington and Silverstein from London. Also contributing to this report were Times staff writers Tracy Wilkinson and John Daniszewski in London and Sebastian Rotella in New York.
UK Muslim Cleric
Blames British People For Bombings
July 23, 2005 12:39 p.m. EST
Douglas Maher - All Headline News Staff Reporter
London, England (AHN) - Although he receives government annually and is currently claiming weekly income support, a British Muslim cleric says the citizens of Great Britain got what they deserved with the recent bombings that ravaged the city of London.
Omar Bakri Mohammed, 45, was borin in Syria, but resides in northern London. His assistant cleric, Anjem Choudary, says, “Nobody has yet pointed the finger at Tony Blair for his nasty policies in Iraq. If they continue the same foreign policy, we can expect more of the same."
Mohammed says, "I blame the British government and the British people. The Government has said, ‘You are with us or with terrorism’. I don’t think that is the way forward. The British people showed Tony Blair full support when they elected him again after he waged the latest Iraq war.”
He continues by saying, “We’re going to incite people to do jihad (Holy War). We will conquer the White House. It will be no surprise that we will be in charge and Muslims will control the earth. Let your death occur in the battlefield. If you make yourself available to Jihad, He will accept you as Shaheed (a martyr).”
British politicians and citizens are calling for Mohammed's immediate deportation back to Syria.
Labour MP Andrew Dismore tells The Sun, “His presence is not conducive to the public good.”
Muslim Murderers: Kill British Queen
by J. Grant Swank, Jr.
Nov 14, 2005
The Queen of England is "an enemy of Islam," according to Al-Qaeda. She, like all other infidels, must be slain.
According to "Mohammad Sidique Khan, ringleader of the London bombings that killed 52 commuters from Mohammad Sidique Khan, ringleader of the London bombings that killed 52 commuters," all non-Muslims must be slaughtered. That is reported by Abul Taher in Times On Line.
Khan states: "'It is very clear, brothers and sisters, that the path of jihad and the desire for martyrdom is embedded in the holy prophet and his beloved companions.
"'By preparing ourselves for this kind of work, we are guaranteeing ourselves for paradise and gaining the pleasure of Allah.
"'And by turning our back on this work, we are guaranteeing ourselves humiliation and the anger of Allah. Jihad is an obligation on every single one of us, men and women.'"
There you have it. It is the Islamic call to worldwide rule in the name of the Koran's Allah. In order to rule, Muslims must have no planetary inhabitants but themselves, cowardly Muslims excluded by being executed along with the non-Muslims.
This Khan mandate is stated in the context of cowardly Muslims in England giving allegiance to the Queen rather than bowing down solely to the Islamic deity. That is abhorrent to the likes of Khan; therefore, the Muslims now residing in England must be taught a lesson. They must fall in line with killing off non-Muslims, which would include the Queen, and thus set up Islamic rule in all of England. The Queen must go. Allah must rule from her throne in her place.
Al-Qaeda has gone so far as to state that the Queen is the "severest enemy of Islam." This is broadcast in a video message "justifying the July bombings in London."
Here and there across the globe, insane Muslims are corralling their own cultists into killing off the masses. These crazies then move into such Muslim nations as Jordan to press the point. They move into a Muslim wedding feast to underline their ambition as being supreme.
This is World War III. It is held in various unpredictable locales. It is seen through by warriors dressed in wedding attendees' garb. It is a whole different mode of combat. Nevertheless, it is just as real and deadly.
Finally, with the Jordanian massacre, the Muslims leaders such as the Jordanian King are castigating their own. It is time, long overdue time. Far past real-time in real-life. Nevertheless, peace-peoples are happy that at last somebody belonging to the Islamic clique is speaking out against Islamic killers international. Time will tell if their voices increase in volume and number. Don't count on it being a wild surge for peace. Nevertheless, in these confusing times anything is possible.
Obviously with the Queen of England under attack, every democracy leader of every freedom-based country is under attack. It is merely a matter of time until there is an assassination and then a number of them dominoing the hellish craze of Islamic slaughterers who thrill at blood in the streets.
That is why France is wise to inform the public that Muslim rioters will be deported promptly. The British lawmakers were amiss in not supporting British Prime Minister Tony Blair in his efforts to corral the social destroyers by putting them away for at least a 90-day period while investigations were undergoing.
The United States has been walking the fine line in not wanting to incite Muslim riots and at the same time having the President refer to Islam as "an ideology of hate." Blair has called it an "evil ideology." Yet on the other hand, Mr. Bush placed the Koran in the White House library for the first time at which time he invited Muslims to a dinner in the White House. Laura Bush met in another room with Muslim women to celebrate the occasion.
So it appears that national leaders don't know what to do to stave off the Muslim killers. They placate them. They threaten them. They deport them. They tolerate them. They pat them on the back. They smile at them. They scowl at them.
All the while the Queen sits upon her throne - in danger.
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK!
Angry Blair wants Muslim radicals out
August 6, 2005
BY MARA D. BELLABY
LONDON -- Prime Minister Tony Blair proposed strict anti-terror measures Friday that would allow Britain to expel foreigners who preach hatred, close extremist mosques and bar entry to Muslim radicals. ''The rules of the game are changing'' after last month's bomb attacks, he declared.
The proposals, which also target extremist Web sites and bookshops, are aimed at excluding radical Islamic clerics accused of whipping up hatred and violence among disenfranchised Muslim men.
''We are angry. We are angry about extremism and about what they are doing to our country, angry about their abuse of our good nature,'' Blair said. ''We welcome people here who share our values and our way of life. But don't meddle in extremism because if you meddle in it ... you are going back out again.''
Also Friday, police charged three men with failing to disclose information about the whereabouts of a suspect in the failed July 21 London bomb attacks. Police did not name the suspect. The wife and sister-in-law of Hamdi Issac, a suspected July 21 attacker, face similar charges, as does another man.
The July 7 suicide attacks on London's transit system and the failed July 21 attacks raised fresh concern about the freedoms Britain offers to individuals and groups known for extremist activities. Blair said the focus of the proposals was on foreigners because authorities think ''the ideological drive and push is coming from the outside.''
Some members of Britain's 1.8 million-strong Muslim community expressed concern that moderate Muslims would be subjected to new prejudices and restrictions.
Closing the door to militants
Britain has been criticized for lagging its neighbors in responding to terrorism. Since last month's attacks, France has expelled two extremist Muslim prayer leaders and plans to ship home eight others. Italian authorities deported eight Palestinian imams.
Blair said the government was prepared to amend human rights legislation if legal challenges to his proposals proved insurmountable.
Under the proposals, anyone who preaches hatred or violence could be deported, those linked to terrorism would be automatically refused asylum, and steps would be taken to make it easier to strip naturalized citizens of their British citizenship if they preached violence.
The government also will consider a request from police and security services to hold terror suspects for three months without charge. The limit is 14 days. The measures also would extend the use of home arrest for Britons who cannot be deported.
New powers would be created to allow the closure of mosques that foment extremism.
Authorities will draw up lists of radical preachers who will not be allowed to enter Britain, and a list of radical Web sites and bookstores. Any foreigner who ''actively engages'' with those places could face deportation. Membership in extremist Islamic groups would also become a crime.
AP
Islamic extremist rally calling for Islamic Britain is banned
Thursday, 17th November 2005, 14:31
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) -
Leaflets showing a Muslim fighter holding a rocket launcher outside 10 Downing
Street are being probed by detectives amid claims they are linked to exiled
preacher of hate Sheikh Omar Bakri.
The sickening pamphlets shows a black Islamic flag flying over Parliament and
invite people to a rally in east London.
But shocked council officials and police discovered that the hall booked for the
meeting was made under a false name apparently to celebrate the religious
festival of Eid.
And officers revealed that the man behind the meeting is Abdul Muhid, a leading
member of the Saviour Sect set up by Omar Bakri after his group Al-Muhajiroun
was disbanded.
The group has justified the suicide terror attacks on July 7 in which 52 people
were murdered as they were not innocent because they did not follow Islamic law.
The group had booked a community centre in Walthamstow claiming they wanted to
celebrate the religious festival of Eid, but the leaflets declared "it is only a
short matter of time before the black flag of Islam flies high above 10 Downing
Street."
Muhid, 23, has twice been arrested over violence at rallies over the past year
and now faces a police probe into the distribution of the flyers.
The leaflet for the banned rally on November 6 which was to have been held at
The Asian Centre in Walthamstow had the headline "Islamic State for Britain.
There can be no negotiations."
The leaflets go on to claim with 2,000 mosques, countless Madrassahs, Muslim
Schools, Halal butchers and restaurants up and down the country, "Britain is
already on the verge of becoming an Islamic State."
"The revival of Islamic awareness amongst the Muslims in the UK is at its
fastest pace and more and more Muslims and non-Muslims are realising that there
can be no negotiations with Islam, no negotiations with the implementation of
the Khalafah and the Shari'ah law, it is an absolute inevitable."
Muhid, from Stoke Newington, east London, was last arrested when he was part of
a group of 50 men using loud hailers to berate passer-bys in Southall on May 1
this year.
When police arrived to disperse the group, a scuffle broke out with some of the
supporters.
He was arrested for violent disorder and assaulting a police officer in
Chingford on July 13 and quizzed, but charges were dropped because of lack of
evidence.
And he was arrested for inciting racial hatred after a man complained of
homophobic and racist comments made when Muhid was in a group of eight manning a
religious stall in Walthamstow on September 14 last year.
He appeared at Waltham Forest Magistrates Court and bailed, but again charges
were dropped by the CPS.
A police source said: "Muhid is always in possession of the leaflets and he has
only ever been seen with a loudhailer or distributing the leaflets at market
stalls. We don't know if he is making them but we assume he is because he is
always at the centre of things."
A police spokeswoman confirmed the group was now under investigation over the
controversial flyers.
She said: "The first we heard about the event was from the council on October
23.The Asian Centre was booked for 2.30pm on Sunday November 6 and the booking
was subsequently cancelled.
"An investigation is on-going into the printing and distribution of the leaflets
but at this stage there has been no arrests."
A Waltham Forest spokeswoman said: "A booking had been made at the Asian Centre
for a private party to celebrate Eid.
"In light of new information, the Council acted responsibly and cancelled the
booking. It is clear that the centre was misled over the details of the booking
and what is planned is a rally that is open to the public.
"Waltham Forest has a long history of good community relations and the Council
takes it duty to promote good relations between people of different racial
groups seriously.
"We became very concerned that allowing this event to go ahead could lead to a
breakdown in community relations.
"It is a testament to the close partnership working that exists in the borough
that this information was identified and was quickly acted on by both the Police
and the Council."
Blair’s ban fails to silence Muslim preachers of
hate
The Sunday Times November 20, 2005
ISLAMIC extremists are targeting British Muslims with violent Al-Qaeda propaganda, in defiance of Tony Blair’s announcement four months ago that he would clamp down on preachers of hate.
London-based foreign extremists are using websites to post video footage of suicide operations and attacks by insurgents against coalition forces in Iraq. There are also postings of the execution of Russian soldiers by mujaheddin rebels in Chechnya.
There is growing exasperation among the Saudi authorities about the government’s apparent reluctance to tackle two Saudi citizens who are responsible for some of the most blatant incitement.
Muhammad al-Massari, a London-based Saudi extremist, has been allowing the forum pages of his website — www.tajdeed.net — to be used by terrorist groups. They include Al-Qaeda in Iraq, headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was responsible for the murder of Ken Bigley, the British hostage.
A second Saudi, Saad al-Fagih, uses his website and satellite radio broadcasts to incite an uprising against the House of Saud.
Ferej Alowedi, the Saudi chargé d’affaires in London, said: “We have been requesting the British authorities to have them extradited. We can give written assurance that we will not execute or torture them.”
Last week The Sunday Times disclosed that al-Massari’s website carried an attack on the Queen as one of the “severest enemies of Islam” from Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden’s second in command. This was in defiance of a declaration by Blair that the “rules of the game” were changing. He said after the London bombings: “The new grounds [for deportation] will include fostering hatred, advocating violence to further a person’s beliefs, or justifying or validating such existence.”
Yet al-Massari’s website, which was shut down in May, has returned and has messages that incite Muslims to join the global jihad, and glorify the Al-Qaeda attack in Amman that left at least 60 people dead on November 9.
The Saudi dissident advocates the beheading of homosexuals and describes the September 11 attacks as the “blessed conquest in New York and Washington”. Al-Massari was not available for comment.
In his response to the terrorist killing of 52 commuters on July 7, Blair also announced that the radical group Hizb ut-Tahrir and the offshoots of Al-Muhajiroun would be banned.
He said: “Those that. . . incite hatred or engage in violence against our country and its people have no place here.” A few days after his announcement, 10 foreign preachers were arrested. They are in police custody awaiting court hearings about their deportations.
But, more than four months later, Hizb ut-Tahrir remains active and is lobbying Muslims to challenge the new anti-terror legislation.
Al-Ghuraaba and the Saviour Sect, two offshoots of Al-Muhajiroun, which had kept a low profile since the summer, announced on Friday that they had merged into a stronger organisation.
The new group — Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah (ASWJ) [Followers of the Prophet] — is headed by Anjem Choudary, who was second in command to the cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed before Al-Muhajiroun disbanded early this year.
Bakri is in Lebanon now. Although he was widely thought to be the first cleric to be deported after Blair’s announcement, he managed to slip out of Britain in August.
At a press conference this weekend, the leaders of ASWJ mocked Blair’s efforts to ban them.
Abu Izzedine, also known as Omar Brooks and a prominent member, said: “Blair decided to ban us almost a year after we disbanded. The British government is one of the worst governments on the planet.”
He previously said of the London bombings: “I would never denounce the bombings, even if my own family was to suffer, because we always stand with the Muslims, regardless of the consequences.”
Another member of ASWJ, Abu Yahya, denounced the Queen. He said: “The Queen is enemy to Islam and Muslims. We see in reality her actions all around the earth, her forces, army, navy, her air force bombing, destroying Muslims, killing our families, destroying our properties and occupying our land.
NO ONE seemed willing to take responsibility for tackling the Abu Hamza problem.
Government departments pointed the finger of blame at one another; politicians complained that the police and the spymasters did not investigate him properly; Scotland Yard moaned about MI5 and vice-versa. Detectives felt that the Crown Prosecution Service let them down; the CPS moaned that the court system was stacked against them. The judges retorted that they did not make the laws; if anyone was to blame it was the civil servants and politicians at Westminster. The blame game went round and round as Tony Blair banged the table in exasperation.
Every chance there had been to pursue Abu Hamza seemed to have been missed, wasted or blocked.
For more than twenty years there had been a catalogue of bureaucratic foul-ups and a lack of resolve by the British authorities to tackle him, even when presented with a clear opportunity to do so.
The first occasion was in 1980, when Abu Hamza was arrested as an illegal immigrant and brought before the courts for overstaying his visa. Had his case been subjected to a proper investigation, potential offences under the Marriage Act, the Births and Deaths Registration Act and the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act could have been discovered. But the validity of his marriage to Valerie Traverso and the truth about his claim to be the father of her baby daughter were not examined.
He came to the attention of the police again in the mid-1980s, when his bullying behaviour began to alarm the imams and trustees of a number of mosques. Members of the Muslim community in Brighton approached Sussex police, and at Regent’s Park mosque in London trustees took court action to keep him away from the building.
When he returned from Afghanistan and Bosnia in the mid-1990s there was further trouble in Luton. But he was left to carry on with his activities and to seize control at Finsbury Park.
Abdulkadir Barkatullah, one of the management committee ousted by Abu Hamza, said he and community representatives went to the police seven times to complain about assaults and extremist activities inside the mosque. No action was taken.
The Prime Minister had urged the Muslim community to do more about the scourge of extremism within its own ranks but, Barkatullah said, “When we did do precisely that with Abu Hamza, we were ignored.”
If those who raised the alarm at home were overlooked, then foreign intelligence agencies were discounted. Those of France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands all accused Abu Hamza of being the ringmaster of a terrorist operation. The French and the Algerians had spies inside the mosque, and were horrified at what they uncovered. Egypt wanted to swap a British prisoner for Abu Hamza. All shared their findings with Whitehall, but nothing happened.
Senior sources now admit that the British response was coloured by a belief that the French were wildly over-reacting to the Islamist threat. These same sources agree that Britain underestimated the real menace of Abu Hamza, and did not devote enough resources to investigating his network until 9/11 jolted every Western power.
It seems a lame excuse that British security authorities needed to see skyscrapers collapsing in New York to realise the danger of Islamic fundamentalists, when they had damning proof of Abu Hamza’s direct involvement with terrorists in Yemen in 1998, when he had bought a satellite phone and supplied £500 of airtime for the kidnappers of 16 Western holidaymakers.
Irrefutable evidence of his calls to and from the kidnappers’ leader was gathered by GCHQ, the British Government’s intelligence listening post. But in Britain telephone intercept evidence cannot be produced as evidence in the criminal courts.
A leading counter-terrorism investigator says today that he has no doubt that were such evidence admissible, Abu Hamza would have been prosecuted for his role in the Yemen abductions and deaths.
Scotland Yard did send a file to the CPS in March 1999, but it was rejected, marked “insufficient evidence”.
The FBI thought differently. To Whitehall’s embarrassment, American investigators have announced that they will use the evidence harvested by GCHQ and other British agencies should they get the chance to prosecute Abu Hamza in the US.
The tragic events in Yemen did lead to Abu Hamza’s brief arrest for four days in March 1999. His home was thoroughly searched, and a large number of audio and video recordings of his sermons were confiscated. They included three videotapes of sermons that would be held in court seven years later as amounting to the offence of “soliciting to murder”. But at the time, the police took no action.
In one recording, Abu Hamza told his followers that they had to fight, kill and die, because “no drop of liquid is loved by Allah more than the liquid of blood”.
Detectives, who say they were focusing on the Yemen investigation, decided that no offence had been committed. The content of the sermons formed no part of their report to the CPS, and the tapes were returned to Abu Hamza — who in turn insists that he took this as a clear signal that nothing he was saying could be deemed to be illegal.
Also taken from him in that search in 1999 were the eleven volumes of the Encyclopaedia of Afghani Jihad. Seven years later these would be described to an Old Bailey jury as a terrorist manual. They, too, were returned.
The police signalled their concern about his activities by permanently confiscating two passports found in his home during the raid. One, in his own name, had expired; the second, in the name Adam Ramsey Eaman, had been used by Abu Hamza to travel to Bosnia, where he met Arab mujahidin fighters in 1995. No prosecution ensued from his possession of this document, because he obtained it legally after changing his name by deed poll.
If Abu Hamza used sleight of hand to change his identity, others at the mosque engaged in naked fraud to purloin identities and money, and to falsify benefit claims. Surely someone should have thought it strange that so many young men, of similar ages, were turning up with near-identical claims for welfare and housing, and using the same address? Islamist militants were jailed for massive credit card frauds which could be traced back to Finsbury Park, but Abu Hamza was not even questioned. The British authorities were clearly aware that he was involved in fundraising for terrorism — not least because he confessed it to his contacts in the intelligence services.
Some of his emissaries were stopped leaving Britain carrying large amounts of money. James Ujaama, who has struck a deal to testify against Abu Hamza in the US, was questioned at Heathrow airport with a suitcase full of cash days before the 9/11 attacks. He told officials that he was flying to Pakistan and then crossing into Afghanistan to deliver the funds for the establishment of a Taliban school.
US investigators claim to have obtained further evidence that Abu Hamza was directly bankrolling al-Qaeda’s Darunta camp, which specialised in explosives and poisons training and where the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, and others from Finsbury Park were sent. But he was never charged with financing terrorism.
Abu Hamza was not simply a fundraiser for terrorist camps. He provided a production line of recruits for al-Qaeda and others to train as jihadi fighters and suicide bombers. In the camps, his name was well-known; he was someone who could refer candidates to the highest echelons of al-Qaeda’s leadership. When Ujaama fell ill on a visit to Afghanistan he was treated by Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s personal physician and second-in-command of al-Qaeda.
British law enforcement agencies say they knew about Abu Hamza’s activities, but were powerless to stop him. It was not until late 2001, when the controversial Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act was passed into law, that sending someone abroad to undergo terrorist training and instruction became a criminal offence. Yet even after the new laws were introduced, Abu Hamza’s followers continued to disappear off to camps run by outlawed groups, and still nobody in authority laid a finger on him.
David Blunkett, out of government since November 2005 and with time to reflect on his stewardship of the fight against terrorism, believes that the sinister nature of Abu Hamza was not appreciated. “There was still an assumption when I took office as Home Secretary (in 2001) that he was a bigmouth and was worth tracking but wasn’t at the centre of events,” he says.
Blunkett is angry to have learnt since that the intelligence services never showed him “the detailed trail” of networks, the personal history and the high-level contacts that would have indicated that Abu Hamza was “a real threat and a danger”.
He freely admits that the British authorities at all levels were nervous about taking action against Abu Hamza. They saw the preacher not as a terrorist suspect but as an outspoken religious leader of a minority faith, and feared that any action against him would be labelled as Islamophobic and an abuse of human rights.
“It is clear that for all sorts of reasons there was a reluctance in our society to believe that it was possible for a faith to be misused in that way,’ says Blunkett, adding: “It is also clear now that there were opportunities for having taken action. By putting the jigsaw together, it is possible for us to realise that this man was a danger.”
Before 2001, no one considered that Islamist terror was a threat to Britain, and up until that year the anti-terrorist effort in the UK was still directed at fighting dissident elements of Irish republicanism.
It is easily forgotten now, but the Real IRA waged a destructive bombing campaign in London during 2000 and 2001. Just five weeks before 9/11 a Real IRA car bomb exploded on Ealing Broadway, west London, injuring several people.
American investigators were aghast at how Abu Hamza was treated. They were sick of handing information to British agencies only to see him being allowed to continue preaching hatred in front of the cameras. One senior official in the US Department of Justice said: “We just did not understand what was going on in London. We wondered to ourselves whether he was an MI5 informer, or was there some secret the British were not trusting us with? He seemed untouchable.”
Exasperated US security agencies decided that if Britain were not going to act, then they would. Hence the warrant handed over by FBI agents stationed at the US embassy in Grosvenor Square in May 2004.
Some in the British Government continued to dither.
Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney-General, thought it would look bad for Britain to surrender a British citizen to the Americans without making any effort to try him in Britain. This argument won the day. Britain would not hand Abu Hamza over if it could be proven that he had committed serious crimes here.
The police were instructed to build a case, and to do it swiftly. The obvious place to look again for evidence was in the thousands of recordings of his sermons recovered in the search of his home in 1999.
In August 2004, Abu Hamza was formally arrested inside Belmarsh jail and taken across London to be interviewed at Paddington Green police station. Two months later he was charged with using his sermons to incite murder and stir up racial hatred. His lawyers pointed out that police had examined some of this evidence before and handed it back to him. He himself said: “If I was not already in prison, I would have laughed.”
America wanted to put Abu Hamza on trial for recruiting, financing and directing terrorism, charges that could see him jailed for up to a hundred years.
But British prosecutors chose to intervene and to accuse him of lesser offences, mostly under a century-and-a-half-old statute.
The central charge was that he had crossed the boundaries of freedom of expression — the criminal equivalent of ignoring a “Keep off the grass” sign. Somehow Britain managed to make it look as if Abu Hamza was getting off lightly.
Riots over mosque on the Queen's doorstep
06/10/06
By David Pilditch
THE QUEEN’s home town was gripped by fear last night as war erupted between
rival gangs of race-hate thugs.
Extra officers were called in and riot police placed on stand-by as mobs of
Muslim and white youths prepared for a fourth consecutive night of violence in
the royal town of Windsor in Berkshire.
The Queen usually spends weekends at Windsor Castle and no decision has yet been
made over whether she will change her plans. In unprecedented scenes of mayhem
and disorder in the historic town, armed gangs of more than 100 youths have
fought running battles in the streets.
A Muslim-run dairy which wants to build a mosque has been petrol-bombed and
vehicles have been vandalised.
The outbreak of disorder began after a mother and her daughter were set upon by
a gang of 20 Asian youths armed with baseball bats, iron bars and pitchforks.
The shaven-headed thugs – all dressed in white robes – launched the attack after
pouring out of a former office building which is being used as an unofficial
mosque.
They attacked Karen Hayes, 46, and her 18-year-old daughter Emily before turning
their weapons on the teenager’s car. The pair had gone to help after Karen’s
15-year-old son Sean and a friend were beaten up by the gang. Police have said
it is unlikely the mob will be brought to justice.
As dusk fell last night, gangs of hooded white youths began to gather outside
the dairy entrance.
With scarves wrapped around their mouths to hide their identity, the teenage
boys insisted they were the victims of the unrest.
One 17-year-old youth said: "The Asians have got no respect for us. What they
normally do is start on the kids." Meanwhile, scores of Asian youths marched
through the streets chanting "We are getting our mosque".
Three police riot vans swooped on the 40-strong mob of white youths. As a
stand-off developed between the teenagers and Muslim workers at the gates of the
Medina dairy, around 30 officers moved in.
Police stopped and searched gang members, making them remove the scarves
covering their faces and asked them to disperse, which the majority of them did.
Dairy manager Sikander Khan said it felt a little like being under siege. "We
have all these lorries to load up and we feel intimidated with them here."
Locals said tensions had been growing between residents and staff at the dairy
for months. Three arrests have been made since this week’s violence began.
Problems started after Sardar Hussain, who bought the dairy in 2002, applied for
planning permission to turn a nearby office building into a mosque and Islamic
education centre.
Official permission has not been given but workers have been using the building
for prayers. And locals insist it is already attracting a hard-core element of
fundamentalists.
People opposing the conversion claim there are not enough Muslims in Windsor to
warrant a mosque. There are said to be around 500 Muslims in a town with a
population of more than 30,000.
Staff at the dairy say they have faced verbal abuse, their cars have been
damaged and stones, bricks and bottles have been thrown at the buildings. Mr
Hussain, who came to Britain from Pakistan in 1973, insisted the attacks which
provoked the disorder were not connected to his plan for a mosque.
He said: "I am disappointed this is happening. This is the Queen’s town. I like
to see this town in peace and quiet. I like to see everybody get on with their
lives.
"We are providing a service to the community. I feel safe because I am in the
hands of God but I feel sad this has happened in the Queen’s town."
Chief Superintendent Brian Langston, of Thames Valley Police, said: "The type of
behaviour shown over the past few evenings will not be tolerated by police.
"We will not allow any section of the community to be intimidated by mindless
violence. All reported incidents are being investigated as serious criminal
activity.
"Three arrests have already been made and we will continue to use robust
policing tactics to deal with anyone threatening public safety."
Last week it was revealed that the Queen had allowed a Muslim prayer room to be
set up at Windsor Castle. Nagina Chaudhry, a student who works part-time in the
castle’s gift shop, won approval from Her Majesty to pray during Ramadan within
the castle walls.
Last night Nagina, 19, begged rival gangs to stop the violence. She said: "I
believe that if the Queen is willing to accept other cultures and religions,
then surely Windsor as a town should be equally gracious.
"I hope the problem is resolved quickly and peacefully but I believe the mosque
should be built as there is no proper place for Muslims in the town to pray."
Local councillor Cynthia Endacott said: "I do not think the police have taken a
pro-active response to the complaints from residents over the years.
"They have been warned that something might happen. I would urge everyone in the
community to stay calm."
Council leader Mary-Rose Gliksten said: "We have got a long and proud history of
our community relations in Windsor and we regret incidents that have happened
this week. We will be doing everything to calm the situation." The Rev Louise
Brown, who chaired a chaotic public meeting over the dairy’s planned mosque in
2004, said there were deep-rooted problems which led to the violence.
"This is a matter that has been bubbling up. There are issues with the dairy
that have never been resolved."
Ms Brown, who is vicar of nearby All Saints Church, added: "There is a lot of
history and sadly where there is a lot of history, there are problems." Since
the Medina dairy moved to the site – formerly owned by Express Dairies – it has
developed into a 24 hours a day, seven days a week operation.
Bitter neighbours say they have had to suffer sleepless nights caused by
articulated lorries delivering around the clock.
Asian youths are travelling to Windsor from neighbouring towns and there are
rumours that people as far away as Birmingham are planning riots. A petrol bomb
made out of a beer bottle was found at the roadside in one of the flashpoint
streets. One mother, who wished to be known only as Carol, said: "I have a
17-year-old boy and an eight-year-old girl and I’m putting a curfew on them
because I’m petrified of what might happen.
"I have not slept for two nights. The whole community is frightened and these
two groups continue to wind each other up. I fear it has gone too far to bring
back. Somebody is going to get killed."
There have been reports from across Britain of attacks on Muslims during the
holy month of Ramadan.
On the Isle of Wight an investigation was under way last night after a Muslim
prisoner at Parkhurst claimed a warder had defaced his copy of the Koran.
Massoud Shadjareh, of the Islamic Human Rights Commission said: "Rude words were
written across the page."
And last week a pig’s head was thrown at a mosque during night prayers in
Newsport, Gwent.
Al Qaeda was behind 'plot' to behead soldier
Evening Standard
02.02.07
A foiled plot to kidnap, torture and behead a British Muslim soldier was orchestrated by Al Qaeda, police sources have said.
Officers suspect the mastermind behind the appalling attempt to bring the horrors of Baghdad to the streets of Britain is a senior Al Qaeda terrorist with close links to Osama Bin Laden.
The alleged plan was to abduct a Muslim soldier, mirroring the murders of British hostages Ken Bigley and Margaret Hassan.
The victim would have been made to plead for his life to Tony Blair, denounce the war and ultimately be executed - all on film.
In a move which would have caused unprecedented terror and revulsion, images of his death would have been posted on the Internet, security sources said.
The alleged plot follows an appeal by extreme Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed last summer for fanatics to kidnap a British soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan - branding all Muslims who serve with the coalition troops as "non-believers".
A senior security source said: "The plot involved a ruthless gang who regard British Muslim soldiers who serve in Iraq or Afghanistan as traitors for killing fellow Muslims.
If they had not found a suitable Muslim soldier to kill, it is quite possible they would have plucked an innocent member of the public off the streets and beheaded him.
"They wanted to scare British Muslims into leaving the military and also send a message of revenge to Downing Street for sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan."
Other targets could have been civil servants or anyone seen to be collaborating with the Government.
It has emerged that the Ministry of Defence has identified one individual soldier as the most likely potential victim.
The man, understood to be a regular soldier rather than a reservist, was said to be in a safe location.
Security sources said that at least one other British Muslim - on a hit-list of 25 potential targets - had also been identified as being in "imminent danger". He, too, was being kept safe.
It is understood that a tip-off from a trusted informant last summer sparked the dramatic events in Birmingham when nine men suspected of being members of the terror cell were arrested in a series of raids across the city.
During a six-month, £10million surveillance operation involving 250 police officers and MI5, cameras, telephone taps and surveillance teams had been used to monitor the group's movements.
Officers had hoped to keep the men under surveillance for a further two months to gather further intelligence but sources said the operation was brought forward following "clear indications" that the gang were making final preparations to enact their murderous plan.
One said: "Police had no choice but to carry out the arrests."
Eight men were arrested in raids at 4am while a ninth was held on a motorway in the afternoon.
Those arrested included businessmen, a teacher and a father-of-four on benefits. All are British of Pakistani descent.
The nine men were arrested on suspicion of the 'commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism' under the Terrorism Act.
The scale of the operation, which involved hundreds of officers, prompted a protest from some local Muslims, who accused police of over-the-top tactics.
West Midlands Police said 12 addresses had been sealed off in the Sparkhill, Washwood Heath, Kingstanding and Edgbaston areas of Birmingham.
They included an Islamic bookshop which was co-founded almost a decade ago by Moazzam Begg, who was captured and imprisoned in the Guatanamo Bay camp in Cuba before his controversial return in 2005.
Police also searched a grocery store run by a respected Asian businessman.
One arrested man was named locally as 29-year-old Amjad Mahmood.
His brother Zair said: "The police won't let me know where he is. His wife and kids are very distressed. My mother and father are very distressed."
Local councillor Ansar Ali Khan said he had spoken to the father of the arrested man who, he said, was "in shock to know that his son had been arrested".
He described him as "a very hard-working businessman", adding: "He has served the community for 30 years and he is proud to be British. He cannot imagine his son having any link to this sort of activity."
The brother of Lance Corporal Jabron Hashmi, 24, the first British Muslim soldier to be killed on active duty in Afghanistan, spoke of his fears that his hero brother may have unwittingly inspired the plot.
Corporal Hashmi was labelled a "traitor to Islam and professional terrorist" in a vicious internet hate campaign following his death.
His brother Zeeshan Hashmi, 27, himself a former soldier who is now studying Arabic at Cambridge University, said: "It would have been a horrendous crime had it taken place. My brother would have felt exactly the same."
The plot to kidnap and behead a British Muslim soldier is further evidence that fanatics in Pakistan are actively planning atrocities in Britain, sources said.
The London bombings on July 7 2005 and last summer's alleged airline terror plot were both masterminded in Pakistan, investigators believe.
It is believed anti-terrorist officers are liaising with their counterparts in Pakistan in the hunt for the mastermind of the Birmingham plot.
There have been claims that the raids had been exploited by the Government following days of damaging stories about fundraiser Lord Levy, casinos and turmoil in the Home Office.
A source at West Midlands Police said: "There is widespread fury that Whitehall officials have been briefing sensitive details of this operation.
"This terror raid has come at a very convenient time for the Government as it has taken a number of embarrassing stories off the news agenda.
"But it must be stressed that the timing of the operation was an independent police decision."
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."
SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL