A man who is accused of waging a urine and faeces-spraying campaign at two supermarkets, a pub and a bookshop caused £700,000 damage, a court heard yesterday.
Sahnoun Daifallah, 42, is alleged to have squirted a brown, foul-smelling substance from a spray container at four businesses in Gloucestershire on May 14 and 16 last year.
The court heard the man from White City, Gloucester, visited the Air Balloon pub at around 12.45pm on May 14 where police were called after he asked a barmaid Susan Lawson-Bagent how much it would cost to rape her.
When officers arrived Daifallah had gone but he had left a trail of stench behind him which the prosecution say was his calling card.
Stephen Dent, prosecuting, told the jury: “He mixed up an evil potion of various biological ingredients including his own faeces and urine.
“It was not until after he had left that staff started to notice a bad smell of excrement.
“We say that this was his little calling card because he did not like the way he had been treated.”
Daifallah then moved on to Waterstone’s bookstore in Cirencester where it is alleged he sprayed the brown substance all over a toilet in the coffee shop.
Staff noticed the smell but it was not until after he had left the store that they discovered a 20-metre area of 38 shelves had been doused in the foul substance.
In total 706 books were contaminated, most of them in the children’s section.
On May 16 at around 11am Daifallah is said to have visited the Tesco store in Quedgeley.
Mr Dent said a customer saw Daifallah reach into his laptop bag and produce a jet of fluid over the frozen chips.
He allegedly moved on to the wine section where a member of staff saw a fine vapour come from bag and on to the wine, leaving brown fluid over the shelves.
The store was closed for two days while it was cleaned and the cost of the damage was £421,000.
Daifallah is then alleged to have driven to the Morrisons store in Abbeydale where an employee in the wine section noticed him acting strangely.
Mr Dent said: “The assistant said that Mr Daifallah absolutely stunk, that he had to stop himself from gagging because of the strong smell of ammonia and urine.”
Daifallah, of Bibury Road, has pleaded not guilty to four charges of contaminating goods and two charges of damaging property of Waterstone’s and Morrisons.
He also denies possession of material to contaminate goods and having an offensive weapon, namely a catapult with marbles.
Daifallah has chosen to represent himself in court.
The jury was shown CCTV footage of a man dressed all in black, which the prosecution say is Daifallah, carrying a bag, entering and walking around Tesco and Morrisons.
The prosecution also showed the jury close-up pictures of the meat counter and dairy section of Morrisons where products were covered in a brown slurry.
Police arrived at Daifallah’s home 10 minutes after he left the Tesco store and while the incident was unfolding in Morrisons, and waited for him to return.
On searching the house they found messages scrawled all over the walls with what the prosecution say are fantasies about biological weapons.
One message said: “The ants get out to every direction to get food, then they bring it back to Tesco and Asda.
“If you poison those then you kill the ants.”
Police also found a camcorder bag containing sachets of excrement each labelled with the name of a city or town – Bristol, Cheltenham, Birmingham, Worcester, Cardiff and Gloucester. Bottles containing faeces and urine were also found in his kitchen and car.
Daifallah told police that someone else had written the messages on his walls and said that he used the spray for his garden.
Guilty Verdict in 'Fecal Jihad' Case...
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Killer Ordered Wife to Read from the Qur'an Prior to Murder...
A TAXI driver stabbed his wife to death just days after his second arrest for allegedly abusing her, a court has been told.
Sabina Akhtar was murdered by Malik Mannan within five days of police cancelling bail conditions which banned him from contacting her, Manchester Crown Court heard.
Mr Mannan had been arrested for defying those conditions - imposed after Sabina told police she had been attacked by him as many as 25 times, the jury heard.
Sabina, 26, the mother of their three-year-old son, was found dead at the family home in Charlton Road, Levenshulme.
She died from a single stab wound to her chest which penetrated her heart. Mr Mannan, 36, of Meldon Road, Longsight, denies murder, claiming he acted in self-defence.
Sabina, from Bangladesh, had an arranged marriage with Mr Mannan, who was divorced, the court heard.
She became upset when she found he was having an affair with a woman she called his `other wife' and with whom Mr Mannan had two young children, the jury was told.
But Sabina decided to `suffer in silence' and stay with him.
After marrying in Bangladesh in 2003, Sabina learned of the affair in 2005.
Despite assurances it was over, Mr Mannan kept seein the woman, said prosecutor Paul Reid.
He said Mr Mannan subjected Sabina to a catalogue of threats and attacks - and last July she called police. But `owing to her confusion and language difficulties, no formal complaint was recorded'.
The next day, Mr Mannan slapped their son and he burned the marriage certificate, the jury was told.
The court heard he grabbed Sabina's throat and ordered her to read passages from the Koran. "This is your final hour," he is alleged to have told her.
The jury was also told he said to Sabina: "I am going to get a knife and when I return I am going to slaughter you."
Sabina made a second complaint to police and Mr Mannon was arrested that day and later released on bail, on condition he did not approach his wife or go to their home.
But the Crown says he continued to harass Sabina and was arrested on September 7 for defying his bail conditions.
The jury was told Mr Mannan was arrested after he put his hand through the letter box and shouted to Sabina to open the door.
After he was released without charge and his bail conditions cancelled, the court heard he sent a text to Sabina boasting: "I am a free man since 1.30. Case file closed. Isn't it great?"
Mr Mannan's family told police on September 12 they hadn't heard from him, so officers broke into Sabina's home and found her dead.
Sabina Akhtar was murdered by Malik Mannan within five days of police cancelling bail conditions which banned him from contacting her, Manchester Crown Court heard.
Mr Mannan had been arrested for defying those conditions - imposed after Sabina told police she had been attacked by him as many as 25 times, the jury heard.
Sabina, 26, the mother of their three-year-old son, was found dead at the family home in Charlton Road, Levenshulme.
She died from a single stab wound to her chest which penetrated her heart. Mr Mannan, 36, of Meldon Road, Longsight, denies murder, claiming he acted in self-defence.
Sabina, from Bangladesh, had an arranged marriage with Mr Mannan, who was divorced, the court heard.
She became upset when she found he was having an affair with a woman she called his `other wife' and with whom Mr Mannan had two young children, the jury was told.
But Sabina decided to `suffer in silence' and stay with him.
After marrying in Bangladesh in 2003, Sabina learned of the affair in 2005.
Despite assurances it was over, Mr Mannan kept seein the woman, said prosecutor Paul Reid.
He said Mr Mannan subjected Sabina to a catalogue of threats and attacks - and last July she called police. But `owing to her confusion and language difficulties, no formal complaint was recorded'.
The next day, Mr Mannan slapped their son and he burned the marriage certificate, the jury was told.
The court heard he grabbed Sabina's throat and ordered her to read passages from the Koran. "This is your final hour," he is alleged to have told her.
The jury was also told he said to Sabina: "I am going to get a knife and when I return I am going to slaughter you."
Sabina made a second complaint to police and Mr Mannon was arrested that day and later released on bail, on condition he did not approach his wife or go to their home.
But the Crown says he continued to harass Sabina and was arrested on September 7 for defying his bail conditions.
The jury was told Mr Mannan was arrested after he put his hand through the letter box and shouted to Sabina to open the door.
After he was released without charge and his bail conditions cancelled, the court heard he sent a text to Sabina boasting: "I am a free man since 1.30. Case file closed. Isn't it great?"
Mr Mannan's family told police on September 12 they hadn't heard from him, so officers broke into Sabina's home and found her dead.
Worcester to become first city in Britain to be twinned... with Gaza
One is a picturesque cathedral city in the heart of England, famed for its china and the tangy sauce that shares its name.
The other is a grief-stricken war zone in the Middle East run by a group listed as a terrorist organisation by both the EU and the U.S.
They may not seem best suited as twins, but Worcester, birthplace of Sir Edward Elgar, could become the first British city to be twinned with Gaza City.
A motion calling for the twinning association to consider the link was passed by 29 votes to nil, with six abstentions, at a meeting of the Tory-run council.
Labour councillor Alan Amos, who first suggested the twinning, said: 'Like many I have watched the plight of the people of Gaza, seeing them get bombed and bombed by Israelis with advanced military weapons.
'But rather than sit there thinking, "Isn't that terrible" I really wanted to do something about it.
'We wanted to bring people together to show a gesture of solidarity - so Gaza could look at us and see that the whole world isn't against them, there are people who understand their plight and think what is happening to them is unacceptable.
'We are optimistic this will go ahead. And it is a humanitarian gesture and not a political move.'
Tory councillor David Tibbutt, who supported the move, said the link with Gaza City should be more than a gesture.
He added: 'It is important that we concentrate on how we can really make a difference in the areas of culture, mutual learning, social activity and in some cases humanitarian aid.'
The proposal will now go to the city's twinning association, which has already fostered links with Kleve in Germany, Le Vesinet in France and Worcester in Massachusetts.
Worcester residents have given a mixed response to the proposal.
Sandra Thompson, 62, said: 'If there are some positive outcomes for the people of Gaza City then I am 100 per cent behind the idea. People in Worcester are lucky to live in a peaceful, conflict-free environment and it is easy to forget about those who aren't as fortunate.'
But Nick Walton, 29, said: 'It is a nice idea, but I'm not sure what it is going to achieve. There are lots of cities all over the world enduring similar problems and to single one out for help is not exactly an impartial approach.'
Labour councillor Jo Hodges said the move was 'an empty gesture' and added: 'We have several successful twinnings where we are able to visit the twinning towns - this sort of activity is more or less impossible for Gaza.'
Alexandra Syrotiuk, visitor centre manager for Worcester Tourism, said: 'We have children from local schools going over to our German and French towns that we are twinned with for visits. I couldn't see that happening with Gaza.'
City MP criticises Gaza twin bid
The other is a grief-stricken war zone in the Middle East run by a group listed as a terrorist organisation by both the EU and the U.S.
They may not seem best suited as twins, but Worcester, birthplace of Sir Edward Elgar, could become the first British city to be twinned with Gaza City.
A motion calling for the twinning association to consider the link was passed by 29 votes to nil, with six abstentions, at a meeting of the Tory-run council.
Labour councillor Alan Amos, who first suggested the twinning, said: 'Like many I have watched the plight of the people of Gaza, seeing them get bombed and bombed by Israelis with advanced military weapons.
'But rather than sit there thinking, "Isn't that terrible" I really wanted to do something about it.
'We wanted to bring people together to show a gesture of solidarity - so Gaza could look at us and see that the whole world isn't against them, there are people who understand their plight and think what is happening to them is unacceptable.
'We are optimistic this will go ahead. And it is a humanitarian gesture and not a political move.'
Tory councillor David Tibbutt, who supported the move, said the link with Gaza City should be more than a gesture.
He added: 'It is important that we concentrate on how we can really make a difference in the areas of culture, mutual learning, social activity and in some cases humanitarian aid.'
The proposal will now go to the city's twinning association, which has already fostered links with Kleve in Germany, Le Vesinet in France and Worcester in Massachusetts.
Worcester residents have given a mixed response to the proposal.
Sandra Thompson, 62, said: 'If there are some positive outcomes for the people of Gaza City then I am 100 per cent behind the idea. People in Worcester are lucky to live in a peaceful, conflict-free environment and it is easy to forget about those who aren't as fortunate.'
But Nick Walton, 29, said: 'It is a nice idea, but I'm not sure what it is going to achieve. There are lots of cities all over the world enduring similar problems and to single one out for help is not exactly an impartial approach.'
Labour councillor Jo Hodges said the move was 'an empty gesture' and added: 'We have several successful twinnings where we are able to visit the twinning towns - this sort of activity is more or less impossible for Gaza.'
Alexandra Syrotiuk, visitor centre manager for Worcester Tourism, said: 'We have children from local schools going over to our German and French towns that we are twinned with for visits. I couldn't see that happening with Gaza.'
City MP criticises Gaza twin bid
Civil servants ready to pay £2,000 each (of your cash) to hear Islamic extremist preach
Government officials will spend thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money to attend a lecture by an Islamic extremist whom Jacqui Smith is under pressure to ban from Britain.
Yesterday, the Mail revealed how the Home Secretary was facing demands to deny a visa to Ibrahim Moussawi - a spokesman for the Lebanese terrorist organisation Hezbollah - to come to speak at a British university.
Now it has emerged that the lectures Moussawi plans to deliver are targeted at Whitehall officials who deal in foreign affairs and extremism.
They will each spend up to £1,890 of taxpayers' cash attending the Political Islam event at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) next month.
Moussawi - who is among the key speakers at the week-long course - is scheduled to address two sessions on March 25 and is expected to be paid for the talks.
Another speaker at the event is the UK-based extremist Dr Kamal Helbawy, a former spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood - a group said to have inspired Al Qaeda.
JAMES SLACK: Will Jacqui Smith ban this Islamic hate-monger? Or is she a hypocrite?
Last night, Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens, a researcher for the Centre for Social Cohesion, a respected think-tank, said: 'In their willingness to pay extremists like Dr Helbawy and Dr el-Moussawi, SOAS are helping these men present themselves as mainstream figures.
'It is particularly worrying that the target audience includes Government officials and the police, who may find themselves paying for advice on tackling terrorism from its very exponents.'
The CSC said it was now imperative Miss Smith ban Moussawi, who has allegedly called Jews 'a lesion on the forehead of history'.
Home Office insiders say they have yet to receive a visa request from Moussawi, but that it would be studied closely if submitted.
A spokesman for the School of Oriental and African Studies said: 'The programme has a wide range of speakers with diverse specialisms. The rationale behind the invitation to Dr Moussawi is to help Government officials and other senior leaders understand more clearly what makes Hezbollah tick.'
Yesterday's controversy came as ministers were criticised for backsliding on two promises on terrorism: one to ban the extremist Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir, and the other to close down extremist websites.
The pledge to proscribe Hizb ut-Tahrir - which refuses to condemn suicide bombers and has called for the destruction of Israel - was given by Tony Blair when he was prime minister in response to the London bombings of July 7, 2005.
However, yesterday Communities Secretary Hazel Blears appeared to clear Hizb ut-Tahrir of advocating terrorism and even seemed to open the door to Government officials holding talks with the group.
Meanwhile, the Home Office admitted that not a single website had been closed down under terrorism laws, despite a pledge by Jacqui Smith that material that illegally 'glorifies terrorism' would be removed.
Tory MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Commons sub- committee on counter-terrorism and a security adviser to the Prime Minister, received the admission in a Parliamentary answer.
He said: 'This drives a coach and horses through the Government's counter-terrorism strategy. No websites have been closed, and ministers are back-pedalling on Hizb ut-Tahrir. It is just nonsensical. The Government must have a clear strategy and stick to it.'
The Home Office said material had been taken down using an informal route, with requests made direct to internet service providers.
Yesterday, the Mail revealed how the Home Secretary was facing demands to deny a visa to Ibrahim Moussawi - a spokesman for the Lebanese terrorist organisation Hezbollah - to come to speak at a British university.
Now it has emerged that the lectures Moussawi plans to deliver are targeted at Whitehall officials who deal in foreign affairs and extremism.
They will each spend up to £1,890 of taxpayers' cash attending the Political Islam event at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) next month.
Moussawi - who is among the key speakers at the week-long course - is scheduled to address two sessions on March 25 and is expected to be paid for the talks.
Another speaker at the event is the UK-based extremist Dr Kamal Helbawy, a former spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood - a group said to have inspired Al Qaeda.
JAMES SLACK: Will Jacqui Smith ban this Islamic hate-monger? Or is she a hypocrite?
Last night, Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens, a researcher for the Centre for Social Cohesion, a respected think-tank, said: 'In their willingness to pay extremists like Dr Helbawy and Dr el-Moussawi, SOAS are helping these men present themselves as mainstream figures.
'It is particularly worrying that the target audience includes Government officials and the police, who may find themselves paying for advice on tackling terrorism from its very exponents.'
The CSC said it was now imperative Miss Smith ban Moussawi, who has allegedly called Jews 'a lesion on the forehead of history'.
Home Office insiders say they have yet to receive a visa request from Moussawi, but that it would be studied closely if submitted.
A spokesman for the School of Oriental and African Studies said: 'The programme has a wide range of speakers with diverse specialisms. The rationale behind the invitation to Dr Moussawi is to help Government officials and other senior leaders understand more clearly what makes Hezbollah tick.'
Yesterday's controversy came as ministers were criticised for backsliding on two promises on terrorism: one to ban the extremist Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir, and the other to close down extremist websites.
The pledge to proscribe Hizb ut-Tahrir - which refuses to condemn suicide bombers and has called for the destruction of Israel - was given by Tony Blair when he was prime minister in response to the London bombings of July 7, 2005.
However, yesterday Communities Secretary Hazel Blears appeared to clear Hizb ut-Tahrir of advocating terrorism and even seemed to open the door to Government officials holding talks with the group.
Meanwhile, the Home Office admitted that not a single website had been closed down under terrorism laws, despite a pledge by Jacqui Smith that material that illegally 'glorifies terrorism' would be removed.
Tory MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Commons sub- committee on counter-terrorism and a security adviser to the Prime Minister, received the admission in a Parliamentary answer.
He said: 'This drives a coach and horses through the Government's counter-terrorism strategy. No websites have been closed, and ministers are back-pedalling on Hizb ut-Tahrir. It is just nonsensical. The Government must have a clear strategy and stick to it.'
The Home Office said material had been taken down using an informal route, with requests made direct to internet service providers.
British 'Councillor' Approves of Stoning Adulterous Women...
Politicians in Brent are calling for the resignation of a councillor after he advocated the introduction of Sharia law for British Muslims on a website, including the death penalty for women who commit adultery. The remarks were a response to The Archbishop of Canterbury's comments made earlier this month in which he said the adoption of Sharia law in the UK seemed unavoidable.
Councillor Atiq Malik, (Democratic Conservative Group), wrote two blogs, one on the UK Polling Report website and one on the Conservative Home website. Both read: "If Muslims living in the UK are happy that disputes be decided by Sharia courts then what?
"The reason why male gets more share than women is that male members of the family have the responsibilty to provide living expenses to female members of the family.
"If an unmarried woman has an affair she is lashed 100 times. If a married woman has an affair she is stoned to death. What is wrong in it?"
But when the Observer contacted Mr Malik he backtracked on his original views and said he did not believe Sharia law should be introduced in the UK but that it was acceptable in Islamic states.
He said: "No I am not adovating Sharia Law in England. England is not a Muslim country. Sharia Law is the belief of Muslims and is part of Koran. In a Muslim majority country the Koran is the code of conduct. But it is not practical in England because it is not a Muslim country.
"Yes of course I believe in Sharia, it is our way of life. I don't see any harm in Muslims believing what is in the Koran."
But politicians from different parties have been outraged by the remarks and believe he should step down from his post.
Councillor Ann John, leader of the Labour group, said: "I was pretty shocked and I don't think he is fit to hold office. He should resign. He should be challenging his religion. It is disgusting.
"To think that whipping and stoning women to death is okay is appaling. We live in a liberal and democratic society but we still have a long way to go. Saying that this is exceptable whether here or anywhere else is not right."
Mr Malik was expelled from the Brent Conservative group in May last year for voting against Tory policy.
Councillor Bob Blackman, leader of Conservative group, said: "We live in the UK and our system of law works well for us. We can tolerate people having different views but such extremism renders him unfit to be a politician. These comments confirm the wisdom of the group to expell him and if the group had not already told him to leave then it would do now."
Meanwhile, a group calling for the introduction of Sharia law in the UK, has advertised a conference in Wembley on Sunday (March 1).
On the Islam for UK website it says a talk on the Islamic state will take place at Vale Farm Sports Centre in Watford Road, north Wembley.
However, Brent Council has issued a statement on its website stating: "Brent Council would like to be clear that the conference entitled The Islamic State - Past, Present and Future is not taking place at Vale Farms Sports Centre on Sunday.
"The centre has not been booked to hold this event and promotions stating this are misleading and inaccurate. Please do not attend this venue for such an event."
What do you think? Have your say at http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/forums
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
This special Mail investigation reveals how thousands of men are milking the benefits system to support several wives
He cut a smart figure in his grey suit and crisply ironed shirt. The 6ft tall Somalian bowed to the judge, calling him 'Sir', before begging for his wife, Fatima, and their teenage son to be allowed to stay in Britain.
Fatima, with a black khimar veil covering her hair and shoulders, sat quietly next to her husband.
In her late 30s and wearing open sandals, she lowered her dark eyes as the details of the unconventional life she and her husband, Abdi, led in the West London suburb of Shepherd's Bush unfolded at a busy immigration court.
Multiple marriages in Britain were first declared illegal in 1604
The judge listened in silence. Perhaps he knew from past experience what was coming next. Abdi went on to reveal that Fatima was not his only wife.
Indeed, he was a self-confessed bigamist who had a second, much younger wife and a 13-year-old daughter by her. They both lived nearby.
'I visit them regularly,' said Abdi, 51, who arrived in Britain in the 1990s and works in an old people's home. 'I have done nothing wrong. In Somalia, it is normal to have two wives - even three or four. Fatima is still my wife and she should not be deported.'
He was unable to produce wedding certificates or valid official documents to prove where, or when, he had married both women, therefore raising questions over the validity of the unions, under either Somali or British law.
Yet his story, unravelling at an ordinary weekday hearing at Taylor House, an asylum appeals' centre in North London, is just one example of the growing phenomenon of multiple marriage in Britain.
Officially, such unions are punishable by up to seven years in prison. They were first declared illegal in England and Wales in 1604, when the Parliament of James I took action to restrain 'evil persons' marrying more than one wife. Parliament ruled that anyone found guilty of the crime would be sentenced to death.
In the four centuries since, bigamy (having two wives) and polygamy (more than two) has been frowned on by the state, the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church.
Yet it is clear that officialdom is turning a blind eye to such marriages.
A recent review by four Government departments - the Treasury, the Work and Pensions Department, the Inland Revenue and the Home Office - has concluded that 1,000 men in the United Kingdom are now polygamists, although some say the figure is higher.
Baroness Warsi has warned that politicians have failed to tackle the problem of polygamy because of 'cultural sensitivity'
What is more, the review found, a Muslim man can claim state support of more than £10,000 a year to keep his wives, if the wedding took place in one of those countries where polygamy is commonplace, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia and across huge tracts of Africa.
For example, a man can receive &£92.80 a week in income support for wife number one, and a further £33.65p for each of his subsequent spouses.
Therefore, if he has four wives - the maximum permitted under Islamic teachings - he can claim nearly £800 a month from the British taxpayer.
Controversially, a polygamist is also entitled to more generous housing benefits and bigger council houses to reflect the large size of his family. He is also able to claim £1,000 a year in child benefit for each of his growing brood.
The Government insists that polygamy has declined in Britain since the 1988 Immigration Act, which made it harder for men to bring second, third or fourth wives to the UK.
However, it's little wonder that critics claim our generosity simply encourages more Muslim men to keep several spouses. Supporters of polygamy claim the Koran states unequivocally that a Muslim man can marry up to four women so long as he treats them equally.
But the Taxpayers' Alliance, a lobby group, has complained: 'Polygamy is not officially condoned here, so why should British taxpayers have to pay for extra benefits for men to have two, three or four wives?'
Last week, Baroness Warsi, a Tory spokesperson for community cohesion who is British-born of Pakistani parents, waded into the argument, warning that politicians have failed to tackle the problem of polygamy because of 'cultural sensitivity'.
The respected Muslim peer told the BBC: 'We've just avoided either discussing or dealing with the matter head on.'
Baroness Warsi, a Muslim herself, urged the Government to bring in laws demanding the official registration of 'Nikah' or religious Islamic marriage ceremonies, which often take place secretly in private houses with 'an imam and a couple of witnesses there' - and which are used to get round our marriage laws.
So how do the polygamists get away with it here? Firstly, it needs to be understood that the generous benefits system allows any man and the partner he lives with to claim benefits together - even if the woman is not officially registered as his wife.
If they do marry, to avoid breaking Britain's bigamy laws, such men often engage in a ceremony with their second or third wife in a Nikah secretly in their own homes and never register the union officially in this country.
Another technique is for the man to divorce his first wife under British law while continuing to live with her as his spouse under Islamic law. He then gets a visa for a new wife to enter the country and can legally marry her here.
Moreover, our politically correct immigration rules state that if a husband has divorced his first wife under British law - and even if that divorce is actually suspected to be part of a plan to set up a polygamous household - a second wife from abroad must be allowed to come and live here.
During this investigation, I spoke to health workers and benefits officers who have seen at first-hand the scale of polygamy in Britain.
An NHS district nurse working in Tower Hamlets, East London, explained that it was now commonplace. He said he knew of a Bangladeshi-born male patient with two wives and 13 children aged between three months and 15 years.
'The women have council flats, each paid for by the local authority. The elderly husband collects benefits for both women, who are in their 30s. The wives speak very little English, but they are in and out of each other's flats and are friends.
'On more than one occasion when I have been called to the flats to give treatment to the old man, I have heard them talking in the kitchen and even taking each other's children to the park.'
The male nurse said this family set-up was not unusual. 'I know of others that comprise of one husband, a number of wives and numerous children.
'It is not difficult to conclude that if there were no state benefits, a man could not afford to live like this, especially here in London.
'The system is at fault. The men want more wives for their sexual pleasure, but also because it is lucrative.'
Yet there is another issue to be raised. Are the Government figures of around 1,000 foreign men living polygamously a gross underestimate?
Recently, a senior imam in Finchley, North London, said there are at least 4,000 men involved in such marriages.
Meanwhile, to show just how far some men have stretched the teaching of the Koran, another senior Islamist, Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, has revealed a case of a man living here with five wives.
But what, indeed, of the wives living in polygamous marriages themselves?
In an age of supposed sexual equality, how can they accept what many will feel is the degradation that goes hand in hand with polygamy?
Not surprisingly, few dare to speak out publicly for fear that they will be ostracised by their families.
But one 34-year-old mother who lives in the Bangladeshi community of East London rang the Mail because she said she wants to reveal the truth of what is happening.
Sitting in her kitchen in Newham, she reeled off a list of male relatives and friends who have two or three wives.
What is more, the woman - who does not want to be named for fear of attacks on her and her family - said that polygamy is tacitly encouraged by our benefits system, where few questions are asked or checks made.
The woman, whom we will call Kaela, arrived in Britain with her mother and younger brother when she was 11.
They were following her father, who had come to Britain from a poor province called Sylhet, seeking work in the food factories of West London.
Kaela learned English, went to a local comprehensive and, at 19, fell in love with a Bangladeshi-born boy who had also arrived in this country as a youngster.
They married, set up home in a small council flat and soon had two children. Kaela worked hard for her family. With a clutch of GCSEs, she became an adviser to the Bangladeshi community on issues such as welfare, housing and education. She now works as a parttime civil servant.
Yet, two years ago, her husband suddenly disappeared back to Bangladesh and, in an Islamic Nikah ceremony, married a 19-year-old second wife who has since given birth to his son.
'My husband has a British passport and plans to come back into this country with his two-year-old boy and his new wife.
'He has not given me a penny. He knows that the State will provide for us. He has told me to tell the authorities I have been deserted and claim income support, housing benefit and council tax.'
But what of his second wife? Kaela suspects the shy teenager without any English will be brought into Britain on a tourist visa, pretending to be her own son's nanny.
'I have seen it happen before,' Kaela explains. 'I know of one man living in East London who has two wives here, each with a flat, and a third wife in Bangladesh. Between the wives, there are five children under 13, all living in this country.
'The first two women look after the third wife's child. So who pays to keep this enormous family? The State, of course.
'I have an uncle who lives near Heathrow who has two wives. They are all together in a big five-bedroom house, with off-street parking. It is a council flat and the rent is paid from housing benefits because he does not work.
'The first wife, who is 60, claims pension credit and carer's allowance to look after his old mother, whom he has brought here as a dependent from Bangladesh.
'His much younger second wife claims income support for herself and child benefits for their three children of school age. We are talking about hundreds of pounds a week to keep this family going.'
Kaela says there are myriad tricks used to bring second wives into Britain. Apart from the 'nanny ruse', new female partners enter the country using tourist visas, student visas or work permits. They simply overstay the visas, which are normally for six months, and stay in Britain, often hiding away in their husband's home.
But women suffer as a result of polygamy, says Kaela. 'The first wives get depressed because they are so ashamed of their husband taking a second or third wife.
'Many wives have been here for years, but have never been allowed to learn English or even go out of the house alone. They have no one to turn to for help.'
No one knows such anguish better than Sameera, a well-spoken, middle-aged woman living in one of our multi-cultural cities, whose 55-year-old husband found a second wife after 30 years of marriage.
He went on holiday to his homeland of Pakistan where, without Sameera's knowledge or consent, he married a 26-year-old cousin.
'I fainted when I heard,' says Sameera. 'The fact that he's married a girl young enough to be his daughter has upset me so much.
'I cried. I felt like my mind was exploding. The ground had just fallen from me. Why did he do it? It shouldn't happen.'
Astonishingly, though, Sameera has been forced to welcome the new wife into her house.
The alternative, she says, would be the breakdown of her relationship with her husband and, possibly, the loss of her home. In other words, she might be thrown on to the streets.
Yet despite such emotional cruelty, there are those who say polygamy should be legal in multicultural Britain. A leading Muslim academic at Cambridge University has claimed that men are biologically designed to desire more than one woman and that, therefore, polygamy should be legalised.
Meanwhile, a primary school teacher in Birmingham recently spoke publicly about his contented life with two wives and six children, all living in the same house.
Even a prominent female member of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain - set up in 1992 to debate Islamic issues - has claimed that she knows of many very happy polygamous marriages in Britain.
'I am aware that this practice is taking place, and there are couples who are quite satisfied with their relationship, and they would like it to carry on and be protected by law,' she proclaimed.
Back at the immigration appeals centre at Taylor House, which heard the case of Somali-born polygamist Abdi, a Home Office lawyer took me aside and whispered: 'This man's not the only husband doing this.
Too bad these same ministers didn't spend more time addressing the crisis of 3000 young muslim women who fall victim to forced marriages per year
'Last week, there was one man who was born in Pakistan and arrived to settle here only four years ago. He brought in one wife legally. They arrived as asylum seekers. The next wife came in on a student's visa. The third pretended to be visiting relatives in Southwark, South London. She had a sixmonth tourist visa but overstayed and was about to be deported.
'She ended up here, begging to remain in Britain with her husband.'
As for Abdi, I spoke to his son after the case adjourned as he waited for a bus with his mother, Fatima, while his father went back to work. The polite, intelligent-teenager is studying at college and hopes to become an engineer.
He came to Britain with his mother (who speaks only a few words of English) as asylum seekers from Somalia several years after Abdi had made the journey alone seeking a job, money and a better future.
'I knew my father had a second wife,' the teenager said with a friendly smile. 'That is not unusual in Somalia. I want to stay in Britain, and so does my mother. Our lives should not be shattered because of this.'
But British taxpayers footing the bill may beg to disagree.
Taxpayer financed muslim POPULATION JIHAD continues on warp speed in the UK.
Fatima, with a black khimar veil covering her hair and shoulders, sat quietly next to her husband.
In her late 30s and wearing open sandals, she lowered her dark eyes as the details of the unconventional life she and her husband, Abdi, led in the West London suburb of Shepherd's Bush unfolded at a busy immigration court.
Multiple marriages in Britain were first declared illegal in 1604
The judge listened in silence. Perhaps he knew from past experience what was coming next. Abdi went on to reveal that Fatima was not his only wife.
Indeed, he was a self-confessed bigamist who had a second, much younger wife and a 13-year-old daughter by her. They both lived nearby.
'I visit them regularly,' said Abdi, 51, who arrived in Britain in the 1990s and works in an old people's home. 'I have done nothing wrong. In Somalia, it is normal to have two wives - even three or four. Fatima is still my wife and she should not be deported.'
He was unable to produce wedding certificates or valid official documents to prove where, or when, he had married both women, therefore raising questions over the validity of the unions, under either Somali or British law.
Yet his story, unravelling at an ordinary weekday hearing at Taylor House, an asylum appeals' centre in North London, is just one example of the growing phenomenon of multiple marriage in Britain.
Officially, such unions are punishable by up to seven years in prison. They were first declared illegal in England and Wales in 1604, when the Parliament of James I took action to restrain 'evil persons' marrying more than one wife. Parliament ruled that anyone found guilty of the crime would be sentenced to death.
In the four centuries since, bigamy (having two wives) and polygamy (more than two) has been frowned on by the state, the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church.
Yet it is clear that officialdom is turning a blind eye to such marriages.
A recent review by four Government departments - the Treasury, the Work and Pensions Department, the Inland Revenue and the Home Office - has concluded that 1,000 men in the United Kingdom are now polygamists, although some say the figure is higher.
Baroness Warsi has warned that politicians have failed to tackle the problem of polygamy because of 'cultural sensitivity'
What is more, the review found, a Muslim man can claim state support of more than £10,000 a year to keep his wives, if the wedding took place in one of those countries where polygamy is commonplace, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia and across huge tracts of Africa.
For example, a man can receive &£92.80 a week in income support for wife number one, and a further £33.65p for each of his subsequent spouses.
Therefore, if he has four wives - the maximum permitted under Islamic teachings - he can claim nearly £800 a month from the British taxpayer.
Controversially, a polygamist is also entitled to more generous housing benefits and bigger council houses to reflect the large size of his family. He is also able to claim £1,000 a year in child benefit for each of his growing brood.
The Government insists that polygamy has declined in Britain since the 1988 Immigration Act, which made it harder for men to bring second, third or fourth wives to the UK.
However, it's little wonder that critics claim our generosity simply encourages more Muslim men to keep several spouses. Supporters of polygamy claim the Koran states unequivocally that a Muslim man can marry up to four women so long as he treats them equally.
But the Taxpayers' Alliance, a lobby group, has complained: 'Polygamy is not officially condoned here, so why should British taxpayers have to pay for extra benefits for men to have two, three or four wives?'
Last week, Baroness Warsi, a Tory spokesperson for community cohesion who is British-born of Pakistani parents, waded into the argument, warning that politicians have failed to tackle the problem of polygamy because of 'cultural sensitivity'.
The respected Muslim peer told the BBC: 'We've just avoided either discussing or dealing with the matter head on.'
Baroness Warsi, a Muslim herself, urged the Government to bring in laws demanding the official registration of 'Nikah' or religious Islamic marriage ceremonies, which often take place secretly in private houses with 'an imam and a couple of witnesses there' - and which are used to get round our marriage laws.
So how do the polygamists get away with it here? Firstly, it needs to be understood that the generous benefits system allows any man and the partner he lives with to claim benefits together - even if the woman is not officially registered as his wife.
If they do marry, to avoid breaking Britain's bigamy laws, such men often engage in a ceremony with their second or third wife in a Nikah secretly in their own homes and never register the union officially in this country.
Another technique is for the man to divorce his first wife under British law while continuing to live with her as his spouse under Islamic law. He then gets a visa for a new wife to enter the country and can legally marry her here.
Moreover, our politically correct immigration rules state that if a husband has divorced his first wife under British law - and even if that divorce is actually suspected to be part of a plan to set up a polygamous household - a second wife from abroad must be allowed to come and live here.
During this investigation, I spoke to health workers and benefits officers who have seen at first-hand the scale of polygamy in Britain.
An NHS district nurse working in Tower Hamlets, East London, explained that it was now commonplace. He said he knew of a Bangladeshi-born male patient with two wives and 13 children aged between three months and 15 years.
'The women have council flats, each paid for by the local authority. The elderly husband collects benefits for both women, who are in their 30s. The wives speak very little English, but they are in and out of each other's flats and are friends.
'On more than one occasion when I have been called to the flats to give treatment to the old man, I have heard them talking in the kitchen and even taking each other's children to the park.'
The male nurse said this family set-up was not unusual. 'I know of others that comprise of one husband, a number of wives and numerous children.
'It is not difficult to conclude that if there were no state benefits, a man could not afford to live like this, especially here in London.
'The system is at fault. The men want more wives for their sexual pleasure, but also because it is lucrative.'
Yet there is another issue to be raised. Are the Government figures of around 1,000 foreign men living polygamously a gross underestimate?
Recently, a senior imam in Finchley, North London, said there are at least 4,000 men involved in such marriages.
Meanwhile, to show just how far some men have stretched the teaching of the Koran, another senior Islamist, Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, has revealed a case of a man living here with five wives.
But what, indeed, of the wives living in polygamous marriages themselves?
In an age of supposed sexual equality, how can they accept what many will feel is the degradation that goes hand in hand with polygamy?
Not surprisingly, few dare to speak out publicly for fear that they will be ostracised by their families.
But one 34-year-old mother who lives in the Bangladeshi community of East London rang the Mail because she said she wants to reveal the truth of what is happening.
Sitting in her kitchen in Newham, she reeled off a list of male relatives and friends who have two or three wives.
What is more, the woman - who does not want to be named for fear of attacks on her and her family - said that polygamy is tacitly encouraged by our benefits system, where few questions are asked or checks made.
The woman, whom we will call Kaela, arrived in Britain with her mother and younger brother when she was 11.
They were following her father, who had come to Britain from a poor province called Sylhet, seeking work in the food factories of West London.
Kaela learned English, went to a local comprehensive and, at 19, fell in love with a Bangladeshi-born boy who had also arrived in this country as a youngster.
They married, set up home in a small council flat and soon had two children. Kaela worked hard for her family. With a clutch of GCSEs, she became an adviser to the Bangladeshi community on issues such as welfare, housing and education. She now works as a parttime civil servant.
Yet, two years ago, her husband suddenly disappeared back to Bangladesh and, in an Islamic Nikah ceremony, married a 19-year-old second wife who has since given birth to his son.
'My husband has a British passport and plans to come back into this country with his two-year-old boy and his new wife.
'He has not given me a penny. He knows that the State will provide for us. He has told me to tell the authorities I have been deserted and claim income support, housing benefit and council tax.'
But what of his second wife? Kaela suspects the shy teenager without any English will be brought into Britain on a tourist visa, pretending to be her own son's nanny.
'I have seen it happen before,' Kaela explains. 'I know of one man living in East London who has two wives here, each with a flat, and a third wife in Bangladesh. Between the wives, there are five children under 13, all living in this country.
'The first two women look after the third wife's child. So who pays to keep this enormous family? The State, of course.
'I have an uncle who lives near Heathrow who has two wives. They are all together in a big five-bedroom house, with off-street parking. It is a council flat and the rent is paid from housing benefits because he does not work.
'The first wife, who is 60, claims pension credit and carer's allowance to look after his old mother, whom he has brought here as a dependent from Bangladesh.
'His much younger second wife claims income support for herself and child benefits for their three children of school age. We are talking about hundreds of pounds a week to keep this family going.'
Kaela says there are myriad tricks used to bring second wives into Britain. Apart from the 'nanny ruse', new female partners enter the country using tourist visas, student visas or work permits. They simply overstay the visas, which are normally for six months, and stay in Britain, often hiding away in their husband's home.
But women suffer as a result of polygamy, says Kaela. 'The first wives get depressed because they are so ashamed of their husband taking a second or third wife.
'Many wives have been here for years, but have never been allowed to learn English or even go out of the house alone. They have no one to turn to for help.'
No one knows such anguish better than Sameera, a well-spoken, middle-aged woman living in one of our multi-cultural cities, whose 55-year-old husband found a second wife after 30 years of marriage.
He went on holiday to his homeland of Pakistan where, without Sameera's knowledge or consent, he married a 26-year-old cousin.
'I fainted when I heard,' says Sameera. 'The fact that he's married a girl young enough to be his daughter has upset me so much.
'I cried. I felt like my mind was exploding. The ground had just fallen from me. Why did he do it? It shouldn't happen.'
Astonishingly, though, Sameera has been forced to welcome the new wife into her house.
The alternative, she says, would be the breakdown of her relationship with her husband and, possibly, the loss of her home. In other words, she might be thrown on to the streets.
Yet despite such emotional cruelty, there are those who say polygamy should be legal in multicultural Britain. A leading Muslim academic at Cambridge University has claimed that men are biologically designed to desire more than one woman and that, therefore, polygamy should be legalised.
Meanwhile, a primary school teacher in Birmingham recently spoke publicly about his contented life with two wives and six children, all living in the same house.
Even a prominent female member of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain - set up in 1992 to debate Islamic issues - has claimed that she knows of many very happy polygamous marriages in Britain.
'I am aware that this practice is taking place, and there are couples who are quite satisfied with their relationship, and they would like it to carry on and be protected by law,' she proclaimed.
Back at the immigration appeals centre at Taylor House, which heard the case of Somali-born polygamist Abdi, a Home Office lawyer took me aside and whispered: 'This man's not the only husband doing this.
Too bad these same ministers didn't spend more time addressing the crisis of 3000 young muslim women who fall victim to forced marriages per year
'Last week, there was one man who was born in Pakistan and arrived to settle here only four years ago. He brought in one wife legally. They arrived as asylum seekers. The next wife came in on a student's visa. The third pretended to be visiting relatives in Southwark, South London. She had a sixmonth tourist visa but overstayed and was about to be deported.
'She ended up here, begging to remain in Britain with her husband.'
As for Abdi, I spoke to his son after the case adjourned as he waited for a bus with his mother, Fatima, while his father went back to work. The polite, intelligent-teenager is studying at college and hopes to become an engineer.
He came to Britain with his mother (who speaks only a few words of English) as asylum seekers from Somalia several years after Abdi had made the journey alone seeking a job, money and a better future.
'I knew my father had a second wife,' the teenager said with a friendly smile. 'That is not unusual in Somalia. I want to stay in Britain, and so does my mother. Our lives should not be shattered because of this.'
But British taxpayers footing the bill may beg to disagree.
Taxpayer financed muslim POPULATION JIHAD continues on warp speed in the UK.
Lord Ahmed jailed for dangerous driving
Labour peer Lord Ahmed was today jailed for 12 weeks for dangerous driving after admitting he was texting while driving on a motorway just before being involved in a fatal crash.
Sheffield crown court had previously heard how Ahmed sent and received five text messages while driving in the dark at speeds of 60mph and higher along a 17-mile stretch of the M1 on Christmas Day 2007.
Martyn Gombar, 28, a Slovakian man living in Leigh, Lancashire, died when the peer's Jaguar hit an Audi car that had crashed into the central reservation and was stationary in the fast lane of the motorway near Rotherham, South Yorkshire.
Ahmed, 51, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving when he appeared at Sheffield magistrates court last year.
He had been due to be sentenced by magistrates in December but a district judge decided a crown court judge needed to deal with the case and gave the peer an interim driving ban.
Sentencing him today, Mr Justice Wilkie made clear the texting incident had no bearing on the fatal collision.
"After a full and thorough police investigation it's clear the dangerous driving had no causal link to the accident."
But the judge went on: "It is of the greatest importance that people realise what a serious offence dangerous driving of this type is.
"I have come to the conclusion that by reason of the prolonged, deliberate, repeated and highly dangerous driving for which you have pleaded guilty, only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified."
As well as jailing him for 12 weeks, the judge imposed a one-year driving ban and ordered the peer to pay £500 prosecution costs.
Earlier, Jeremy Baker QC, defending, put a series of points of mitigation to the judge, including Lord Ahmed's years of service to the community and the country.
The barrister also pointed to the peer's attempts to help Mr Gombar and how he took it upon himself to warn other motorists about the incident at some personal risk to himself.
Baker described how the defendant had come to Britain as a child speaking no English but had built up a successful business and political career before being made a life peer. His client provided an important function for the country both nationally and internationally, particularly in the field of inter-faith relations, he said.
Sheffield crown court had previously heard how Ahmed sent and received five text messages while driving in the dark at speeds of 60mph and higher along a 17-mile stretch of the M1 on Christmas Day 2007.
Martyn Gombar, 28, a Slovakian man living in Leigh, Lancashire, died when the peer's Jaguar hit an Audi car that had crashed into the central reservation and was stationary in the fast lane of the motorway near Rotherham, South Yorkshire.
Ahmed, 51, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving when he appeared at Sheffield magistrates court last year.
He had been due to be sentenced by magistrates in December but a district judge decided a crown court judge needed to deal with the case and gave the peer an interim driving ban.
Sentencing him today, Mr Justice Wilkie made clear the texting incident had no bearing on the fatal collision.
"After a full and thorough police investigation it's clear the dangerous driving had no causal link to the accident."
But the judge went on: "It is of the greatest importance that people realise what a serious offence dangerous driving of this type is.
"I have come to the conclusion that by reason of the prolonged, deliberate, repeated and highly dangerous driving for which you have pleaded guilty, only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified."
As well as jailing him for 12 weeks, the judge imposed a one-year driving ban and ordered the peer to pay £500 prosecution costs.
Earlier, Jeremy Baker QC, defending, put a series of points of mitigation to the judge, including Lord Ahmed's years of service to the community and the country.
The barrister also pointed to the peer's attempts to help Mr Gombar and how he took it upon himself to warn other motorists about the incident at some personal risk to himself.
Baker described how the defendant had come to Britain as a child speaking no English but had built up a successful business and political career before being made a life peer. His client provided an important function for the country both nationally and internationally, particularly in the field of inter-faith relations, he said.
library stocked books calling for jihad and the murder of infidels
A library service was stocking books which encouraged jihad and the murder of non-Muslims, a Government-backed report has revealed.
A cost-cutting measure has been blamed for the blunder, which happened five years ago.Leicester City Council had changed its book supplier so it could buy more foreign-language books for its customers.However, council bosses say they were poorly advised by the new provider and, as a result, brought some inflammatory material into stock.After "several months", they realized the dangerous nature of the material and removed it from the shelves, and returned it to the supplier.
A city council spokesman said: "We bought some stock from independent book sellers who, as it turned out, did not advise us very well. One of our staff identified that about two or three titles had a jihadist theme, and the books were removed from the shelves.[...]The report also revealed the council had problems with people attempting to donate inflammatory books...
Of course multiculturalism has long manifested itself in the sorts of books Western libraries select, but this is ridiculous. "Jihad books were in library,"
A cost-cutting measure has been blamed for the blunder, which happened five years ago.Leicester City Council had changed its book supplier so it could buy more foreign-language books for its customers.However, council bosses say they were poorly advised by the new provider and, as a result, brought some inflammatory material into stock.After "several months", they realized the dangerous nature of the material and removed it from the shelves, and returned it to the supplier.
A city council spokesman said: "We bought some stock from independent book sellers who, as it turned out, did not advise us very well. One of our staff identified that about two or three titles had a jihadist theme, and the books were removed from the shelves.[...]The report also revealed the council had problems with people attempting to donate inflammatory books...
Of course multiculturalism has long manifested itself in the sorts of books Western libraries select, but this is ridiculous. "Jihad books were in library,"
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Freed Guantanamo prisoner's return on luxury jet cost £160,000
A British resident back home after more than four years in Guantanamo Bay could now claim thousands of pounds in benefits if he is allowed to stay in the UK.
Binyam Mohamed, who flew back from the controversial camp in Cuba yesterday, is almost certain to be given permission to remain here permanently.
This would make him eligible for State benefits, and he could even apply for legal aid to fund a multi-million-pound compensation claim against the Government.
Ehiopian-born Mohamed, 30, first arrived in the UK in 1994, aged 16, and was refused asylum but in 2000 he was granted leave to remain until 2004.
By this time, he was already incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay.
After more than four years in the prison camp, he landed back in Britain yesterday vowing to expose Whitehall 'collusion' in his torture.
He was flown back on a luxury Gulfstream jet accompanied by two Foreign Office officials, two Metropolitan police officers and a doctor.
The Foreign Office and Home Office jointly paid for the trip, which is estimated to have cost as much as £160,000.
A Foreign Office spokesman refused to comment on the figure today. He said: 'The overall cost of the operation is not yet known.'
Mohamed was initially held under terror laws, although not arrested, and questioned by officers 'conducting investigations into his case'. Five hours later, he was freed.
He has agreed to abide by several voluntary security measures in Britain, including regular reports to a police station.
His immigration status will now also be under review. So far, he has been given 'temporary admission' to the UK while the Home Office considers his case.
If he is allowed to stay permanently, his benefits entitlements would be boosted because refugees cannot claim payouts like Income Support and Housing Benefit.
Someone with indefinite leave to remain can qualify for Housing Benefit of £60.50 a week and council tax relief which can be worth hundreds of pounds a year.
If Mohamed looks for work, he will be entitled to claim Jobseeker's Allowance of £60.50 a week.
However, if his physical and emotional maltreatment have left him unable to work, he could be eligible for Disability Living Allowance of up to £113.75 a week or Employment Support Allowance of up to £89.50.
His lawyers are privately confident that he will not be deported or arrested, meaning he will probably remain at liberty to spend the rest of his life in Britain.
Some are already questioning why Britain had campaigned to have Ethiopian-born Mohamed back at all because of the cost of his return and ongoing supervision.
Tory backbencher Philip Davies said: 'Why on earth we should be taking in this chap? If he was a UK citizen, fair enough. But he's not and only happened to be living here for a few years.
'We also don't know if this chap is a risk. If he is a danger then is he putting people's lives at risk, let alone the huge cost of the police and security services monitoring him?'
Mohamed had been on hunger strike until earlier this month in protest at his treatment in Guantanamo and looked extremely gaunt on his return yesterday.
However, he managed to walk from the plane unaided after the ten-hour flight from Cuba to RAF Northolt in North-West London.
The U.S. agreed to a British request to free him last week. All charges against him had already been dropped and he was never tried.
In a statement released by his lawyers to coincide with his return, Mohamed said: 'I have been through an experience that I never thought to encounter in my darkest nightmares.
'I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next, and tortured in medieval ways - all orchestrated by the U.S. government.
'I am not asking for vengeance - only that the truth should be made known so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured.'
Mohamed spent a total of seven years in U.S. custody after being arrested in Pakistan in 2002 as a suspected Al Qaeda terrorist.
He had left Britain - where had been granted exceptional leave to remain after arriving from the U.S. as a teenager - in late 2001 for Afghanistan.
He has apparently insisted that he went there to kick a drug habit and see for himself if the Taliban had created a good Islamic regime.
Mohamed claimed yesterday that the deepest despair of his ordeal came when he realised the British agents he hoped would come to his rescue were actually working with his tormentors.
In his statement, he said: 'Many have been complicit in my own horrors over the past seven years.
'I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence.
'I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.'
His comments prompted calls by Amnesty International for a full public inquiry and opposition MPs demanded that the Foreign Secretary come clean over allegations of Britain's involvement.
David Miliband officially welcomed Mohamed's return yesterday, but he is already under intense pressure for refusing to publish secret files said to show that British agents helped the Americans inflict hideous abuse on the prisoner during his detention in Morocco, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Mr Miliband has repeatedly insisted that Britain 'abhors' torture and never orders or condones it.
But Mohamed claims that Britain knew his U.S. captors hung him from wrist straps, beat him and mutilated his genitals with a scalpel to make him confess to a 'dirty bomb' plot.
Early on, he was questioned by an MI5 agent in Pakistan, although the British spy has never been accused of carrying out any torture directly.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said it was 'high time' the Government asked the new U.S. administration for permission to release secret files on the matter.
He added: 'If the Government had done this, they would not be facing allegations of a cover-up.'
Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Edward Davey said: 'Now that Binyam Mohamed has landed in Britain, the Government is out of excuses for delaying a full inquiry into its involvement in his alleged torture.'
Lord Carlile of Berriew, the independent reviewer of terrorism laws, has urged Mr Miliband to 'lance the sore' over Mohamed's treatment by publishing details which were edited out of a High Court judgment.
Mohamed was released from Northolt at 6.45pm and driven away. He said he was 'neither physically nor mentally capable' of facing the media yet.
Gordon Brown refused to say if Mohamed would face any restrictions on his movement, insisting that national security had to be the priority.
His lawyer Clive Stafford Smith said he would spend the next few days or weeks in 'a quiet place to recover from his ordeal'.
He batted away a question about whether Mohamed had really been 'on holiday' in Afghanistan.
Mr Stafford Smith said: 'If people have got problems with Binyam going to Afghanistan, that's their problem. Human rights are human rights, not just for British citizens. He's not angry, he's sad. He's lost seven years of his life.'
Mohamed could stay at a rural property belonging to a wealthy supporter of Reprieve, the campaign group which lobbied for his release.
But his lawyer would not say where Mohamed will spent the next few days, adding: 'He just wants to go to a place we've got him for tonight where he can be by himself with his sister and he can try to get his life together again.'
Mohamed's statement
'I hope you will understand that after everything I have been through I am neither physically nor mentally capable of facing the media on my arrival back to Britain. Please forgive me if I make a simple statement through my lawyer. I hope to be able to do better in days to come.
I have been through an experience that I never thought to encounter in my darkest nightmares.
Before this ordeal, 'torture' was an abstract word to me. I could never have imagined that I would be its victim.
It is still difficult for me to believe that I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next, and tortured in medieval ways - all orchestrated by the U.S government.
While I want to recover, and put it all as far in my past as I can, I also know I have an obligation to the people who still remain in those torture chambers. My own despair was greatest when I thought that everyone had abandoned me. I have a duty to make sure that nobody else is forgotten.
I am grateful that in the end I was not simply left to my fate. I am grateful to my lawyers and other staff at Reprieve, and to Lt Col Yvonne Bradley, who fought for my freedom.
I am grateful to the members of the British Foreign Office who worked for my release.
And I want to thank people around Britain who wrote to me in Guantanamo Bay to keep my spirits up, as well as to the members of the media who tried to make sure that the world knew what was going on.
I know I would not be home in Britain today if it were not for everyone's support. Indeed, I might not be alive at all. I wish I could say that it is all over, but it is not.
There are still 241 Muslim prisoners in Guantanamo. Many have long since been cleared even by the U.S. military, yet cannot go anywhere as they face persecution.
And I have to say, more in sadness than in anger, that many have been complicit in my own horrors over the past seven years.
For myself, the very worst moment came when I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence.
I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.
I am not asking for vengeance; only that the truth should be made known, so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured. Thank you.'
Binyam Mohamed, who flew back from the controversial camp in Cuba yesterday, is almost certain to be given permission to remain here permanently.
This would make him eligible for State benefits, and he could even apply for legal aid to fund a multi-million-pound compensation claim against the Government.
Ehiopian-born Mohamed, 30, first arrived in the UK in 1994, aged 16, and was refused asylum but in 2000 he was granted leave to remain until 2004.
By this time, he was already incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay.
After more than four years in the prison camp, he landed back in Britain yesterday vowing to expose Whitehall 'collusion' in his torture.
He was flown back on a luxury Gulfstream jet accompanied by two Foreign Office officials, two Metropolitan police officers and a doctor.
The Foreign Office and Home Office jointly paid for the trip, which is estimated to have cost as much as £160,000.
A Foreign Office spokesman refused to comment on the figure today. He said: 'The overall cost of the operation is not yet known.'
Mohamed was initially held under terror laws, although not arrested, and questioned by officers 'conducting investigations into his case'. Five hours later, he was freed.
He has agreed to abide by several voluntary security measures in Britain, including regular reports to a police station.
His immigration status will now also be under review. So far, he has been given 'temporary admission' to the UK while the Home Office considers his case.
If he is allowed to stay permanently, his benefits entitlements would be boosted because refugees cannot claim payouts like Income Support and Housing Benefit.
Someone with indefinite leave to remain can qualify for Housing Benefit of £60.50 a week and council tax relief which can be worth hundreds of pounds a year.
If Mohamed looks for work, he will be entitled to claim Jobseeker's Allowance of £60.50 a week.
However, if his physical and emotional maltreatment have left him unable to work, he could be eligible for Disability Living Allowance of up to £113.75 a week or Employment Support Allowance of up to £89.50.
His lawyers are privately confident that he will not be deported or arrested, meaning he will probably remain at liberty to spend the rest of his life in Britain.
Some are already questioning why Britain had campaigned to have Ethiopian-born Mohamed back at all because of the cost of his return and ongoing supervision.
Tory backbencher Philip Davies said: 'Why on earth we should be taking in this chap? If he was a UK citizen, fair enough. But he's not and only happened to be living here for a few years.
'We also don't know if this chap is a risk. If he is a danger then is he putting people's lives at risk, let alone the huge cost of the police and security services monitoring him?'
Mohamed had been on hunger strike until earlier this month in protest at his treatment in Guantanamo and looked extremely gaunt on his return yesterday.
However, he managed to walk from the plane unaided after the ten-hour flight from Cuba to RAF Northolt in North-West London.
The U.S. agreed to a British request to free him last week. All charges against him had already been dropped and he was never tried.
In a statement released by his lawyers to coincide with his return, Mohamed said: 'I have been through an experience that I never thought to encounter in my darkest nightmares.
'I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next, and tortured in medieval ways - all orchestrated by the U.S. government.
'I am not asking for vengeance - only that the truth should be made known so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured.'
Mohamed spent a total of seven years in U.S. custody after being arrested in Pakistan in 2002 as a suspected Al Qaeda terrorist.
He had left Britain - where had been granted exceptional leave to remain after arriving from the U.S. as a teenager - in late 2001 for Afghanistan.
He has apparently insisted that he went there to kick a drug habit and see for himself if the Taliban had created a good Islamic regime.
Mohamed claimed yesterday that the deepest despair of his ordeal came when he realised the British agents he hoped would come to his rescue were actually working with his tormentors.
In his statement, he said: 'Many have been complicit in my own horrors over the past seven years.
'I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence.
'I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.'
His comments prompted calls by Amnesty International for a full public inquiry and opposition MPs demanded that the Foreign Secretary come clean over allegations of Britain's involvement.
David Miliband officially welcomed Mohamed's return yesterday, but he is already under intense pressure for refusing to publish secret files said to show that British agents helped the Americans inflict hideous abuse on the prisoner during his detention in Morocco, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Mr Miliband has repeatedly insisted that Britain 'abhors' torture and never orders or condones it.
But Mohamed claims that Britain knew his U.S. captors hung him from wrist straps, beat him and mutilated his genitals with a scalpel to make him confess to a 'dirty bomb' plot.
Early on, he was questioned by an MI5 agent in Pakistan, although the British spy has never been accused of carrying out any torture directly.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said it was 'high time' the Government asked the new U.S. administration for permission to release secret files on the matter.
He added: 'If the Government had done this, they would not be facing allegations of a cover-up.'
Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Edward Davey said: 'Now that Binyam Mohamed has landed in Britain, the Government is out of excuses for delaying a full inquiry into its involvement in his alleged torture.'
Lord Carlile of Berriew, the independent reviewer of terrorism laws, has urged Mr Miliband to 'lance the sore' over Mohamed's treatment by publishing details which were edited out of a High Court judgment.
Mohamed was released from Northolt at 6.45pm and driven away. He said he was 'neither physically nor mentally capable' of facing the media yet.
Gordon Brown refused to say if Mohamed would face any restrictions on his movement, insisting that national security had to be the priority.
His lawyer Clive Stafford Smith said he would spend the next few days or weeks in 'a quiet place to recover from his ordeal'.
He batted away a question about whether Mohamed had really been 'on holiday' in Afghanistan.
Mr Stafford Smith said: 'If people have got problems with Binyam going to Afghanistan, that's their problem. Human rights are human rights, not just for British citizens. He's not angry, he's sad. He's lost seven years of his life.'
Mohamed could stay at a rural property belonging to a wealthy supporter of Reprieve, the campaign group which lobbied for his release.
But his lawyer would not say where Mohamed will spent the next few days, adding: 'He just wants to go to a place we've got him for tonight where he can be by himself with his sister and he can try to get his life together again.'
Mohamed's statement
'I hope you will understand that after everything I have been through I am neither physically nor mentally capable of facing the media on my arrival back to Britain. Please forgive me if I make a simple statement through my lawyer. I hope to be able to do better in days to come.
I have been through an experience that I never thought to encounter in my darkest nightmares.
Before this ordeal, 'torture' was an abstract word to me. I could never have imagined that I would be its victim.
It is still difficult for me to believe that I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next, and tortured in medieval ways - all orchestrated by the U.S government.
While I want to recover, and put it all as far in my past as I can, I also know I have an obligation to the people who still remain in those torture chambers. My own despair was greatest when I thought that everyone had abandoned me. I have a duty to make sure that nobody else is forgotten.
I am grateful that in the end I was not simply left to my fate. I am grateful to my lawyers and other staff at Reprieve, and to Lt Col Yvonne Bradley, who fought for my freedom.
I am grateful to the members of the British Foreign Office who worked for my release.
And I want to thank people around Britain who wrote to me in Guantanamo Bay to keep my spirits up, as well as to the members of the media who tried to make sure that the world knew what was going on.
I know I would not be home in Britain today if it were not for everyone's support. Indeed, I might not be alive at all. I wish I could say that it is all over, but it is not.
There are still 241 Muslim prisoners in Guantanamo. Many have long since been cleared even by the U.S. military, yet cannot go anywhere as they face persecution.
And I have to say, more in sadness than in anger, that many have been complicit in my own horrors over the past seven years.
For myself, the very worst moment came when I realised in Morocco that the people who were torturing me were receiving questions and materials from British intelligence.
I had met with British intelligence in Pakistan. I had been open with them. Yet the very people who I had hoped would come to my rescue, I later realised, had allied themselves with my abusers.
I am not asking for vengeance; only that the truth should be made known, so that nobody in the future should have to endure what I have endured. Thank you.'
Islamic group slams 'out of touch' imams for causing drift towards extremism
Young Muslims are being pushed towards extremism because their mosques are run by elderly and out-of-touch cliques, a report by an Islamic think-tank .
The Quilliam Foundation, an anti-extremist Islamic organisation, accused imams of failing to teach and preach in English and of shutting women out of their mosques.
Only about 3 per cent of Muslim clerics were born in this country and most do not have full command of English, the study said.
The report said that mosque leaderships did not promote British values and allowed young people to drift towards jihadists who speak their own language.
The group called on the Government for stricter limits on visas for Islamic clerics coming to Britain and for an end to state grants for mosques that do not have at least one imam who preaches in English and supports the principles of democracy.
The Quilliam Foundation - which has been backed with almost £1million of taxpayers' money and attacked by some Islamic groups as being a mouthpiece for the Government - also said madrassas, mosques' equivalent of Christian Sunday schools, should be fully inspected by local children's services officials.
The survey was based on responses to five questions given by 512 mosques last autumn.
It found 97 per cent of imams were born overseas and 92 per cent were trained abroad, while more than half of the Muslims in Britain were born here.
'The religious leadership in the vast majority of Britain's mosques are not in full command of the English language, and are likely to be ill-equipped to address the real concerns and everyday experiences of young British Muslims,' the report found.
Nearly half, 44 per cent, of mosques do not hold their Friday lectures or sermons in English, the survey said. A similar proportion have no space for women, and their managements take the view that it is unnecessary for women to come to pray.
The report also accused some mosques of barring Muslims from the 'wrong' ethnic background and other of 'poor educational standards' in the way they teach 100,000 children who go to them for religious instruction.
Many mosques, the Quilliam report said, are run by groups of elderly founding members from a single ethnic background. Few women and young people are on management committees or trustee boards.
The report picked out one mosque in Lancashire with members mainly of Indian Gujarati background which told a prospective member that no Pakistanis would be accepted.
The mosque, the report said, had been given £26,000 in public money and was backed by a local council of mosques which had been financed by more than £500,000 from the taxpayer.
A Home Office spokesman insisted that immigration rules for religious leaders are already tough.
He said: 'A minister of religion would have to be able to communicate to a relatively high level in English. In addition, the Resident Labour Market Test means that religious organisations must ensure that jobs cannot be filled by workers in the United Kingdom.'
But Tory cohesion spokesman Baroness Warsi said: 'These reports demonstrate that mosques have huge potential to play a vital role in the communities which they serve.
'But, in doing so, it is essential that they are responsive to the needs of their congregation. They must have a deep understanding of the national language, culture and society.
'I would like to see them working closer with other faith communities; to develop stronger corporate governance, to improve access for women and to increase the employment of British imams whilst strengthening the work they do in their local community.'
The Quilliam Foundation, an anti-extremist Islamic organisation, accused imams of failing to teach and preach in English and of shutting women out of their mosques.
Only about 3 per cent of Muslim clerics were born in this country and most do not have full command of English, the study said.
The report said that mosque leaderships did not promote British values and allowed young people to drift towards jihadists who speak their own language.
The group called on the Government for stricter limits on visas for Islamic clerics coming to Britain and for an end to state grants for mosques that do not have at least one imam who preaches in English and supports the principles of democracy.
The Quilliam Foundation - which has been backed with almost £1million of taxpayers' money and attacked by some Islamic groups as being a mouthpiece for the Government - also said madrassas, mosques' equivalent of Christian Sunday schools, should be fully inspected by local children's services officials.
The survey was based on responses to five questions given by 512 mosques last autumn.
It found 97 per cent of imams were born overseas and 92 per cent were trained abroad, while more than half of the Muslims in Britain were born here.
'The religious leadership in the vast majority of Britain's mosques are not in full command of the English language, and are likely to be ill-equipped to address the real concerns and everyday experiences of young British Muslims,' the report found.
Nearly half, 44 per cent, of mosques do not hold their Friday lectures or sermons in English, the survey said. A similar proportion have no space for women, and their managements take the view that it is unnecessary for women to come to pray.
The report also accused some mosques of barring Muslims from the 'wrong' ethnic background and other of 'poor educational standards' in the way they teach 100,000 children who go to them for religious instruction.
Many mosques, the Quilliam report said, are run by groups of elderly founding members from a single ethnic background. Few women and young people are on management committees or trustee boards.
The report picked out one mosque in Lancashire with members mainly of Indian Gujarati background which told a prospective member that no Pakistanis would be accepted.
The mosque, the report said, had been given £26,000 in public money and was backed by a local council of mosques which had been financed by more than £500,000 from the taxpayer.
A Home Office spokesman insisted that immigration rules for religious leaders are already tough.
He said: 'A minister of religion would have to be able to communicate to a relatively high level in English. In addition, the Resident Labour Market Test means that religious organisations must ensure that jobs cannot be filled by workers in the United Kingdom.'
But Tory cohesion spokesman Baroness Warsi said: 'These reports demonstrate that mosques have huge potential to play a vital role in the communities which they serve.
'But, in doing so, it is essential that they are responsive to the needs of their congregation. They must have a deep understanding of the national language, culture and society.
'I would like to see them working closer with other faith communities; to develop stronger corporate governance, to improve access for women and to increase the employment of British imams whilst strengthening the work they do in their local community.'
Monday, February 23, 2009
'Rise in attacks' on British Jews
The number of attacks on Jews in Britain has risen sharply since Israeli attacks began on Gaza last December, a charity has said.
The Community Security Trust, a charity working to protect Jews in the UK, says more than 250 anti-Semitic incidents were recorded in four weeks.
They include property vandalism, verbal threats and some physical attacks, most of which centred on north London.
The same period last year saw just 27 incidents, according to the trust.
Synagogue fire
Communities Minister Sadiq Khan said: "The Government strongly condemns the increase in anti-Semitic incidents. British Jews, like all communities, must be able to live their lives free from fear of verbal or physical attack.
"In recent weeks a steady, worrying and deplorable rise in the type and the number of incidents has demonstrated how events overseas can impact here and further underlines the importance of work to tackle anti-Semitism."
Among the crimes recorded by the trust were violent street assaults, hate e-mails and graffiti threatening British Jews.
There was one report of an arson attack on a synagogue in Brondesbury, north-west London, and other cases of racist graffiti and young groups chanting anti-Semitic slogans. The trust says schoolchildren have also been singled out for verbal abuse and bullying.
The incidents took place in predominately Jewish areas, including Golders Green and Stamford Hill in north London, as well as parts of Salford and Bury in Greater Manchester.
Mark Gardner, from the trust, said the "outburst of anti-Semitic rage during the Gaza conflict showed the shocking impact upon British Jews of widespread anti-Israel hysteria".
Liberal Democrat shadow home secretary Chris Huhne called for the home secretary and the police to stamp on anti-Semitic crime "quickly and firmly".
“ It is totally unacceptable that any minority should find their lives disrupted because of events in another part of the world, for which they cannot be held responsible ” Chris Huhne, Lib Dem shadow home secretary
"It is totally unacceptable that any minority should find their lives disrupted because of events in another part of the world, for which they cannot be held responsible," he said.
Last month, prominent British Muslim scholars and progressive thinkers denounced the attacks, saying British Jews "should not be held responsible" for Israel's actions in Gaza.
An international summit to be held in London next week will try to come up with ways to tackle the problem around the world.
The Community Security Trust said the overall number of anti-Semitic attacks in 2008 was slightly lower than the previous year, falling from 561 to 541.
No comparable figures are collected for Islamophobic incidents.
Since 2000, there has been an upward trend in racially or religiously aggravated assault, peaking around 2006 and falling slightly since then.
'You grow immune to the threat'
The Community Security Trust, a charity working to protect Jews in the UK, says more than 250 anti-Semitic incidents were recorded in four weeks.
They include property vandalism, verbal threats and some physical attacks, most of which centred on north London.
The same period last year saw just 27 incidents, according to the trust.
Synagogue fire
Communities Minister Sadiq Khan said: "The Government strongly condemns the increase in anti-Semitic incidents. British Jews, like all communities, must be able to live their lives free from fear of verbal or physical attack.
"In recent weeks a steady, worrying and deplorable rise in the type and the number of incidents has demonstrated how events overseas can impact here and further underlines the importance of work to tackle anti-Semitism."
Among the crimes recorded by the trust were violent street assaults, hate e-mails and graffiti threatening British Jews.
There was one report of an arson attack on a synagogue in Brondesbury, north-west London, and other cases of racist graffiti and young groups chanting anti-Semitic slogans. The trust says schoolchildren have also been singled out for verbal abuse and bullying.
The incidents took place in predominately Jewish areas, including Golders Green and Stamford Hill in north London, as well as parts of Salford and Bury in Greater Manchester.
Mark Gardner, from the trust, said the "outburst of anti-Semitic rage during the Gaza conflict showed the shocking impact upon British Jews of widespread anti-Israel hysteria".
Liberal Democrat shadow home secretary Chris Huhne called for the home secretary and the police to stamp on anti-Semitic crime "quickly and firmly".
“ It is totally unacceptable that any minority should find their lives disrupted because of events in another part of the world, for which they cannot be held responsible ” Chris Huhne, Lib Dem shadow home secretary
"It is totally unacceptable that any minority should find their lives disrupted because of events in another part of the world, for which they cannot be held responsible," he said.
Last month, prominent British Muslim scholars and progressive thinkers denounced the attacks, saying British Jews "should not be held responsible" for Israel's actions in Gaza.
An international summit to be held in London next week will try to come up with ways to tackle the problem around the world.
The Community Security Trust said the overall number of anti-Semitic attacks in 2008 was slightly lower than the previous year, falling from 561 to 541.
No comparable figures are collected for Islamophobic incidents.
Since 2000, there has been an upward trend in racially or religiously aggravated assault, peaking around 2006 and falling slightly since then.
'You grow immune to the threat'
Insurance worker faked £1m of claims to fund his love of sports cars
An insurance worker has been jailed after stealing more than £1million from his employers to fund his lavish lifestyle and love of sports cars.
Tahir Mahmood Khan falsified more than 350 insurance claims while he worked as an accident claims negotiator at a leading firm, paying cheques into bogus bank accounts created by an accomplice.
The fraudster was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in jail after he was caught out by a colleague dealing with another claim.
Neighbours told of how top-of-the-range sports cars were parked on his drive and he was often seen driving in Italian sports cars and went on luxury holidays to Dubai.
A neighbour said: 'I have never really had any dealings with him though he's always been friendly. He was always polite.
'The fraud squad was up at his home last year and everything went, like the posh cars, and he was then going around in an old banger.'
When confronted by police, Khan gave a a false address where a man who refused to be named but confirmed he was Khan's younger brother, said: 'He is a nice bloke and he always helps his family out.'
Khan, who for the last five years has lived with his wife and children in Lancashire, pleaded guilty to two counts of theft to the value of £1,004,411.26 at Stoke Crown Court for the crimes committed between July 2002 and September 2006.
His accomplice Bilal Fazal, pleaded guilty to laundering £200,000 and was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison at the same hearing.
A spokesman for The Co-operative Insurance, said: 'We welcome the custodial sentence given to Mr Khan.
'The successful prosecution follows extensive investigations between The Co-operative Insurance, Staffordshire Police Financial Crime Unit and the Asset Recovery Agency.
'We hope to recover most of the losses incurred and wish to make clear that none of our customers were affected by the incident.'
Nick Price, District Crown Prosecutor for CPS Staffordshire, said: 'Khan falsified injury claims by inventing a fictitious claimant and then requesting a company cheque as payment.
'He was only discovered when a colleague noticed a discrepancy on one of the files he was raising a cheque for.
'Khan and Fazal will be subject to further proceedings under the Proceeds of Crimes Act 2002 which allows the court to make an order against them to pay a sum equal to the benefit from their crime.'
Tahir Mahmood Khan falsified more than 350 insurance claims while he worked as an accident claims negotiator at a leading firm, paying cheques into bogus bank accounts created by an accomplice.
The fraudster was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in jail after he was caught out by a colleague dealing with another claim.
Neighbours told of how top-of-the-range sports cars were parked on his drive and he was often seen driving in Italian sports cars and went on luxury holidays to Dubai.
A neighbour said: 'I have never really had any dealings with him though he's always been friendly. He was always polite.
'The fraud squad was up at his home last year and everything went, like the posh cars, and he was then going around in an old banger.'
When confronted by police, Khan gave a a false address where a man who refused to be named but confirmed he was Khan's younger brother, said: 'He is a nice bloke and he always helps his family out.'
Khan, who for the last five years has lived with his wife and children in Lancashire, pleaded guilty to two counts of theft to the value of £1,004,411.26 at Stoke Crown Court for the crimes committed between July 2002 and September 2006.
His accomplice Bilal Fazal, pleaded guilty to laundering £200,000 and was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison at the same hearing.
A spokesman for The Co-operative Insurance, said: 'We welcome the custodial sentence given to Mr Khan.
'The successful prosecution follows extensive investigations between The Co-operative Insurance, Staffordshire Police Financial Crime Unit and the Asset Recovery Agency.
'We hope to recover most of the losses incurred and wish to make clear that none of our customers were affected by the incident.'
Nick Price, District Crown Prosecutor for CPS Staffordshire, said: 'Khan falsified injury claims by inventing a fictitious claimant and then requesting a company cheque as payment.
'He was only discovered when a colleague noticed a discrepancy on one of the files he was raising a cheque for.
'Khan and Fazal will be subject to further proceedings under the Proceeds of Crimes Act 2002 which allows the court to make an order against them to pay a sum equal to the benefit from their crime.'
Labour ducking polygamy issue because of 'cultural sensitivity', says Muslim peer
Politicians have failed to take polygamy seriously because of 'cultural sensitivity', a Muslim peer has claimed.Baroness Warsi, a Tory spokesman for community cohesion, said this has resulted in laws banning the practice not being properly enforced.
The Conservative peer urged the Government to bring in rules demanding the registration of all religious marriage ceremonies to stop men in Britain marrying more than one woman without registering them.
The Government has no figures on polygamous marriages, but the practice is thought to be common in parts of the Muslim communities and the number is thought to run into thousands.
Polygamy is a crime in Britain, punishable by up to seven years in jail.
But the practice is legal in many Muslim countries, and the UK benefits system recognises 'extra' wives as dependents - provided the marriage took place legally overseas.
Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, provided he can support them properly and equally.
Islamic law allows a man to take up to four wives, provided he can support them properly and equally.
In some cases it is thought Muslim men marry second wives in a religious ceremony in the UK without registering the marriage.
The changes urged by Baroness Warsi would end that practice by demanding that all such weddings be registered - rendering the man liable to prosecution.
The Tory peer, who was born in Britain to Pakistani parents, said: 'There has been a failure on the part of policy-makers to respond to this situation.
'Some of it has been done in the name of cultural sensitivity and we've just avoided either discussing or dealing with this matter head on.'
She told the BBC: 'There has to be a culture change and that has to be brought about by policymakers taking a very clear stance on this issue, saying that in this country, one married man is allowed to marry one woman.
'And that must be the way for everyone who lives in this country.'
Muslim weddings are not recognised by the state, and couples must also undergo a register office ceremony to be married in the eyes of the law.
Baroness Warsi proposed rules making it compulsory to register private Muslim 'Nikah' marriage ceremonies which take place in the home - with 'an imam and a couple of witnesses there' - within a four-week period.
She said: 'If that was the case, then those marriages would have to be declared within law and if those marriages were declared within law, then clearly if the person has a first legal wife then there could be potential cases of bigamy being brought.'
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: 'It is Government policy to prevent the formation of polygamous households.
'Polygamous marriages that have been contracted in overseas countries are legally recognised.
'It is not the role of Government to take a position on the rites, beliefs or practices of any particular religious faith, other than where these give rise to conflict with the common law.'
Ministers reviewed polygamy laws last year, but opted to leave them unchanged.
Men with multiple wives can claim extra income support, jobseeker's allowance and housing and council tax benefits for his dependents provided the marriage took place legally overseas - although the state only recognises one of his wives as his legal spouse.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Muslim teetotaller went on wrecking spree after drinking bottle of Jack Daniels
strict teetotaller went berserk after downing a bottle of bourbon to take away his grief at his mother’s illness.
A friend advised Muslim non-drinker Dolshad Mohammed that alcohol would ease his mental pain, Bradford Crown Court heard today.
Mohammed, 25, proceeded to drink almost a whole bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey, prosecutor Dave MacKay said.
He then went on a drunken spree of window-smashing at his lodgings in Park View Road, Manningham, Bradford.
Police, who had to force their way into Mohammed’s bedroom to arrest him, found him jumping up and down on the bed, the court heard.
He seized a knife but dropped it when a police dog was used to restrain him.
Mohammed, who did £600 damage, apologised to police officers, saying he had “drunk too much vodka”.
His barrister, Anastasis Tasou, told Judge Peter Benson it was Jack Daniels whiskey.
Mohammed downed almost a full bottle after learning his mother was gravely ill.
Mr Tasou said Mohammed, a strict Muslim who had never touched alcohol before, was advised that liquor would take away his pain.
“He drank almost a whole bottle and it obviously had a dramatic effect,” Mr Tasou said.
Mohammed, who needed a Kurdish interpreter in court, “behaved in a wholly bizarre and uncharacteristic way,” Judge Benson said.
Mohammed, who pleaded guilty to affray and criminal damage in June last year, hung his head in the dock.
Judge Benson said it was obvious he was thoroughly ashamed.
He trusted he had not touched alcohol since.
Mohammed was sentenced to a community order with 100 hours’ unpaid work and six months’ probation service supervision.
A friend advised Muslim non-drinker Dolshad Mohammed that alcohol would ease his mental pain, Bradford Crown Court heard today.
Mohammed, 25, proceeded to drink almost a whole bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey, prosecutor Dave MacKay said.
He then went on a drunken spree of window-smashing at his lodgings in Park View Road, Manningham, Bradford.
Police, who had to force their way into Mohammed’s bedroom to arrest him, found him jumping up and down on the bed, the court heard.
He seized a knife but dropped it when a police dog was used to restrain him.
Mohammed, who did £600 damage, apologised to police officers, saying he had “drunk too much vodka”.
His barrister, Anastasis Tasou, told Judge Peter Benson it was Jack Daniels whiskey.
Mohammed downed almost a full bottle after learning his mother was gravely ill.
Mr Tasou said Mohammed, a strict Muslim who had never touched alcohol before, was advised that liquor would take away his pain.
“He drank almost a whole bottle and it obviously had a dramatic effect,” Mr Tasou said.
Mohammed, who needed a Kurdish interpreter in court, “behaved in a wholly bizarre and uncharacteristic way,” Judge Benson said.
Mohammed, who pleaded guilty to affray and criminal damage in June last year, hung his head in the dock.
Judge Benson said it was obvious he was thoroughly ashamed.
He trusted he had not touched alcohol since.
Mohammed was sentenced to a community order with 100 hours’ unpaid work and six months’ probation service supervision.
British Muslims Assist Taliban with Killing British Troops...
British Muslims are providing the Taliban with electronic devices to make roadside bombs for use in attacks against British forces serving in southern Afghanistan, The Telegraph can disclose.
The devices, which enable Taliban fighters to detonate roadside bombs by remote control, are either sent to sympathizers in the region, or carried by volunteers who fly to Pakistan and then make their way across the border.
Details of how British electronic components have been found in roadside bombs were given to David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, when he visited British troops at their military compound at Lashkagar, in Helmand province, earlier this week.
In a briefing on British operations in southern Afghanistan by Brigadier Gordon Messenger, the Royal Marine commander of the British battlegroup, Mr Miliband was shown examples of the crude, home-made devices that are being used in attacks against British patrols.
They included mobile phones filled with explosives, which could kill or seriously injure British soldiers patrolling on foot, and more sophisticated devices that can be used against military vehicles.
Explosives experts who have examined the devices say they have found British-made electronic components that enable Taliban insurgents to detonate their home-made, road-side bombs by remote control.
The electronic devices smuggled into Afghanistan from Britain range from basic remote control units that are normally used to fly model airplanes to more advanced components that enable insurgents to conduct attacks from up to a mile away from British patrols.
"We have found electronic components in devices used to target British troops that originally come from Britain," a British explosives officer told Mr Miliband during a detailed briefing on the type of improvised explosive device (IED) used against British forces.
When asked how the components had reached Afghanistan, the officer explained that they had either been sent from Britain, or physically brought to Afghanistan by British Muslims who had flown over.
The disclosure is the latest in a string of suggestions from British commanders about the connections between British Muslims and violence in Afghanistan...
Electronic devices such as "mobile phones filled with explosives, which could kill or seriously injure British soldiers patrolling on foot, and more sophisticated devices that can be used against military vehicles." Quite ingenious these British Muslims; combining their Western heritage (e.g.., technology) with their jihadi blood-lust, they can sure be quite creative.
The devices, which enable Taliban fighters to detonate roadside bombs by remote control, are either sent to sympathizers in the region, or carried by volunteers who fly to Pakistan and then make their way across the border.
Details of how British electronic components have been found in roadside bombs were given to David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, when he visited British troops at their military compound at Lashkagar, in Helmand province, earlier this week.
In a briefing on British operations in southern Afghanistan by Brigadier Gordon Messenger, the Royal Marine commander of the British battlegroup, Mr Miliband was shown examples of the crude, home-made devices that are being used in attacks against British patrols.
They included mobile phones filled with explosives, which could kill or seriously injure British soldiers patrolling on foot, and more sophisticated devices that can be used against military vehicles.
Explosives experts who have examined the devices say they have found British-made electronic components that enable Taliban insurgents to detonate their home-made, road-side bombs by remote control.
The electronic devices smuggled into Afghanistan from Britain range from basic remote control units that are normally used to fly model airplanes to more advanced components that enable insurgents to conduct attacks from up to a mile away from British patrols.
"We have found electronic components in devices used to target British troops that originally come from Britain," a British explosives officer told Mr Miliband during a detailed briefing on the type of improvised explosive device (IED) used against British forces.
When asked how the components had reached Afghanistan, the officer explained that they had either been sent from Britain, or physically brought to Afghanistan by British Muslims who had flown over.
The disclosure is the latest in a string of suggestions from British commanders about the connections between British Muslims and violence in Afghanistan...
Electronic devices such as "mobile phones filled with explosives, which could kill or seriously injure British soldiers patrolling on foot, and more sophisticated devices that can be used against military vehicles." Quite ingenious these British Muslims; combining their Western heritage (e.g.., technology) with their jihadi blood-lust, they can sure be quite creative.
Taxi Driver Clubs Passengers with Baseball Bat...
A TAXI driver beat up two customers with a baseball bat in two separate incidents, a court heard.
Amran Khan is alleged to have assaulted Phillip Booth on February 23 last year.
He is also accused of causing grievous bodily harm to Adrian Dubiel with intent on June 15 and inflicting grievous bodily harm to Mr Dubiel on the same day.
The 31-year-old, of Rushton Road, Cobridge, denies all three charges.
Prosecutor Paul Spratt told Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court yesterday that Mr Booth went to the taxi rank in High Street, Newcastle, at 2.15am on February 23.
Mr Spratt said: "He told the driver he wanted to go to Gillow Heath, Biddulph, and agreed a £20 fee. He paid the money before the journey started.
"When he came to get out, the defendant wanted an additional sum of money. Mr Booth said they had agreed £20. The defendant produced a weapon. He got out and went around to the passenger's side.
"Mr Booth says he was struck a number of times with a weapon."
The court heard Mr Booth, who was left with bruising, noted the taxi's registration number as MJ03 OBA.
"The defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle with that registration number," said Mr Spratt.
Khan, who drives for Middleport-based Magnum Taxis, was interviewed and told police he is the owner of the vehicle but said he was not driving at the time.
In the second alleged incident, the court heard Mr Dubiel had been getting a taxi home from Newcastle at about 2am.
"He got in the taxi and simply said 'Madeley tenner'," said Mr Spratt.
"The defendant said, 'I will show you a ride for a tenner' and drove in the opposite direction to Madeley.
"The taxi pulled into a side road and stopped. Mr Dubiel got out. It is said the defendant got out and hit him once to the back of the head and once to the back."
The court heard Mr Dubiel was bleeding heavily but still managed to note the taxi's registration number and the name of the firm on his mobile phone. He typed 'MG03 OBA Magnum'.
Mr Dubiel had a depressed fracture of the skull and was in hospital for six days.
Mr Spratt said: "The records of the taxi business were investigated and showed the defendant was working until gone 3am.
"The prosecution case is that this is the same taxi and the same defendant."
Mr Booth, who picked Khan out at a video identification parade, said: "He produced a rounders bat from under his seat. We were both outside when the bat comes across my chest four or five times.
"The driver got back in the taxi. He put his car in reverse and tried to run me over. He reversed at very high speed. I was able to get out of the way."
Mr Dubiel, who did not pick out Khan, told the jury: "He pulled over and stopped. My intention was to walk back towards Newcastle when I was struck to the back of the head. I went down and was struck again to the back and ribs.
"I looked around to see what happened and saw the driver of the taxi walking back to the car with a white or silver baseball bat."
The trial continues
Amran Khan is alleged to have assaulted Phillip Booth on February 23 last year.
He is also accused of causing grievous bodily harm to Adrian Dubiel with intent on June 15 and inflicting grievous bodily harm to Mr Dubiel on the same day.
The 31-year-old, of Rushton Road, Cobridge, denies all three charges.
Prosecutor Paul Spratt told Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court yesterday that Mr Booth went to the taxi rank in High Street, Newcastle, at 2.15am on February 23.
Mr Spratt said: "He told the driver he wanted to go to Gillow Heath, Biddulph, and agreed a £20 fee. He paid the money before the journey started.
"When he came to get out, the defendant wanted an additional sum of money. Mr Booth said they had agreed £20. The defendant produced a weapon. He got out and went around to the passenger's side.
"Mr Booth says he was struck a number of times with a weapon."
The court heard Mr Booth, who was left with bruising, noted the taxi's registration number as MJ03 OBA.
"The defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle with that registration number," said Mr Spratt.
Khan, who drives for Middleport-based Magnum Taxis, was interviewed and told police he is the owner of the vehicle but said he was not driving at the time.
In the second alleged incident, the court heard Mr Dubiel had been getting a taxi home from Newcastle at about 2am.
"He got in the taxi and simply said 'Madeley tenner'," said Mr Spratt.
"The defendant said, 'I will show you a ride for a tenner' and drove in the opposite direction to Madeley.
"The taxi pulled into a side road and stopped. Mr Dubiel got out. It is said the defendant got out and hit him once to the back of the head and once to the back."
The court heard Mr Dubiel was bleeding heavily but still managed to note the taxi's registration number and the name of the firm on his mobile phone. He typed 'MG03 OBA Magnum'.
Mr Dubiel had a depressed fracture of the skull and was in hospital for six days.
Mr Spratt said: "The records of the taxi business were investigated and showed the defendant was working until gone 3am.
"The prosecution case is that this is the same taxi and the same defendant."
Mr Booth, who picked Khan out at a video identification parade, said: "He produced a rounders bat from under his seat. We were both outside when the bat comes across my chest four or five times.
"The driver got back in the taxi. He put his car in reverse and tried to run me over. He reversed at very high speed. I was able to get out of the way."
Mr Dubiel, who did not pick out Khan, told the jury: "He pulled over and stopped. My intention was to walk back towards Newcastle when I was struck to the back of the head. I went down and was struck again to the back and ribs.
"I looked around to see what happened and saw the driver of the taxi walking back to the car with a white or silver baseball bat."
The trial continues
Woman jailed for false rape claim
A 23-year-old woman has been jailed after falsely claiming she had been raped by a taxi driver in a bid to obtain £10,000 from him.
Bradford Crown Court heard yesterday how the cabbie acted as a Good Samaritan when Shabnam Masood flagged down his vehicle in September 2007 and told him she had been assaulted by her boyfriend.
She was jailed for six months after the court heard she intended to ask the driver, Mohammed Taj, to pay up £10,000 to avoid a court case.
Prosecutor Michelle Colborne said the taxi driver arranged for the woman to be put up at a hotel in Bradford after she claimed to be hungry and homeless and they later had consensual sex. But the next day Masood phoned the police and alleged that she had been abducted by two men.
She claimed she had been blind-folded, tied up and taken to an unknown location in a car where she was raped by one of the men.
The taxi driver was arrested, interviewed and subjected to an intimate medical examination.
But Miss Colborne said CCTV footage of Masood’s movements showed her behaving in a carefree manner until the police arrived.
“On sight of the police she throws herself to the ground and demonstrates the persona of a victim,’’ said Miss Colborne.
Masood, of Brompton Road, Bradford, pleaded guilty last month to a charge of perverting the course of justice and Judge Roger Scott said it was clear that the false rape claim had been designed to get £10,000 from the alleged attacker.
He told her: “I shall deal with you on the basis that £10,000 was what was envisaged by you as the end result”.
She now faces deportation as an overstayer in this country.
‘’The end result was that he (the alleged rapist) would not go to court, but you would receive £10,000 to share between you and your partner.”
Masood’s lawyer, Assumpta O’Rourke, described her as a vulnerable individual who was easily manipulated. She said: “Miss Masood fully accepts her wrong-doing.’’ Sakhawat Hussain, chairman of the Bradford Private Hire Association, said later: “All the drivers are vetted by the Criminal Record Bureau and if they have any convictions, serious or not serious, they are not allowed to get their taxi licences.
“When something like this comes out it gives the driver a bad name, his family and all the rest of the members a bad name – it puts a black scar on the person’s life.”
Barbara Siedlecki, manager of Star (Surviving Trauma After Rape), said: “A malicious false allegation is very detrimental and I think it stops people coming forward.
“If people are reading that these allegations are false and someone gets six months, it leads them not to report any incidents.”
Bradford Crown Court heard yesterday how the cabbie acted as a Good Samaritan when Shabnam Masood flagged down his vehicle in September 2007 and told him she had been assaulted by her boyfriend.
She was jailed for six months after the court heard she intended to ask the driver, Mohammed Taj, to pay up £10,000 to avoid a court case.
Prosecutor Michelle Colborne said the taxi driver arranged for the woman to be put up at a hotel in Bradford after she claimed to be hungry and homeless and they later had consensual sex. But the next day Masood phoned the police and alleged that she had been abducted by two men.
She claimed she had been blind-folded, tied up and taken to an unknown location in a car where she was raped by one of the men.
The taxi driver was arrested, interviewed and subjected to an intimate medical examination.
But Miss Colborne said CCTV footage of Masood’s movements showed her behaving in a carefree manner until the police arrived.
“On sight of the police she throws herself to the ground and demonstrates the persona of a victim,’’ said Miss Colborne.
Masood, of Brompton Road, Bradford, pleaded guilty last month to a charge of perverting the course of justice and Judge Roger Scott said it was clear that the false rape claim had been designed to get £10,000 from the alleged attacker.
He told her: “I shall deal with you on the basis that £10,000 was what was envisaged by you as the end result”.
She now faces deportation as an overstayer in this country.
‘’The end result was that he (the alleged rapist) would not go to court, but you would receive £10,000 to share between you and your partner.”
Masood’s lawyer, Assumpta O’Rourke, described her as a vulnerable individual who was easily manipulated. She said: “Miss Masood fully accepts her wrong-doing.’’ Sakhawat Hussain, chairman of the Bradford Private Hire Association, said later: “All the drivers are vetted by the Criminal Record Bureau and if they have any convictions, serious or not serious, they are not allowed to get their taxi licences.
“When something like this comes out it gives the driver a bad name, his family and all the rest of the members a bad name – it puts a black scar on the person’s life.”
Barbara Siedlecki, manager of Star (Surviving Trauma After Rape), said: “A malicious false allegation is very detrimental and I think it stops people coming forward.
“If people are reading that these allegations are false and someone gets six months, it leads them not to report any incidents.”
HE'S BIN AWAY TOO LONG!
I see the BBC are drooling in anticipation that new Jihad poster boy Binyan Mohamed is due to come back to Blighty next week! Love the pic of him posing beside the Thames - wonder was it tourism or reconnaissance?
The BBC are so enthusiastic about portraying Binyam as a cheerful Brit that it is almost amusing. Wonder have they more pics of him dressed up as Pearly King doing the Lambeth Walk ... before he went on his travels to Al Queda's holiday camps?
Friday, February 20, 2009
Any Muslim advocating for the caliphate, sharia, jihad, and the slaying of homosexuals to be branded "extremist" -- new anti-terror code
The government is considering plans that would lead to thousands more British Muslims being branded as extremists, the Guardian has learned.
The proposals are in a counterterrorism strategy which ministers and security officials are drawing up that is due to be unveiled next month.
Some say the plans would see views held by most Muslims in Britain being classed by the government as extreme.
According to a draft of the strategy, Contest 2 as it is known in Whitehall, people would be considered as extremists if:
• They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.
• They promote Sharia law.
• They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.
• They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.
• They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Contest 2 would widen the definition of extremists to those who hold views that clash with what the government defines as shared British values. Those who advocate the wider definition say hardline Islamist interpretation of the koran leads to views that are the root cause of the terrorism threat Britain faces. But opponents say the strategy would brand the vast majority of British Muslims as extremists and alienate them even further.
The Guardian has also learned of a separate secret Whitehall counterterrorism report advocating widening the definition of who is considered extremist. Not all in Whitehall agree with the proposals and one official source said plans to widen the definition were "incendiary" and could alienate Muslims, whose support in the counterterrorism effort is needed. There were also fears it could aid the far right.
Contest 2 is still being finalised by officials and ministers. Those considered extreme would not be targeted by the criminal law, but would be sidelined and denied public funds. Ed Husain, of the Quilliam Foundation thinktank, said the root causes of terrorism were extremist views, even if those advocating the views did not call for violence.
Husain, once an extremist himself, said: "Violent extremism is produced by Islamist extremism and it's only right to get into the root causes."
Inayat Bunglawala, a former spokesman for the Muslim Council of Great Britain, said such plans would affect many British Muslims. Bunglawala, who now runs Engage, which tries to get Muslims to participate in politics and civic society, said: "That would alienate the majority of the British Muslim public. It would be counterproductive and class most Muslims as extremists.
"Well, Bunglawala, if the shoe fits -- wear it.
In a speech in December, the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, said the government's counterterrorism strategy had to include challenging nonviolent extremist groups that "skirt the fringes of the law ... to promote hate-filled ideologies".
The Contest strategy was put in place in 2003 as the UK beefed up its response to the threat of al-Qaida inspired terrorism.
But the security service's assessment shows no drop in those they consider dangerous and the UK's terror threat level remains at severe general.
The Home Office said: "We don't comment on leaked documents."
In other words, the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain. Yet "opponents say the strategy would brand the vast majority of British Muslims as extremists and alienate them even further." If a Muslim believes in all the above, he/she has already alienated themselves from UK society; and so, it is a moot point for the UK to worry about "further alienating" them.
The proposals are in a counterterrorism strategy which ministers and security officials are drawing up that is due to be unveiled next month.
Some say the plans would see views held by most Muslims in Britain being classed by the government as extreme.
According to a draft of the strategy, Contest 2 as it is known in Whitehall, people would be considered as extremists if:
• They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.
• They promote Sharia law.
• They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.
• They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.
• They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Contest 2 would widen the definition of extremists to those who hold views that clash with what the government defines as shared British values. Those who advocate the wider definition say hardline Islamist interpretation of the koran leads to views that are the root cause of the terrorism threat Britain faces. But opponents say the strategy would brand the vast majority of British Muslims as extremists and alienate them even further.
The Guardian has also learned of a separate secret Whitehall counterterrorism report advocating widening the definition of who is considered extremist. Not all in Whitehall agree with the proposals and one official source said plans to widen the definition were "incendiary" and could alienate Muslims, whose support in the counterterrorism effort is needed. There were also fears it could aid the far right.
Contest 2 is still being finalised by officials and ministers. Those considered extreme would not be targeted by the criminal law, but would be sidelined and denied public funds. Ed Husain, of the Quilliam Foundation thinktank, said the root causes of terrorism were extremist views, even if those advocating the views did not call for violence.
Husain, once an extremist himself, said: "Violent extremism is produced by Islamist extremism and it's only right to get into the root causes."
Inayat Bunglawala, a former spokesman for the Muslim Council of Great Britain, said such plans would affect many British Muslims. Bunglawala, who now runs Engage, which tries to get Muslims to participate in politics and civic society, said: "That would alienate the majority of the British Muslim public. It would be counterproductive and class most Muslims as extremists.
"Well, Bunglawala, if the shoe fits -- wear it.
In a speech in December, the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, said the government's counterterrorism strategy had to include challenging nonviolent extremist groups that "skirt the fringes of the law ... to promote hate-filled ideologies".
The Contest strategy was put in place in 2003 as the UK beefed up its response to the threat of al-Qaida inspired terrorism.
But the security service's assessment shows no drop in those they consider dangerous and the UK's terror threat level remains at severe general.
The Home Office said: "We don't comment on leaked documents."
In other words, the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain. Yet "opponents say the strategy would brand the vast majority of British Muslims as extremists and alienate them even further." If a Muslim believes in all the above, he/she has already alienated themselves from UK society; and so, it is a moot point for the UK to worry about "further alienating" them.
Some Muslim schools 'make children despise the West': Ban on cricket and Harry Potter
Some Islamic schools are promoting fundamentalist views and encouraging children to despise Western society, a report warns.
An investigation by the Civitas social policy think-tank found websites of some of the UK’s 166 Muslim schools are spreading extreme teachings, while a handful had links to sites promoting jihad, or holy war.
Examples include web forums forbidding Muslims from reading Harry Potter books, playing chess or cricket and listening to Western music.
The Civitas report, entitled Music, Chess and Other Sins, claims Ofsted inspectors are incapable of scrutinising Muslim faith schools properly, and demands an inquiry by MPs.
Many of the websites featured in the report were shut down or edited in the hours before it was published.
Islamic schools educate thousands of Muslim children. Most operate in the private sector although increasing numbers are seeking state funding.
The study, overseen by Dr Denis MacEoin, a university lecturer in Islamic studies, looked at material found on Islamic schools’ websites, either content or via links.
More...
Imagine you are a 7/7 terrorist, pupils aged 11 are told in government-promoted exercise
Examples include the website of the Madani Girls’ School in East London which stated: ‘Our children are exposed to a culture that is in opposition with almost everything Islam stands for.
‘If we oppose the lifestyle of the West then it does not seem sensible that the teachers and the system which represents that lifestyle should educate our children.’
The report claims this ‘bruising comment’ gives children a ‘negative picture of Western life’.
The website comments have since been edited and parts deleted.
Dr MacEoin stressed that the problems were not found in all Muslim schools, but said some were instilling a disturbing ‘ghetto mentality’.
The Association of Muslim Schools condemned the study as ‘misleading, intolerant and divisive’, claiming it was ‘based on prejudices rather than evidence’.
A spokesman said: ‘Muslim schools provide an outstanding standard of education. Ex-pupils have developed into exemplary citizens and participate in all aspects of civic society.’
The Department for Children, Schools and Families said it was investigating the claims and would treat seriously any failure by state-funded schools to ‘promote community cohesion’.
An investigation by the Civitas social policy think-tank found websites of some of the UK’s 166 Muslim schools are spreading extreme teachings, while a handful had links to sites promoting jihad, or holy war.
Examples include web forums forbidding Muslims from reading Harry Potter books, playing chess or cricket and listening to Western music.
The Civitas report, entitled Music, Chess and Other Sins, claims Ofsted inspectors are incapable of scrutinising Muslim faith schools properly, and demands an inquiry by MPs.
Many of the websites featured in the report were shut down or edited in the hours before it was published.
Islamic schools educate thousands of Muslim children. Most operate in the private sector although increasing numbers are seeking state funding.
The study, overseen by Dr Denis MacEoin, a university lecturer in Islamic studies, looked at material found on Islamic schools’ websites, either content or via links.
More...
Imagine you are a 7/7 terrorist, pupils aged 11 are told in government-promoted exercise
Examples include the website of the Madani Girls’ School in East London which stated: ‘Our children are exposed to a culture that is in opposition with almost everything Islam stands for.
‘If we oppose the lifestyle of the West then it does not seem sensible that the teachers and the system which represents that lifestyle should educate our children.’
The report claims this ‘bruising comment’ gives children a ‘negative picture of Western life’.
The website comments have since been edited and parts deleted.
Dr MacEoin stressed that the problems were not found in all Muslim schools, but said some were instilling a disturbing ‘ghetto mentality’.
The Association of Muslim Schools condemned the study as ‘misleading, intolerant and divisive’, claiming it was ‘based on prejudices rather than evidence’.
A spokesman said: ‘Muslim schools provide an outstanding standard of education. Ex-pupils have developed into exemplary citizens and participate in all aspects of civic society.’
The Department for Children, Schools and Families said it was investigating the claims and would treat seriously any failure by state-funded schools to ‘promote community cohesion’.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
British Cleric Preacher Calls for Flogging Drunks...
The lawyer, who recently praised the Mumbai terror attacks, said anyone becoming intoxicated by alcohol should be given 40 lashes in public.
He claimed alcohol was "the root of all evil".
The 41-year-old made the remarks on his website , which argues that Britain should become an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law.
Mr Choudary also used the plight of George Best, the former Manchester United footballer who died aged 59 in 2005 after a long battle with alcoholism, to illustrate why it must be outlawed.
He wrote: "Under Islam, all harmful intoxicants will be banned unequivocally, regardless of their classification or their profitability in retail marketing.
"The Final Messenger Muhammad condemned the manufacturing, transporting, retailing and consuming of alcoholic beverages over 1,400 years ago and equated it with being one of the roots of all evils.
"Islam additionally imposes 40 lashes in public for deliberate intoxication, followed by 80 lashes in public if repeated for a second time."
Mr Choudary argued that alcohol should be "removed from society".
He also wrote that everything would be "sound" and "put right" if Sharia law was introduced in the UK, adding: "Islam is undeniably the only real solution for Britain's problems."
Anjem Choudary, who believes that no non-Muslim can be innocent, and thus that any attacks by Muslims on non-Muslims are justified, is working from traditional canons of Islamic law in calling for this.
He claimed alcohol was "the root of all evil".
The 41-year-old made the remarks on his website , which argues that Britain should become an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law.
Mr Choudary also used the plight of George Best, the former Manchester United footballer who died aged 59 in 2005 after a long battle with alcoholism, to illustrate why it must be outlawed.
He wrote: "Under Islam, all harmful intoxicants will be banned unequivocally, regardless of their classification or their profitability in retail marketing.
"The Final Messenger Muhammad condemned the manufacturing, transporting, retailing and consuming of alcoholic beverages over 1,400 years ago and equated it with being one of the roots of all evils.
"Islam additionally imposes 40 lashes in public for deliberate intoxication, followed by 80 lashes in public if repeated for a second time."
Mr Choudary argued that alcohol should be "removed from society".
He also wrote that everything would be "sound" and "put right" if Sharia law was introduced in the UK, adding: "Islam is undeniably the only real solution for Britain's problems."
Anjem Choudary, who believes that no non-Muslim can be innocent, and thus that any attacks by Muslims on non-Muslims are justified, is working from traditional canons of Islamic law in calling for this.
Terror suspect pours scorn on 'rubbish' £3,000 EU payout for unlawful Belmarsh detention
A terror suspect awarded thousands of pounds of UK taxpayers' cash by human rights judges in Strasbourg has complained bitterly that the size of his payout was 'rubbish'.
Fanatical Abu Rideh was one of nine terror suspects - including hate cleric Abu Qatada - awarded handouts worth tens of thousands by the European Court of Human Rights for being unlawfully detained in Belmarsh prison.
But the Palestinian fanatic, who is linked to hook-handed preacher Abu Hamza and once threatened to kill himself in front of a judge, said: 'This is nothing. What is £3,000? This is not money.'
'And you give them this money? This is rubbish money. I don't want this money - give it back.'
Rideh's remarks came amid huge controversy over the court's decision to pay compensation and costs totalling almost £75,000 to the fanatics, who were detained without trial in Belmarsh in the direct aftermath of September 11.
Qatada, known as Osama bin Laden's Ambassador in Europe, received a cheque for £2,500 only 24 hours after the Law Lords ruled he should be deported to his native Jordan, where he faces terrorism charges.
The European court accepted that the UK Government had locked up the international terror suspects - who were free to leave jail at any time, provided they left the country - at a time when there was a 'public emergency threatening the life of the nation'.
But the judges still ruled that detaining the men - who could not be forcibly deported in case they were ill-treated in their homeland - had breached their human rights.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she was 'very disappointed' with the ruling,
'We should have slung him out years ago as soon as his outrageous views became clear. By hobbling the legal system with the Human Rights Act and the supremacy of the European Court, our politicians have endangered the country and wasted huge amounts of taxpayers' money.'
The verdict came only a day after the Lords overturned a human rights ruling that Qatada could not be deported to Jordan.
He immediately appealed to Europe, and is likely to remain in the UK for years, adding to the £1.5m he has already cost the taxpayer in prison, legal and benefit costs for his wife and five children.
Human rights layers claimed the fine print of the compensation case could pave the way for an appeal in the UK courts, and his possible release on bail.
Qatada was returned to Belmarsh high security prison last year after an immigration tribunal ruled there was a risk of him breaching the terms of his bail.But that decision, by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac), was based largely on evidence held in secret. The Strasbourg court ruled Siac hearings which relied on secret evidence were in breach of terror suspects' human rights.
Lawyers could use this is a grounds for an appeal, the campaign group Justice suggested.
Qatada, six Algerians, Rideh, and a Tunisian man were given sums of up to £3,400 by the court. A Moroccan and a Frenchman, who left the country voluntarily after their arrest, were not awarded any compensation. Qatada may have to wait to get his hands on the money, as his assets are currently frozen.
Rideh, 38, who is suspected of having links to Al Qaeda, threatened to kill himself in court two years ago, He shouted 'Kill me like they killed Saddam. Do you want me to kill myself?'
He brandished a packet and told Judge Jack Beatson at the High Court in London 'I have a razor' before his psychiatrist led him out. Rideh came to Britain in 1995 and was arrested in 2001, suspected of arranging cash for terrorists linked to Al Qaeda, which he denies.
The Home Office rejected Rideh's claim that he had been mistreated in Belmarsh. A spokesman said: 'The Government strongly rejects this accusation and all claims that the applicants' detention involved inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment were dismissed in today's judgment.'
Fanatical Abu Rideh was one of nine terror suspects - including hate cleric Abu Qatada - awarded handouts worth tens of thousands by the European Court of Human Rights for being unlawfully detained in Belmarsh prison.
But the Palestinian fanatic, who is linked to hook-handed preacher Abu Hamza and once threatened to kill himself in front of a judge, said: 'This is nothing. What is £3,000? This is not money.'
The extremist, a father of five who lives in west London after being granted UK asylum, continued: ''You put people locked up for three-and-a-half years with no trial and no charge with torture in Belmarsh and with everything.
'And you give them this money? This is rubbish money. I don't want this money - give it back.'Rideh's remarks came amid huge controversy over the court's decision to pay compensation and costs totalling almost £75,000 to the fanatics, who were detained without trial in Belmarsh in the direct aftermath of September 11.
Qatada, known as Osama bin Laden's Ambassador in Europe, received a cheque for £2,500 only 24 hours after the Law Lords ruled he should be deported to his native Jordan, where he faces terrorism charges.
The European court accepted that the UK Government had locked up the international terror suspects - who were free to leave jail at any time, provided they left the country - at a time when there was a 'public emergency threatening the life of the nation'.
But the judges still ruled that detaining the men - who could not be forcibly deported in case they were ill-treated in their homeland - had breached their human rights.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she was 'very disappointed' with the ruling,
Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This decision will horrify most reasonable people in the UK.
'It shows just how incompetent the Government has been at managing the problem of preachers of hate and, frankly, it makes a mockery of the concept of human rights if we can't protect ourselves against people who are out to destroy our society.'
Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said of Qatada: 'This man hates everything Britain stands for, so it is disgusting that ordinary taxpayers are now forced to pay him thousands of pounds.
'It shows just how incompetent the Government has been at managing the problem of preachers of hate and, frankly, it makes a mockery of the concept of human rights if we can't protect ourselves against people who are out to destroy our society.'
Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said of Qatada: 'This man hates everything Britain stands for, so it is disgusting that ordinary taxpayers are now forced to pay him thousands of pounds.
'We should have slung him out years ago as soon as his outrageous views became clear. By hobbling the legal system with the Human Rights Act and the supremacy of the European Court, our politicians have endangered the country and wasted huge amounts of taxpayers' money.'
The verdict came only a day after the Lords overturned a human rights ruling that Qatada could not be deported to Jordan.
He immediately appealed to Europe, and is likely to remain in the UK for years, adding to the £1.5m he has already cost the taxpayer in prison, legal and benefit costs for his wife and five children.
Human rights layers claimed the fine print of the compensation case could pave the way for an appeal in the UK courts, and his possible release on bail.
Qatada was returned to Belmarsh high security prison last year after an immigration tribunal ruled there was a risk of him breaching the terms of his bail.But that decision, by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac), was based largely on evidence held in secret. The Strasbourg court ruled Siac hearings which relied on secret evidence were in breach of terror suspects' human rights.
Lawyers could use this is a grounds for an appeal, the campaign group Justice suggested.
Qatada, six Algerians, Rideh, and a Tunisian man were given sums of up to £3,400 by the court. A Moroccan and a Frenchman, who left the country voluntarily after their arrest, were not awarded any compensation. Qatada may have to wait to get his hands on the money, as his assets are currently frozen.
Rideh, 38, who is suspected of having links to Al Qaeda, threatened to kill himself in court two years ago, He shouted 'Kill me like they killed Saddam. Do you want me to kill myself?'
He brandished a packet and told Judge Jack Beatson at the High Court in London 'I have a razor' before his psychiatrist led him out. Rideh came to Britain in 1995 and was arrested in 2001, suspected of arranging cash for terrorists linked to Al Qaeda, which he denies.
The Home Office rejected Rideh's claim that he had been mistreated in Belmarsh. A spokesman said: 'The Government strongly rejects this accusation and all claims that the applicants' detention involved inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment were dismissed in today's judgment.'
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Jihadist murderer plots poison terror strike from prison cell
Osama bin Laden's "master poisoner" is planning terror outrages from his jail cell.Home Office documents seen by the Mirror reveal Kamel Bourgass is recruiting extremist prisoners to communicate with undercover al-Qaeda operatives.
Bourgass, 33, is already serving life for murdering a police officer.
Held in segregation at a topsecurity jail, Bourgass is being monitored by secret services after evidence was found of a plot involving a "quantity of cyanide".
Reports suggest he was using other inmates at Wakefield prison, West Yorks, their relatives and friends to link with al-Qaeda terrorists in London, where the poison was hidden. A source said: "Bourgass has tried to use cyanide before and appears intent on masterminding another attack, even from behind bars.
"He was taken out of circulation on the wing because we believe he was using others to get information to al-Qaeda operatives on the outside.
"Even locked up he remains a real threat to the public."
He is also linked to Abu Musabal-Zarqawi, who beheaded Briton Ken Bigley in Iraq. Convicted of killing Det Con Stephen Oake, 40, during a police raid on a flat in Manchester in 2003, Bourgass is still described in Home Office reports as a "risk to life and state"....
Now in jail, offender assessments reveal Bourgass "refused to co-operate" with the authorities for the past 13 months.
He is said to be prepared to "use weapons and extreme violence", and a report continues: "He has extreme beliefs, re. links to a terrorist cell in London and possession of explosives."
One document states: "There have been reports he has been involved on the wing in discussing extremist views, hence the recent move to segregation."...
For a far more extensive representation of muslim violence worldwide go to the Religion of Peace website
Jihadist ordered deported, but he's staying
Radical cleric Abu Qatada will stay in Britain for months despite a House of Lords ruling that he should be deported to Jordan where he faces terror charges. The Law Lords said Qatada, dubbed "Osama Bin Laden's right hand man in Europe", could be sent back to Jordan where he faces terror charges after overturning a Court of Appeal decision.
But the extremist could still remain in the country for many months if he takes his case to the European Court of Human Rights.
The judgment is a victory for the Home Office in its long-running campaign to remove Qatada from Britain, which has cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds already.
The Law Lords also ruled in favour of the Government over its attempts to deport two other men to Algeria.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said a deportation order will be served on Qatada immediately.
However any attempts to remove him would be put on hold if the case goes to Europe.
Ms Smith said: "I'm delighted with the Lords' decision today in the cases of Abu Qatada and the two Algerians 'RB' and 'U'.
"It highlights the threat these individuals pose to our nation's security and vindicates our efforts to remove them.
"My top priority is to protect public safety and ensure national security and I have signed Abu Qatada's deportation order which will be served on him today.
"I am keen to deport this dangerous individual as soon as I can."
In a statement, Qatada's lawyer confirmed his intention to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
The move is likely to delay any moves to deport him for months and even years....
Queen of England congratulates Iranian Mullahs on their 30th Anniversary
Queen Elizabeth congratulates the Islamic Republic for "national" day. In a brief notice on her official website, the Queen of England sent her greetings to the ruling clerics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
She is the only foreign leader we know of who has ever referred to the anniversary of the Khomeinist revolution as Iran's "national" day. For the record, the Islamic Republic itself has decreed April 1 - not February 10 - as its "independence day," because that was the day in 1980 that the Islamic Republic regime was officially decreed. Many Iranians consider their true independence day to be August 5, the anniversary of the 1906 constitutional revolution).
Iranians have long suspected the British government of interfering in Iran's internal affairs; some have accused Britain of conspiring with Khomeini in 1979 to bring down the Shah. The Queen's statement could have been written by modern Iranian novelist Iraj Pezeshkzad, whose comic hero, dear Uncle Napolean, saw a British hand behind every ill of Iranian society.
She is the only foreign leader we know of who has ever referred to the anniversary of the Khomeinist revolution as Iran's "national" day. For the record, the Islamic Republic itself has decreed April 1 - not February 10 - as its "independence day," because that was the day in 1980 that the Islamic Republic regime was officially decreed. Many Iranians consider their true independence day to be August 5, the anniversary of the 1906 constitutional revolution).
Iranians have long suspected the British government of interfering in Iran's internal affairs; some have accused Britain of conspiring with Khomeini in 1979 to bring down the Shah. The Queen's statement could have been written by modern Iranian novelist Iraj Pezeshkzad, whose comic hero, dear Uncle Napolean, saw a British hand behind every ill of Iranian society.
libraries put Qur'an, Bible on top shelf to avoid offending Muslims
Librarians are being told to move the Bible to the top shelf to avoid giving offence to followers of Islam.
Muslims have complained of finding the Koran on lower shelves, saying it should be put above commonplace things.
So officials have responded with guidance, backed by ministers, that all holy books should be treated equally and go on the top shelf together.
This means that Christian works, which also have immense historical and literary value, will be kept out of the reach and sight of many readers.
The guidance was published by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council, a quango answering to Culture Secretary Andy Burnham.
It said Muslims in Leicester had moved copies of the Koran to the top shelves of libraries, in keeping with the belief that the Koran is the all-important word of God.
The report said the city’s librarians consulted the Federation of Muslim Organisations and were advised that all religious texts should be kept on the top shelf.
‘This meant that no offence is caused, as the scriptures of all the major faiths are given respect in this way, but none is higher than any other,’ the guidance added.
Critics said such a move implied religious works should be treated as objects of veneration rather than as books to be read. Robert Whelan of the Civitas think-tank said:
‘Libraries and museums are not places of worship. They should not be run in accordance with particular religious beliefs.
‘This is violating the principles of librarianship and it is part of an insidious trend.’...
Muslims have complained of finding the Koran on lower shelves, saying it should be put above commonplace things.
So officials have responded with guidance, backed by ministers, that all holy books should be treated equally and go on the top shelf together.
This means that Christian works, which also have immense historical and literary value, will be kept out of the reach and sight of many readers.
The guidance was published by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council, a quango answering to Culture Secretary Andy Burnham.
It said Muslims in Leicester had moved copies of the Koran to the top shelves of libraries, in keeping with the belief that the Koran is the all-important word of God.
The report said the city’s librarians consulted the Federation of Muslim Organisations and were advised that all religious texts should be kept on the top shelf.
‘This meant that no offence is caused, as the scriptures of all the major faiths are given respect in this way, but none is higher than any other,’ the guidance added.
Critics said such a move implied religious works should be treated as objects of veneration rather than as books to be read. Robert Whelan of the Civitas think-tank said:
‘Libraries and museums are not places of worship. They should not be run in accordance with particular religious beliefs.
‘This is violating the principles of librarianship and it is part of an insidious trend.’...
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Men tried over 'plane bomb plot'
Eight men plotted to use "home-made bombs" disguised as soft drinks to blow up transatlantic planes mid-flight, Woolwich Crown Court has heard.
The jury was told that had the alleged plot come off, there would have been deaths on an "unprecedented scale".
The bombs would be made of household items smuggled on board and detonated in mid-flight.
All eight men deny the alleged plot, which counter-terrorist police claim to have foiled in August 2006.
Prosecutor Peter Wright said the ringleaders of the alleged conspiracy were two men, Abdulla Ahmed Ali and Assad Sarwar, from Walthamstow, east London, and High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire.
Mr Wright told the jury: "The means by which they intended to inflict heavy casualties on ordinary civilians was by the carrying out of a series of co-ordinated and deadly explosions.
"These men were indifferent to the carnage that was likely to ensue if their plans were successful... They intended, with others, to cause a series of co-ordinated explosions aboard a number of transatlantic passenger aircraft."
The explosions were to be caused by the detonation in-flight of home-made bombs made from everyday household items such as drinks bottles and batteries which could be smuggled on board, Mr Wright said.
“ What these men intended to bring about together and with others was a violent and deadly statement of intent that would have a truly global impact ” Prosecutor Peter Wright
"Inevitably such an event would have fatal consequences for the various passengers and crew who happened, quite by chance, to be flying to North America on the day selected by them to commit this atrocity.
"Consequently, it is the Crown's case that these men and others were actively engaged in a most deadly plot designed to bring about what would have been, had they been successful, a civilian death toll from an act of terrorism on an almost unprecedented scale."
Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar were arrested by counter-terrorism police on 9 August, 2006, when it was believed they were "almost ready" to launch the terror strike, Mr Wright said.
The pair were the plot's ringleaders, while the others were the "foot-soldiers" prepared to carry out the bombings, he added.
While they had no knowledge of the scale of the conspiracy, they had the "cold-eyed certainty of the fanatic".
He said: "They were prepared to strike a blow in which they would lose their lives but it was a blow that would reverberate across the globe."
Undercover detectives had followed Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar for weeks as they made the final preparations for the attacks, the court heard.
Mr Wright said the men and other conspirators had been extremely busy and the intended date of the terror strike "was not far off".
The prosecution alleges the plot was being directed from Pakistan.
"This was not something that had been devised merely by Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar once they had realised they shared a common interest, this was part of a much wider scheme of things," Mr Wright said.
"Acts of terrorism on an international scale, directed from abroad using home-grown terrorists, young, radicalised Muslims prepared to lose their lives in a global act of jihad."
A computer memory stick containing details of flights from Heathrow Airport to North American destinations was found in Mr Ali's pocket when he was arrested, the court heard.
It held details of flights operated by three carriers, American Airlines, United Airlines and Air Canada, from August to October 2006.
Seven services, all leaving from Terminal 3 of the London airport, all due to be mid-flight at the same time, and all one-way only, were highlighted.
They were travelling to Montreal and Toronto in Canada and San Francisco, Washington, Chicago and New York in the United States.
Other key conspirators were overheard discussing whether to target other flights from different terminals and as many as 18 suicide bombers, Mr Wright said.
The court heard Mr Ali was an "influential figure who led by example" and who "exalted the virtues of martyrdom as a modern-day method of warfare".
The married father-of-one was found with an address book containing details of the plot, including preparations for a disguise and instructions of how to prepare the bombs, the jury was told.
Police discovered martyrdom videos recorded by six members of the gang, the court heard.
A cassette tape found in Sarwar's car featured two of the men, Arafat Waheed Khan and Umar Islam.
A search of the garage at Mr Sarwar's High Wycombe home uncovered recordings by Mr Ali, Mr Savant, Mr Zaman, Mr Hussain, and a second by Mr Khan.
Mr Wright said the films showed the men contemplating a violent death in the name of Islam.
Those in the dock are: Abdulla Ahmed Ali, also known as Ahmed Ali Khan, 28, of Prospect Hill, Walthamstow; Assad Sarwar, 28, of Walton Drive, High Wycombe;
Tanvir Hussain, 27, of Nottingham Road, Leyton, east London; Ibrahim Savant, 28, of Denver Road, Stoke Newington, north London;
Arafat Waheed Khan, 27, of Farnan Avenue, Walthamstow; Waheed Zaman, 24, of Queen's Road, Walthamstow;
Umar Islam, also known as Brian Young, 30, of Bushey Road, Plaistow, east London; and Donald Stewart-Whyte, 22, of Hepplewhite Close, High Wycombe.
Mr Savant, Mr Khan, Mr Zaman, Mr Islam and Mr Stewart-Whyte face one additional charge of conspiracy to murder, which again they deny.
The jury was told that had the alleged plot come off, there would have been deaths on an "unprecedented scale".
The bombs would be made of household items smuggled on board and detonated in mid-flight.
All eight men deny the alleged plot, which counter-terrorist police claim to have foiled in August 2006.
Prosecutor Peter Wright said the ringleaders of the alleged conspiracy were two men, Abdulla Ahmed Ali and Assad Sarwar, from Walthamstow, east London, and High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire.
Mr Wright told the jury: "The means by which they intended to inflict heavy casualties on ordinary civilians was by the carrying out of a series of co-ordinated and deadly explosions.
"These men were indifferent to the carnage that was likely to ensue if their plans were successful... They intended, with others, to cause a series of co-ordinated explosions aboard a number of transatlantic passenger aircraft."
The explosions were to be caused by the detonation in-flight of home-made bombs made from everyday household items such as drinks bottles and batteries which could be smuggled on board, Mr Wright said.
“ What these men intended to bring about together and with others was a violent and deadly statement of intent that would have a truly global impact ” Prosecutor Peter Wright
"Inevitably such an event would have fatal consequences for the various passengers and crew who happened, quite by chance, to be flying to North America on the day selected by them to commit this atrocity.
"Consequently, it is the Crown's case that these men and others were actively engaged in a most deadly plot designed to bring about what would have been, had they been successful, a civilian death toll from an act of terrorism on an almost unprecedented scale."Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar were arrested by counter-terrorism police on 9 August, 2006, when it was believed they were "almost ready" to launch the terror strike, Mr Wright said.
The pair were the plot's ringleaders, while the others were the "foot-soldiers" prepared to carry out the bombings, he added.
While they had no knowledge of the scale of the conspiracy, they had the "cold-eyed certainty of the fanatic".
He said: "They were prepared to strike a blow in which they would lose their lives but it was a blow that would reverberate across the globe."
Undercover detectives had followed Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar for weeks as they made the final preparations for the attacks, the court heard.
Mr Wright said the men and other conspirators had been extremely busy and the intended date of the terror strike "was not far off".
The prosecution alleges the plot was being directed from Pakistan.
"This was not something that had been devised merely by Mr Ali and Mr Sarwar once they had realised they shared a common interest, this was part of a much wider scheme of things," Mr Wright said.
"Acts of terrorism on an international scale, directed from abroad using home-grown terrorists, young, radicalised Muslims prepared to lose their lives in a global act of jihad."
A computer memory stick containing details of flights from Heathrow Airport to North American destinations was found in Mr Ali's pocket when he was arrested, the court heard.
It held details of flights operated by three carriers, American Airlines, United Airlines and Air Canada, from August to October 2006.
Seven services, all leaving from Terminal 3 of the London airport, all due to be mid-flight at the same time, and all one-way only, were highlighted.
They were travelling to Montreal and Toronto in Canada and San Francisco, Washington, Chicago and New York in the United States.
Other key conspirators were overheard discussing whether to target other flights from different terminals and as many as 18 suicide bombers, Mr Wright said.
The court heard Mr Ali was an "influential figure who led by example" and who "exalted the virtues of martyrdom as a modern-day method of warfare".
The married father-of-one was found with an address book containing details of the plot, including preparations for a disguise and instructions of how to prepare the bombs, the jury was told.
Police discovered martyrdom videos recorded by six members of the gang, the court heard.
A cassette tape found in Sarwar's car featured two of the men, Arafat Waheed Khan and Umar Islam.
A search of the garage at Mr Sarwar's High Wycombe home uncovered recordings by Mr Ali, Mr Savant, Mr Zaman, Mr Hussain, and a second by Mr Khan.
Mr Wright said the films showed the men contemplating a violent death in the name of Islam.
Those in the dock are: Abdulla Ahmed Ali, also known as Ahmed Ali Khan, 28, of Prospect Hill, Walthamstow; Assad Sarwar, 28, of Walton Drive, High Wycombe;
Tanvir Hussain, 27, of Nottingham Road, Leyton, east London; Ibrahim Savant, 28, of Denver Road, Stoke Newington, north London;
Arafat Waheed Khan, 27, of Farnan Avenue, Walthamstow; Waheed Zaman, 24, of Queen's Road, Walthamstow;
Umar Islam, also known as Brian Young, 30, of Bushey Road, Plaistow, east London; and Donald Stewart-Whyte, 22, of Hepplewhite Close, High Wycombe.
Mr Savant, Mr Khan, Mr Zaman, Mr Islam and Mr Stewart-Whyte face one additional charge of conspiracy to murder, which again they deny.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Geert Wilders Banned From Britain for Criticizing Islam...
Yesterday British authorities caved into jihadist intimidation and barred Dutch politician Geert Wilders, maker of the film Fitna, from entering the country. But Wilders is going to challenge the ban and attempt to travel to Britain anyway.
The Hague - PVV leader Geert Wilders has conclusively decided to travel to Great Britain this Thursday. This was made public by the member of Parliament this Wednesday, one day after the British government had denied him access to the country.
Last Tuesday, Wilders hadn't been entirely sure whether he should confront the British authorities. But by now, he is quite determined simply to take the plane to Great Britain. "We'll see whether they put the handcuffs on me," he already said Tuesday.
On his website Wilders says that he received a letter from the British embassy on Tuesday in which he was informed that he would not be allowed to enter Britain.
'Great Britain is sacrificing freedom of speech,' said Wilders. 'You would expect something like this to happen in countries like Saudi Arabia but not in Great Britain. This cowardly act by the British government is a disgrace.'
Wilders was originally invited by a member of the British House of Lords to screen 'Fitna'. According to the British government, Wilders would, however, pose a threat to public security because of his ideas about Islam and Muslims, and therefore he's not welcome. "Great Britain is sacrificing the freedom of speech," Wilders says.
More sickening news of dhimmitude from Great Britain. As this blog (and many others) have chronicled - apparently it continues to be OK for muslim terrorists to enter and live in the UK - just a few examples:
UK TAXPAYERS PROVIDE THE "GOOD LIFE" FOR CONVICTED TERRORIST
AL QAEDA "PIPELINE" SUSPECT LIVED ON THE DOLE
BIN LADEN'S "RIGHT HAND MAN" SET FOR LIFE ON BRITISH BENEFITS
CONVICTED TERRORIST FINDS TAXPAYER PAID SAFETY IN THE UK
TERRORIST DEMANDS BRITISH TAXPAYERS PAY FOR HIS PORN-IN-LOO LAWSUIT
Yet a Dutch politician is banned.
I am absolutely disgusted!
Brown branded coward by banned MP
The Hague - PVV leader Geert Wilders has conclusively decided to travel to Great Britain this Thursday. This was made public by the member of Parliament this Wednesday, one day after the British government had denied him access to the country.
Last Tuesday, Wilders hadn't been entirely sure whether he should confront the British authorities. But by now, he is quite determined simply to take the plane to Great Britain. "We'll see whether they put the handcuffs on me," he already said Tuesday.
On his website Wilders says that he received a letter from the British embassy on Tuesday in which he was informed that he would not be allowed to enter Britain.
'Great Britain is sacrificing freedom of speech,' said Wilders. 'You would expect something like this to happen in countries like Saudi Arabia but not in Great Britain. This cowardly act by the British government is a disgrace.'
Wilders was originally invited by a member of the British House of Lords to screen 'Fitna'. According to the British government, Wilders would, however, pose a threat to public security because of his ideas about Islam and Muslims, and therefore he's not welcome. "Great Britain is sacrificing the freedom of speech," Wilders says.
More sickening news of dhimmitude from Great Britain. As this blog (and many others) have chronicled - apparently it continues to be OK for muslim terrorists to enter and live in the UK - just a few examples:
UK TAXPAYERS PROVIDE THE "GOOD LIFE" FOR CONVICTED TERRORIST
AL QAEDA "PIPELINE" SUSPECT LIVED ON THE DOLE
BIN LADEN'S "RIGHT HAND MAN" SET FOR LIFE ON BRITISH BENEFITS
CONVICTED TERRORIST FINDS TAXPAYER PAID SAFETY IN THE UK
TERRORIST DEMANDS BRITISH TAXPAYERS PAY FOR HIS PORN-IN-LOO LAWSUIT
Yet a Dutch politician is banned.
I am absolutely disgusted!
Brown branded coward by banned MP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)