Another of Anjem Choudary's Followers Sentenced For Support of al-Qaeda

If it walks like a duck....

A man with links to radical Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary has been jailed for two years for terrorism offences.

Royal Mail worker Mohammed Benares, 45, had terror guides showing how to make a bomb and detonator and how to handle an AK47 assault rifle.

Benares, of Saltley, Birmingham, downloaded the terror material from the internet and stored it on three external hard drives. He also had links with another radical preacher, Abu Izzadeen.

The documents included online al Qaida magazine Inspire and step-by-step instructions on how to make a bomb ‘In the kitchen of your mom’ using readily-available ingredients.

The court heard that Benares had attended a demonstration organised by the Muslims Against Crusades group( Benares at 0:17) in central London on September 11, 2011 to coincide with the 10th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

The Daily Mail states in the bullet points state he had over 50 copies of "AQAP's Inspire". There are only eleven issues of Inspire though. So he must have had copies of various other al-Qaeda publications such as Vanguards of Khorasan, Shahamat or Al-Samoud.

Abu Izzadeen a revert formerly known as Trevor Brooks was recently released after serving time for terrorist fund-raising and inciting terrorism.

Posted by: Howie at 10:16 AM


1 I know, I know, but from the snippet above it looks like he was essentially jailed for talking to people and reading magazines. Where specifically was his terrorism? Because 'making a bomb in mom's kitchen' types of books are covered by 1st amendment.
If that was a 2A loving gun enthusiast, would we be singing a different tune? What I don't like is double standard.

Posted by: HerWrath at July 15, 2013 11:28 AM

2 The 1st amendment does not apply to UK. They have different laws.

In the UK certain publication are banned.

For instance in the US the information published by a designated terrorist group is not "banned" so long as its just information. When used in a context or intent for support of a proscribed terrorist group its arguable a person can be prosecuted for material support. For distributing this in a context of support. See Tarek Mehanna case. Whereas other times they are not procesuced for that See Samir Khan case.

But you can publish that information in a neutral context (information only) or a context of advocacy against terrorism. See Jawa report.

But in the UK once a group is listed as a designated terrorist entity even simple possession of that group's propaganda can be a crime.

They are generally more ready to ban groups and their publications outright. Which is Ironic considering that LiveLeak is hosted there. I never understood why a person viewing a stream can be charged while the host is immune, probably because LivLeak belongs to Kilroy if you catch my drift.

So the laws are different. In the US Samir Khan was tolerated/not charged well after it was clear he was working in support of al-Qaeda. Our opinion was that he was clearly providing material support.

To me context matters. Its everything. Samir should have been stopped and charged well before he fled to Yemen. I've never been able to resolve the statements that Mehanna broke the law yet Samir didn't. They both did its just the spooks liked watching Samir to the point of fault.

The Anarchists cookbook is not banned here. Posting it with an incitement to Jihad for the purpose of helping a proscribed terrorist group might still be illegal even under US law. Even if simple possession of that information is not a crime.

Posted by: Howie at July 15, 2013 11:43 AM

Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0032 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0023 seconds, 10 records returned.
Page size 8 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.