|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
British students jailed for possessing extremist
literature
By Chris Talbot
31 July 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Four 20-year-old Bradford University students and a 19-year-old
school student were jailed after a trial at the Old Bailey for
being found with material said to be glorifying Islamic
terrorism on their computers. Aitzaz Zafar, Usman Malik
and Awaab Iqbaal were jailed for three years each, Akbar Butt
was jailed for 27 months and the school student, Mohammed Irfan
Raja was given two years youth detention.
Such is the atmosphere created by politicians and the media
after the attempted terror bombings in London and Glasgow earlier
this month that there was very little opposition in the media
to what are police state measuresthe jailing of these youths
merely for downloading material readily available on the Internet
The case is the first successful prosecution under the Terrorism
Act 2000 for possessing material useful for terrorism.
Raja, at the age of 17, had run away from his home in London
leaving a note to his parents saying, if not in this [world]
we will meet in [the Garden of Paradise]. According to the
prosecution, he was planning to go and fight in Afghanistan after
training in Pakistan, and for that purpose he had joined the four
students in Bradford. No serious evidence that this was anything
more than an adolescent fantasy is reported.
His parents talked to him over the phone and persuaded him
to return home after three days. Raja was said to have been depressed
and had discussed Islamic fundamentalism with the Bradford students
over the Internet. His parents contacted the police and Raja apparently
confessed, during several interviews, of his desire to fight Muslim
causes abroad. He directed the police to the Bradford students
who were arrested for having the extremist material on their computers.
One of the students, Aitzaz Zafar, was interviewed on BBC Radio
4s Today programme. Asked whether the inflammatory
jihadist material he had downloaded was not an indication
of terrorist intent, Zafar said that he was researching
into my religionlooking at all aspects of it. He had
become more politically aware as a student, and research
had led me to different sites and places. The interviewer
pressed him on why he had horrific material, including
the video of a beheading. Zafar said that he had downloaded a
zipped file containing more than 200 documents. I never
read all of them and in court they cherry-picked one documentand
within that a paragraph. Asked why he had a copy of the
Terrorists Handbook on his computer, he said
he had been in a chat room discussing the Muslim religion and
politics, and it was one of the files that had been sent himpeople
send you all sorts.
Reports of the trial claim that the five youths had made Internet
contact with a certain British man called Imran who in one online
chat had advised them how to travel unnoticed to Pakistan. Also
mentioned was a Brother Ali in New Jersey, who had
told Raja to get in touch with the Bradford students. Whether
either of these men had sent them the zipped file or the Terrorists
Handbook is not recorded. They were not produced as witnesses,
and no explanation was given of why they were not arrested also.
It is hardly a secret that such chat rooms can be used by provocateurs
and the intelligence services.
There is clearly some disquiet in establishment circles at
the way democratic rights are being trampled on in such cases.
David Livingstone, an associate fellow in international security
at Chatham House, home of the Royal Institute of International
Affairs, appeared as a witness for the defence at the trial. He
told the Today programme that there was no evidence that
the five had planned to instigate a terrorist attack. The prosecution
could radicalise young Muslims through
a perceived sense of injustice, he said.
Claiming the five youths were engaged in mischievous
activity, Livingstone said, If you are going to pursue every
case of mischief you are going to end up with a very jammed-up
criminal justice system and you will certainly have to build more
prisons.
Livingstone called for the traditional method of debating with
students who were attracted to Islamic fundamentalism, instead
of slugging away with the rather blunt instrument of the criminal
justice system.
However, top political, legal and police circles are clearly
determined to utilise the fear of terrorist attacks, not only
to use such draconian measures but to introduce others.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said that in the next session
of parliament he intends to raise the 28-day limit on the time
that police can hold a suspect without charge. Although the proposal
for a 90-day period was narrowly defeated when put forward by
Tony Blair in 2005, Brown has called for a consultation
on increasing the time to up to 56 days, supporting police claims
that they need more time to plough through computer memories and
collect evidence in terrorist cases.
Brown also announced he is intending to bring in a unified
border force to boost the fight against terrorism,
creating a highly visible uniformed force that would
bring together immigration and Customs officers. He is also calling
for identity cards to be introducedin the face of longstanding
opposition from human rights campaigners. Other measures will
include an attempt to get all-party support for using e-mail and
telephone intercepts as evidence.
Brown stated that the police and security services are now
tracking 2,000 individuals, an increase of 400 in the past nine
months. Security forces claim that there have been 15 terrorist
plots discovered since 9/11 and that there are another 30 plots
in the making.
Some indication of the increasingly oppressive regime being
implemented in Britain by the police and security services, directed
particularly at Muslim and Asian youth, was contained in report
from the Metropolitan (i.e., London) Police covering the first
four months of 2007. Under the anti-terror laws, some 23,000 stops
and searches were carried out, an increase of 37 percent
over the previous year. Only 27 arrests were made on terrorism
offences, but 242 other arrests were made. At least 16 percent
of those stopped were Asian compared to 12 percent in the population
as a whole.
Further evidence that the war against terror is
allowing all pretence at democratic rights to be swept aside came
in a Channel 4 report of how terrorist prisoners are being treated
at Frankland Prison, County Durham. Some 10 percent of prisoners
in this jail are Muslim and it is said to contain the leaders
of the three major terrorism trials that took place in Britain
over the last year.
Hussain Osman, one of those convicted for the failed suicide
bombing of July 21, 2005, reportedly had his cell set on fire.
Channel 4 reported that this event took place after death threats
were allegedly made to Omar Khyam, convicted as the ringleader
for the so-called fertiliser bomb plot in April of this year.
Dhiren Barot, convicted in November of last year for plotting
various bomb attacks in the UK and US, was reported having had
boiling water thrown at him. Barot suffered severe third-degree
burns, described by a prison officer to Channel 4 as one of the
worst cases he had seen. These three incidents had all taken place
in the last three weeks.
Omar Khyams wife told Channel 4 that the prison authorities
had been previously warned: Omar in the end went into segregation
himself and only a few days later Dhiren Barot was attacked, which
shouldnt have happened because the prison knew that these
threats were taking place.
According to Channel 4s sources, there were fascists
among the prisoners in the jailmembers of Combat 18 or British
National party supporterswith swastikas daubed on the walls.
A conflict had built up over where the Muslim prisoners were to
hold their prayers.
See Also:
The London bombing trial: How much did
the security services know?
[20 July 2007]
Britain: New terror
warnings issued to justify policies of war and repression
[15 November 2006]
One year on: Lessons
of the London bombings
[7 July 2006]
Britain: More evidence
suggests July 7 bombings were preventable
[27 March 2006]
Britain: outstanding
questions on July 7 bombings warrant independent inquiry
[6 August 2005]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |