been called “the Godfather of Global Jihad”. His oft-repeated slogans ("Jihad and the rifle alone. NO negotiations. NO conferences and NO dialogue" , and, “We are the terrorists for God”) are the common calling-card of violent Islamist extremism and crop up ad infinitum on jihadist social media sites and blogs. Professor Gleave refers to Abdullah Azzam as the “celebrated…Godfather of contemporary jihadism”. Claimant’s answer 306. The Claimant sought to suggest in cross-examination by Mr Caldecott QC that he had mentioned Sayyid Qutb and Abdullah Azzam and the other Imams not because he agreed with their views on violence but merely in order to illustrate people standing up against oppression. I found this answer disingenuous. By linking these four notorious, manifestly extreme Islamic figures to his unbroken chain of virtuous Prophetic “legacy” stretching back to the earliest prophets of impeccable provenance and virtue (i.e. Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed the Prophet) it is transparently clear, in my view, that the Claimant was seeking to cloak the 20 th century violent ideologues (i.e. Hassan al-Banna, Abdul ‘Ala Maududi, Sayyid Qutb and ‘Abdullah Azzam) with the patina of authentic, mainstream Islamic approval and respectability. In my judgement, this is something that only someone espousing extremist Islamic views would do. General approach 307. As emphasised above, I have borne in mind that the audiences would not have had the luxury of detailed expert evidence in relation to all the historical and theological references made by the Claimant during his speeches. However, the Claimant was not merely making a series of obscure historical references to ‘freedom fighters’ as Professor Gleave suggests. The likes of Hassan al-Banna, Abdul Ala Maududi, Sayyid Qutb and Abdullah Azzam are notorious figures in the world of Islam, whose views and reputations for proselyting extremist and violent ideologies are widely known to many Muslims. If the Claimant was intending to send out ‘coded’ messages, the code was all too transparent. Conclusion 308. In conclusion, in my judgement, in the CAGE PRISONERS SPEECH (2010), the Claimant espoused extremist Islamic positions and promoted or encouraged religious violence. The Claimant again uses jihad in the sense exclusively of “fighting physically the enemies of Islam”, i.e. qital. The Claimant praises fellow Muslims who have migrated (made hijra) to other lands in order physically to fight the enemies of Islam (qital). The Claimant suggests that there was a moral and theological equivalency between the “good deeds” and “legacy” of the earliest prophets such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed, and the “legacy of good deeds [sic]” of four notorious 20th century Islamic extremists and violent ideologues: Hassan alBanna (the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood), Abdul ‘Ala Maududi (the founder of Jamaat e-Islami), Sayyid Qutb (the author of “Milestones” which became the ideological blueprint for Al-Qaeda and ‘ISIS’) and ‘Abdullah Azzam (who declared the Afghan jihad, mentored Osama bin Laden and is celebrated as the “Godfather of global jihad”). The Claimant suggests that the CAGE prisoners are the inheritors of the “legacy of good deeds” of these infamous 20th century Islamic extremists and violent ideologues. The Claimant praise the virtues and “good deeds” of jihadis who 70

Select target paragraph3

Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents