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merely making a series of obscure historical references to ‘freedom fighters’ as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