Anjem Choudary convicted of supporting Islamic State

Anjem Choudary

Source: The Guardian

By Jamie Grierson and Vikram Dodd

Notorious hate preacher faces up to 10 years in prison after swearing allegiance to Isis, it can now be revealed

Anjem Choudary, one of the most notorious hate preachers living in Britain, is facing jail after being found guilty of supporting Islamic State.

Following years in which he avoided arrest despite his apparent sympathy for extremism and links to some of Britain’s most notorious terrorists, Choudary was convicted at the Old Bailey after jurors heard he had sworn an oath of allegiance to Isis.

The 49-year-old, who has links to one of Lee Rigby’s killers, Michael Adebolajo, and the Islamist militant Omar Bakri Muhammad, also urged followers to support Isis in a series of talks broadcast on YouTube.

Choudary and his co-defendant, Mohammed Rahman, 33, told their supporters to obey Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Isis leader, who is also known as a caliph, and travel to Syria to support Islamic State or “the caliphate”, the court heard.

Read further

Suggested Reading

Shariah and Constitution: A Personal Journey

Secularism: A Word with Unlimited Potential

Do Muslims Prefer Camels Over Modern Cars?

Neither with the Islamophobes, Nor with the Islamists or the Islamomaniacs

 

5 replies

  1. European Convention on Human Rights of human rights defines freedom of speech and its exceptions.

    Article 10 provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are “in accordance with law” and “necessary in a democratic society”. This right includes the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas, but allows restrictions for:

    interests of national security
    territorial integrity or public safety
    prevention of disorder or crime
    protection of health or morals
    protection of the reputation or the rights of others
    preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence
    maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary

Leave a Reply