'Terror manual' teenager guilty

I think this deserves its own topic.

Quote:
[size=18]'Terror manual' teenager guilty[/size]

A teenager has been told that he faces jail after an Old Bailey jury found him guilty of having a terrorism-related explosives manual.
Abdul Patel, an 18-year-old from east London, was said in court to be "ready, willing and able" to help terrorists.

The Muslim teenager was found guilty of one charge of possessing a document likely to be useful for terrorism.

The jury found him not guilty of a second charge of possessing a document for an act of terrorism.

Patel, of Clapton in east London, was 17 when he was arrested at his wife's family home in August 2006.

Under his bed police found what prosecutors said was an explosives manual detailing the construction of home-made bombs.

The manual was originally written for US experts and contained diagrams and drawings for improvised explosive devices. It included bomb recipes involving ordinary chemicals and products, such as fertiliser.

[b]'No innocent explanation' [/b]

Prosecuting, Peter Wright, QC, said Patel's possession of the manual had no innocent explanation.

"It was entirely deliberate. It was available for use if called upon," he said.

"It was in the custody of a young man who was ready, willing and able to assist in a cause he believed in.

"In the wrong hands, the information contained in this manual can have catastrophic consequences, including causing explosions of the most terrifying kind in the UK and abroad.

"What police found was kept for a terrorist purpose should the need arise."

Patel had told the court the manual was not his, but had been left with him by another man known to his father. He had asked the man to take the boxes back, he said.

One of the boxes also included a CD which the prosecution said included images of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Islamist threats to US servicemen and women.

Lines in the address included: "We promise we will not let you live safely. Our Mujahideen are coming to you very soon to let you see what you did not see before."

But Mr Wright told the trial that Patel could be linked to another alleged Islamist via mobile phone calls and text messages, a relationship which added weight to the prosecution case.

Patel's contact got in touch within hours of arriving in the UK on a false passport, the trial heard.

But the teenager, arrested a few months after his wedding, denied being radicalised. He said his father was living in South Africa and had a long-standing interest in the Afghan war.

Remanding Patel on conditional bail until sentencing on 26 October, Judge Peter Rook warned Patel that he was keeping "all options open".

[url= News[/url]

Guess they have never heard of the jolly roger cook book then. At that age it is "cool" to know about some of this stuff.

This development has frightening repercussions.

It is now illegal to read about certain topics in the UK.

From the article it seems the conviction was stronger than that. He was linked to someone who came on a false passport who is also alleged to be an Islamist and contacted him shortly after arriving, and along with the materials were images of terror attacks. His defence, whether true or not, that he was looking after it for someone else, cancels out the possibility that he was just curious. I don't know whether the conviction is correct but I would think if he was harmless his defence would have easily cast doubt on any links to terror. The police wouldn't waste resources if it were such a flimsy prosecution.

  • It can never be satisfied, the mind, never. -- Wallace Stevens

They locked up a wannabe who didnt knw better.

But they let people with multiple asbos walk around free.

Where the justice in that?

Back in BLACK

"Seraphim" wrote:
They locked up a wannabe who didnt knw better.

But they let people with multiple asbos walk around free.

Where the justice in that?

hahahahahahahahaha a Lol

He who sacrifices his conscience to ambition, burns a picture to obtain the ashes!

"Seraphim" wrote:
They locked up a wannabe who didnt knw better.

But they let people with multiple asbos walk around free.

Where the justice in that?


Clearly they felt the guy they locked up was involved in terrorist activity. If they're correct, justice was done whether or not he "didn't know better". The evidence categorically shows that information was gathered via surveillance. Whatever they found under his bed was enough to bring the case. I'm pleased they did their jobs.
  • It can never be satisfied, the mind, never. -- Wallace Stevens

"Joie de Vivre" wrote:
Clearly they [i]felt[/i] the guy they locked up was involved in terrorist activity.

Is "felt" good enough?

Surely, if he was involved in a terrorist activity there would have been other prosecutions too.

He seems to have been found guilty because he might possibly have been involved in some sort of terrorism-related activity.

What he was targeting, if anything, we don't know. Whether he had the materials to carry out an attack we don't know. It's not even clear if his "contact" has been arrested and charged with anything.

He had an explosives manual and an Islamist CD-R. He's been found guilty of possessing illegal literature.

Admin had it right when he said:

Quote:
It is now illegal to read about certain topics in the UK.

im not missing the news at all not when it surrounds nothing but news of muslim=terrorist. i detest the usage of words such as islamist, its part of a new dictionary of propaganda language. So what does it mean exactly, coz i believe the media wrongly makes it synonymous with muslims as a whole. Is an islamist another word for a muslim or what?..ticks me off this nonsense.

"Islamist", for me, is someone who justifies their particular take on politics using a rigid, and often unscholarly, interpretation or view of Islam. They would say something like "I'm right because what I say is from the Quran. If you disagree with me, you disagree with the Quran therefore you are not a Muslim." Basically that kind of absolutist knuckle-headism.

However, "Islamist" is often used by some right-wingers to mean anyone who wants their politics to be informed by Islam or anyone who is a Muslim and wants to be political. In this case "Islamist" is used to associate the individual with al Qaeda and to undermine their stance and Islam itself.

Or something like that.

"Joie de Vivre" wrote:
Clearly they felt the guy they locked up was involved in terrorist activity.

No, they didn't. Charges related to that got dropped.

They felt he had the knowledge that should he have wished to make explosives he could have.

Next time we will see "12 y/o steals magnesium from chemistry lab for terrible jihad!"

Well, we won't but I totally disagree with the legislation dealing with this issue.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

this topic reminds me of my dissertation from last year. I did a comparision of Irish (the IRA) and islamic (Al Qaeda) terrorists. I was always a bit wary when i was sat in the computer room looking around to see if no one was looking while i was accessing terrorist websites (it were just for background info on the groups and their aims, honest). Also most of the books in the libray relating to terrorim either had Al Qaeda plastered all over them or Osama Bin Laden. I didnt dare carry them on the bus in case i got jumped. Some how i managed to shove them into my very small bag.

No not the gum drop buttons! – Gingy