Tag Archives: EAST MIDLANDS

MuslimTeacher Zameer Ghumra Jailed For Showing Beheading Videos To Kids At UK Madrassa

Muslim extremist Zameer Ghumra has been jailed for six years for his attempted brain washing of schoolboys at his madrassa (Muslim school). The Islamofascist from Leicster abused his position of trust at the religious school.Using the opportunity to try and radicalise a future generation of jihadis. During lessons the Muslim schoolboys were shown ISIS beheading videos. Zameer Ghumra also promoted the Islamic jihad in Syria portraying ISIS terrorists as some kind of oppressed victims just defending their homes. He also encouraged the children not to have non Muslim friends and integrate with British society.

British pharmacist jailed for showing beheading video to kids
Zameer Ghumra was found guilty of disseminating terrorist propaganda and trying to brainwash young boys


Image Credit: Social Media/Twitter
Zameer Ghumra
Published: 09:33 October 7, 2017
PTI

London: A British man was on Friday sentenced to six years’ imprisonment by a UK court for showing a Daesh beheading video to schoolchildren.
Zameer Ghumra was found guilty of disseminating terrorist propaganda and trying to brainwash young boys into supporting Daesh at Nottingham Crown Court on Friday.

The 38-year-old pharmacist, believed to be of Arabic origin, also told the children they should kill anyone who insulted Islam and instructed them to make only Muslim friends.
“These were shocking crimes which damaged the children and caused offence to the vast majority of law-abiding Muslims,” Judge Gregory Dickson said.
The judge also noted the lack of remorse shown by Ghumra during his trial when determining his sentence.

 

The jury was told that the children, who came in contact with the accused at a madrassa he had set up, were encouraged to go to Syria to fight with the Daesh where they would have to behead people. Ghumra also followed various Daesh-linked social media accounts and made the two children follow similar accounts. Prosecutor Simon Davis said Ghumra had told a customer that Daesh were “not bad people – they’re only defending themselves”.
Ghumra, from the city of Leicester, was working as a pharmacist in Oundle, Northamptonshire, when he was arrested at Birmingham Airport in September 2015.
He had denied the charges and claimed that the children had been induced to make “false allegations” against him.
Sue Hemming of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said: “Zameer Ghumra tried to brainwash impressionable children with this violent ideology by making one watch beheading videos and urging them both to adopt a hard line religious outlook.”
“The CPS case was that he intended to radicalise them in the hope that they would go on to be involved in terrorism.
“The children were brave to give evidence and we would like to thank them for helping to secure this conviction of a dangerous man,” Hemming said.
Ghumra was found guilty of the charge of disseminating “terrorist propaganda” in the form of a graphic Twitter video on his mobile phone between January 2013 and September 2014.
Detective Chief Superintendent Martin Snowden, head of Counter Terrorism Policing North East, said: “That act alone is unforgivable. His teaching role increases his risk, potentially giving him direct access to young or vulnerable people who may look up to him as an authority figure.”

Muslim woman plays the victim and starts legal proceedings against interrogation at airport

A Muslim woman who was stopped and questioned at the airport under anti terrorism law has started legal proceedings claiming that her human rights were violated. The Muslim woman was prosecuted after she refused to cooperate with the police and wouldn’t  answer their questions regarding the reasons for her visit to France. Now she is playing the victim in the whole thing like Muslims so often do despite pleading guilty to the charge of wilfully failing to comply with her duty under Schedule 7 to answer questions.  

Sylvie Beghal claims that being asked questions without a lawyer present under Schedule 7 violated the right to liberty (Article 5), right to a fair trial (Article 6) and Ms Beghal’s right to protection for her private and family life (Article 8). Under Schedule 7 anti terrorism laws a lawyer would not of been able to advise his client during questioning anyway and she had a legal duty to answer. Ultimately it was the woman’s stubbornness being awkward refusing to answer that resulted in her arrest .Now she is acting hard done to and putting  the whole schedule 7 laws at risk challenging the legality of an essential weapon in fighting terrorism.

If a person had nothing to hide then why would they object to a few questions if it helped keep our nation safe from terrorist attack. The only people who have anything to gain from those laws getting scrapped would be the Muslim terrorists who hate this country so much they want to slay as many innocent men, women and children as possible.

MUSLIMS TERROR RISK AT AIRPORT

Muslim woman in legal challenge to interrogation at airport

2:27pm Thursday 21st March 2013 in News

A Muslim woman is seeking a legal declaration that her human rights were violated when she was prosecuted after refusing to submit to an interrogation under anti-terrorism laws at an airport.

Mother-of-three Sylvie Beghal was stopped and questioned, even though she was not “suspected” of being a terrorist.

Police officers said they needed to speak to her regarding her “possible involvement” in acts of terrorism.

In what is believed to be the first legal challenge of its kind, Mrs Beghal’s lawyers argued this week at London’s High Court heard.that the entire process of stopping and questioning people “without reasonable suspicion” breaches the European Convention on Human Rights.

They said it was significant that Mrs Beghal had no right of access to a lawyer while being questioned and was being put under direct compulsion to provide information.

The court heard she indicated she would answer questions after the arrival of her lawyer, but the police chose not to wait.

When her lawyer arrived after her questioning had finished, the officers did not seek to ask her any more questions in the lawyer’s presence, three judges were told.

Mrs Beghal, a French national living in the UK, arrived back at East Midlands Airport with her children on January 4, 2011 following a visit to Paris but was not formally detained or arrested.

She was stopped at the UK Border Agency desk but refused to co-operate with questioning by Leicestershire police officers acting under powers given by schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT).

Mrs Beghal asked to consult with a lawyer and for an opportunity to pray.

After being given time to pray, police officers told her she could telephone her lawyer after she was searched. The prosecution initially accused her of physically resisting the search.

At 9.30pm she was taken to a room for an examination under Schedule 7 and asked to provide reasons for her journey, where she stayed in Paris, whom she had met or visited and how her travel was funded.

She was also asked whether she had a criminal record and about her knowledge of the French-Algerian community in Leicestershire, her use of vehicles, the languages she spoke and her current and past employment.

She failed to provide answers to most of the questions, indicating she would only answer questions after her lawyer arrived.

She was subsequently charged with wilfully obstructing a search, assaulting a constable and wilfully failing to comply with her duty under Schedule 7 to answer questions.

The first two charges were eventually dismissed in December 2011 after the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence and Mrs Beghal pleaded guilty to the third charge.

She did so after District Judge Temperley, sitting at Leicester Magistrates’ Court, refused her request to stay the charge as an abuse of process, and the case was referred to the High Court.

Ms Beghal’s counsel Matthew Ryder asked three senior judges – Lord Justice Gross, Mrs Justice Swift and Mr Justice Foskett – to rule Schedule 7 “incompatible” with the human rights convention.

Mr Ryder argued Schedule 7 violated the right to liberty (Article 5), right to a fair trial (Article 6) and Ms Beghal’s right to protection for her private and family life (Article 8).

Mr Ryder also argued the prosecution was an unjustifiable interference with Ms Beghal’s “right to free movement” within an EU country as an EU national.

Louis Malby, appearing for the Crown Prosecution Service, told the judges that Schedule 7 empowered officers to question a person entering or leaving the country if they “appear to be a person who is, or has been, concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism”.

Any person being questioned was under a legal duty to give the officer any information in his or her possession that was requested.

Arguing that Mrs Beghal’s rights had not been breached, Mr Malby said: “The ability to stop and examine passengers at ports is an essential tool in the protection of the public from terrorism.”

Mr Malby said Mrs Beghal was given an opportunity to consult with a solicitor in advance of questioning, and it was agreed that a telephone consultation took place.

But a solicitor would have had no purpose at the actual questioning, other than as an observer to ensure proper procedure, as Mrs Beghal was under a legal obligation to answer the questions put to her.

Reserving judgment, the judges said they would give their ruling at a future date.