Anjem Choudary

[samuelellis]

About bloody time

[Mr_B]

Something tells me he'll get off the charge and be even more insufferable. Even if convicted, the slap on the wrist will no doubt be a badge of honour.

[Cobnapint]

audidoody said:

I'm keeping the champagne on ice until he's convicted, sentenced, and exhausted all avenues of appeal.

I fear this will run and run

Yes, the phones in the ECHR will be red hot this afternoon. He'll try every trick under the sun.

I'm sure the met will have built up enough of a case to finally nail the tw*t.

[Mr_B]

The Government had better of got this right. Failure here walks a fine line between freedom of speech and thought crimes that he will exploit and be invited on every single TV channel to talk about. Failing against this scum bag could result on some major egg on face when some so brazenly challenges you in the way Choudary does.

[Esseesse]

colin_p said:

Whilst I detest Choudry, I like the fact he is given airtime and column inches so that people can actually see what he stands for and represents.

This is in direct contrast to what the main stream media usually does, and that is making excuses for and constantly striving to sanitise the so called religion of peace. Religion of peace, yawn, sensible people know the truth and that is, it isn't. Lef'tard apologists will argue otherwise.

With this parasite, as horrible as he is, getting airtime means that people can see him and what he represents for what it actually is. That is; a cruel, brutal, backward ideology.

He is the absolute best PR rep that the ideology has in this country, he tells it as it is and people see it for what it is. If he gets locked up there will be no balance against the la-la land of the deluded BBC / Grauniad lefty driven apologist nonsense.

This, also while I also detest him, I have some sympathy for his 'people with strong opinions should be free to air them' angle.

[andyb66]

BBC has it too

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33784926

Sorry mods, started a new topic before seeing this one.

[MrBrightSi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sNIfjmj45o

Faith in mankind restored.

[anonymous-user]

Digga said:

I'm sure whatever he's 'done' (i.e. charged with) is largely the same as he's been doing for far longer than the investigation.

ISIS were not classed a proscribed organisation until June 2014, which is when the investigation began.

[audidoody]

I still reckon he's deep undercover for MI5

[TheExcession]

audidoody said:

I still reckon he's deep undercover for MI5

I'd like to think that too.

If he's not then I would volunteer to be the first to line up and pull the trigger on him, that's Buddhism that is.

He is an evil and despicable man where there is no law other than his law.

Bit like an Arni 'Terminator' - there is no reasoning with these people, no discussion.

Here's another vision into his version of law and reality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCfP4Eg1B4

[RedTrident]

La Liga said:

Digga said:

I'm sure whatever he's 'done' (i.e. charged with) is largely the same as he's been doing for far longer than the investigation.

ISIS were not classed a proscribed organisation until June 2014, which is when the investigation began.

I hope he gets convicted. I don't think he well.

Begg recently embarrassed the State. I think this man will also.

Does anyone know what exactly he's supposed to have said? If it was on an online lecture it will be in the public domain.

[Digga]

La Liga said:

Digga said:

I'm sure whatever he's 'done' (i.e. charged with) is largely the same as he's been doing for far longer than the investigation.

ISIS were not classed a proscribed organisation until June 2014, which is when the investigation began.

Exactly - he's very shrewd and it's up to the authorities to be smarter. Perhaps they have out-manoeuvred him. We will have to wait and see.

[gruffalo]

jakesmith said:

Perfect, shame he can't be sentenced to being beaten around the penis with a baseball bat

Edited by jakesmith on Wednesday 5th August 13:33

I am not quite sure that is in the sentencing guidelines for the offence but I am not sure what the guidelines for this offence are.

Can anyone educate me please?

[jakesmith]

gruffalo said:

I am not quite sure that is in the sentencing guidelines for the offence but I am not sure what the guidelines for this offence are.

Can anyone educate me please?

10 years maximum sentence

[anonymous-user]

I can't stand Choudary, but I wonder whether prosecuting him is wise. It gives him yet another platform from which to spout his claptrap. He is representing himself, and used the first hearing to give a predictable blah speech.

I also have some concerns about criminalising speech, even hatey speech. Don't we have broad enough shoulders to shrug off his splenetic rantings?


Prosecutions such as these can backfire. Compare the failed prosecution of that other extremist ranter, Nick Griffin.

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 8th August 09:16

[Digga]

Breadvan72 said:

Compare the failed prosecution of that other extremist ranter, Nick Griffin.

Griffith is and was a buffoon - remember the anti-immigrant flyer with the picture of the Polish squadron Spitfires? Whatever he did or did not preach, and notwithstanding the fact he was an odious little man, he didn't support any organisation that was directly opposed to the whole of Western democracy.

I do think there is a tipping point where a democracy is damned if it does or damned if it does not prosecute such hateful outpourings.

[ooo000ooo]

Don't know if this has been posted yet Pastor James McConnell in court over online 'satanic Islam' sermon some people have suggested the 2 cases are similar.
Facebook comments about have been a laugh with his christian supporters quoting the bible, atheiests shooting them down and the inevitable catholic/protestant posters squaring up to each other.

[RedTrident]

Digga said:

Breadvan72 said:

Compare the failed prosecution of that other extremist ranter, Nick Griffin.

Griffith is and was a buffoon - remember the anti-immigrant flyer with the picture of the Polish squadron Spitfires? Whatever he did or did not preach, and notwithstanding the fact he was an odious little man, he didn't support any organisation that was directly opposed to the whole of Western democracy.

Is ISIS opposed to the whole of Western democracy?

I'm now a bit worried whether I'll get in trouble for asking such a question.

As for Griffin and Choudary, I think the line for me is hate speech vs encouraging others to break the law/harm others. Have no idea anymore what the legal position is.

[Mr_B]

Breadvan72 said:

I can't stand Choudary, but I wonder whether prosecuting him is wise. It gives him yet another platform from which to spout his claptrap. He is representing himself, and used the first hearing to give a predictable blah speech.

I also have some concerns about crinminalising speech, even hatey speech. Don't we have broad enough shoulders to shrug off his splenetic rantings?


Prosecutions such as these can backfire. Compare the failed prosecution of that other extremist ranter, Nick Griffin.

I agree with most of this, and his rants to you or me are probably more an Islamic Life of Brian style comedy skit we can ignore. But in his case he is linked via what he said to people who kill invoking it. The last person I want to be agreeing with is Choudary on free speech principles as he stands in the dock and with me having to concede he is correct, but I'm hoping the Government has at least had its legal team ensure they are not going to be made fools of by him.
I hope he represents the extreme end of using these laws and they aren't used that often. By 51/49 with him, I'll sit back and watch what happens in support of the legal action.

[anonymous-user]

Some of our fellow contributors are noticeably absent recently.
You know the ones that probably just lurve Anjem
Have they been killed in air strikes whilst inadvertently "holidaying" in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq etc ?
Just a thought