Mohammed Zahir Khan has filed a lawsuit challenging the United Kingdom’s Terrorist Offenders Restriction of Early Release Act, arguing that the law targets those holding “particular Islamic beliefs and [would] have a disproportionate impact on Muslims.”
Give Mohammed Zahir Khan points for cleverness. He has discovered a vulnerability, and he is exploiting it. The British government is dogmatically committed to the proposition that Islam is a religion of peace and that “Islamophobia” is a massive societal problem. Thus the fact that most of the people who are in prison for terror-related crimes are Muslims is not evidence of the fact that Islamic texts and teachings contain numerous incitements to violence; rather, it is an indication of the “racism” of British authorities against what is not a racial group, but is always treated as one anyway by the British political and media elites. Consequently, the law barring terrorists from early release from prison is “racist” and “anti-Muslim,” because it keeps more of these victims of “Islamophobia” in prison.
The reasoning is tortured and the premises ridiculous, but in shattered, staggering, dhimmi Britain, it just might work.
“Terrorist Challenges New UK Anti-Terrorism Law,” by Patrick Dunleavy, IPT News, May 7, 2020:
A convicted terrorist has filed a lawsuit challenging the United Kingdom’s Terrorist Offenders Restriction of Early Release Act passed into law three months ago.An attorney for Mohammed Zahir Khan, who is currently serving a 4½-year prison sentence for a number of terror related crimes, argues that the new law targets those holding “particular Islamic beliefs and [would] have a disproportionate impact on Muslims.”
That’s because Muslims comprise a majority of inmates serving time for terrorism-related crimes. It is a demographic reality, not an attempt to single out a religious minority group.
We do know that Islamist groups like the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) have made similarly outlandish claims, such as 93 percent of Muslim inmates in prison for terrorism or terror-related crimes were set-up by overzealous prosecutors.
“Many convicted Muslims were sentenced to long years in prison for doing essentially nothing,” a study underwritten last year by ICNA’s Council for Social Justice says.
Britain’s Parliament passed the new law following two deadly stabbing rampages by convicted terrorists who had been granted an early release from prison.
A subsequent investigation uncovered more than 70 terrorists, including radical Islamic clergy Anjem Choudary, who incited support for ISIS, were granted an early release from prison. Many of these inmates had refused to attend any sort of de-radicalization program while incarcerated.
The new law, argued James Eadie on behalf of the Secretary of Justice, “applied equally to all terrorist offenders, regardless of race, religion or otherwise.”
Public safety was the focus, and terrorists posed the greatest risk to achieving that.
Even after completing a sentence, the inmate’s case will be reviewed by a parole board to assess the potential risk to society if released. That is a sound policy and not discriminatory.
“Protecting the public is Government’s first duty,” Britain’s Secretary of State for Justice Robert Buckland said when the law passed.
The law has blocked the scheduled release of 50 terrorists, including Khan, who now is challenging the law.
Khan was set to be released in February, but now will have to wait until November. Under the Terrorist Offender Early Release Act, he will have to appear before a review board to determine whether he still poses a threat to public safety.
Khan’s criminal history followed the oft-seen path of radicalization from common crook to jihadist. He had been involved in low level crimes – including drug distribution, robbery, and gang activity.
In social media posts, Khan had expressed his support for the Islamic State and called for Shiite Muslims to be burned alive and for the death American servicemen. He also encouraged lone wolf terrorists to becoming a shahid, a term used to describe a martyr in Islam. In another social media post, he included a photo of an ISIS flag….
Dude says
Haha. Now they will slit their own throats.
Their defence testimony will reveal the apalling sedition found in their ‘scriptures’.
Are they really that stupid? Funny how it always comes down to this. And yes, they are that stupid – even the lawyers.
b.a. freeman says
well, Dude, it’s only stupid if the people they use it on – the elitist head-up-a** governmental types running UKistan – aren’t fooled by it. because those people *are* fooled by it – all the time – i have no doubt that the law will be thrown out. the best future i can see for UKistan and EUrabia in general is that after protracted civil wars, which may last decades, if not longer, civilization will survive. because of the uneducated, ahistorical, leftist elites, thousands, if not millions, will die. and that blood will be on the hands of the left.
gravenimage says
Too true, b.a. freeman.
LB says
That’s exactly right. This isn’t a question of whether the muslim terrorist will appeal the suit or not; it is the question of how many hundreds of thousands of British taxpayer pounds will be given to him after he wins the suit. UK is in full islamic surrender mode and has been that way for a good number of decades.
Rob says
Don’t change the law, change the beliefs.
Jayell says
It’s the brainless bigotted arrogance and transparently stupid sophistry that gets me. If certain laws that are clearly intended to ensure public safety by specifically curtailing destructive criminal activity then appear to have the effect of targetting particular groups, then it’s safe to assume that’s because the particular groups in question have a proven reputation for destructive criminal activity and would therefore pose a threat to public safety. If these particular groups do not wish to be ‘targetted’ by the law then they should respect the law, which means respecting the people for whom the law has been created to protect. If a person complains about a law that’s specifically designed to stop people indulging in destructive criminal acts, then it’s logical to infer that this is because the person concerned approves of destructive criminality, presumes some right to commit it and therefore has no respect the rights and safety of others. That’s the definition of a dangerous criminal whom the law has duty to target in order to protect society, and therefore whom the law must lock up for the safety of all. So in attempting to argue against that, the ‘hero’ of this piece is effectively admitting thaf he’s a dangerous criminal who therefors needs to be locked up. Which is precisely what’s already happened to him. Problem?
RichardL says
Muslims are terrorists because they good Muslims, that’s what ICNA is saying. Truth coming from jihadis, sorry, civil rights organisations. They UK is rulked by sharia anyway…
tim gallagher says
So the counter terrorism laws are unfair (boo- fucking – hoo) because they target people holding “particular Islamic beliefs”. Would those beliefs be the notion of Muslims (straight out of f-ing Koran) being called to go out and kill non-Muslims? What are load of garbage from this Muslim maggot. “A disproportionate impact on Muslims”. Well, duh. It’s not Buddhists or Christians who are told by their religion to go and murder non-believers, and who are so often carrying out those instructions.. As the minister says, “Protecting the public is Government’s first duty”. Damned right. Well, it should be and not sucking up to the Muslim scum, which, alas, seems to happen a lot in the UK and in most of our countries. If protecting the public really was the main aim of Government, then shut Muslims out. That would genuinely protect all of us non-Muslims. These Muslim scum, like this person, continually try to play us for fools. As if non-Muslims, in any Muslim country, would have rights like this scumbag is trying to claim.
Roger Woodhouse says
The problem Islam believers have is that ‘their’ so called ‘religion’counts for nothing untill the whole world is converted.Killing non believers is considered the right thing to do by those who accept that the quran was handed down to them by Allah their moon God.If most muslims ignore this command its not that they dont believe it.They are happy when other more radical muslims carry it out.This is something our governments dont want to grasp.
tim gallagher says
Yes, Roger, Islam is 100% incompatible with our values. Imagine being so dumb that you let in a bunch of people who, as you say, believe that it is “the right thing to do” to kill non-believers in their crappy religion. Yet our countries’ leaders keep letting the Muslim enemy in. I cannot understand why our countries keep letting Muslims in. As I said, up above, Muslims often do take us for fools and see us as a soft touch. Our leaders have to wake up and shut Muslims out.
Scheherazade Smith says
Had they executed him for treason in the first place, which was the civilised thing to do, he would now not be making a further nuisance of himself.
Still, Islam and Muslims continue to advertise themselves as the unique evils that they are on this planet.
GreekEmpress says
Talking about “Islamic beliefs” here is an update on Professor Damask who received death threats and was chastised by Scottsdale Community College for questions on a quiz about Islamic terrorism:
THE COLLEGE HAS APOLOGIZED!!!
Steven Gonzales, interim chancellor apologized personally and behalf of Maricopa Community Colleges for the way the matter was handled and for lack of consideration for the professor’s right of academic freedom. He was also troubled by the rush to judgement of the college and its failure to follow proper procedures. He also said there will be an investigation and he will ensure appropriate accountability where ever failures occurred. The investigation will not involve the professor, who is at no risk of losing his job.
Foundation for Individual Rights in Education also weighed in reminding the college that “requiring a faculty member to avoid questions concerning terrorism—one of the most controversial public policy matters of the past 20 years—is precisely the coercive activity barred by Arizona law.”
Board members of MCCD we’re not notified of the situation, death threats to the Professor and his family (many of which came from foreign countries),
and threats to burn down the college.
The story has hit national news now. Nobody from the college ever returned my phone calls, and I wasn’t holding my breath. Has anybody here seen the story on the news??
Zuhdi Jasser, who is based in Phoenix was basically in support of Professor Damask. Of course, Imraan Siddiqi of AZ CAIR weighed in as well. But as of right now—
ARIZONA 1——-CAIR 0
James Lincoln says
GreekEmpress,
This is truly GREAT news!
I saw the article in the Arizona Daily Independent:
https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2020/05/11/college-apologizes-to-professor-who-connected-islam-to-terrorism/
gravenimage says
Great news, GreekEmpress–thank you!
gravenimage says
And James, thank you for that link.
gravenimage says
UK: Convicted terrorist files suit, says new counterterror law targets those holding “particular Islamic beliefs”
…………………..
How *dare* the filthy Infidels try to stop Muslims from murdering them? Bad dhimmis!
Walter Sieruk says
When that Muslim terrorist filed a legal suit and likewise said that the new counter terror law targets those holding “particular Islamic beliefs” he was thus admitting that his beliefs in violence for Islam is based on Islam and Islam’s “holy book” the. Quran, Sura 9:5,111,123, 47:4.
So in spite of the lying words of the many apologists for Islam when they claim that “Islam is non-violent peaceful religion” the terrible reality is that Islam is,indeed. a religion of violence and killing.
Furthermore, if a new law has actually been enacted that “targets” violent actions based on Islam then that a good thing. For the laws of any Western nation, in this case the United Kingdom, need to be and should be designed for safety and protection of the citizens of that Western country.
gravenimage says
UK: Convicted terrorist files suit, says new counterterror law targets those holding “particular Islamic beliefs”
………………
Of course, this is false–this law doesn’t stop anyone from holding these beliefs–just from *acting on them*.
OTTER says
Muslims always have it backwards. You are in jail because you did a criminal act. You’re not in jail because you’re a Muslim. The cause comes before the effect. If you stop committing terrorism you’ll stop going to jail. How difficult is that?
One fundamental tool in social sciences is to observe patterns and draw conclusions from them. The conclusion which I draw from the overpopulation of Muslims in jail is that Islam causes Muslims to become criminals. What other reasonable explanation could there be?
mortimer says
Many of them are in jail because the wanted to imitate Mohammed’s criminal behaviors in the hadiths and Sira. Anyone who believes Mohammed is a role model is a risk to society.
libertyORdeath says
They know exactly what they did and exactly what their warped religion commands them to do. This is simple legal gamesmanship or lawfare. I hope the prosecution compiles a thorough case including the motivating factors which lead to islamic terrorism, i.e. the quran, hadiths, and other islamic texts. This is a great chance to bring the evil ideology out into the open.
Kilauea says
Not being able to kill infidels keeps me from practicing my religion – Zahir Khan. The Brits are total dumb asses if they even listen to this POS.
Giacomo Latta says
This Khan has obviously acquired a lot of experience in playing the system. He knows already that he has many legislators and judges on his side because these simpletons have declared Islam a religion.
infidel says
Another example of these mad animals milking the legal machinery of the Khafir and enmesh them in an endless legal rigmarole
infidel says
Another example of legal jehaad and milking the legal machinery of the Khafir and enmeshing them in an endless legal rigmarole
gravenimage says
Muslims use Infidel’s laws to spread Islam where they can.
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan) says
So if anti-terror laws entirely match up to your religion, you dont come to the conclusion that that tells you something about your religion?
Instead you scream “IT’S SO RACIST OF YOU TO TRY TO STOP US BLOWING YOU UP!!!” And the court, let’s face it, will probably agree!
Palladini says
I so hope the Jude(s) who get this case tell this looser that his lawsuit cannot go ahead, and if it targets mostly muslims, the maybey it is time for the Muslim reformation. They are forced to follow a pedophile who also was a war monger. That in day and age is complete idiocry.