Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Terrorist propaganda student Mohammed Gul jailed

Options
  • 25-02-2011 4:17pm
    #1
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭


    A law student who posted Islamic terrorist propaganda on the internet after becoming radicalised has been jailed for five years.

    Mohammed Gul was "pouring petrol on the fire" and his actions could have spurred others to commit acts of terror, the Old Bailey was told.

    Gul, 23, of Hornchurch, east London, was found guilty of five counts of disseminating terrorist publications.

    Judge David Paget said his sentence had to be a deterrent to others.

    ........................

    The offences were committed when Gul was 19 or 20 years old, said Timothy Moloney QC in mitigation.

    "He is ashamed of the comments he made and he regrets them and wishes he hadn't said them," he said.

    Sean Larkin QC, prosecuting, told the trial: "These were glorifying terrorism.

    "Mr Gul became more and more involved in extreme views.

    "He spent more and more time in internet forums and chatrooms with people who expressed extreme views.

    "He became more and more radicalised. He decided to make these videos and upload them," he added.

    "For people interested in this sort of thing, people with a grievance against coalition forces, he was pouring petrol on the fire."

    He added jihadi songs to clips from al Qaeda, the Taliban and Iraqi media sites.

    One video showed an image of Osama bin Laden along with words from a poem which praised him.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12576973

    This is quite frightening, 5 years in prison for posting videos? It seems they were reposts too, so already available online.

    I think that's a bit scary to be honest. Like thinking of say The Wolfe Tones (the band) videos on youtube or even Christy Moore - loads of their songs have videos made by people showing images from the north -murals/famous photos etc which I'm sure could be argued glorify militant republicanism. I really don't think the makers should go to prison though.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Its a disgraceful verdict and a complete overreaction.


  • Options
    #3
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Thats ridiculous, I doubt they would invoke that for republicans though, there would be hell.


  • Options
    #4
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    ridiculous. whatever ever happened to freedom of speech?


  • Options
    #5
    LondonIrish90
    Closed Accounts Posts: 882 ✭✭✭LondonIrish90


    Personally I'm very pleased. The boy was promoting and encouraging acts of terrorism in the UK. Glad to see he has been punished properly for doing so. Will also make others think twice about posting videos that could potentially radicalise other muslims in Britain. Shows this sort of thing will not be tolerated in the United Kingdom.


  • Options
    #6
    LondonIrish90
    Closed Accounts Posts: 882 ✭✭✭LondonIrish90


    paky wrote: »
    ridiculous. whatever ever happened to freedom of speech?

    It still exists. Laws against the expression of hatred still exist too. Thankfully.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    whiteonion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    LondonIrish90 wrote: »
    Personally I'm very pleased. The boy was promoting and encouraging acts of terrorism in the UK. Glad to see he has been punished properly for doing so. Will also make others think twice about posting videos that could potentially radicalise other muslims in Britain. Shows this sort of thing will not be tolerated in the United Kingdom.

    Fascists don't like freedom of speech. Are you a fascist?


  • Options
    #8
    whiteonion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    LondonIrish90 wrote: »
    It still exists. Laws against the expression of hatred still exist too. Thankfully.

    Should I get arrested for singing the song "Come out ye black and tans"?


  • Options
    #9
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »
    This is quite frightening, 5 years in prison for posting videos? It seems they were reposts too, so already available online.

    I think that's a bit scary to be honest. Like thinking of say The Wolfe Tones (the band) videos on youtube or even Christy Moore - loads of their songs have videos made by people showing images from the north -murals/famous photos etc which I'm sure could be argued glorify militant republicanism. I really don't think the makers should go to prison though.

    The guy is clearly in favour of Al Qaeda etc. but this verdict is that of psychological policing! If it is not based on anything else than the media he produced, then it is merely attacking the principles of freedom of speech.

    Sure the guy is radicalised - but do not generate trumped up charges just to 'make an example' of him.


  • Options
    #10
    sollar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭sollar


    This verdict could be very interesting if any dissident republicans get prosecuted for the same thing.


  • Options
    #11
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Fascists don't like freedom of speech. Are you a fascist?
    Birds have two legs. Are you a bird?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    The guy is clearly in favour of Al Qaeda etc. but this verdict is that of psychological policing! If it is not based on anything else than the media he produced, then it is merely attacking the principles of freedom of speech.

    Sure the guy is radicalised - but do not generate trumped up charges just to 'make an example' of him.
    In what sense are the charges 'trumped up'? Did they plant drugs on him or something?


  • Options
    #13
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    In what sense are the charges 'trumped up'? Did they plant drugs on him or something?

    I could produce a video in the next five minutes 'glorifying' terrorism.

    So what?

    The judgement is based on his perceived political standpoint - reproducing photos of taliban fighters or Al Qaeda atrocities with fitting music or recordings from the Koran is neither here nor there.

    Whilst the judgement is probably perfectly correct on his standpoint (that he endorses bloody jihad against the west and would probably have a go if he got half a chance) it is still just an exercise in psychological policing.

    He will be back out in a couple of years (unless he has a successful appeal - which he should) and then what? Will he suddenly be un-radicalised? A short spell in prison did a great job to quash Hitler's political ambitions... :pac:


  • Options
    #14
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    LondonIrish90 wrote: »
    Personally I'm very pleased. The boy was promoting and encouraging acts of terrorism in the UK. Glad to see he has been punished properly for doing so. Will also make others think twice about posting videos that could potentially radicalise other muslims in Britain. Shows this sort of thing will not be tolerated in the United Kingdom.

    That sort of thing being dissent?

    This is thought police plain and simple


  • Options
    #15
    Sunnyisland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,562 ✭✭✭✭Sunnyisland


    sollar wrote: »
    This verdict could be very interesting if any dissident republicans get prosecuted for the same thing.


    Years ago, maybe its still the same, But you could go to prison here if a superentendent said HE believes you are a memeber of a proscribed organisation and many did go.When goverments decide they dont want you around they always have laws to make it so.


  • Options
    #16
    LondonIrish90
    Closed Accounts Posts: 882 ✭✭✭LondonIrish90


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    That sort of thing being dissent?

    This is thought police plain and simple

    No its not. He can think what he likes, most people wont care. He just cant post it on the internet if it advocates acts of terrorism against the British state. Thats when people start to care, and thats when he has been given a very apt prision sentence.


  • Options
    #17
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    LondonIrish90 wrote: »
    No its not. He can think what he likes, most people wont care. He just cant post it on the internet if it advocates acts of terrorism against the British state. Thats when people start to care, and thats when he has been given a very apt prision sentence.

    Where does it say he advocated "terrorism against the British state"?


  • Options
    #18
    whiteonion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    LondonIrish90 wrote: »
    No its not. He can think what he likes, most people wont care. He just cant post it on the internet if it advocates acts of terrorism against the British state. Thats when people start to care, and thats when he has been given a very apt prision sentence.

    Britain is a fascist police state. The fact that cops can murder unarmed civilians proves it. Britain is a filthy, degenerate police state. I will never set my foot in that ****hole.


  • Options
    #19
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    No one should ever be punished for expressing any view. Ever.

    Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. It should apply to everyone and every viewpoint.


  • Options
    #20
    Emily77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2 ✭Emily77


    I wonder- would your reactions be different if he had attended meetings in person or do you use different rules for the internet?


  • Options
    #21
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    "meetings"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Emily77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2 ✭Emily77


    Nodin wrote: »
    "meetings"?

    Attending a meeting vs. expressing your opinions through a forum- are they so different? would people feel different if he had been meeting people in person instead of the internet?


  • Options
    #23
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    I have mixed feelings about this case. On the one hand, freedom of speech should always be one of the most prized rights of a liberal society, and receive commensurate protection. On the other hand, there is, GWB's clumsy and unhelpful terminology notwithstanding, a war extant between GB and AQ and her affiliates. Does freedom of speech cover the abetting of an enemy force? I would be surprised if one could point to any conflict in history where advocating for the enemy was tolerated by the host nation. In this case, his actions go beyond mere advocating for an enemy, and seek the destruction of society, and the murder of innocent civilians. Does freedom of speech cover this? Should it? If, say, war broke out between Britain and Germany again, would those who condemn this ruling, similarly condemn the laying of charges against those propogandising for Germany?

    As far as I can see, this man's interaction with the offending material wasn't passive. He wasn't the Islamist equivalent of a Wolf Tones fan. He actively sought to incite the murder of those around him. He sought to bring about the deaths of as many people as possible. He didn't personally kill people, but he made such killings more likely; his weapon wasn't the gun, but the internet. And it's a potent weapon.

    I can understand why people are uneasy about this man's imprisonment. There's merit to the point that he's hardly likely to leave prison a reformed character. That though could be used of any offender. I realise that this sentence may be used as propaganda for other extremists, but it's naive to believe that such people as those who murder indiscriminately, are genuinely pushed to it by such instances. And, frankly, someone who would condemn the British for this, whilst exulting in the dismemberment of innocent UN workers, as is the case with many jihadis, isn't exactly the most rational of people.

    So, whilst genuine concerns can be raised about this case, I think that, on balance, the prosecution had merit, and the sentence not unreasonable.


  • Options
    #24
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,469 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    No one should ever be punished for expressing any view. Ever.

    Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. It should apply to everyone and every viewpoint.

    So if I incite a mob to racial violence because of my views or if I destroy another person's reputation because of my views or if I leak my employer's confidential information as my views causing his company a loss, are all of those acceptable downsides to the freedom of speech?

    Or, should there be some limits to free speech and it is up to society to decide where the dividing line is? Don't forget that words can often do more than a physical assault - the pen is mightier than the sword etc.


  • Options
    #25
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    So if I incite a mob to racial violence because of my views or if I destroy another person's reputation because of my views or if I leak my employer's confidential information as my views causing his company a loss, are all of those acceptable downsides to the freedom of speech?

    Or, should there be some limits to free speech and it is up to society to decide where the dividing line is? Don't forget that words can often do more than a physical assault - the pen is mightier than the sword etc.

    how could you argue with such genius?


  • Options
    #26
    jakdelad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 452 ✭✭jakdelad


    Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12576973

    This is quite frightening, 5 years in prison for posting videos? It seems they were reposts too, so already available online.

    I think that's a bit scary to be honest. Like thinking of say The Wolfe Tones (the band) videos on youtube or even Christy Moore - loads of their songs have videos made by people showing images from the north -murals/famous photos etc which I'm sure could be argued glorify militant republicanism. I really don't think the makers should go to prison though.
    yep scary alright
    so no posting any jedward sh1te, or justin barbwire,
    my teenage daughters torture us daily prison would be heaven


Advertisement