UK Woman Sentenced to Year in Prison for Having al-Qaeda Magazine

Woman Sentenced to Year in Prison for Having al-Qaeda Magazine

infowars.com

Curious readers beware: in the British police state, merely possessing a copy of the supposed al-Qaeda magazine Inspire will get you a twelve month stint in the hoosegow.

Last Thursday, the sister of two men convicted of planning a Christmas 2010 terror plot – including blowing up a toilet at the London Stock Exchange – was jailed after British authorities found a digital copy of the magazine on the memory card of her cell phone.

I just saw this article posted by infowars.com on my facebook feed and thought I would bring it to the attention of ATS for discussion.

Pretty scary to think you can now be imprisoned in the UK just for reading a magazine.



Another clip from the article says that Iran believes that this magazines true authors are actually the CIA.

In September 2011, Iran said the CIA is behind Inspire, not followers of Osama bin Laden, after the magazine criticized Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for stating that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to invade and occupy the Middle East.

“The Iranian government has professed on the tongue of its president Ahmadinejad that it does not believe that al Qaeda was behind 9/11 but rather, the U.S. government,” an article published in the magazine reads. “So we may ask the question: why would Iran ascribe to such a ridiculous belief that stands in the face of all logic and evidence?”

Article related to above quote

Iran is doubling down on the conspiracy theories after an al Qaeda magazine blasted Iranian president Mahmoud Adhmadinejad's 9/11 claims, this time suggesting the true authors of the terror publication -- which often instructs readers to murder Americans -- are not radical Islamists, but secret agents for the CIA.

Al Qaeda in Yemen Call Ahmadinejad a 9/11 Truther

Regardless of what your opinion of Alex Jones and info wars is, this is some good stuff.

What say you ATS?

It had instructions on bomb making , mixing bomb making chemicals and possible targets in the magazine , that is why it was banned and she was arrested.The same as if you where to have the anarchists cookbook nowadays

As for Iran believes ...well they believe a lot , do you believe them?

reply to post by gambon


The CIA and the US government has had its ties to Al-Qaeda in the past.

I don't have enough information to draw any final conclusions about this magazine being associated with the CIA or not. I certainly wouldn't put it past them though.

I also don't believe Al-Qaeda is solely responsible for the attacks on 9/11. I guess Adhmadinejad and I have that in common.

The same as if you where to have the anarchists cookbook nowadays

Actually, you're wrong about that. At least in the USA

Source

It is not illegal to own the Anarchist's Cookbook in the United States. Many people think it is a banned book because of the things that are talked about in it are illegal to carry out. Something is only illegal once you do it (not reading it or thinking about it).

As poster #2 said..

In the UK it is illegal to be in posession of materials which are designed to be used for terror attacks, and this includes instructions for the making of, unless you have valid reason to be in posession of those items.

In the eyes of the police, curiosity is not a valid reason. Obviously, the courts agreed in this case.

Its a disgustingly wide law, theoretically you could be arrested for posession of a chemistry textbook under it. Fortunatly the police haven't abused it too much yet. The last time I know of this law being invoked was when two political sciences students were arrested for ordering an Al'Quieda book from the University library. On that occasion, the court ruled that being political science students, meant they had valid reason, and they were freed.

But still, its one law I think it too wide, and too heavy handed.

reply to post by BMorris

But still, its one law I think it too wide, and too heavy handed.

I agree with you there.

I'm not very familiar with the laws in the UK.

Thanks for the response

reply to post by MagicWand67


Dear MagicWand67,

Your statement is not correct. They were jailed for planning to blow up the London Stock Exchange. Here is a link to the article that Alex Jones linked to. The Australian - Four British Islamists admit plot to blow up London Stock Exchange

reply to post by AQuestion

Your statement is not correct.

Please clarify which of my statements you believe is incorrect.

The article I posted is about the sister of one of those men who was arrested.

Link

Judge Adrian Fulford said he accepted Ruksana Begum’s explanation that she downloaded the magazine to better understand her brothers’ case.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by gambon

 

The CIA and the US government has had its ties to Al-Qaeda in the past.

I don't have enough information to draw any final conclusions about this magazine being associated with the CIA or not. I certainly wouldn't put it past them though.

I also don't believe Al-Qaeda is solely responsible for the attacks on 9/11. I guess Adhmadinejad and I have that in common.

The same as if you where to have the anarchists cookbook nowadays

Actually, you're wrong about that. At least in the USA

Source

It is not illegal to own the Anarchist's Cookbook in the United States. Many people think it is a banned book because of the things that are talked about in it are illegal to carry out. Something is only illegal once you do it (not reading it or thinking about it).

edit on 10-12-2012 by MagicWand67 because: (no reason given)

We are not talking about the usa , we talking the UK , in the uk the coookbook is banned.

reply to post by AQuestion

It seemed to me, after reading your link twice, that the woman in question was a sister of one of those involved in the plot and not an actual plotter. But still, the judge followed the law in convicting her.

reply to post by gambon

We are not talking about the usa , we talking the UK , in the uk the coookbook is banned.

Well I'm glad I don't live in the UK.

I don't think people should be put in prison just for reading a magazine.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by BMorris

 

I agree with you there.

I'm not very familiar with the laws in the UK.

Thanks for the response

Why start a thread on a story where laws in the UK are a pretty important part then?

reply to post by Merriman Weir

Why start a thread on a story where laws in the UK are a pretty important part then?

Why comment in this thread if you have nothing to say about the topic?

I started the thread to discuss it and perhaps learn something.

I also wanted to discuss the part about this so called Al-Qaeda magazine calling Adhmadinejad a 9/11 truther.

I found that part of the article to be curious and worth discussion.

So do you have anything of value to add to the actual topic?

reply to post by Merriman Weir

If I might hazard a guess?

Why start a thread on a story where laws in the UK are a pretty important part then?

Because he believes that everybody should abide by American principles. And, also, he didn't feel like mentioning that in Islamic and communist countries you can be, and have been, killed for reading the wrong stuff.

reply to post by charles1952


You would be 100% incorrect in your assumption.

Where did that garbage come from?

Are you saying that because I'm from the US I can not take part in any discussion about news from the UK?

reply to post by MagicWand67


Dear MagicWand67,

She did not go to jail for having a magazine. Here is an article from the BBC news.

Al-Qaeda material bride Ruksana Begum jailed

The relevant paragraph is"

"The 22-year-old earlier pleaded guilty to having material which was likely to be useful to someone committing or preparing an act of terrorism." The fact that her defense attorney claimed it was to understand her brother is doubtful. Her brother was arrested for planning to blow up buildings, she obtained materials that explained how to do the same thing and then went to London. The fact is, she plead guilty. Best guess is that they wanted to try her for the same thing as her brother; but, allowed a plea bargain instead.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by AQuestion

 

It seemed to me, after reading your link twice, that the woman in question was a sister of one of those involved in the plot and not an actual plotter. But still, the judge followed the law in convicting her.

Dear charles1952,

She plead guilty to having materials that would be useful to terrorists. BBC news says, "The 22-year-old earlier pleaded guilty to having material which was likely to be useful to someone committing or preparing an act of terrorism.". It was a plea bargain. If someone admits to having committed a crime, the judge had to give her some jail time. The question is why did she plead guilty?

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

Why start a thread on a story where laws in the UK are a pretty important part then?

Why comment in this thread if you have nothing to say about the topic?

I started the thread to discuss it and perhaps learn something.

I also wanted to discuss the part about this so called Al-Qaeda magazine calling Adhmadinejad a 9/11 truther.

I found that part of the article to be curious and worth discussion.

So do you have anything of value to add to the actual topic?

Do you really need it spelling out? (see what I did there?)

What I added was of value: it added context to where you say:

Pretty scary to think you can now be imprisoned in the UK just for reading a magazine.

It's not like a woman's magazine you see in the dentist: hair trends for next spring! post-break up diet tips! I married my dog! It's a magazine aimed at terrorists and their supporters and contains bomb-making instructions &c.

Now it might be news to a lot of Americans, but 9-11 wasn't the day terrorism was invented. We've had to deal with it for a long time in Britain so we take it pretty seriously and have laws to reflect this. Laws you admit you know nothing about.

You might think its "scary" that you can be imprisoned for reading a magazine, however I can assure you it's not as scary as being caught-up in a terrorists bombing. I can vouch for that through personal experience. Can you?

reply to post by AQuestion

Dear AQuestion,

I agree with you. No qualifications. She pled guilty and was sentenced. Routine.

But you raise a very interesting point. I didn't see that it was a plea bargain, but if it was, could she have been avoiding a charge of plotting by offering evidence against her own brother? It's certainly possible. I don't know enough to say. I'm really glad you brought that up, though.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Dear charles1952,

A pleasure to converse with you. I regret to say that I do not know the specifics of how the English courts have interpreted the law; however, we do know that you can own science books and even books about bomb making in England and not go to jail. It is a guess; but, I will bet you that the law requires that the information not be commonly available and lets face it, you and I cannot just order that same "magazine" and get it. Why did she need an Al Qaida application that let you know how to make bombs in order to understand her brother and why did she keep it with her when she went to London? Apparently she knew it was illegal because she plead guilty.

What is very interesting is that she did not claim that what she did was legal. She did not claim that she believed it was legal to have these materials, why not? Even if it is not a valid legal argument, you would still say that to the press. Her attorney made it about her owning a magazine AFTER he allowed her to plead guilty. Alex Jones is a sensationalist that only provides the facts that are in alignment with the agenda he pushes. I find it very hard to believe that she did not have any idea what her brothers believed and why.

I love my brother, if he were arrested tomorrow for being a terrorist, I would be shocked; but, I would not find some application for making bombs, I would ask him why he did what he did. You don't need an application for your phone to make bombs in order to understand Al Qaida and it's followers, you can read their statements in the news and on supportive sites.

Mr. Jones and others seek to make this about free access to information; but, it is not. If I send you a letter asking you to kill someone and I send it to a hundred people, it is illegal. The question is and always should be whether or not a thing is said in jest or is an actual attempt to achieve an illegal goal. I may not be 100% right about how this all went down; but, I would not have plead guilty if all I did was buy a magazine. Peace.

reply to post by charles1952


There is no such thing as a plea bargain in the English courts. officially at least. You get charged with crimes which there is evidence for but pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity will usually get you a lighter sentence.

It's also worth noting, that with time served already on remand and with good behaviour, she will be out of prison in less than a month. The judge noted her good character and actually accepted she only had the publication to understand her brothers motives, but the law is the law and she pleaded guilty.