Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hamza: Cleric sent gangs to seize control of rival mosques (police refused to help moderate Muslims)
Times (UK) ^ | 9 February 2006 | Daniel McGrory and Sean O’Neill

Posted on 02/08/2006 6:18:17 PM PST by Stultis

Cleric sent gangs to seize control of rival mosques


ABU HAMZA sent teams of young supporters around the country with orders to take over other mosques.

Rival clerics have told The Times that they were threatened by gangs claiming to be members of Abu Hamza’s Supporters of Sharia group.

Some of the rivals were beaten up inside their own mosques, and worshippers were bullied into finding somewhere else to pray — but police refused to intervene.

Abu Hamza wanted to acquire more places where he and his lieutenants could brainwash a generation of young men and send them off to terror training camps abroad.

Followers who tired of his antics described how he behaved like a mafia godfather in dealing with anyone who thwarted his will. Two rival imams in London were hospitalised after being attacked, but no police action was taken.

In one of his sermons, heard by the jury during his trial at the Old Bailey, Abu Hamza boasted about his heavy-handed tactics, saying: “If the people know you are firm, they will back down. They all back down.”

His takeover attempts began in the late 1980s when he joined a group of Algerian-born radicals trying to take over the Central London Mosque in Regent’s Park.

Fazli Ali, 66, the former estates manager there, said: “Hamza and his cronies threatened me several times. I was head of security but they even threatened to kill me. Ours was a peaceful place but he wanted to turn it into a political arena.”

The leadership of the mosque banned Abu Hamza from their premises, so he sought out other, more vulnerable, targets around Britain.

These sites not only provided recruiting centres, they were also places for raising cash and a haven to carry out criminal operations such as producing bogus welfare claims and cloning credit cards.

There is evidence of how his supporters tried to seize control of mosques in Luton, Brighton, Burnley and at least another half a dozen towns.

From these places scores of UK-based Muslims and British-born Islamic converts were dispatched abroad to al-Qaeda camps and the authorities concede that they have no idea what became of these men.

A number were killed in fighting or suicide attacks, but most have disappeared.

Imams reported what was happening to police, but say that senior officers were reluctant to interfere in the internal affairs of mosques.

Some imams took Abu Hamza on in the civil courts to try to halt his plans, but such cases were expensive and rarely resolved satisfactorily. Most of his rivals were too scared to stand up to his militia.

The Abu Hamza road-show travelled across the UK, urging his young audiences to oust their elderly imams and use their mosques to recruit “jihadis”, or holy warriors.

After one visit to Burnley, in 1999, tape recordings were made of his sermons and sold in Islamic bookshops.

In one recording, one of Abu Hamza’s followers told the audience: “If we’re a group of people here in Burnley, we’ll take over the whole of Burnley. We have people with Kalashnikovs and you declare jihad against the kuffar (unbeliever). Every single Muslim outside Burnley who does not come and support you is a rebel.”

Shortly after Abu Hamza’s visit, a group of young Muslims left the town for Pakistan, telling their parents that they were going to study in a religious school.

What they were really up to emerged a few months later when two — a university student and a trainee accountant — died when an artillery shell landed on a mosque in Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan. Five other people died in the incident. The remaining youths returned to their families and confessed that they had been to Taleban training camps.

Muslim elders in Burnley banned Abu Hamza from preaching in any of the town’s mosques. They also reported what had happened to Lancashire police but maintain that no action was taken.

Abu Hamza ousted trustees who opposed him at Finsbury Park, described by police as the honeypot of his recruitment operation. The trustees complained that the police did nothing to help them, and suggested the victims seek a court order to evict the invaders.

Efforts by supporters to seize control of mosques intensified after Finsbury Park was closed down in a police raid in 2003.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: captainhook; finsburymosque; finsburyparkmosque; hamza; islamists; terrorists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last
To: mylife
Some of the rivals were beaten up inside their own mosques, and worshippers were bullied into finding somewhere else to pray — but police refused to intervene.

Amazing

Now, now. I detect disapproval. We must accommodate cultural differences. That's all the police were doing. It may not be our way, but it's normal for funda..., er conserva..., uh traditional Muslims to intimidate and savage co-religionists who resist their ways and threaten the purity of their native culture. And besides it's really our fault 'cause of, you know, Western oppression and colonialism and other stuff like that.</multiculturist mode>

Seriously it's a little reminiscent of the 80's. I remember there was always shock and nervousness (at the very least, and sometimes more demonstrative concern) whenever Reagan would name Soviet dissidents, or attack communist countries on their systemic humans rights abuses. The attitude was always, "Don't rock the boat," "Don't alienate the Soviets," "It'll only make things worse," and similar tripe.

The advocates of "nuance" -- not just leftists but many "mainstream" foreign policy establishment types as well -- argued that we must understand and accept that the communists just had a different system, with different standards. They weren't criminals who enslaved hundreds of millions; they just had a different world view is all. It was even argued (here more by the left) that their system had virtues ("social justice," yada, yada) that balanced out the deficiencies which capitalists "unfairly" emphasized and exaggerated.

It's not unlike that with (genuinely) moderate Muslims today. Or even Muslims, whether "moderate" or not, who belong to sectarian or ethnic minorities, regularly intimidated and attacked by (often Islamist) majorities. THEY'RE IGNORED. The media, and not just the liberal media but outlets like FoxNews as well, usually pretend they just don't exist.

The loud pushy Islamists (or the quieter but even more pushy fake "moderates") are allowed to present their extreme and particularistic version of Islam as normative, even as the ONLY Islam. Heck, they're not just allowed but actively assisted by the media, and to often by Western governments as well.

Look at the cartoon story. Newspaper after newspaper, newscast after newscast, right-wing, left-wing, mainstream, states as uncontested fact that "Islam" (full stop, unqualified) prohibits representations of the prophet Mohamed. That's complete B.S. "Islam" does no such thing. Some versions of Islam do. Some interpretations of Islam do. Others don't. But the Islam of Islamists -- radical Muslims -- is the only Islam as far as the media is concerned.

I guess radical ranters make for better ratings. But what we need to keep in mind is that every time Islamists are strengthened, every time they accrue greater legitimacy through media attention, every time the lie that their Islam is normative is allowed to sink in a little deeper, moderate and minority Muslims are weakened and made more vulnerable. And even as is they are attacked and murdered throughout the Muslim world every single day.

Sorry for the rant. This is an issue with me.

21 posted on 02/08/2006 8:21:48 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
It's not unlike that with (genuinely) moderate Muslims today. Or even Muslims, whether "moderate" or not, who belong to sectarian or ethnic minorities, regularly intimidated and attacked by (often Islamist) majorities. THEY'RE IGNORED. The media, and not just the liberal media but outlets like FoxNews as well, usually pretend they just don't exist.

I know they exist. The question for me is which side these so-called moderates are going to take, when push comes to shove (and we're just about at the shove point). Even the moderates seem programmed to hate America and Israel. Even the ones who live here, like it, and seem well acculturated will go absolutely batshit on you if you drop the word "Israel" into the conversation. It happened to me often enough in New York that I finally realized there are some things you simply cannot discuss with Muslims. It isn't worth the stomach acid.

I think I already know the answer to my question, they're going to stick with their own regardless. They may only stand back and quietly approve of the radicals' actions, but that is enough for me to consider them enemies. If they're not going to fight them, what good are they?

As you may have guessed, this is an issue with me.

22 posted on 02/09/2006 7:55:17 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart
I know they exist. The question for me is which side these so-called moderates are going to take

In a sense is doesn't matter. The inculcation/legitimization/defense/expression of ideological diversity in Islam and in Islamic societies is a good in itself. It the short run radicals may find some benefit, but it will weaken and ultimately destroy them in the end. Islamism existentially depends on creating and enforcing the impression that it represents the authentic and only Islam.

Diversity is a universal solvent to extremism.

23 posted on 02/09/2006 8:28:25 AM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson