Anjem Choudary Photo by: Snapperjack
64 The Counter Terrorist ~ June/July 2014
This has certainly been the case with the British Government’s handling of the “Londonistan unholy trinity.” Whilst most militant groups operate in the shadows, trying to avoid the security services, one particular British-based organisation has continued to attract public scrutiny with provocative actions. Despite being regularly banned, it has morphed into four different groups over the years, though they remain quite similar. Though claiming to be a nonviolent organisation, it has reportedly inspired a number of terrorist attacks within the UK in recent years. This is not unlike the common technique employed where terrorist groups conduct violent operations to manipulate governments while “non-violent” activists with aligned goals agitate for favourable governmental policies and concessions, a sort of carrot and stick approach that can be either closely or only peripherally coordinated. Most notably, Michael Adebolajo, convicted of killing British soldier Lee Rigby in 2013, is known to have attended group rallies.2 Until 2010, the UK’s key “non-violent” hard-line Islamist group was known as Islam4UK. Prior to that, it operated as al-Muhajiroun (the emigrants), The Saviour Sect, and Al-Ghurabaa. Its desire to see a return to the Islamic Caliphate— mirroring the Muslim Brotherhood, alQaeda and others—stems from its Saudi Salafi-Wahhabi roots. Although it has always claimed to be a peaceful group, there is significant evidence to show that it has contributed to radicalising British citizens who have gone on to plot terrorist activity. In addition, its members have had violent confrontations with groups such as the British National Party and the English Defence League.3 Islam4UK was allegedly motivated by a deep seated sense of outrage at Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq.4
One of its members, Abu Ibrahim, told the BBC, “if you start the war we won’t turn the other cheek.”5 Islam4UK has always claimed it abhors bloodshed, accusing the British Government of hypocrisy for its violent policies of confronting terrorists and warlords in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as laws alleged to stand against the UK’s Muslim community. Its leaders, including selfstyled Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, claim “terrorism for the British regime translates as anyone calling for the implementation of shariah and the liberation of Muslim land.”6 Bakri, born in Syria in 1958, fled his homeland after joining the Muslim Brotherhood in a failed revolt against President Assad in 1982. He lived in exile, first in Beirut in neighbouring Lebanon before moving on to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. When the Saudis expelled him he came to the UK and was granted indefinite leave to remain. He became leader of the British branch of Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Islamic Liberation Party), which openly advocates a non-violent revolution to establish an Islamic state. In 1996 Bakri split with the international leaders of Hizb ut-Tahrir and established al-Muhajiroun.7 British political leaders consistently underestimated Bakri, who had an almost Walter Mitty-like persona in the press.8 His call for Prime Minister John Major’s assassination and for Bosnian Muslims to “eat” Serbs rather than accept Western aid were, apparently, not taken seriously. Behind the scenes he travelled up and down the UK, fuelling a sense of grievance amongst young British Muslims and agitating against Britain’s policies in the Middle East, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. While his Egyptian rival Abu Hamza was preaching radicalization from the Finsbury Park Mosque in London, al-