He has no regrets because he doesn’t think he did anything wrong, and by the lights of Islamic law, he didn’t. The question for Britain, which British officials will certainly not consider, is how many other Ali Harbi Alis are there in the country now — people who have no regard for British law, but are concerned only for Islamic law? And what are the implications of their presence for the future of the country? British authorities wave away such questions and smear those who ask them as “Islamophobes,” but the day is coming when those Muslims themselves will force authorities to confront such issues.
Meanwhile, how many of David Amess’ colleagues in the British Parliament did indeed get the message, and will not vote in the future for something that someone like Ali Harbi Ali might regard as an attack on Muslims? Probably quite a few, given today’s pandemic of cowardice in Britain and all over the West.
“I killed David Amess to save Muslims, Ali Harbi Ali tells jury,” by Kieran Gair and Duncan Gardham, The Times, April 7, 2022:
The alleged terrorist killer of Sir David Amess has told a court that he wanted to kill a politician to stop him from “harming Muslims” in Syria.
Ali Harbi Ali, 26, told the jury at the Old Bailey that he wanted to “make hijrah”, to travel and fight for Islamic State, but he found it too difficult to get there.
He is accused of stabbing Amess, the Conservative MP, more than 20 times during a constituency surgery in Leigh-on-Sea, Essex, on October 15 last year. The prosecution alleges that he had planned an attack for years and considered other MPs including the cabinet minister Michael Gove and Mike Freer, the Tory MP for Finchley & Golders Green.
Giving evidence on Thursday, Ali said he decided to kill Amess because of his voting record on foreign policy including airstrikes in Syria.
“I decided to do it because I felt that if I could kill someone who made decisions to kill Muslims, it could prevent further harm to those Muslims,” Ali said. “He voted previously in parliament, not just him . . . I decided if I couldn’t make hijrah, if I couldn’t help the Muslims [in Syria], I would do something here.”
Asked what difference killing Amess would make, Ali said: “For one, he can’t vote again. If he had previous for doing votes like that he won’t do it in the future, and perhaps send a message to his colleagues.”
…I thought if I couldn’t go join Islamic State, I should try and do something here to help Muslims here.”
Earlier Ali told the court that he was contacted by police in 2014… The alleged terrorist said he was interviewed by police who asked him about Twitter accounts and how he felt about the government. “I [would just] nod, say yes and they’ll leave you alone afterwards and they did,” Ali said.
He told the jury that he was supposed to have two meetings but “they [the police] were happy with the first one”….
Asked whether he regretted stabbing Amess to death, he said: “No.”
Ali told the court he had been prepared to die fighting for Isis in Syria and that he would not have minded if the terrorist group had claimed responsibility for the attack on Amess.
He said: “If you encourage someone to an act of jihad, it’s a good thing.” Asked whether he was proud of his actions, he said: “To be proud of an act of jihad is a dangerous thing.”
Ali said he carried out the attack “for Islam” and that “if Islamic State didn’t exist, I would have done the same thing”.
Earlier he said he would not describe the killing as murder because “I don’t think it’s unlawful”….
Michael Copeland says
Ali said, “an act of jihad, it’s a good thing.” He did the killing “for Islam”. Yet Kieran Gair and Duncan Gardham of The Times carefully refer to him as an “alleged terrorist”.
What more does someone have to do or say to qualify as “a terrorist”?
PMK says
“…the day is coming when those Muslims themselves will force authorities to confront such issues.”
Will the day ever come when all non-Muslims will themselves force authorities to confront such values? The murderer said he found it difficult to get to Syria. Is Britain still arresting people who are trying to go there? I often wonder why authorities in Western countries don’t give these people a one-way ticket and let them know they will forever be denied reentry to any Western country, whether or not they are citizens.
Violet says
Don’t give them a heads up…let them go and do not permit their return. Can you imagine if the fighting age men and women from every country that faced a war deserted it? UK along with all of Europe would have been Hitlers. NY and America would have been emptied of fighting men on 9/11.
On the whole, middle easterners have not brought benefit to the west, on the contrary, many have brought murder and mayhem to peaceful nations that foolishly permitted their entry.
Fitna says
When it comes to Muslims committing violence in the name of their religion for the media/elites, it is like trying to understand quantum mechanics…they’re completely clueless, even when the Jihadi slowly and carefully spells it out for them in plain English.
But if anyone was to attack a Muslim, no mystery there-he’s a ‘right-wing extremist’, part of a vast group of racists and Nazis and they need to be crushed. No running to ‘mental illness,’ or ‘tiny minority’ or other excuses.
Maybe it could be that religions still have a far too highly privileged place and by default everyone just assumes if you’re a believer, you’re automatically also a good, nice, kind, moral person. Maybe they just have blinders on, they just refuse to accept that religious people can be bad and can commit crimes, esp. in the name of their religion.
It’s not right that innocents continue to get raped and murdered on a daily basis while the authorities continue to be at a loss to understand or explain what is happening. There is no excuse because there is tons of evidence from around the world that shows us how dangerous Muslims as a group are.
This problem can be resolved very easily. Non-Muslims need to come together and openly discuss what is Islam and what it means for our future, should we continue to treat Muslims with kid gloves.
The reality is that all Muslims are in a perpetual state of war with non-Muslims and they need to be removed from free countries, excluding those who have genuinely left Islam and pose no threat.
This is why India for example had it’s “Partition” and why Muslims have been thrown out of other nations like Myanmar or are in ‘reeducation camps’ as in China. Because people eventually realize you cannot live in peace with Muslims. So why not avoid all that trouble and remove them before thousands or millions of innocents are harmed by them?
Keith O says
According to this turds twisted logic, killing someone to prevent them from doing something that may harm others is a good thing.
Does that then mean that it’s open season on any and all mudslimes? because they “may” at some point in the future harm someone?
It’s such a great pity that the once United Kingdom no longer has the death penalty.
Perhaps they could turn one of the Falkland islands into a modern day penal colony just for Islamists.
Violet says
United Kingdom? The Kingdom is not united because politicians permitted enemies through the gates.
violet says
Governments who ignore and/or continue to permit Islam from entering or remaining in their lands are neglecting their purpose which is to keep their own citizens safe and not the people from foreign lands who have one thing in mind….which is to topple western civilization. If old obscure laws prevent this, change the laws.