Although the al-Qaeda inspired Rahman Shah’s asylum claim was rejected, no one bothered to follow up. It’s an ongoing reflection of how jihadists have special privileges in the UK beyond those of law-abiding citizens. One cannot even criticize jihadi doctrine in the UK without being facing persecution from the Starmer government and his DEI-supporting minions, such as the judge (who has a remained anonymous) in Shah Rahman’s case:
despite the claim being turned down, he was allowed to stay in Britain after a judge ruled that deporting the convicted terrorist would be a breach of his human rights.
Never mind the public’s right to safety, and the need to protect national security.
“His claim was initially rejected under the Refugee Convention, which allows officials to deny status to those guilty of terrorist acts or serious crimes.”
TERRORIST ALLOWED TO STAY IN LONDON DESPITE REJECTED ASYLUM CLAIM
An Islamist terrorist who plotted to bomb the London Stock Exchange was allowed to remain in Britain despite a rejected asylum claim.
Shah Rahman, jailed in 2012, was later granted restricted leave after a… pic.twitter.com/xAFFSKlXwP
— Mossad Commentary (@MOSSADil) April 21, 2026
London Stock Exchange bomb plotter was allowed to stay in UK!
A terrorist denied asylum was granted leave to remain in Britain on human rights grounds, a court ruling reveals.
Shah Rahman, a convicted terrorist who was jailed for threatening to blow up the London Stock… pic.twitter.com/hbGIbiJSJZ
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 21, 2026
If this judge’s family were attacked, injured or killed by a jihadist, his ruling would likely exploit a grey area, and be quite different.
Judge is a bastard https://t.co/mZ09nqo211
— BALBIR SINGH (@balbir59) April 21, 2026
It is high time that Britain reform its Human Rights Act, or at least reject the prevailing interpretation of Article 3. There have been recent proposals to do just that to prevent “unreasonable claims” from serious criminals and jihadists who pose security threats. Such reforms need to be fast-tracked to stop rogue judges who sympathize with the worst elements of society over any concerns for national security from interpreting these laws in favor of criminal and jihadi migrants.
“Migrant crisis: Islamist terrorist allowed to stay in Britain – despite having asylum claim turned down,” by Dan McDonald, GB News, April 21, 2026:
An Islamist terrorist who plotted to blow up the London Stock Exchange was allowed to stay in Britain despite having his asylum claim turned down.
Shah Rahman was jailed in 2012 – alongside three other extremists inspired by Al-Qaeda – over the plot.
Just five years later, he was released onto Britain’s streets, but was later recalled to prison in 2022 for breaches of his license.
However, a fresh immigration case involving his wife has uncovered that the terrorist had been allowed to remain in the country despite having his asylum claim turned down.
Rahman married Mauritian national Parveen Purbhoo while on license in 2019 in an Islamic ceremony in London.
She was later barred from Britain for life by then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman after officers at Heathrow Airport uncovered Isis-related material on her phone.
Her relation to Rahman can now be revealed after legal restrictions were lifted.
The judgement in the Mauritian national’s case revealed that Rahman had lodged an unsuccessful asylum claim – shortly after his release from prison….
jerry glenn says
Dhimmi Britain continues to surge in the European Islamopandering derby.
Eddie says
This is misleading.
Asylum is meaningless in Britain.
No one is deported even if refused.
“Right wing” speakers from abroad are not allowed into the UK.
Very dangerous. Not in the public interest.
As Mr Spencer is well aware.
An out break of the truth could have catastrophic results.
somehistory says
“Islamist terrorists now have more ‘human rights’ than we do”
“”Down in the bowels of hell, Osama bin Laden will be kicking himself. After 9/11, he hid in Pakistan. But that, he must now realise, was his fatal mistake.
Instead, he should have moved to Britain. If he had, he’d have been perfectly safe. In fact, he wouldn’t even have had to bother hiding because he could simply have told a judge that removing him would breach his human rights.
Last year, the polling firm, JL Partners, asked the British public whether they would support the deportation of serious foreign criminals, such as rapists and paedophiles, even if deportation would put those foreign criminals in danger of being tortured. And you’ll never guess how the British public responded. An overwhelming majority said they’d be perfectly happy to risk such an outcome, thank you very much. As for the very small minority who disagreed, I don’t know how many of them were thinking, “No, I don’t want foreign paedophiles to be tortured abroad. I want to torture them here, myself.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/islamist-terrorists-now-have-more-human-rights-than-we-do/ar-AA21tBLe?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=69e96b29dc6542d79fb85f61c25acc54&ei=23
Oren says
So many times, I have run into people, and debated them online, who told me all they cared about was making money, and living the best lives that they could. With this article title, I think the pinnacle of rebuttals has been attained! They probably still wont listen, but it is good to know that the real world will smash the numerous forms of demons that imprison us. We may not be able to do anything yet, but soon, yes soon, the world will be filled with our words and narratives. In G-d I trust.
Alkflaeda says
So, let me guess. The sequel to this story will be that continuing to bar Rahman’s wife on account of her IS connections will be deemed to breach his right to family life, so her barring will be overturned so that they can both live off taxpayer funded jizya in the UK.