A man who made a stabbing gesture as he called for jihad "by sword" at a busy Brighton mosque has been found guilty of encouraging terrorism.

Abubaker Deghayes, 53, was convicted at the Old Bailey following a trial.

He addressed about 50 worshippers, including children, at the Brighton Mosque and Muslim Community Centre on 1 November 2020 after evening prayers.

The judge said he was considering immediate custody for Deghayes, who will be sentenced on 25 February.

Deghayes, from Saltdean in East Sussex, was bailed with conditions to stay at his home address on an electronically monitored curfew. He was told to report to a police station on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

He has been instructed to surrender his passport and not apply for travel documents, and not to attend the Brighton Mosque mentioned in this case.

Judge Nigel Lickley said: "Because of the offence you have been convicted of I must have in the forefront of my mind an immediate custodial sentence."
'Jihad is compulsory'

Prosecutor Ben Lloyd told the jury Deghayes had said "jihad is fighting by sword" and was compulsory.

In a video of the speech played to the court, Deghayes said: "Whose power is more powerful than us? Allah is more powerful than you.

"You, idiots. You kuffar (non-believers)... The non-believer is an idiot. He's stupid."

He went on to say: "Jihad, jihad, jihad. Jihad is compulsory. Jihad is fighting by sword.

"That means this jihad is compulsory upon you, not jihad is the word of mouth but jihad will remain compulsory until the Day of Resurrection."

Mr Lloyd had told jurors that the speech was not given "innocently or naively".

In August 2018, Deghayes, the father of two teenage boys who were killed fighting in Syria, was jailed for attempting to intimidate a witness in a court case against him.

Another son, Abdul, was killed by a convicted drug dealer in February 2019.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-60055075

Any parallels between Nnamdi Kanu's hate speech and this Islamic terrorist? I believe so. For those of you saying that a person cannot be convicted by mere speech alone, I'd like to inform you that you're thoroughly misinformed

blasted12:
Any parallels between Nnamdi Kanu's hate speech and this Islamic terrorist? I believe so. For those of you saying that a person cannot be convicted by mere speech alone, I'd like to inform you that you're thoroughly misinformed

my dear this person is a Muslim and you know all muslims are not terorist But all terorist are Muslims, Nnamdi Kanu is not a terorist he does not have mark of beast on his foe head, know this and know peace

Coolsperm:
my dear this person is a Muslim and you know all muslims are not terorist But all terorist are Muslims, Nnamdi Kanu is not a terorist he does not have mark of beast on his foe head, know this and know peace

This talk is rubbish and you know it deep down in your bigoted soul. The question remains: Can Nnamdi Kanu be convicted for the similar crime of inciting his followers to commit acts of violence against the state?

That's a country that works, unlike one who let's a bandit advocate visit the bandits and speak for them. An advance society would keep a close watch on potential threats, evaluate their threat level, use gestures or physical evidence to zero in on the threats and have them incarcerated before they can commit the crime.

matrix199:
That's a country that works, unlike one who let's a bandit advocate visit the bandits and speak for them. An advance society would keep a close watch on potential threats, evaluate their threat level, use gestures or physical evidence to zero in on the threats and have them incarcerated before they can commit the crime.

Yes well said but that's not the point of the thread. Some people like gidgiddy and co argued that Nnamdi Kanu cannot be changed and convinced for making inciting statements and verbal threats against the state. The aim of this thread is to prove them wrong

Is there anything wrong in what he said

Coolsperm:
my dear this person is a Muslim and you know all muslims are not terorist But all terorist are Muslims, Nnamdi Kanu is not a terorist he does not have mark of beast on his foe head, know this and know peace

What a useles and senseless comment.

blasted12:
Yes well said but that's not the point of the thread. Some people like gidgiddy and co argued that Nnamdi Kanu cannot be changed and convinced for making inciting statements and verbal threats against the state. The aim of this thread is to prove them wrong

Well, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. I remember what Buhari himself said about Boko haram terrorist and about baboon and dog being soaked in blood in the wake of the 2011 election. Are those not inciting statements/clamours as well?

matrix199:
Well, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. I remember what Buhari himself said about Boko haram terrorist and about baboon and dog being soaked in blood in the wake of the 2011 election. Are those not inciting statements/clamours as well?

Yes it's possible but Buhari is not on tria, nnamdi kanu is

Shekau is a Terrorist.

1. Shekau(and his people) killed, abducted, maimed, beheaded, raped women, stole from people.
Nnamdi Kanu (and his Ipob, ESN, UGM) did thesame.

2. Shekau called for his own Shariah govern country/State.
Nnamdi Kanu calls for biafra.

3. Shekau(and his people) killed numerous people and disposed their bodies.
Nnamdi Kanu (and his Ipob ESN UGM) killed violators of their rules and CANNIBALIZES ON THEIR FLESH.


YET SHEKAU IS A TERRORIST AND NNAMDI KANU IS NOT?

Coolsperm:
my dear this person is a Muslim and you know all muslims are not terorist But all terorist are Muslims, Nnamdi Kanu is not a terorist he does not have mark of beast on his foe head, know this and know peace