UPDATE on trial, 19th Nov, from the prosecuting counsel: The “Leader” of this “terror plot”, Bilal Abdulla is accused of “telling astonishing lies” in attempting to shift the blame to his dead colleague, by stating that he, Abdulla, “didn’t know about terror attack”. See history of attack here.
Comment at end
Bilal Abdulla - arrested after the explosive laden jeep crashed into Glasgow airport, June 30th 2007
18th November, 2008
“WE WILL NOT KILL or INJURE ANY INNOCENT PERSON“
An NHS doctor who crashed into Glasgow Airport in a car packed with gas canisters says he told the police officers who arrested him that he was a terrorist.
The moment the truck crashed into Glasgow Airport
Iraqi Bilal Abdulla, 29, said he told Scottish police just minutes after his arrest that he was a terrorist.
But the junior doctor told a jury at Woolwich Crown Court that he was not part of a conspiracy to kill or injure anyone.
Giving evidence in his defence, Abdulla said he planned to flee Britain via Turkey after attacks on London’s West End failed.
But as they approached the airport his friend Kafeel Ahmed, 28, suddenly swerved the Jeep into the Glasgow terminal building without warning.
Kafeel Ahmed died one month after receiving 90% burns in the Glasgow airport attack
Abdulla gave a dramatic insider’s account of the attack that caused chaos at the airport and led to his arrest on June 30 last year.
Asked if he told an officer he was a terrorist as he arrived at a Glasgow police station, he said: “I said something along those lines, but it was more like a question.
I am told I am a terrorist, but is your Government not a terrorist, is your army not a terrorist? By the definition of the Act, according to English law, yes.
Junior doctor Bilal Abdulla giving evidence at his trial
“Everyone was saying you are a terrorist, you are arrested under the Terrorism Act and so forth.
“That is my case in a nutshell. I am told I am a terrorist, but is your Government not a terrorist, is your army not a terrorist?
“By the definition of the Act, according to English law, yes. That is my aim, to change opinion using violence, using fire devices.”
Bilal Abdulla
The two men wanted to highlight the plight of people in Iraq and Afghanistan with a series of incendiary device attacks, the defence has said.
Abdulla admitted he threw a petrol bomb and fought with bystanders as he got out of the burning vehicle after his friend accelerated into the building.
But he said Ahmed suddenly passed him the lit petrol bomb and he tossed it away to protect himself from several others in the passenger footwell.
Abdulla said the airport attack was “clumsy” and if the men had intended to kill people they would have done it a different way.
From the beginning, from day one, we said we will not kill or injure any innocent person.
Bilal Abdulla insists he never intended to hurt anyone
Asked by his barrister Jim Sturman QC if he planned to kill anyone, he said: “I never had such an agreement with Kafeel, from the beginning, from day one, we said we will not kill or injure any innocent person.
“Look at this incident. This incident, if it was to kill people or cause an explosion, we would not have done it that way. It looks very clumsy, say we entered the terminal, the car is not already set on fire.
“If you want to cause something instantaneous, if you want to cause a fire immediately, the car should be set on fire when you are driving into the airport.”
Abdulla is on trial with Mohammed Asha, 28, accused of conspiracy to murder and to cause explosions. The two men deny the offences.
Ahmed, an Indian engineering student, died one month after the attack from critical burns after dousing himself in petrol.
Fox News report on start of terror trial of these two doctors in Britain
TERRORISM ACT 2006
Read The Terrorism Act 2006 here
This alleged terrorist, if imprisoned, as surely he must be after his admission, should spend some time reading and understanding the difference between HIS act of terror and his accusations towards the British government and his attacks on the land of the British people.
- Convention Offences at NO TIME refers to our democratically government’s decisions on war. It is about TERRORISM, not the democratic decisions of the government.
- “Terrorism”, while it has been prefaced by the word “state”, where that clearly applies in some cases has also been extrapolated by such as the accused in order to justify the use of terrorism as a response. This seems to be the defence of this individual in our courts today.
- But this definition clearly does not apply to a state such as ours where people are free to criticise, complain, demonstrate and put forward their own thoughts as to a government’s decisions as long as they do so within the law, excluding fully the use of acts of “terrorism”.
- Our government does not ‘terrorise’ its citizens, and neither can opponents of the government.
TARGETING POLITICAL LEADERS … TERRORISTS AT BLAIR/BROWN HANDOVER
The intention of the accused from earlier court statements, had been initially to attack Britain’s political leaders at the change-over between Blair & Brown, but they were too well protected. It would have been the accused terrorists’ optimal position just to remove one or both of them, permanently. Presumably, without hurting them much. Had the equipment been ready, and their original political targets more accessible, the politicians wouldn’t have felt a thing!
This ‘unready equipment’ was not meant to kill or injure any innocent person.
That phrase was repeated by Abdulla on several occasions – “any innocent person”.
Political leaders were, in the minds of the accused, NOT “innocent persons” but terrorists themselves!
So it would have been all right to have removed them from this world?!
Er, no.
Here in Britain we do not attack, bomb, shoot, injure or attempt to kill in any way political leaders or anyone else because of differences of opinions on foreign, or indeed ANY policy. That’s freedom and democracy for you. We vote them out of power. We do not blow them to kingdom come.
And neither will we kill you, Mr Abdulla and Mr Asha if we conclude that you are terrorists.
SACK THE SOUP TASTERS
I do recall that on the day Blair left office I expressed reservations here at this blog at how he and his wife seemed to be left carelessly unguarded on a rail station platform on their way to his constituency. He even carried his own case.
This brought from me the concern that his hands would not be free to protect himself or his wife in the event of a knife attack, common in London. His security seemed peculiarly low-profile considering his position in politics a couple of hours earlier, and considering that Intelligence had suggested that Al Qaeda had publically spoken of an attack at the Blair/Brown handover.
And now he was the new Middle East peace envoy, hardly a less dangerous position.
Then, on arrival at Sedgefield, there was a mix-up with cars. Cherie went into the wrong car. Whoops … the mind boggles. WHERE were the security people to check this?
The soup-tasters were pretty useless.
Perhaps I should offer my services to high profile politicians as Security Consultant.
OTHER NEWS:
Obama’s plans on Guantanamo Bay terrorism suspects.
Tags: Bilal Abdulla, consultant personal security, Glasgow airport trial, I did not mean to hurt or harm anyone, London nail bombs, Mohammed Asha, security advisers, we will not kill or injure any innocent person
Tony Blair 
November 18, 2008 at 4:54 pm |
his security now, thank god, seems to be more adequate than it was in the first hours after he left office. but it seems as if they didn’t have time to set it up then.
December 4, 2008 at 11:27 pm |
These guys used to go to extremist group Hizb-ut-tahrirs talks. Isn’t it about the time the government banned with extremist group as it is banned in the Middle eastern countries !
December 5, 2008 at 12:38 am |
Where did you get the informationa about the HuT connection, Ibn? I’d be interested in your source for this.
It surely is time Hizb ut-Tahrir was banned. Tony Blair tried to do so in 2005 after the 7/7 bombings but was stopped by the do-gooders, liberal Left UnIntelligentsia, such as Shami Chakrabarti, the legal left and even the police, who feared civil unrest.
What the hell are we coming to?
Hell, I think.