For those who may have missed it during all the Super Bowl mania, there was another Islamic terror stabbing attack in London this weekend. Twenty-year-old Sudesh Amman managed to stab three people before being shot dead by police. Thankfully, none of the victims were killed and the only one at room temperature is the attacker.
But in the wake of the attack, questions were immediately raised about how this took place. Amman had already been convicted on charges of terrorist activity and been sent to prison. But his sentence was only slightly more than three years and he was released early anyway. The police were supposedly following him on the day of the attack, and yet he managed to secure a blade on his person and carry out the attack. This has prompted the Brits to come up with new protocols for how they deal with terrorists and rethink their generous sentencing policies. (Associated Press)
The British government plans to announce new rules for the imprisonment of convicted terrorists after an Islamic militant who was recently released from prison stabbed two people in south London, the second such attack in less than three months.
Home Secretary Priti Patel, who is in charge of the police, said the government would release its plans Monday. Following Sunday’s attack and a Nov. 29 attack in which two people were killed in central London, the government said it would effectively stop the early release of convicted extremists, double terror sentences and overhaul the conditions under which they are released back into the community.
Amman appeared to have a bomb strapped to himself at the time of the attack, but it turned out to be a fake. Still, law enforcement apparently saw this coming. The man had published violent videos online, along with detailed bombmaking instructions. He clearly wasn’t making much of a secret of his intentions.
So the Brits will now double the sentences that such Islamic terrorists receive and put an end to the early release programs that allowed Amman to be back out on the streets so quickly. They also want to put a larger emphasis on “deradicalization” programs. But does that ever truly work? Once these maniacs have sworn their allegiance to ISIS or any other terror group, it seems as if the story only ends with them in prison or dead, either by their own devices or through law enforcement action.
Perhaps there’s another path that could be taken. Brits don’t enjoy the same constitutional rights and privileges that Americans do. While I’m not arguing that this is a good thing, it does give their courts more options than would be possible in the United States. After serving a sentence for terrorist offenses, would it be possible for Great Britain to just ship these ISIS wannabes off to Syria or Iraq and bar them from returning? It’s something to consider, anyway.
It’s not as if Amman was some sort of loyal servant of the crown who deserved to stay in England. Here’s something he wrote to his girlfriend last year: “If you can’t make a bomb because family, friends or spies are watching or suspecting you, take a knife, Molotov, sound bombs or a car at night and attack the tourists (crusaders), police and soldiers of taghut or Western Embassies in every country you are in this planet.”
Does that sound like someone you want wandering around the shopping malls? At some point, you have to give up on hopes of redemption and look out for your own citizens. These new, stiffer penalties are a step in the right direction, but it seems as if Great Britain could be doing more. Right now there are three people sitting in the hospital, no doubt wondering how they managed to be stabbed by a man that the police were tailing at the time. They deserve answers.