Prison attack by jailed terrorists ‘must be wake-up call,’ UK govt warned

A violent assault by three known terrorists inside a high-security jail must be a “wake-up call,” the UK government has been warned. (Reuters/File Photo)
Short Url
Updated 25 February 2022
Follow

Prison attack by jailed terrorists ‘must be wake-up call,’ UK govt warned

  • ‘Animalistic’ assault by 3 known terrorists in high-security facility evidence of security failings: Expert
  • Among attackers was Hashem Abedi, who assisted brother with 2017 suicide bombing of Manchester Arena

LONDON: A violent assault by three known terrorists inside a high-security jail must be a “wake-up call,” the UK government has been warned.

In May 2020, the trio — including Hashem Abedi, the brother of the man behind the Manchester Arena bombing — launched an “animalistic” joint assault on a prison officer.

They were being held at HMP Belmarsh’s high-security unit, described as a prison within a prison, alongside other terrorists and violent criminals at the time.

A court heard that attackers Abedi, Ahmed Hassan, and Muhammad Saeed associated with each other and other terrorist inmates, and that Abedi had been accused of being their leader.

Their trial is one of several court cases that have exposed terrorist networking inside HMP Belmarsh, with one plotter previously telling an undercover officer he was “surrounded by jihadis” who frequently discussed terror attacks and gave him trial advice, The Independent reported.

Ian Acheson, a former prison governor who carried out a government-commissioned review of Islamist extremism in jails, said he had raised security concerns with ministers.

“The HSU is supposed to be our most extreme custody, holding some of the most dangerous people in Western Europe,” he told The Independent.

“The fact that such a ferocious attack on staff could happen here is a huge security failure that ought to be a shocking wake-up call for ministers.”

Other Islamist extremists “came within seconds of murdering a prison officer at HMP Whitemoor earlier in 2020 — the public and prison staff will be entitled to know that they are properly protected from such offenders,” Acheson added.

The May 2020 assault on custodian manager Paul Edwards was not designated as a terror attack, and Woolwich Crown Court heard it followed a dispute about inmates’ privileges and the prison regime.

A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said: “Due to the criminal history of the defendants, the assault was investigated by the Counter Terrorism Command. However, there was no evidence of any terrorist intent.”

Several incidents in the previous months, including a mass brawl, had resulted in Muslim and non-Muslim prisoners being separated in the HSU and Abedi had made several allegations of unfair treatment.

Some prison officers believed that Abedi was trying to take a leadership role in the unit, after a powerful inmate was transferred elsewhere.

Abedi and the other two attackers were each handed three years or more on top of their existing sentences. Abedi was already sentenced to be behind bars for decades over the bombing of the Manchester Arena in 2017, which killed 22 people, many of them children.


WHO chief says reasons US gave for withdrawing ‘untrue’

Updated 25 January 2026
Follow

WHO chief says reasons US gave for withdrawing ‘untrue’

  • US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in a joint statement Thursday that Washington had formally withdrawn from the WHO
  • And in a post on X, Tedros added: “Unfortunately, the reasons cited for the US decision to withdraw from WHO are untrue”

GENEVA: The head of the UN’s health agency on Saturday pushed back against Washington’s stated reasons for withdrawing from the World Health Organization, dismissing US criticism of the WHO as “untrue.”
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned that US announcement this week that it had formally withdrawn from the WHO “makes both the US and the world less safe.”
And in a post on X, he added: “Unfortunately, the reasons cited for the US decision to withdraw from WHO are untrue.”
He insisted: “WHO has always engaged with the US, and all Member States, with full respect for their sovereignty.”
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in a joint statement Thursday that Washington had formally withdrawn from the WHO.
They accused the agency, of numerous “failures during the Covid-19 pandemic” and of acting “repeatedly against the interests of the United States.”
The WHO has not yet confirmed that the US withdrawal has taken effect.

- ‘Trashed and tarnished’ -

The two US officials said the WHO had “trashed and tarnished” the United States, and had compromised its independence.
“The reverse is true,” the WHO said in a statement.
“As we do with every Member State, WHO has always sought to engage with the United States in good faith.”
The agency strenuously rejected the accusation from Rubio and Kennedy that its Covid response had “obstructed the timely and accurate sharing of critical information that could have saved American lives and then concealed those failures.”
Kennedy also suggested in a video posted to X Friday that the WHO was responsible for “the Americans who died alone in nursing homes (and) the small businesses that were destroyed by reckless mandates” to wear masks and get vaccinated.
The US withdrawal, he insisted, was about “protecting American sovereignty, and putting US public health back in the hands of the American people.”
Tedros warned on X that the statement “contains inaccurate information.”
“Throughout the pandemic, WHO acted quickly, shared all information it had rapidly and transparently with the world, and advised Member States on the basis of the best available evidence,” the agency said.
“WHO recommended the use of masks, vaccines and physical distancing, but at no stage recommended mask mandates, vaccine mandates or lockdowns,” it added.
“We supported sovereign governments to make decisions they believed were in the best interests of their people, but the decisions were theirs.”

- Withdrawal ‘raises issues’ -

The row came as Washington struggled to dislodge itself from the WHO, a year after US President Donald Trump signed an executive order to that effect.
The one-year withdrawal process reached completion on Thursday, but Kennedy and Rubio regretted in their statement that the UN health agency had “not approved our withdrawal and, in fact, claims that we owe it compensation.”
WHO has highlighted that when Washington joined the organization in 1948, it reserved the right to withdraw, as long as it gave one year’s notice and had met “its financial obligations to the organization in full for the current fiscal year.”
But Washington has not paid its 2024 or 2025 dues, and is behind around $260 million.
“The notification of withdrawal raises issues,” WHO said Saturday, adding that the topic would be examined during WHO’s Executive Board meeting next month and by the annual World Health Assembly meeting in May.
“We hope the US will return to active participation in WHO in the future,” Tedros said Saturday.
“Meanwhile, WHO remains steadfastly committed to working with all countries in pursuit of its core mission and constitutional mandate: the highest attainable standard of health as a fundamental right for all people.”