Abu Hamza Wants to Return to London Prison

Egyptian hardline preacher Abu Hamza. (Reuters)
Egyptian hardline preacher Abu Hamza. (Reuters)
TT

Abu Hamza Wants to Return to London Prison

Egyptian hardline preacher Abu Hamza. (Reuters)
Egyptian hardline preacher Abu Hamza. (Reuters)

Egyptian preacher Mustapha Kamel Mustapha, dubbed Egyptian Abu Hamza, can no longer stand the conditions in US prison and wants to return to Belmarsh British prison.

The former Finsbury Park imam registered an appeal against his detention at the maximum security ADX Florence prison.

The convicted hardline preacher, 59, claims his conditions at the prison violate human rights under Article 3 of the European Convention, which protects people from "inhuman and degrading treatment".

The Sunday Times reported that in October 2015, Abu Hamza was convicted of 11 terrorism offenses and was deported to the US, where is spends 23 hours a day in solitary confinement and is only allowed out of his cell for an hour.

He claims that he is "permitted to one hour per day of recreation time outside of his cell... [and] even during that one-hour recreation, however, [he] is still confined within a cell-sized cage" on his own, according to the newspaper.

Before US prosecutors won their eight-year legal battle to transfer him from the UK in October 2012, Abu Hamza was locked up at Belmarsh, southeast London, where conditions were quite different.

Hamza is a double amputee, blind in one eye, suffers from diabetes, psoriasis and a condition where he sweats excessively and has to shower twice a day.

In his appeal, the preacher argued that he received at Belmarsh daily visits from medical staff, regular doctor visits, and was allowed to mix with other inmates. But, according to the appeal, at the US prison he is subject to regular outbreaks of infections in his hands, which have been increasing in severity.

One of Abu Hamza's lawyers stated: "We strongly believe that the conditions of his confinement violate the expectations of the European Convention on Human Rights and the promises that were made by the US government to the [British and European] courts as part of the extradition process."

The lawyer reiterated that Abu Hamza would go back to Belmarsh in a second if he could.

Asharq Al-Awsat received a letter from Abu Hamza sent to his family two years ago in which he described his confinement conditions in the US prison. He told the family that he is not allowed to see or talk to anyone and they continue to give him canned food.

The preacher was finally granted the permission to speak to his family for 30 minutes once a month, however, he was denied this right recently for failing to submit a urine sample.

Abu Hamza claimed the tube they gave him to provide the sample was very small and he was not able to hold it.

Mustapha Kamel Mustapha, or Abu Hamza al-Masri, was born in Alexandria, Egypt in 1958, the son of a naval officer and a primary school headmistress. He graduated from civil engineering college, and in 1979, he entered the UK on a student visa.

In 1980, he was granted UK citizenship after marrying his first wife, a British Muslim convert, the mother of his oldest son, Mohammed Kamel, who was convicted of being part of a bomb plot in Yemen and was imprisoned for three years in 1999.

Abu Hamza later divorced his first wife and remarried in 1984 a woman whom he had met in a Muslim celebration in London.

Over the years, Hamza has given several different reasons for why he had lost his hands and eye including: a road paving project in Pakistan, an explosion while working in a mine in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, during a fight with the Pakistani Mujahideen, and during an accidental bombing while working with Pakistani military in Lahore.



Despite Sharp Decline, Inflation Remains a Sore Point for Harris

Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris delivers a speech at The Alan Horwitz "Sixth Man" Center, a youth basketball facility, as she campaigns in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US October 27, 2024. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris delivers a speech at The Alan Horwitz "Sixth Man" Center, a youth basketball facility, as she campaigns in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US October 27, 2024. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
TT

Despite Sharp Decline, Inflation Remains a Sore Point for Harris

Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris delivers a speech at The Alan Horwitz "Sixth Man" Center, a youth basketball facility, as she campaigns in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US October 27, 2024. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris delivers a speech at The Alan Horwitz "Sixth Man" Center, a youth basketball facility, as she campaigns in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US October 27, 2024. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

For six months or so in 2021, as vaccines paved an economic reopening from the COVID-19 pandemic and fresh waves of federal benefits flowed to household bank accounts, President Joe Biden's administration reaped the benefit with an approval rating pinned above 50%.
It has been mired around 40% ever since, with the scarring impact of subsequently high inflation still cited by voters as a major issue even though the pace of price increases has declined, wages and the economy continue to grow, and the jobless rate remains low, Reuters said.
As good as the economy might seem across most major indicators, inflation that peaked at 9% more than two years ago has been hard for Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris to outrun, and given former President and Republican candidate Donald Trump a cudgel that remains effective on the eve of the election even as inflation has dwindled to 2.4%.
"Inflation has not faded as an issue," said Justin McCarthy, a spokesperson for Gallup, the polling giant that fields monthly surveys that include an open-ended question, without lists or prompts, of what respondents feel is the "most important" issue facing them. Those citing inflation as the most serious issue has fallen from highs of around 20% during the peak inflation surge in 2022 to around 15% in recent polls, but that remains double the historic norm and is part of broader concern about the economy cited by more than 40% of respondents.
It's an area where Trump continues to hold a polling edge despite Harris' pledges to address issues like high housing costs or the "price gouging" she cites as a cause of high prices in the grocery aisle.
In a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, 68% of respondents in seven swing states said the cost of living was "on the wrong track," and 61% said the same about the economy. Half said Trump had "a better plan, policy or approach" to managing the economy compared with 37% for Harris, while on inflation Trump was favored 47% to 34%.
In-person voting concludes on Tuesday, with polls showing an overall tight race between Harris and Trump nationally and in the battleground states seen as determining the outcome.
The Biden administration and later the Harris campaign recognized early on the problem inflation posed.
Biden named one of his signature pieces of legislation the "Inflation Reduction Act," though much of it focused on subsidies for electric vehicles and clean energy. As rising rent and housing prices emerged as a particularly acute issue, they launched proposals that included capping rent increases, tax incentives for affordable housing construction, and downpayment help for first-time home buyers.
What they didn't publicize so much is how sticky a problem it would be for the households living through it.
Attitudes improved somewhat as inflation began to ease last year, but the change only went so far.
'UNAMBIGUOUSLY NEGATIVE'
Solutions have been offered by both campaigns, but inflation, the responsibility first and foremost of the Federal Reserve through its management of interest rates and credit conditions, is difficult for elected officials to address.
Republican President Richard Nixon tried the direct route by freezing wage and price increases for 90 days in 1971 and establishing a government panel to approve them after that. Inflation was 4.3% at the time and did fall below 4% in the summer of 1972 as Nixon campaigned for reelection.
But it soared that fall as the controls were eased, and following an embargo by Arab oil exporters in 1973 exceeded 12% by the end of 1974.
When inflation started rising during his term in office, Democratic President Jimmy Carter used a major address in 1978 to announce plans to limit government spending and call for voluntary wage and price limits from business. By the middle of his losing reelection bid against Republican Ronald Reagan prices were rising more than 14% annually.
After two recessions, a period of punishing interest rates imposed by the Fed and its firmer commitment to inflation control, price increases gradually settled close to the 2% level the central bank eventually adopted as its official target - and stayed there until the COVID-19 pandemic.
Economists have sparred over the exact reasons inflation took off beginning in 2021, and if that could have been prevented. But they generally agree on the broad mix. As the pandemic limited spending on in-person services, it also created deep backlogs in the manufacture and delivery of the goods, from bikes to appliances to automobiles, that were suddenly in high demand as a result of roughly $5 trillion in stimulus from the federal government.
The pandemic support began under Trump; Biden added more in a move some economists feel may have supercharged demand beyond what was needed.
It is a debate being litigated in hindsight and in the shadow of a health crisis that lingered long enough - new COVID variants were still suppressing in-person gatherings through 2021 - to even implicate the Fed. Inflation took off in 2021; the central bank did not raise rates until March 2022.
What doesn't seem in doubt is the impact on the public mood, something that shouldn't be a surprise.
Surveys about inflation have been consistent in finding that price shocks register deeply and are not quickly forgotten.
"Inflation significantly complicates household decision-making, which is seen as its most critical consequence," researchers Alberto Binetti of Bocconi University and Francesco Nuzzi and Stefanie Stantcheva of Harvard University concluded from the results of an online survey of 2,264 people conducted between March and May. "This complexity affects daily economic choices" and adds to economic uncertainty.
Nor do people seem to care much if, as has happened recently and Democrats have tried to emphasize, wages rise faster than prices.
"Inflation is perceived as an unambiguously negative phenomenon without any potential positive economic correlates," they found, with people expecting it to be fixed "without significant trade-offs."