Abu Qatada cannot be deported.

[El Presidente]

Human rights act is the worst thing we have ever signed up to.

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

 

[looney]

I think his case is an unfortunate by-product of a very sensible piece of legislation.

Theres nothing by about it, he needs turfing out with the HR legislation..

 

[Tom Bombadil]

and 911 and 77 was also supported by members of western intell and government.

he seems to misinterperate the koran, but freedom of speech anyone? what has he actually done wrong? passports are a control mechanism for profit anyway.

it seems to me like another pys-ops to create more "anti-muslim" feeling as the west soon wade into syria and then possibly iran. take the bait right wing foot fans......sigh.

It must be true, der internetz sez so.

 

[looney]

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

Weak shot. Why not pass one with all that and removing undesirables.

 

[pauli cee]

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

aren't a couple of these already debateble within our society already?

 

[Meade's Ball]

the right to marry and to start a family

Seems like getting close to 100 Tories MPs might be against this right for everyone.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I hope it is not legal aid. He was found with £170k in his house.

 

[pipkin112]

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

All these should be a right to law abiding citizens, not shit bags like Abu Qatada

 

[Dandyman]

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

What he said - although clearly some posters do object to other people enjoying these rights.

 

[cunning fergus]

and 911 and 77 was also supported by members of western intell and government.

he seems to misinterperate the koran, but freedom of speech anyone? what has he actually done wrong? passports are a control mechanism for profit anyway.

it seems to me like another pys-ops to create more "anti-muslim" feeling as the west soon wade into syria and then possibly iran. take the bait right wing foot fans......sigh.

Well like all of us in this country is he is free to say what he likes, but not without consequences.

If you are going to lament our loss of free speech you should focus on the enlightened social pioneers who take offence at the drop of a hat. These people see prejudice and discrimination everywhere even when it doesn't exist............and they are in the ascendancy. Recently we had fans from this forum who celebrated someone being reported to the police (for hate crimes) as a consequence of being idiot.

The nature of what this piece of dogshit has advocated puts those homophobic palace fans and what they are going to sing on the 31 Jan into perspective..................for the well adjusted anyway.

 

[ees complicated no?]

Out of interest, which of the following do you disagree with from The Human Rights Act?

the right to life
freedom from torture and degrading treatment
freedom from slavery and forced labour
the right to liberty
the right to a fair trial
the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
the right to respect for private and family life
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
freedom of expression
freedom of assembly and association
the right to marry and to start a family
the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
the right to an education
the right to participate in free elections
the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

I believe every human starts off with 'a right for a chance at life' but I also believe that if that person does something inhuman ie murderers, terrorists, pedophiles and other serious crimes, that 'right of a life' should be taken away & dealt with a accordingly, that could be from 'X' amount of time in prison, corporal punishment or the death penalty.

The human rights act is just stupid and when it come to crimes its it favour of the criminal and not the victims, this is why I dont think there should be a 'Human act law' but just common sence on what rights humans have.

 

[happypig]

He canot be deported because he might be tortured. Fair enough in my book. However, why can we not invite the interrogators and prosecutors here, have him interviewed and tried here, where we can ensure he is treated fairly and then if convicted, we require the foreign power to assure us that he will not be mistreated in prison. Alternatively we ask them to pay for the costs of his incarceration here.
Every one's a winner.

Vote Pig !

 

[Waynflete]

However abhorrent his views may be, he has not been convicted of anything. We cannot deport him because he may be tortured. This sounds entirely reasonable to me. The human rights act exists precisely for reasons like this - to prevent the torture of a person who has not been convicted of a crime. We cannot discard this principle just because we rightly condemn his political views.

 

[brightonrock]

Think he's obviously a wrong'un but I for one am proud to say I live in a country and society where we take the moral high ground, and no-one is punished without good evidence, no matter how much they differ from your perspectives/values. His views are obviously abhorrent but until he does something illegal (I know that's a can of worms in itself) I don't think deporting him is necessarily the right thing to do. People moaning about human rights and how extreme nations treat women, or slavery for example, yet advocate the same in return. The reason we're better than the likes of him is we don't sink to his level.

Oh, and keep your enemies closer, and all that jazz. Don't think for a moment that because he isn't getting thrown on a ferry out the country, he isn't being kept an eye on.

 

[glasfryn]

Weak shot. Why not pass one with all that and removing undesirables.

racist undesirables


being a racist in illegal is it not and being sedicious is also illegal is it not, holding prayer meeting in the middle of the road is illegal is it not, europe has only made this ruling so they don't have to put up with his racist rantings in their little corner

 

[looney]

racist undesirables


being a racist in illegal is it not and being sedicious is also illegal is it not, holding prayer meeting in the middle of the road is illegal is it not, europe has only made this ruling so they don't have to put up with his racist rantings in their little corner

Strictly speaking I dont think any of that is illegal in certain contexts. Stirring up to what amounts to cultural warfare should be enough to get an illegal immigrant removed in any sane country.

 

[Hotchilidog]

He canot be deported because he might be tortured. Fair enough in my book. However, why can we not invite the interrogators and prosecutors here, have him interviewed and tried here, where we can ensure he is treated fairly and then if convicted, we require the foreign power to assure us that he will not be mistreated in prison. Alternatively we ask them to pay for the costs of his incarceration here.
Every one's a winner.

Vote Pig !

Funnily enough, I think Amnesty International want him to be tried here.

The grounds for refusing the deportation are sound, you cannot use evidence gained from torture in a trial as it is not only unethical but also unsound.

If there is evidence that he has committed any criminal acts here then he should be tried here.

If anyone should be getting flak in this situation it should be the Jordanians who need to get their house in order re their use of torture in criminal investigation not the European Court who are upholding what seems to be a perfectly reasonable and civilised position.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I don't disagree with anything in the Human Rights Act. However this does not apply to this piece of crap we are dealing with.

The Human Rights Act has been abused in his case.

By the way, who is paying for all these court appearances. Is he using and abusing our legal aid system?

Deport the out of this country. He is already an illegal that arrived here on a fake passport anyway.
When are we going to start using some common sense in these cases.

 

[Falkor]

However abhorrent his views may be, he has not been convicted of anything. We cannot deport him because he may be tortured. This sounds entirely reasonable to me. The human rights act exists precisely for reasons like this - to prevent the torture of a person who has not been convicted of a crime. We cannot discard this principle just because we rightly condemn his political views.

Is he not wanted in Jordan for being part of 2 terrorist plots.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

I'm not so sure that he won't be deported.

As I understand it he can't be deported if it is likely that he will be tortured if he goes back.

But the court did NOT decide this. They accepted an undertaking obtained by the British Government from the Jordanian Government that he would not be tortured, so on this point deportation would be allowed. (Quite how effective that undertaking would prove to be in practice is another question).

But the court did decide that it was likely that evidence would be used against him which HAD been obtained under torture of another suspect, and this is the point where deportation failed.

So presumably there is nothing to stop the British Government getting a second undertaking from the Jordanian Government agreeing that this evidence would not be used against him.

If they do that then the way is clear for him to be deported.

As always, there's a whole lot more to this than the Daily Mail headline would suggest.