|
I believe I detect a national sigh of relief.
|
Why did it take so long?
Why was he allowed to come here in the first place?
Why was he allowed to stay?
|
What's he actually done rather than the fairly vague assertions made by Ministers and in the press?
If he's that dangerous and a threat to UK why couldn't they charge him here?
AC describes him well in previous threads.
|
>> If he's that dangerous and a threat to UK why couldn't they charge him here?
Because he hadn't committed his crimes in the UK, and he'd already been convicted in Jordan.
If Bin Laden had taken up residence in London, and the UK said that he was dangerous but that they couldn't charge him and were going to hold him until they could deport him to face charges in the US, would that not have been a reasonable position?
Also, just because there is not sufficient evidence to convict somebody, doesn't mean they are not a danger.
|
|
He would have been put on trial for offences committed her, but the security services were not prepared to "compromise their source". (Thats usually security speak for illegally obtained inadmissible evidence!)
|
>> He would have been put on trial for offences committed her, but the security services
>> were not prepared to "compromise their source". (Thats usually security speak for illegally obtained inadmissible
>> evidence!)
Yes, that is probably a typical reason why somebody might be known to be dangerous, but cannot be convicted, as the current US administration has discovered when they tried to close Guantanamo.
At least now they just blow them to smithereens with a drone. It's hard to go on hunger strike and embarrass your captors when you are in a million pieces.
|
"The UK government have expelled Mr Qatada, but at the same time, they are helping thousands of Qatadas in Syria in all possible ways, and all this financed by the British people.
When some of these people return to the UK, because it is their homeland, the police would spend billions of pounds on their surveillance. However, as long as the UK and other EU governments blindly obey every order from the White House and do not care about their own people, there will always be terrorists ready to sacrifice themselves for their ideas.
And what about ordinary people who are ignored all the time, except when they have to sacrifice themselves in all kind wars and conflicts? They have become numb, and do not care either. They know that they will always foot the bill".
Comment from today's Independent.
|
Perhaps now we will find out what crimes he has committed, if any. The Jordanians seem to think he was some sort of big operator. I hope the trial is properly reported.
Qatada's benign smile and the twinkle in his eye make him appear quite sympathetic, and I have promoted him (not entirely seriously) as a British national treasure worthy of elective office. He wouldn't be the first dubious character to enjoy that status...
|
I understand he arrived using a fake passport (true or not?). If so, he did not need to commit a crime here for him to be deported.
Now what about his wife & children, I wonder? Have they gone too?
Perhaps their right to a "family life" might be better achieved in Jordan, where their pater familias currently resides?
Last edited by: Roger on Sun 7 Jul 13 at 12:14
|
>>
>> Now what about his wife & children, I wonder? Have they gone too?
>> Perhaps their right to a "family life" might be better achieved in Jordan, where their
>> pater familias currently resides?
>>
They know where they are well off.
As usual the Mail has it sussed. :-)
tinyurl.com/k26tzzj
|
"Neighbours of Abu Qatada have threatened to stop paying council tax if his family is not removed from the area.
Qatada was this morning due to be flown to Jordan...But it is believed that his wife, two sons and two daughters will remain living in the UK.
Now residents in Stanmore, North-West London, where the family live, want them removed, saying they are ‘fed up’. They have signed a petition threatening to refuse to pay council unless the family is evicted."
What exactly are they "fed up" with? The all night parties?
Or do they think their neighbourhood is too posh for someone on benefits?
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 7 Jul 13 at 14:20
|
"What exactly are they "fed up" with?"
I don't know, but my guess would be that they're fed up with paying taxes, some of which will be diverted to pay the benefits for a bunch of leeches who despise the hand that feeds them
|
>> "What exactly are they "fed up" with?"
>>
>> I don't know, but my guess would be that they're fed up with paying taxes,
>> some of which will be diverted to pay the benefits for a bunch of leeches
>> who despise the hand that feeds them
It is presumably something more specific than that, because there are possibly millions of people who fit into that description in the UK, and they aren't asking for them all to be evicted.
I somehow doubt that these people are making a selfless stand against a national system they oppose.
|
|
My life already.......Stanmore no less. Ok Yah!!!
|
>> I understand he arrived using a fake passport (true or not?). If so, he did
>> not need to commit a crime here for him to be deported.
If you seek to leave one country in order to seek asylum in another then doing so on your own passport (even if you're allowed one) is not necessarily and option.
|
you are supposed to seek asylum at once in the first country of safety.
1/ That was not the UK
2/ Did not seek asylum upon first arrival.
|
>> you are supposed to seek asylum at once in the first country of safety.
>>
>> 1/ That was not the UK
>> 2/ Did not seek asylum upon first arrival.
I don't think there is anything in the rules to prevent you from seeking asylum, either because you could have sought it elsewhere or because you didn't claim in when first arriving.
tinyurl.com/ld235em
|
>> >> you are supposed to seek asylum at once in the first country of safety.
>> >>
>> >> 1/ That was not the UK
>> >> 2/ Did not seek asylum upon first arrival.
>>
>> I don't think there is anything in the rules to prevent you from seeking asylum,
>> either because you could have sought it elsewhere or because you didn't claim in when
>> first arriving.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/ld235em
All asylum applications will be determined by the Secretary of State in accordance with the Geneva Convention....
|
>> All asylum applications will be determined by the Secretary of State in accordance with
>> the Geneva Convention....
OK, so here is the text of the convention.
en.wikisource.org/wiki/1951_Refugee_Convention
Where exactly does it say that you cannot claim asylum if you are already in the country or if you could have claimed it in another country?
|
|
Its in Article 1 of the 1951 convention.
|
>> Its in Article 1 of the 1951 convention.
No it isn't.
I provided you with the text of the 1951 convention, so where is the wording you claim?
|
Oh dear, sorry to have sent you round the web, my mistake. Still good fun and yu learned stuff.
now read this and stop trying to be clever dick,
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position
|
>> now read this and stop trying to be clever dick,
>>
>> www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position
A nuanced legal view that lacks the certainty in your 'first country' assertion yesterday.
|
Not at all. If you have left a place of danger and arrived at one on the "safe list" you can no longer travel to lay claim to asylum in another "safe place" because you are no longer in danger, having traveled from a safe place. Most appeals for asylum have been turned down under those circumstances. The problem is that the first place of safety can turn them back for the same reason. Thats why all illegals here who traveled through europe have appealed to stay here under other "human rights" issues.
Anyone who travels to the UK to claim asylum and does not say so at point of entry is automatically an illegal entrant for lying about purpose of visit.
You do of course have the perfectly valid issue of arriving into the UK, from your own safe country which may subsequently become unsafe. Which is quite common in the more unstable parts of the world.
|
>> now read this and stop trying to be clever dick,
Looks like you're the one running around the web! :)
Anyway, that article doesn't back up your claims at all.
It says that a country could move a refugee to another safe country without violating their rights.
It certainly doesn't say that you cannot claim asylum if you could claim it somewhere else, and it also doesn't say that you can only claim asylum when you first arrive.
The person asking the question was under the same mistaken belief as you, and they were also corrected.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 8 Jul 13 at 10:47
|
>> The person asking the question was under the same mistaken belief as you, and they
>> were also corrected.
Not at all sunshine. You were the one running around like a tit. If you spent as much time in your real life as you did trying to score pointless and pedantic points against me, you might even make a success of your life and be likeable.
|
Ah, so you're about to concede. I know your pattern by now Zero.
Bold statement - attempt to cover up with further bold statements - pretend it was all a joke/wind-up - foaming at the mouth insults - silence
I imagine we are rapidly approaching the silence phase...
|
No were are approaching the bored to crap with your pointless and pathetic attempts to score points, You must be a very very insecure chap. I would get therapy if i were you.
Oh and by the way, for your further education this is the "I think you are a right tit thats not worth bothering with" phase.
Clear?
|
>> "I think you are a right tit thats not worth bothering with"
>>
>> Clear?
That we're still at the insult phase, but you're making your excuses to leave? Yes.
Still you've managed to steer the whole thing away from your original, incorrect, claim.
The moon is made of cheese - no it's not, and here is some evidence - you stink, and you're ugly, and everyone hates you
Very clever...
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 8 Jul 13 at 11:59
|
>> Handbags at dawn time?
I'm not risking scraping my Louis Vuitton on Zero's five quid mock leather Primark bag...
|
|
Ah I knew you were a poseur.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 8 Jul 13 at 14:12
|
|
Why has he given up and gone now? New rules on Legal Aid?
|
>> Why has he given up and gone now?
>>
Country just about bankrupt, benefit cheques likely to bounce...likely to nett more from guaranteed foreign aid?
|
>>Why has he given up and gone now?
An interesting question and one I'd like to know the answer to. I'm guessing its not because he's reformed.
I wonder if promises have been made, or threats for the matter, of which we're not aware.
|
|
He's broadly got what he wanted. If particular evidence is excluded conviction in Jordan might be difficult to achieve.
|
|
I wouldn't expect that to stop them holding him though. Best of all... he's not in the UK.
|
The main political cartoon in Monday's Terrorflag, Teresa May as knackered tennis player after a gruelling match, was brilliant I thought.
Sorry to see the back of Qatada. Looking forward to trial reports.
|
And now his family have left the UK.
tinyurl.com/pkf2cq4
|
And his freebie house is going to take £6,000 to clean and repair.
Take the headline with a dose of salt, he was not deported, he went of his own free will at our expense on a private jet.
tinyurl.com/kztchdr
|
I used to work for Reading Borough Council cleaning, repairing and decorating council housing in between tenants.
Doesn't look anything unusual to me. Not even that bad. I've seen stuff that you truly cannot believe that someone could live in, often with kids.
|
|
Wasn't a keen gardener was he.
|
Wasn't a keen gardener was he.
Probably why he decided to leave! - he couldn't get us to provide him with a gardener, and he didn't fancy doing it himself!
|
>> Wasn't a keen gardener was he.
Looks pretty much like several rented properties in that area I lived in between 1980 and 1986.
The product of neglect under successive lets.
It wasn't AQ who let the garage doors get into that state either.
|
I agree with FMR - nothing spectacular there. Any house that has been lived in for a few years and then suddenly vacated seems, and is, unbelievably filthy in a superficial sort of way, with all the underlay, damp wallpaper and general unwanted stuff. And given the sort of payrates everyone in this country except me seems to get, six grand seems nothing for a couple of council jobsworths for a day or two.
A Caribbean friend made a point of letting his house in a roughish area of North London to some Africans, Congolese I think. He regretted it bitterly in the end because they trashed the place. You never know what you're getting with tenants. You may think you can judge them, but people are slobs and liars as often as not.
|
|
A few buy to let rented out around here.Most of them have untidy gardens,loud music on a night or daytime.Is that a Yankee expression? White trash.
|
Abu Qatada - Duncan
