This Qatada fella

[Thedelldays]

Do you think Russia abides by the ECHR rules everytime they want to sling someone out or deal with a troublemaker...I don't think so.As for the Swiss forget it, whatever they vote in their frequent referendums is the law and they don't give a monkey's about what the outside world thinks.

they do what they like in russia and does the rest of europe complain....eer, no

I bet no one in the world would actually care what so ever if we stuck two fingers up to europe and send this lunatic to face his justice in jordan

 

 

the only people that will care would be the yellow belly liberals here in the UK...and of course, the remaining islamic extremists

[Saintandy666]

Do you think Russia abides by the ECHR rules everytime they want to sling someone out or deal with a troublemaker...I don't think so.As for the Swiss forget it, whatever they vote in their frequent referendums is the law and they don't give a monkey's about what the outside world thinks.

 

And do we want to be like Russia? No, I'm glad our government abides by the law.

[Thedelldays]

And do we want to be like Russia? No, I'm glad our government abides by the law.

but kicking out a terrorist is not a slippery slope..its not us turning into a mafia nation....it would be....kicking out a terrorist.

 

we live in a relatively liberal country where media rules and hold MPs to serious account......there would be no chance we would be like russia by kicking out a lunatic

[Saintandy666]

but kicking out a terrorist is not a slippery slope..its not us turning into a mafia nation....it would be....kicking out a terrorist.

 

we live in a relatively liberal country where media rules and hold MPs to serious account......there would be no chance we would be like russia by kicking out a lunatic

 

And we will get round to kicking him out. In fact, the process of *actually* kicking him out would have already begun if not for Theresa May's incompetence. No law change is needed, just a better Home Secretary. Can you imagine Ken Clarke or William Hague making that cock up? I think not. It's unacceptable and she should go.

[Whitey Grandad]

And we will get round to kicking him out. In fact, the process of *actually* kicking him out would have already begun if not for Theresa May's incompetence. No law change is needed, just a better Home Secretary. Can you imagine Ken Clarke or William Hague making that cock up? I think not. It's unacceptable and she should go.

 

I think not. That's why they appealed at the last hour, or so they thought.

[Whitey Grandad]

Exactly. I gave the 2 day example to illustrate more clearly the stupidity of May's interpretation. Surely that was obvious?

 

'Everybody' does not agree it is ambiguous. The government here say one thing (the equivalent of saturday in my 2 day example) whilst the court itself, plus of course Qatada's lawyers, and apparently plus you too in effect, say the other (the equivalent of the sunday in my example)

 

And I still say throw him out anyway! Just sack May as well. Don't make some poor sod of an official with a mortgage take the blame for her.

 

It's not just her interpretation, it is the whole Home Office. I don't agree that Sunday is included in the time for an appeal. 'Expires Sunday' means just that to me. On Sunday it will have expired.

[Window Cleaner]

I think not. That's why they appealed at the last hour, or so they thought.

 

bunch of attention seekers,probably knew very well the Home Office interpretation of the rules and waited until afterwards just to extract the Urite.Will we ever learn with these people, just chuck them out and have done with it.They'll always find reasons for delaying the extraditon ruling,next time it will be one of his thousands of wives is knocked up or something like that.Pity the Yanks aren't interested in him,he have been gone years ago in one way or another.

[Whitey Grandad]

bunch of attention seekers,probably knew very well the Home Office interpretation of the rules and waited until afterwards just to extract the Urite.Will we ever learn with these people, just chuck them out and have done with it.They'll always find reasons for delaying the extraditon ruling,next time it will be one of his thousands of wives is knocked up or something like that.Pity the Yanks aren't interested in him,he have been gone years ago in one way or another.

 

And guess who's paying for his lawyers?

[Window Cleaner]

And guess who's paying for his lawyers?

 

Haven't the faintest idea, assumed it was some Oil Mogul from the back of beyond.

[Whitey Grandad]

Legal aid, innit.

[Whitey Grandad]

Stories are beginning to come out:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133343/Euro-court-tipped-Abu-Qatada-make-ditch-bid-stay.html

 

And in the Times, apparently the written decision gave time to appeal 'within three months' which is where the debate over the deadline begins.

[Thedelldays]

if it true..then another reason why the european project is a total sham

[aintforever]

I think the whole country just want the government to grow a pair, ignore the Europeans and kick him out.

 

The whole situation is a farce.

[Ken Tone]

Stories are beginning to come out:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133343/Euro-court-tipped-Abu-Qatada-make-ditch-bid-stay.html

 

And in the Times, apparently the written decision gave time to appeal 'within three months' which is where the debate over the deadline begins.

 

It was within 3 months 'from' a fixed date ... hence my previous posts trying to explain this to you! What is more the Sunday Times had a story saying that their reporter checked with the European Court before the deadline , and warned the Home Office that their interpretation was wrong, but Theresa May went ahead with her premature announcement regardless. May initially claimed she had been reassured by the court about the date, but later, when challenged over this, failed to produce any evidence that she'd even asked. So a) throw him out anyway, but b) sack May for being stupid and ignoring warnings that she was being stupid, and quite possibly also lying to cover this up.

 

If I say 'within one day from today', it clearly does not mean midnight tonight, but this is basically what May's interpretation equated to.

[Whitey Grandad]

It was within 3 months 'from' a fixed date ... hence my previous posts trying to explain this to you! What is more the Sunday Times had a story saying that their reporter checked with the European Court before the deadline , and warned the Home Office that their interpretation was wrong, but Theresa May went ahead with her premature announcement regardless. May initially claimed she had been reassured by the court about the date, but later, when challenged over this, failed to produce any evidence that she'd even asked. So a) throw him out anyway, but b) sack May for being stupid and ignoring warnings that she was being stupid, and quite possibly also lying to cover this up.

 

If I say 'within one day from today', it clearly does not mean midnight tonight, but this is basically what May's interpretation equated to.

 

It's the interpretation of 'within' that is in question. It doesn't matter what you and I might think.

[Ken Tone]

It's the interpretation of 'within' that is in question. It doesn't matter what you and I might think.

 

I don't see there is any question personally, but I agree that our opinions don't matter. So we can agree to diasagree.

 

What matters if you are appealing to a court of law is what that court thinks.. not what Theresa May thinks. Which is why May has made TWO almighty cock ups, by first making a silly error and then secondly, by ignoring warnings from the Sunday Times that she was wrong -- warnings that the Sunday Times says it gave before she made her incorrect announcement, and that she chose to ignore, apparently not even checking with the court herself.

[Petersfield Saint]

Do you think Russia abides by the ECHR rules everytime they want to sling someone out or deal with a troublemaker...I don't think so.As for the Swiss forget it, whatever they vote in their frequent referendums is the law and they don't give a monkey's about what the outside world thinks.

 

And do we want to be like Russia? No, I'm glad our government abides by the law.

 

I wouldn't mind being more like Switzerland though!

[badgerx16]

if it true..then another reason why the european project is a total sham

 

Just to be clear, the ECHR is nothing to do with the EU.

[Whitey Grandad]

I don't see there is any question personally, but I agree that our opinions don't matter. So we can agree to diasagree.

 

What matters if you are appealing to a court of law is what that court thinks.. not what Theresa May thinks. Which is why May has made TWO almighty cock ups, by first making a silly error and then secondly, by ignoring warnings from the Sunday Times that she was wrong -- warnings that the Sunday Times says it gave before she made her incorrect announcement, and that she chose to ignore, apparently not even checking with the court herself.

 

Well it wasn't May who made the decision it was the Home Office and she acted on their advice. You're right, it's the court whose opinion matters and not some journalist from the Times. The appeal was faxed at 23:13 and as it happens not actually read until the next morning, some sources say after prompting from the court itself. Whether that was Strasbourg time or BST is another question. The original written judgment was before summer time and also before February 29th. A month can be four weeks or it can be a calendar month. Without all the details neither you nor I can pass judgment. The court has not yet ruled on whether the appeal was within time, or valid.

[Whitey Grandad]

Legal aid, innit.

 

Thought so:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133734/Terror-case-lawyers-fight-fanatics-deportation-land-110m-legal-aid.html

 

(It's in the Daily Mail so it must be true)

[Viking Warrior]

ECHR is an intrinsic part of EU legislation sadly it doesn't matter which government is in power the quatada types know how to manipulate the law . Labour tried but failed . Same with mr hook . The moment you show the human rights card you know full well unscrupulous lawyers will come to the for and make a mint . Can you imagine if bin laden had been captured by the sas and brought here you can see it now lawyers defending his human rights . That's a fact some times the law is an ass

[Ken Tone]

Well it wasn't May who made the decision it was the Home Office and she acted on their advice. You're right, it's the court whose opinion matters and not some journalist from the Times. The appeal was faxed at 23:13 and as it happens not actually read until the next morning, some sources say after prompting from the court itself. Whether that was Strasbourg time or BST is another question. The original written judgment was before summer time and also before February 29th. A month can be four weeks or it can be a calendar month. Without all the details neither you nor I can pass judgment. The court has not yet ruled on whether the appeal was within time, or valid.

 

It WAS May who decided to make the announcement, in spite of the warnings that she was wrong. And as Home Secretary she is in charge of, and is responsible for, what the home office does. But I give up! You must be related to her or something!

[Whitey Grandad]

It WAS May who decided to make the announcement, in spite of the warnings that she was wrong. And as Home Secretary she is in charge of, and is responsible for, what the home office does. But I give up! You must be related to her or something!

Not at all, but we mustn't let our personal preferences and prejudices affect our opinions. My feeling is that there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye. I'm sure that more will come out as we move on.

[badgerx16]

ECHR is an intrinsic part of EU legislation.....

 

The European Convention on Human Rights is a treaty drafted and established by the Council of Europe, not the EU, in 1950, after the UN had established the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. The Council of Europe currently has 47 members, including the members of the EU. The European Court of Human Rights is responsible for the interpretation and implementation of the treaty, and is not related to any EU component institution.

It is accepted that, as all members of the EU are signatories to the Convention, being members of the CofE, the European Court of Human Rights by implication does impact EU legislation, although, as far as I know, the EU as an entity is not signatory to the Convention.

Edited 23 April, 2012 by badgerx16

[Thedelldays]

a friend I may or may not know..who is about such things as this...did indeed tell me at the weekend that May (or her dept) had ****ed up royally...

so much so, hooky could well try to claim compensation in the near future

[bridge too far]

Lost his appeal but Ms May did **** up royally as his appeal was within the timeframe

[Saintandy666]

Lost his appeal but Ms May did **** up royally as his appeal was within the timeframe

 

Lucky woman. I assume the Express will be running a front page story tomorrow commending the ECHR's decision.

[Gemmel]

We lost again.

[Dr. Kucho]

Should just deport him regardles what the court/EU says, France does the same with them Romanians.

[Viking Warrior]

Bloody human rights legislation . So he's free to kill and maim people abroad meanwhile we give him to houses . Benefits . Protection and he's allowed to have more than one wife. The judges said the court accepted that Qatada "is regarded as a very dangerous person", but that was not "a relevant consideration" under human rights laws.

Meanwhile are servicemen are accused of mistreatment by afghanis and Iraqis and have the book thrown at the because of politicians desire to go to war . I have not heard iraqis or afghanis be charged for their abuses or atrocities against servicemen and support staff . Human rights always favours the terrorist ane perpetrators of heidious crimes

[pap]

For hopefully the last time, if we didn't want people like Abu Qatada here then we probably shouldn't have let all those extremist/terrorist groups operate out of London in the 1990s.

 

How do you think they all got in and managed to stay? Jumped over a fence?

 

Qatada is being used as a battering ram against the ECHR.

[pap]

Bloody human rights legislation . So he's free to kill and maim people abroad meanwhile we give him to houses . Benefits . Protection and he's allowed to have more than one wife. The judges said the court accepted that Qatada "is regarded as a very dangerous person", but that was not "a relevant consideration" under human rights laws.

Meanwhile are servicemen are accused of mistreatment by afghanis and Iraqis and have the book thrown at the because of politicians desire to go to war . I have not heard iraqis or afghanis be charged for their abuses or atrocities against servicemen and support staff . Human rights always favours the terrorist ane perpetrators of heidious crimes

 

And yet we openly tolerated him and a hell of a lot of other extremists, including those responsible for the Paris Metro bombings in 1995.

 

This is like knowingly inviting a burglar into your house, acting surprised when you get burgled, then asking for burglary laws to be changed to account for your stupidity.

[trousers]

And yet we openly tolerated him and a hell of a lot of other extremists, including those responsible for the Paris Metro bombings in 1995.

 

This is like knowingly inviting a burglar into your house, acting surprised when you get burgled, then asking for burglary laws to be changed to account for your stupidity.

 

I've no knowledge of the circumstance under which this individual entered the country so genuine question born out of ignorance alert...

 

Did we consciously wave him into the country in the knowledge he was an active "burglar" or did he somehow slip through the net due to incompetency somewhere in the customs system and/or inadequate immigration laws?

 

Just trying to ascertain whether the householder in your analogy was naive or incompetent. Or possibly both...

 

Cheers

[JonnyLove]

surely spending all this money on legal fees to deport him, it would of been cheeper to higher someone to sort the situation out for them. (Not condoning or suggesting that's a good thing, just pointing it out)

[pap]

I've no knowledge of the circumstance under which this individual entered the country so genuine question born out of ignorance alert...

 

Did we consciously wave him into the country in the knowledge he was an active "burglar" or did he somehow slip through the net due to incompetency somewhere in the customs system and/or inadequate immigration laws?

 

Just trying to ascertain whether the householder in your analogy was naive or incompetent. Or possibly both...

 

Cheers

 

We let these people into our country knowing full well what they'd done or been accused of, on the tacit agreement that their terrorist activities were conducted elsewhere.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Londonistan_(term)

 

The householder in my analogy intended to exploit the natural tendencies of the burglar to his or her own advantage.

[badgerx16]

I've no knowledge of the circumstance under which this individual entered the country so genuine question born out of ignorance alert...

 

Did we consciously wave him into the country in the knowledge he was an active "burglar" or did he somehow slip through the net due to incompetency somewhere in the customs system and/or inadequate immigration laws?

 

Just trying to ascertain whether the householder in your analogy was naive or incompetent. Or possibly both...

 

Cheers

 

He came here in 1993 and claimed asylum on the grounds that he was escaping torture in Jordan.

 

WRT the current situation, at the previous court hearing, the Home Secretary was told that she had to obtain stronger binding assurances from the Jordanian legal system that none of the contentious evidence would be used in any trial. It seems that the lack of these assurances is what is blocking the extradition.

[Viking Warrior]

Good analogy PAP.

 

I wonder why he is really reluctant to go back to Jordan, Perhaps there other atrocities we do not know about that he has committed. No wonder he is **** scared of going back . If he is so innocent , then go back . A bike that guy who had his wife shot (allegedly in SA when on honeymoon) if he is so innocent then go back and face the courts and let the defence lawyers argue your case, Take Lord Dyson and Co with you, The tax payer will fund their travel costs

[derry]

Stick him on the next Jordanian flight to Amman. Notify the Jordanians and they can arrest him as soon as they are airborne. He hates this country, christians etc just do him a big favour and release him from custody.

[CB Saint]

The government should just get on and change the law and then deport his ass.

[Guided Missile]

Apparently he published this on an Islamic website:

 

"When the Brighton bomb went off, I felt a surge of excitement at the nearness of Margaret Thatcher's demise and yet disappointment that such a chance had been missed. ‘Why did she have to leave the bathroom two minutes earlier?’ I asked myself.”

In the same publication he also said he wished Argentina had won the Falklands War, which claimed the lives of 255 British servicemen.”

[CB Saint]

Apparently he published this on an Islamic website:

 

"When the Brighton bomb went off, I felt a surge of excitement at the nearness of Margaret Thatcher's demise and yet disappointment that such a chance had been missed. ‘Why did she have to leave the bathroom two minutes earlier?’ I asked myself.”

In the same publication he also said he wished Argentina had won the Falklands War, which claimed the lives of 255 British servicemen.”

 

When deportation proceeding were started, I felt a surge of excitement at the nearness of Qatada's demise and yet disappointment that such a chance was missed. Why did the Human Rights law exist I asked myself.

I wish the jordanians had got hold of him beforehand and claimed his life.

[badgerx16]

You would have thought that the organisation that arranged the 'suicides' of David Kelly and Gareth Williams could find some way to make him disappear.

[pap]

You would have thought that the organisation that arranged the 'suicides' of David Kelly and Gareth Williams could find some way to make him disappear.

 

Heh, some of my tin-hat sites talk of beam weapons capable of inducing heart attacks.

[badgerx16]

Heh, some of my tin-hat sites talk of beam weapons capable of inducing heart attacks.

 

The Bulgarian secret service could probably supply 2nd hand umbrellas.

[Viking Warrior]

And another Judge living in cuckoo land

 

Judge Timothy Pontius said they came to the UK to commit the crimes and told them they would be deported after serving their sentences. (Romanian Criminals)

 

He warned eastern European criminals that British courts would not be a "soft touch".

Soft Touch what a joke

[badgerx16]

And another Judge living in cuckoo land

 

Judge Timothy Pontius said they came to the UK to commit the crimes and told them they would be deported after serving their sentences. (Romanian Criminals)

 

He warned eastern European criminals that British courts would not be a "soft touch".

Soft Touch what a joke

 

What has Qatada been found guilty of in a UK court ?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I don't much like this Qatada fellow. On the other hand I do rather like the fact that we live in a country where even the Government still has to abide by the rule of law.

[Whitey Grandad]

We make the law, we can change the law. It is not immutable.

[badgerx16]

We make the law, we can change the law.

 

[benjii]

Apparently he published this on an Islamic website:

 

"When the Brighton bomb went off, I felt a surge of excitement at the nearness of Margaret Thatcher's demise and yet disappointment that such a chance had been missed. ‘Why did she have to leave the bathroom two minutes earlier?’ I asked myself.”

In the same publication he also said he wished Argentina had won the Falklands War, which claimed the lives of 255 British servicemen.”

 

There are Labour MPs who echo the first half of that.