Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Roshonara Choudhry and Stephen Timms: If you can't kill your MP...

This is Roshonara Choudhry, the woman who tried to murder Labour MP Stephen Timms in revenge for him voting in favour of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Ms Choudhry refused to appear at The Old Bailey in person because she does not recognise the jurisdiction of the court.

So she will be sentenced by video-link, and will doubtless be given a lengthy custodial sentence to be passed in a comfortable, internet-equipped, halal-compliant cell...

...from where she will now be able to vote Mr Timms out of office.

You really couldn't make it up.

Frankly, she should have been dragged to the court in handcuffs and forced to stand when the Judge entered.

Human rights?

For a woman who attempted to murder a Member of Parliament?

The 'right' to vote him out of office?

O, please.


Blogger Dick the Prick said...

Your Grace

I guess there's a fine line between psychotic and brainwashed. She was on course for a 1st in her degree before she went nuts.

2 November 2010 at 18:39  
Anonymous Oswin said...

I'm still waiting for MY chance to vote for repatriating these people!

2 November 2010 at 18:40  
Anonymous philip walling said...

The invasion of Iraq was deplorable; Blair should be treated no better than Saddam Hussein (or his mate Aziz (sp?)).

But trying to murder an MP for voting for the invasion? It's despicable, but what do you expect from a Muslim, whose 'faith' tells her to kill the infidel wherever she finds him?
Mind you, if I were an Iraqi (or other Muslim) I'd be pretty annoyed to have my country destroyed, looted and occupied by American and British troops who have killed innumerable people.

The irony is that Mr Timms supported his party, when in government, in favour of wholesale immigration and treating the immigrants as equals. But they're not equals if they believe that murder is anything other than a wicked response to anything.

But, no wonder Miss Choudhry shows no respect for a country that hasn't even got the courage to make her go to court to be tried and make her stand when the judge, who is the representative of the Queen, comes in.
She has by her defiance held up a mirror to the failure of our so-called liberal democracy. It's not just the likes of her that have lost respect for us; we have lost respect for ourselves, and by her behaviour she shows us that.

2 November 2010 at 18:56  
Anonymous LDS said...

Your Grace

I was pleased to see that Tom Harris may be raising this in the House. We will need the support of people like him if this madness is going to be stopped. It needs to be clear that this raises issues for all who actually care about our Parliamentary government and should not be subsumed in the usual party shenanigans. Do all you can.

2 November 2010 at 19:04  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...


This is not a party matter: His Grace is a fervent supporter of Tom Harris and wishes him well with the pursuit.

2 November 2010 at 19:07  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

No doubt somebody in some future time will be able to look back and scratch his head and roll around in fits of laughter Your Grace. Those of us who can see the farcical nature of things have to live in the nightmare so we are not really able appreciate the hilarious angle that people from the future will enjoy. Maybe there will be movies like Monty Python and the 21st Century.

We really are making a complete arse of things.

2 November 2010 at 19:08  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Presumably we still manufacture shackles and manacles in this country? Have her dragged into court. If she creates further fuss, charge her with contempt, and add it to her final sentence ...simples!

2 November 2010 at 19:09  
Anonymous len said...

What tips the balance between a 'moderate ' Moslem and pushes them to be to an 'extremist' Moslem?

Or perhaps the question should be what is there in Islam that makes extremists?

2 November 2010 at 19:17  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

BTW, Nadine is a consummate attention seeker YG - you would do better to not administer her fix.

2 November 2010 at 19:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some people allow evil to happen by voting for it, others commit evil directly with evil acts.

Evil is still evil, wether it be direct or indirect.

Man has no right to take the life of another man, wether it be for religious, political or any other other belief.

Only God Almighty gives life, only He has the right to take it away.

Mr Chipfat @ twitter

2 November 2010 at 19:26  
Anonymous Gerard Tibercross said...

Your Grace

The court does have the option of dragging the recalcitrant to court in chains, and prison officers certainly used to drag the unwilling to their feet when the judge entered (I'm not sure whether the current lot of privatised security staff would do the same).

But if you were the judge would you want a disuptive nutter in court? Choudhry's refusal to attend was likely welcomed in the judge's chambers, in counsels' robing room, and in the canteen where the security staff congregate.

You really should revise your views about the facilities in Her Majesty's free boarding houses. If you don't believe me speak to one of the chaplains at the Ville.

Gerard Tibercross

2 November 2010 at 19:35  
Blogger steve said...

@ Dick

Most Phd's I know are barking whack-a-doodles.

2 November 2010 at 19:46  
Anonymous barking whack-a-doodles said...

It's human rights again....

2 November 2010 at 20:19  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

Threaten to burn their book and Muslims are on the streets in their thousands, kill or displace Christians, hardly a murmur (witness the recent Bagdad atrocity), yet politicians peddle the 'religion of peace' propaganda in apparent ignorance of what the book demands. Of course the majority of Muslims want to live in peace with their neighbours, but only on their terms:

2 November 2010 at 20:53  
Blogger oldmaid said...

If "she does not recognise the jurisdiction of the court" why did she accept our legal representation?

More to the point, why on earth did she want to come here in the first place.

By the way, whilst I do not condone her actions, why on earth did the idiot, oops sorry politician vote to invade another country?

The majority of the people did not believe Blair or his web spinners, Campbell and Mandelson

2 November 2010 at 21:08  
Anonymous lds said...

Sorry your grace I had to go and cook supper. Where do we go now?

2 November 2010 at 22:42  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

Oldmaid's pretty much spot on there. If you're in this country you abide by our rules. If she doesn't accept the laws and justice system of our country, then why should we grant her the privileges that are awarded to law-abiding subjects?

I hate to say it again, but law and society is something you sign up for. If you don't like it then don't come here in the first place. If you're already here then you can protest peacefully, or leave. There are plenty of other nations that will accept your philosophy.

If you break the social contract, then the benefits granted to you under it are broken as well. Break the law and you can't vote; invade someone's home and commit theft and prepare to get your behind handed to you by the owner; attempt treason (which I believe this falls under) and you should be prepared for the strongest of punishments that the state can hand out (in our country this means a stern talking to of course).

As has been said before, by others and myself, there is no reason why we need to abide by any laws of the EU. They would never throw us out as we are far too useful to them. If we left, then they would have to rely on Germany to prop up the rest of the economic mess that is Europe, and I doubt Germany would find this particularly appealing. They have no leverage to make sanctions.

3 November 2010 at 00:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Next will she refuse to go to the infidels prison.
We really have lost the plot in this country.

3 November 2010 at 00:23  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Bearing in mind that this is not the first deadly attack in an mps constituancy office , what astonishes me was the reason she gave , that it was for voting for the Iraq war. I mean why not hold a demonstration outside his office every weekend , that is how you get justice if you feel decisions are wrong , in the arena of votes . As for not accepting the courts juridiscian I wonder in what courts she thought she would be tried in .

3 November 2010 at 00:31  
Blogger Bryan D said...

So, what, Australians get to vote now?

In seriousness, when will the Brits rid themselves of this obvious tyranny. There is no new world to colonize, British people must make Britain work... Or emigrate.

3 November 2010 at 00:57  
Blogger Manfarang said...

And what court were the murderers of Ian Gow and Airey Neave brought

3 November 2010 at 02:08  
Blogger Gnostic said...

So, whatever happened to the offence of contempt of court? And why the hell wasn't this murderous bitch charged with the offence and then dragged into the court like any other common criminal?

When she completes her sentence in about 10 minutes time are we going to deport her sorry backside to Iraq where she clearly feels more at home?

3 November 2010 at 07:12  
Blogger AncientBriton said...

How many atrocities must there be before the Establishment wakes up?

3 November 2010 at 08:56  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

AncientBriton said...

How many atrocities must there be before the Establishment wakes up?

3 November 2010 08:56

Sorry to say this but take a look around you, there is no salvation on the horizon. The establishment is fully signed up to Globalisation and is in the process of selling every single one of us down the river. The destruction of Nation states is in full speed ahead and part of that involves destroying common Identity.

Clearly no sane Nation's justice system would stand for half of the shenanigans that has become the norm for us. I naively thought that perhaps the BNP or UKIP(In the absence of a Tory Party) would trigger a bout of common sense, but even they are an irrelevance.

3 November 2010 at 09:38  
Anonymous CeeFcee said...

Lets take an example from History...Three enemies-of-the state ago (i.e. the boers in South Africa), harsh measures were taken by Lord Kitchener. He locked up boer woman & children in concentration camps. When they began dying in their tens-of-thousands, the boer militants began surrending. The militants were interred on St Helena Island, the Victorian Guantamano. The Church-of-England turned a blind eye to these atrocities. If it weren't for the intervention of Emily Hobhouse, the Daughter of a Cornish Vicar, history would be very different indeed. Her campaign caused the closure of the concentration camps.

Now........the concentration camps defeated the enemy, but targeting women & children would be intolerable nowadays. Perhaps we need a muslim oriented Emily Hobhouse to bring stability ? Perhaps we need a more effective way of dealing with the new enemy-of-the-state ??

3 November 2010 at 14:09  
Blogger Gnostic said...

CeeFcee, it looks like Ms Choudhry missed her chance to do the right thing by a country mile. And it depends whom you consider to be the enemy of the state. I believe our major enemy is none other than - the State!

3 November 2010 at 15:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But they're not equals if they believe that murder is anything other than a wicked response to anything."

shock and awe.

5 November 2010 at 13:20  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older