Tuesday, February 14, 2012

The Government must deport Abu Qatada, regardless

Despite having been found guilty of no crime, he is universally loathed and has managed to attain membership of the Daily Mail’s élite register of the ‘most hated’ in history, ever, along with Myra Hindley, Fred West, Francesco Schettino and Katie Price. He adopts the panoply of an Arab sheikh, pontificates like an Iranian ayatollah, and presides over the Coalition like Ming the Merciless. He entered the UK illegally, claimed welfare effortlessly, and then preached his hatred zealously. Fortunately, it wasn’t without impunity, and he spent six years in prison for urging his brothers and sisters to engage in terrorist attacks, including suicide bombings. Quite why that doesn’t constitute a crime is something of a mystery, but his new-found liberty is subject to some exacting bail conditions, including prohibition from using the internet or mobile phone, meeting any of 27 named individuals, publishing statements, attending a mosque and leading prayers. He is, of course, at liberty to pray to Allah privately.

Apparently, we can’t deport him, despite his forged passport, because there is no assurance that the Jordanian authorities won’t convict him on the strength of evidence obtained by torture. It wouldn’t be a fair trial, you see. What that has to do with HM Government is also something of a mystery, but the European Court of Human Rights has decreed that it most certainly is their/our business, so the British taxpayer is now compelled to house him, support him, feed him and guard him at an estimated cost of £10,000 a week (that’s £500,000 a year, on top of the £1.5million already provided in legal aid and benefits). Some 60 police officers and MI5 agents will provide round-the-clock protection for him and his family. Seemingly ignoring the fact that the primary duty of government is to protect its citizens, the Coalition is apparently more concerned with protecting Abu Qatada from the public than with protecting the public from him.

But he has committed no crime, you say, so he is entitled to a generous welfare settlement and state protection. In the immortal words of Margaret Thatcher, “No. No. No!” Abu Qatada is on record as having praised Osama bin Laden: he told his congregation at Finsbury Park Mosque that Americans should be attacked, wherever they are; that in his view they are no better than Jews (which is low indeed); and that there is no difference between the British, Jews and Americans. We should all be slaughtered, he avers, for the sake of Islam, which would be no sin.

So, regardless of any judgement of the European Court of Human Rights; regardless of any protestations from the Liberal Democrats; regardless of any technical legalistic intervention from Donal Blaney; and regardless, too, of any opposition from the Attorney General Dominic Grieve, whose adoration of the blessed ECHR verges on idolatry, Abu Qatada must be dispatched forthwith to Jordan, whence he came, and where his garb, preaching and pontificating would become someone else’s problem (ethical and financial).

Conservatives believe in the rule of law, of course. Yet increasingly the ECtHR has shown itself to be antithetical to UK interests and prepared to ride roughshod over centuries of established custom and the common law tradition. This is not a narrow partisan issue incited by ‘swivel-eyed, right-wing xenophobes’ who insist on ‘banging on about Europe’; last year Parliament was almost unanimous in setting its face against the ECtHR judgement that we should enfranchise prisoners and grant them the right to vote.

We shouldn’t, and we won’t. In British tradition, voting is an entitlement of the law-abiding, not a right of the lawless. To convert our entitlements into rights dispenses with the need for a social contract, for our rights become inviolable while the concept of duty and responsibility is negated, the rule of law is undermined and justice perverted. Parliament has been subsumed to alien powers; the Queen has been usurped by foreign princes and potentates; and our politicians have been emasculated by unconfined judges. That is the issue before the Government today: are we free to determine our laws and live in accordance with our customs and traditions and rights which go back to Magna Carta and include the Bill of Rights 1689 which declares the supremacy of Parliament over all courts? Or are we now unavoidably and irrevocably subject to a deficient court with designs on European domination through judicial activism?

Let’s be clear about this. Abu Qatada’s presence in the UK isn’t ‘conducive to the public good’. If a Dutch MP can be banned from the UK (even temporarily) for fear of inflaming Islamophobic hatred, why in the name of Allah can’t we deport a foreign Anglophobic Islamaniac intent on inciting hatred against the very foundations of the liberal and democratic state? And we must note the ‘even temporary’ qualification on the treatment of Geert Wilders, not least because it won’t be too long before Abu Qatada’s bail conditions are relaxed and he’ll be free to post on the internet, phone his Islamist ummah-mates and collect his kids from school without being electronically monitored.

This is an issue of national security: Abu Qatada is deemed to constitute a ‘dangerous risk’. The British people see it, the Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper sees it, Conservative backbenchers see it, most of the Cabinet see it, and the Prime Minister sees it. So what is the Government doing? Dispatching the very nice security minister James Brokenshire to negotiate with Jordan and gain assurances that Abu Qatada will get a fair trial.

What constitutes a ‘fair trial’ in an Islamic court? What is the ontology of justice? Who determines the epistemology of fairness? Who arbitrates the methodology of due process? In truth, none of this judicial philosophy is any business at all of either HM Government or the British people. The alien is welcome here and we should be hospitable towards him, but not if he seeks to blow us all to kingdom come and impose a sharia-compliant caliphate. That is not a notion of justice we should admit or negotiate with. Abu Qatada’s continuing presence is not only an affront to civic morality; it is detrimental to the public good.

And why has he never been charged with any crime? He is not only in the UK illegally on a forged passport; he has spent the best part of a decade, at taxpayers’ expense, exhorting young British Muslims to take up arms against the British, Americans and Jews in the name of Mohammed and for the greater glory of Allah. In short, he has incited murder. Why in God’s name are we sending our brave men and women to die in Afghanistan and Iraq while the likes of Abu Qatada are let in through the back door? And why is the Government not prepared to do something about it?

Perhaps we must return to the Attorney General Dominic Grieve, whose task it is to ensure that HM Government upholds the rule of law, even if that law is handed down from Strasbourg and is offensively sacrosanct. There are those who will blame the Europhile Liberal Democrats for inflicting Qatada upon the country, but the real block to reform is indeed the Attorney General. While Tim Montgomerie and ConservativeHome focus on the hapless Andrew Lansley and his floundering Health and Social Care Bill, it falls to this blog to highlight the more egregious offence and the far greater governmental incompetence – that of permitting a foreign court filled with incompetent lawyers to override the Sovereign Legislature and negate the supremacy of Parliament. And responsibility for that lies foursquare with the office of Dominic Grieve, who asserts that HM Government may not pick and choose or play fast and loose with the law. Mr Grieve is one of the Conservative Party’s foremost proponents of the ECHR. The fault, he avers, is not in the law but its interpretation. He lauded the ECHR in his 1997 maiden speech, in which he said:
The incorporation of the European convention on human rights into our national law is something that, although challenging, is nevertheless desirable if it can be done without diminishing the sovereignty of Parliament.
It is indeed challenging, not least because it is manifestly diminishing the sovereignty of Parliament. So does the ECHR thereby become undesirable? No, for both Ken Clarke and Dominic Grieve – the two most senior legal minds in the Cabinet – are opposed in principle to derogation from or revocation of the European Convention (or repeal of the Human Rights Act). It is wrong to blame the Liberal Democrats: it is Conservatives who are the impediments to reform. The Prime Minister cannot fight his corner ‘in Europe' without first fighting his own Cabinet and thereby tearing his party asunder (yet again) over the issue of 'Europe'. Or that’s his excuse.

Perhaps Abu Qatada may yet do the nation a great service, for his continuing presence here exposes the manifest impotence of Parliament, the hypocrisy of the Government, and the corrosive sophistry of the political class.


Blogger Nowhere man said...

" Why in God’s name are we sending our brave men and women to die in Afghanistan and Iraq while the likes of Abu Qatada are let in through the back door? And why is the Government not prepared to do something about it? "

That is all that needs saying. Why do we fight wars overseas when we allow 100's of thousands of illegals/bogus asylum seekers in who are criminal and/or have beliefs that are antithetical to our civilisation.

I would like to hear the governments answer.

I believe they have none.

14 February 2012 at 05:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Love the Matt cartoon about this today. :)

14 February 2012 at 06:48  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Bravo Your Grace.
But can I suggest he is compulsorily allowed to take his entire scumbag family with him - after all we would not wish to deny him his rights to a family life.

14 February 2012 at 06:50  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

This expensive farce is entirely of government's own making, and is nothing to do with EUHCR.
They are going to have to bite the bullet, and reveal a tiny bit of material obtained by covert means.
Oh, the hardship!

14 February 2012 at 07:42  
Blogger Part-time Pilgrim said...

"Apparently, we can’t deport him, despite his forged passport, because there is no assurance that the Jordanian authorities won’t convict him on the strength of evidence obtained by torture. It wouldn’t be a fair trial, you see. What that has to do with HM Government is also something of a mystery,"

In view of this section I am going to nominate this post for the Pontius Pilate award for Pragmatic Justice

14 February 2012 at 07:59  
Blogger Vic Van Den Bergh said...

To act without integrity surely brings us down to the level of those against whom we contend?

We need to deport the man but we need to do it legally and morally. and to suggest anything else is to deny the rule of law and act contrary to God's requirements of us.

Micah 6:8

14 February 2012 at 08:29  
Blogger john in cheshire said...

Whatever happens to this person, it must be such that it puts the fear of God into those who would consider taking up where he has left off. I'd much rather these foreigners feared us than loved us, then we'll stand a chance of regaining some of the decency we have lost by allowing socialists to run our lives and in alliance with the muslims, seek to destroy our country.

14 February 2012 at 09:17  
Blogger bluedog said...

A rather depressing post by His Grace. Indeed, it is impossible to see the point of the British Government, based on the arguments deployed.

Perhaps we will know for certain during the next election that British independence has gone and that British sacrifice in defence of that independence has been futile. The pointer will be the presence on the hustings, possibly not in Dave's presence, but certainly in Clegg's presence, of the dumpy figure of the Kanzellorin.

Communicants will be aware that Frau Merkel is standing on what amounts to a joint-platform with the President of France, seeking his re-election. This raises the tantalising possibility that if the Dwarf is defeated, a protest will be lodged and a fresh election ordered under EU supervision.

After all, German prestige has been placed firmly on the line and a set-back is ausgeschlossen.

As a collateral benefit, it may be that German involvement in any future British election offers the novelty of multiple non-optional preferential voting. Meaning you will vote for the German sponsored candidates until they are elected. Those seeking reform of FtP had better thank their lucky stars that they still have at least some chance.

The French presidential election will be the first test of this proposition.

Verstehen Sie?

14 February 2012 at 09:49  
Blogger Murray Rothbrd (@LibertarianView) said...

For once I disagree absolutely with his Grace:


14 February 2012 at 09:52  
Blogger Roy said...

"Fortunately, it wasn’t without impunity, and he spent six years in prison for urging his brothers and sisters to engage in terrorist attacks, including suicide bombings. Quite why that doesn’t constitute a crime is something of a mystery ..."

There is no mystery about it. Thanks to our debased parliament a "hate crime" is one that inspires or supposedly inspires hatred against certain groups of people but the British people as a whole do not constitute a "vulnerable" group.

To people like Harriet Harman you cannot have "equality" without specifying which groups people have to belong to in order to be "equal." As long as Abu Qatada does not single out any protected group he has committed no crime.

14 February 2012 at 10:11  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

This is God having a laugh. He is rubbing our faces in our rejection of His Christ.

There is much worse to come unless we repent.

14 February 2012 at 10:16  
Blogger Hereward said...

There is a lot more at stake here than the deportation of one high profile undesirable. Enough of this impotent hand wringing. The whole of the spineless pro-EU political class has got to go. Our sovereignty and independence must be restored.

14 February 2012 at 10:17  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Qatada and co have declared themselves to be in a war and soldiers of Allah - during a war and especially on the battlefield civilian niceties and finer points of law have may to be suspended.

Some seem to be suggesting that Goebels had he been caught, that he be given a house and abundant benefits and placed under luxury accommodation arrest rather than render him for examination at the Nuremburg Courts?

No wonder this Country is such a magnetic a haven for such dregs.

Will the next war criminal... sign in please!

14 February 2012 at 11:28  
Blogger DP111 said...

He is an illegal immigrant or whatever, and must be deported. He is entitled though to appeal against the deportation but from from Jordan - and no legal aid, as that should not be available to an illegal immigrant.

This should be applied to all illegal immigrants.

14 February 2012 at 12:46  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace;
I do love a good rant, it shows the frustration and welling anger of the individual. Their inability do anything about is evident yet they just can’t let it go.
I know that feeling your Grace. I must be Masochist to keep reading this blog and getting myself wound up over all that is going on and wrong. But what can we as individuals do about it? The answer is very little unless like minded individuals work together to establish a Force majeure to overthrow traditional politics dominated by weak kneed semi righteous political groups who take it in turn to bring devastation to our (previously) wonderful country.

14 February 2012 at 12:57  
Blogger Hugh said...

Your Grace,

A Bill of Attainder used to be a good way of dealing with persons who displeased our Sovereign Parliament when you were younger.
How say you, does that this situation justify one?

14 February 2012 at 13:21  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

A decision has to be made and pretty soon otherwise this will not go down well with voters. It's our security they are playing with and this vacillating with someone as dangerous as this gives out the message that more of his ilk are welcome as nothing really will happen to them.

I would arrest him and put him on trial here, for hate crimes ( he even broadcast his hatred through the pipes of Belmarsh nick) and include all the other crimes - illegal entry, forged passport, fraud etc.. too. Put him in prison with a nice cell mate like the chap who slashed Ian Huntley's throat. I wish everything back on him.

14 February 2012 at 13:28  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Your Grace

Old Ernst finds all this and and recent events reported on your august blog utterly depressing.

Ernst is bombarded in emails from friends etc to sign a petition to get this scum deported from our tolerant shores but why must I/WE? Has our country been deluded into believing everything is a reality show and we should participate as such..'I'm a Terrorist, get me outta here!' You decide whether he stays or goes?
Why must it be US and not Parliament doing it's duty to protect the nation.

If Ernst, as a British Citizen and human being with rights, cannot get a train to London and travel underground or by bus to his desired destination without wondering whether He will be blow the heck up yet a terrorist who wishes nothing better than for this to happen to Ernst and others but having this declared desire cannot be made to leave so this does not happen because His 'uman rites' trumps mine and others.
How can one person's publicly declared rights to incite hatred and murder but who benefits from our freedoms and welfare whilst here therefore outweigh that of 66 million humans on the other side of the scales of justice living within the same nation?

The truth is we are not sovereign as a nation nor are we able to do the correct thing with people like these as we do not have the guts that Italy has in saying 'Ciao B%st*ardo' and putting them on the first flight out to be judged by the very sharia law they want to impose on us. Sharia Law, not all what it says on the tin then, eh?

Are Italy not obliged under ECHR legislation?

We are controlled by minority rights (Terrorists, Atheists and Gays etc) over the majority by a parliament that pretends it has powers whereas it's are limited as we are NOT sovereign but controlled by EU and it's dicktats (pardon pun).

Atheists have even gone overboard on TV airways today telling Christians if they really are Christians and by what criteria Ernst and others faith in Christ must be declared by them as bona fide in polls or for discussion.
BBC24 were simply ecstatic he deigned to appear and were overcome with excitiement that Dawkin was pronouncing against Christianity and therefore our imaginary friend, Ex Cathedra, from the chair as it were.)

The truth is simply that Parliament is merely a glorified, expensive and impotent council, that must give way to the sovereignty in all things EU but is too scared to declare to the electorate as such.

Otherwise why vote for the monkey if it's the Organ Grinder putting the strings and playing it's tune for our elected MP's to dance to.


14 February 2012 at 15:02  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Oh very well said Ernst.

14 February 2012 at 15:18  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

I'm quite prepared to seem him deported but not to hear the drivel about him being a threat to Britain. He's wanted in Jordan not here. No law enforcement agency has anything on him here except they don't like him. Not much good in a court of law. "We don't like him at all, yer lordship! Put him in jail."

The government needs to get a grip. Either invest in proper criminal detection or shut up!

14 February 2012 at 15:36  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Arden Forester; What about incitement? To both Hatred and violence. He is an Illegal Immigrant and as such should be deported, Period. Preferably to our border in the Atlantic and dropped overboard but anywhere would do along with all other illegal’s.

14 February 2012 at 15:58  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

You miss my point, Mr.Integrity! I am NOT against him being deported. I'm against the government suggesting he's trouble and then not bothering to prove it.

And there's not much integrity in mass drownings, which you favour. You too need to get a grip otherwise you may lack so much integrity you will disintegrate.

14 February 2012 at 16:39  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Forester I'm not the one who missed the point, why do you think he was kept in jail?
I would also make sure they all had swimming lessoms if that was their choice of embarkation. That show integrity don't you think?
Chill out man!

14 February 2012 at 17:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Pilgrim: "In view of this section I am going to nominate this post for the Pontius Pilate award for Pragmatic Justice"


The guy sounds like a turd from what is written about him. However, what's the moral/ethical difference between 1. deporting someone to be tortured for evidence and torturing someone to obtain evidence 2. deporting someone to face trial using evidence based on torture and using evidence obtained by torture in a trial here 3. deporting someone to face an unfair trial and running an unfair trial here 4. deporting someone to face a possible death sentence and having a possible death sentence here? That's the actual issue because we operate here under the rule of law.

14 February 2012 at 17:17  
Blogger Oswin said...

My considered opinion being: regardless of race, creed or colour; or any other consideration; anyone as ugly as he, ought to be deported immediately!

(I note the 'word verification' is ''spitte''!)

14 February 2012 at 18:10  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

Im chilled out OK. Thanks for the thought.

14 February 2012 at 18:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. The Inspector sees this as a win win situation. Time to revel in it…

First win. The European court has been shown up for what it is. An unelected law making body, subject to no checks or balances. Merely a dictator’s considered thoughts. We can send him and his family back anyway, but we would be in contempt of court. What could they do, fine us ? Suspend us from the EU and refuse to take our 51 million daily donation ?

Second win. While he remains here free, he is the living breathing embodiment of Islam. He will attract disciples from our home grown Islamic crop. Bombs may be constructed in his name. Demonstrations in support of him are a possibility. The various ‘liberty’ organisations will come to his aid, showing them up as naïve fools (yes, that includes you Murray Rothbrd, a silly individual who seems to compare sending him back to the burning of the Reichstag. How do you manage to leave your home every morning, with all the potential dangers lurking outside !).

Either way you look at it, we have both vipers by the head, and the venom pours equally and freely from both sets of fangs. Let’s collect it, and wave it in front for all to see…

14 February 2012 at 18:22  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Extra Annoyed Blofield

The Inspector enjoyed your apoplexy today, you speak for him too in these issues…

Must take you to task on as a British Citizen and human being with rights,. Obviously, no one told you that ‘rights’ have been withdrawn from the white indigenous English (…note not ‘British’ but English). In England, only the deserving have rights, like illegal immigrant Jordanian terrorists. Indeed, your beloved Tiddles has more rights as a dumb animal, bless her.

This remarkable state of affairs where Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary have de facto turned their backs on 90% of the people here will not change until we have our own English parliament. Presumably only then will the professional windbags get round to remembering there are other issues in life other than benefit spongers, black and brown ‘disadvantaged’, secularism and the gay crowd. Such a parliament would be innately patriotic (…when was the last time you saw that word in print...). They’ll have to be as Westminster will jealously guard it’s sellout position right up until the EU wind it up, and to be noticed, the new boy will have to be different.

Right then, who’s for armed rebellion ? Enough is enough !

(Rather understand how the Irish rebels felt 100 years ago in their desire to be rid of a foreign non representative occupying power)

14 February 2012 at 18:38  
Blogger non mouse said...

As ever, I'm learning about Charity.

Therefore, I wish no Happy Cupidity Day to the neu Pagans hereabouts. I pray, instead, that the Lord will teach the British to deal appropriately with parasite-bearing mozzies - who are, indeed, not in their natural habitat.

wv: cominett

14 February 2012 at 19:25  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

He's a cupid stunt.

14 February 2012 at 21:23  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


"Must take you to task on as a British Citizen and human being with rights,."
Dear fellow, you are mostly right regarding the debasement of being English..we are the lowest of the low within the definition of our part within the term British.

Ernst is meant to feel like some fascist extremist if the flag of St George (can barely get away with flying the Union Jack) is placed blowing in the wind from his super-villain car or draped from the death-ray of his crater. (Might be forced to dust the cobwebs from Big Bertha and use it soon?)

However being british and the rights associated, irrespective of the country you live in within the union, are always inferior when placed besides the angst of the minorities within, who perceive themselves as unbelievably slighted/snubbed by normal society, hence their's trumps all.

What a country we have become where even the Secularists (Atheism's 'we are tolerant and only want what's best for all' nome de plume. Bit like Mormons sometimes calling themselves 'Jesus Christ church of latter day saints' when it suits them: A door opener for the gullible) can tell christians if they meet their secular/atheist agreed definition of what being a christian is.

What jolly fine caring chaps these atheists are but as His Grace points out...'remove the splint in your eyes first'. What a round handle Dawkins is!

Extra Annoyed is not the half of it, lad. Ernst is furious, angry, mad, raging, boiling, fuming, choked, infuriated, incensed, enraged, maddened, up in arms, on the warpath, foaming at the mouth (not because of Ernst's medication, I might add), wrathful, in high dudgeon, fit to burst.
I am basically beside myself with incandescent fury.


14 February 2012 at 21:54  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

E.Extra...Tiddles; Tiddles may have more rights than my Lab. My mother-in-law told me tonight that they are going to crack another nut with a sledgehammer. According to her, they are going to legislate that you can't have your dog out anywhere without it being on a lead. This is presumably because of one or two vicious dogs attacking kids. No one wants anyone to suffer an attack but there should be other ways of dealing with this. Where is my dog supposed to get his exercise such as running free in the park which she loves to do? If perhaps they put criminals and illegals on leads instead of Tags, we could at least see who they are and keep them under reign.

14 February 2012 at 22:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Steady on Blofeld, you’ll do yourself an injury. The fight back begins. Have you noticed how quiet those that used to go on about the ‘marvellous multicultural society’ we live in have gone. That’s where the temperature should be measured from. And, it;s hardly surprising, the cost of it all is coming to the fore...

Tally ho, we are rallying, what !

14 February 2012 at 22:26  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

I say Integrity, one or two vicious muslims out there who haven’t been locked up yet, but I’ll take my chances with a British hound every time...

14 February 2012 at 22:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ernst said ...
"Ernst is furious, angry, mad, raging, boiling, fuming, choked, infuriated, incensed, enraged, maddened, up in arms, on the warpath, foaming at the mouth (not because of Ernst's medication, I might add), wrathful, in high dudgeon, fit to burst.
I am basically beside myself with incandescent fury."

Do mind the blood pressure! A righteous anger shared by many of us. Time to think of ways of striking back.

After me: - one, two, three

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
forward into battle see his banners go!

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus going on before.

Mr Integrity
The State only rules by consent. What would happen if every dog owner refused to comply and allowed their dogs to run free?

Inspector said ...
"Right then, who’s for armed rebellion ? Enough is enough !"

Passive resistance and refusal to comply with atheist, secular, pc nonsense first.

After me: one, two, three

We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day

Oh, deep in my heart
I do believe
We shall overcome some day

We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand some day

We shall all be free
We shall all be free
We shall all be free some day

We are not afraid
We are not afraid
We are not afraid some day

We are not alone
We are not alone
We are not alone some day

The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around some day

We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day

14 February 2012 at 23:18  
Blogger David B said...

Apart from the last few words I find myself more in sympathy with Viv Van Den Bergh's post than with anything else.

It does seem strange, though, that this guy cannot be deported when (from Malaysia, so European law had nothing to do with it) Hamza Kashagari has been.


David B

15 February 2012 at 00:58  
Blogger TLF+ said...

It sounds as if you have the same "conservative" divide in the UK that we have here in the US... there's a conservative establishment more inclined to share toys with the liberal establishment than with the conservative rank and file.

15 February 2012 at 02:15  
Blogger len said...

I think His Grace has hit the nail firmly and squarely on the Head!.

'Perhaps Abu Qatada may yet do the nation a great service, for his continuing presence here exposes the manifest impotence of Parliament, the hypocrisy of the Government, and the corrosive sophistry of the political class.'

Abu Qatada also unmasks the unacceptable face of Islam.

15 February 2012 at 20:52  
Blogger Nibor said...

Before the war it was unlawful for an alien to take part in political activity .
The PTB probably had good reasons for that legislation .
Bring it back .

16 February 2012 at 21:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


When did the aliens land?

16 February 2012 at 23:47  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo : see 'S.S. Empire Windrush'.

17 February 2012 at 17:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Has that got anything to do with Windrush Square in Brixton?

Didn't know ET came from Jamaica.

17 February 2012 at 18:54  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo: I've not heard of a 'Windrush Square' but I imagine that is exactly it.

ET, a superior being, came from the Windward Islands...his Mama would be appalled at your 'Jamaica' suggestion! :o) A little (justified) West Indies snobbery there...

18 February 2012 at 13:42  
Blogger Nibor said...

way of Dodo ,

At all times for good reasons, then they or their descendants integrated .

A bit different to now , where they land , for no good reason, dont integrate ,settle and mingle in ghettoes and sometimes want to blow us up .

18 February 2012 at 21:52  
Blogger Oswin said...

Nibor: indeed, quite, and exactly!

19 February 2012 at 17:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

So the Anglo Saxons were okay and the Normans? The Jews too? The Irish and Scots? What about white people from the Commonwealth countries?

Are we just talking about West Indians, Asians and more recemtly Eastern Europeans? Those whose skin colour and distinct customs set them apart? Most West Indians were good, solid hard working Christians, so what went amiss? And gypsies, they don't fit in, do they??

Are they all in ghettos? Do they all threaten to blow us up? Or are we just talking about Muslim extremists?

21 February 2012 at 02:17  
Blogger Nibor said...

Way of Dodo,

To take your post seriously , as though you are not just putting up straw man arguments .

AngloSaxons were not OK around 450AD ,but they were in 1930 . Ditto the Normans , Jews , Irish and Scots .

No we`re not just talking about West Indians , Asians and more recent Eastern Europeans . We are not talking about skin colour (unless that is an issue with you ) or customs UNLESS those customs are incompatible with us . We were talking about our society and safety .
Some West Indians went amiss with a subculture and drug culture .They will be disliked by the good ,solid harworking and Christian West Indians , joined of course by everyone else .
Which Gypsies are you referring to ?
Pure Roma, White Gypsies , Travellers ? Obviously the likes of the Dale Farm travellers dont fit in( hated by real Gypsies ).
Some put themselves in ghettoes (Dale Farm again ), They dont ALL threaten to blow us up , but some dangerous ones do (or is this thread about Abu Qata a waste of your time ?) And we are mainly talking NOW about Muslim extremists (unless you know Pentecostals , Presbyterians , Bhuddists , Hindus, Confuscians , druidsor Anglicans who have muderous intent )

21 February 2012 at 04:39  
Blogger Oswin said...

Nibor: don't bother yourself; Dodo, spider-like, is just waiting to pounce on some point or another, as yet to be decided.

He has a bit of a soft spot for muslims, or at least likes to appear as if he does, for whatever reason...?

I agree with many, possibly all, of your 'distinctions' but I generally find it a lot easier to say I'm a 'racist' and save everyone a lot of time, rather than explain as you have, only then to then be condemned anyway. If nowt else, it saves a lot of hot air and grief.

Your original comment @ 21:52 was succinct, and inarguable; unlike Dodo's superfluous questionings.

21 February 2012 at 16:43  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Nibor said ...

"And we are mainly talking NOW about Muslim extremists,

Then do say that rather than launching a general broadside against all 'aliens'. That way you wont be taken for a racist.

25 February 2012 at 23:10  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older