It’s called the rule of law

‘A senior official from the FBI’ is a cunt: "[Islamic terrorists are] laughing at you… They know, because of what your courts have decided, it’s going to be easier for them to execute a terrorist outrage that kills hundreds, if not thousands, of people in Britain. I tell you: they’re laughing."

No. The UK has a fair and reasonable judicial system that does a reasonably good job of protecting everyone in Britain from both crime and the arbitrary exercise of authority. American political leaders make up bollocks about organised terror networks to scare people, and deport people to be tortured without trial.

Admittedly, our political representatives should be flayed alive for signing mad extradition laws with you bastards, which mean that Brits who’ve never even been to America can be arrested here, then deported to face charges of being a Muslim without having the opportunity to defend themselves in a British court first (considerately, our wonderful police service will also give them a good beating on arrest, to help them adjust to life being tortured by inbred rednecks in a federal prison).

Maybe the people who want to destroy all that is worthwhile and decent in Western society are laughing, after all…

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by John B. Bookmark the permalink.

11 thoughts on “It’s called the rule of law

  1. ‘The SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMITTEES, the organisation that reviews whether the Home Office is justified in detaining the men without trial under the security and anti-terrorism legislation, is in no doubt: the men, if left at liberty, would pose a serious threat to the security of Britain.’

    So good to know that an organisation that has about 30% of it’s decisions sucessfully overturned on appeal is in no way towing the HO line.

  2. What we should do in response to this is sit on the steps of Westminster tube station, with bottles of beer in our hand. One of us should then say, "isn’t it amazing we live in a country which goes out of its way to protect the rights of people who want to kill us?". Then, one by one, we should say "God bless the United Kingdom". That’s how they’d do it on the West Wing.

  3. If these people are so f’ing dangerous, then presumably MI6 are keeping an eye on them anyway? In which case, either they will lead us straight to Mr Big, or they will sit at home trying to make ricin out of kidney beans, in which case we can say something like "you’re nicked sunshine" and bang them up on a proper charge.

  4. Oh give me a break.

    The man was caught red-handed with classified naval documents, and a plan to attack ships in the Straight of Hormuz a la the Cole and the Linbourg. You demean yourself even bringing this jihadi up, much less defending him. Of course, he’s just a poor innocent victim of the AmericanNaziNeoconMilitaryIndustrialComplexFascists, discriminating against a pilgrim of the Religion of Peace, who feeds starving children and, in his own words: "propagate[s] the call for jihad, among the Muslims who are sitting down, ignorant of this vital duty."

    Personally, I can’t wait to know that he’s taking an extended tour of his own 10′ x 10′ plot of gorgeous southeastern Cuba. Of course he’ll need some panties to wear on his head, maybe you can led him some of yours?

  5. Yes, I see you trust little-known left-wing propaganda sites quite a bit more. Weren’t you the one who said blogs were of little consequence? What makes an authority? They comport with the reality you wish to see?

  6. Personally, I can’t wait to know that he’s taking an extended tour of his own 10′ x 10′ plot of gorgeous southeastern Cuba.

    Thank God someone is talking sense. He’s so obviously guilty, why the hell waste time poncing about with a trial?

    They should cut his hands off while he’s there – like they do in sensible parts of the world.

  7. Who said he won’t get a trial? I think the whole reason he’s being extradited is that the prosecutors couldn’t expect to get a fair trial in Britain, which is rather sorry comnment IMO.

  8. Timbeaux – sorry, you are being both ignorant and offensive. I do not know Babar Ahmad’s family well, but I know them well enough to see – as does everyone who knows him – just how gross and stupid the charges he faces really are. They are an ordinary family from south London; that Babar should be accused of being some sort of "terror-master" would be comic, if it were not so serious.

    Babar Ahmad is innocent of the charges he faces – I am quite certain of this – and Stop Political Terror are absolutely correct to campaign for his release. Their website is worth a look for the utter paucity of evidence assembled against the man: his father’s thirty-year old holiday brochures from New York produced as "proof" of a plot to destroy the Empire State Building is perhaps the most memorably ludicrous.

    Babar is being extradited because the standard of proof required to extradite someone from the UK is not as great as that needed to try and convict someone. Once in the US, his defence team have plausibly argued that he will not face a fair trial and given the evidence from the former Guantanamo detainees, there is every reason to believe they are correct in this.

    More speculatively, the motivation for the extradition proceedings appear to be political: having beaten and tortured Babar Ahmad in December 2003 before releasing him without charge, the police wish to make it clear that complaints from uppity Muslims will not be tolerated.

    Anyone with any concern for basic standards of civil liberties and the rule of law in Britain should be supporting Babar’s release.

Comments are closed.