Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Darth Loo-knee on 13 February 2012, 22:05:09
-
Of jail allowed to stop in Our Country......
What the hell is the idea of that???
-
Of jail allowed to stop in Our Country......
What the hell is the idea of that???
Just unbelievable isn't it >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
He just needs a bullet between the eyes! >:( >:(
-
It's not OUR country any more Daz! >:(
-
It's not OUR country any more Daz! >:(
Well if these do gooders want him...they should have him >:(
-
I was having a quiet and calm night.Please dont get me started. ::) ;D
-
It was against his 'uman rights.
European Court of InJustice made a ruling, that he might not get a fair trial in Jordan, even though the Jordanian Government have given guarantees. >:( >:( >:( >:(
Which means as a convicted terrorist who detests and despises this county, his right to plot, attack and blow us up is not against our human rights. >:( >:( >:( >:(
This European Court of InJustice run by a bunch of farsighted liberal do-gooder judges that live with their heads up their butts, need to be sorted out, the only chance of that happening is if UKIP get into power and we withdraw for the 'uman no rights act for Mr and Mrs Average Hard Working Who Pay Their Taxes. >:( >:( >:(
-
Well said Rod.Saved me the bother of getting all steamed up jsut before bathtime. :y ;D
-
Jordan apparently condone torture, so Eu won't allow deportation. Fair enough, although I wouldn't loose any sleep sending him their personally...
This has been raised in the house publicly, I bet "they" find that very amusing.
But I don't understand why he has to be released in the first place...? Anyone?
-
I really can't see why we don't just ship him on a plane to Jordan, it doesn't even have to land just let the bugger float down :y :y
What are the European Court going to do ? Throw us out... PLEASE ;)
-
I expect the next ruling by the European Court of
InJustice will be confiscating terrorist weapons and stopping them carrying out terrorist attacks, is against their 'uman rights as they must be allowed to keep the tools of their trade and allowed to carry out that trade. >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
Jordan apparently condone torture, so Eu won't allow deportation. Fair enough, although I wouldn't loose any sleep sending him their personally...
This has been raised in the house publicly, I bet "they" find that very amusing.
But I don't understand why he has to be released in the first place...? Anyone?
As I understand it, but I could be wrong .... he was not arrested for any crime alleged to have been committed in this country, but at the request of the Jordanians for deportation to answer alleged crimes in Jordan. That is why his incarceration and subsequent release on parole has been handled by the Imigration Service and not by any "real" Court in the UK. The ECHR has decreed that his deportation would breach the rules that Labour signed up to, so he cannot be deported AT THIS TIME. As he cannot be deported, he cannot be held indefinitely under English law ... term used is Custody Time Limit .. so he is released on bail, pending talks with the Jordanians. If agreement is reached with them he gets re-arrested and deported .. if no agreement he will, eventually, be released fully.
That is a simple take as I understand it right now, probably a few bits are more complicated but that's the gist of it.. :(
-
the whole problem could be sorted easily by sticking a sawn off shotgun up his jaksy.
-
Jordan has given guarantees regarding the EU concerns about torture,but the EU havent accepted it.Much more to the point however is the fact that the EU can overrule the British Govt. and British law regarding who can or cannot be in this country.
rather disgraceful >:( >:(
Vote UKIP. :y
-
Jordan has given guarantees regarding the EU concerns about torture,but the EU havent accepted it.Much more to the point however is the fact that the EU can overrule the British Govt. and British law regarding who can or cannot be in this country.
rather disgraceful >:( >:(
Vote UKIP. :y
Roger, that. Wilco! :y
-
Jordan apparently condone torture, so Eu won't allow deportation. Fair enough, although I wouldn't loose any sleep sending him their personally...
This has been raised in the house publicly, I bet "they" find that very amusing.
But I don't understand why he has to be released in the first place...? Anyone?
As I understand it, but I could be wrong .... he was not arrested for any crime alleged to have been committed in this country, but at the request of the Jordanians for deportation to answer alleged crimes in Jordan. That is why his incarceration and subsequent release on parole has been handled by the Imigration Service and not by any "real" Court in the UK. The ECHR has decreed that his deportation would breach the rules that Labour signed up to, so he cannot be deported AT THIS TIME. As he cannot be deported, he cannot be held indefinitely under English law ... term used is Custody Time Limit .. so he is released on bail, pending talks with the Jordanians. If agreement is reached with them he gets re-arrested and deported .. if no agreement he will, eventually, be released fully.
That is a simple take as I understand it right now, probably a few bits are more complicated but that's the gist of it.. :(
Ah, cheers Entwood.
So, for instance, handing him over to the Jordanians would be like US troops torchering Iraqi troops in us prison camps? Ie, rather hypocritical? Something of a paradox one might say?
-
So, for the sake of argument, by an accident of birth I was born in a country with poor human rights, then moved to Jordan where I was arrested for extradition. How long exactly would Jordan agonise over my plight before shipping me right back from where I came? Thought so. ;D
-
Just to clarify, the ECHR claims that the evidence against Abu Qatada in Jordan may have been gathered through torture, not that he would be tortured himself were he to extradited. Indeed, Jordan has pledged it would not torture him (though, frankly, I don't give a hoot if they did).
-
Jordan apparently condone torture, so Eu won't allow deportation. Fair enough, although I wouldn't loose any sleep sending him their personally...
This has been raised in the house publicly, I bet "they" find that very amusing.
But I don't understand why he has to be released in the first place...? Anyone?
As I understand it, but I could be wrong .... he was not arrested for any crime alleged to have been committed in this country, but at the request of the Jordanians for deportation to answer alleged crimes in Jordan. That is why his incarceration and subsequent release on parole has been handled by the Imigration Service and not by any "real" Court in the UK. The ECHR has decreed that his deportation would breach the rules that Labour signed up to, so he cannot be deported AT THIS TIME. As he cannot be deported, he cannot be held indefinitely under English law ... term used is Custody Time Limit .. so he is released on bail, pending talks with the Jordanians. If agreement is reached with them he gets re-arrested and deported .. if no agreement he will, eventually, be released fully.
That is a simple take as I understand it right now, probably a few bits are more complicated but that's the gist of it.. :(
Ah, cheers Entwood.
So, for instance, handing him over to the Jordanians would be like US troops torchering Iraqi troops in us prison camps? Ie, rather hypocritical? Something of a paradox one might say?
by that I refer to the pow boot camps in Iraq.
-
Just to clarify, the ECHR claims that the evidence against Abu Qatada in Jordan may have been gathered through torture, not that he would be tortured himself were he to extradited. Indeed, Jordan has pledged it would not torture him (though, frankly, I don't give a hoot if they did).
Do we find ourselves in agreement Nick? :o
-
So, for the sake of argument, by an accident of birth I was born in a country with poor human rights, then moved to Jordan where I was arrested for extradition. How long exactly would Jordan agonise over my plight before shipping me right back from where I came? Thought so. ;D
they'd have a good torture first though probably?
-
Just to clarify, the ECHR claims that the evidence against Abu Qatada in Jordan may have been gathered through torture, not that he would be tortured himself were he to extradited. Indeed, Jordan has pledged it would not torture him (though, frankly, I don't give a hoot if they did).
Do we find ourselves in agreement Nick? :o
Sure looks like it, Chris. :o :o
-
Just to clarify, the ECHR claims that the evidence against Abu Qatada in Jordan may have been gathered through torture, not that he would be tortured himself were he to extradited. Indeed, Jordan has pledged it would not torture him (though, frankly, I don't give a hoot if they did).
Do we find ourselves in agreement Nick? :o
Sure looks like it, Chris. :o :o
Well, had to happen sooner or later I s'pose. ;D
-
One of the problems the UK Government has, is that it has tried to update the terrorism laws of this country, and is firmly committed to the principle (I para-phrase) "deliberate disobedience of the law is in itself, a form of terrorism" ... this means that because Messers Blur and Brun & Co signed up to the ECHR and committed the UK to those rules ... immediate shipping of this man to Jordan in defiance of the ruling would, not only be highly hypocritical, but would put the UK on the same "level" as the terrorists themselves.
The UK, rightly, prides itself on its record of fairness and principle, it is a shame that, rarely, these principles are tested to the extreme... by extremists .. that does NOT however make the principles wrong.
-
Jordan apparently condone torture, so Eu won't allow deportation. Fair enough, although I wouldn't loose any sleep sending him their personally...
This has been raised in the house publicly, I bet "they" find that very amusing.
But I don't understand why he has to be released in the first place...? Anyone?
As I understand it, but I could be wrong .... he was not arrested for any crime alleged to have been committed in this country, but at the request of the Jordanians for deportation to answer alleged crimes in Jordan. That is why his incarceration and subsequent release on parole has been handled by the Imigration Service and not by any "real" Court in the UK. The ECHR has decreed that his deportation would breach the rules that Labour signed up to, so he cannot be deported AT THIS TIME. As he cannot be deported, he cannot be held indefinitely under English law ... term used is Custody Time Limit .. so he is released on bail, pending talks with the Jordanians. If agreement is reached with them he gets re-arrested and deported .. if no agreement he will, eventually, be released fully.
That is a simple take as I understand it right now, probably a few bits are more complicated but that's the gist of it.. :(
I thought he was found guilty in Jordan in his absence. Not 100% sure but thought I read it somwhere.
-
David Mellor was interviewed on TV today and said some things which surprised me.He stated that the UK is not in any way legally obliged to adhere to the rulings of the ECHR, that its findings were only actually advisory in law,and this is why France an Italy have acted in complete defiance of its findings in the past.
He said that coalition ministers simply dont have the bottle to do this,so like to give the impression that they have no choice in the matter.
Tbh I dont know if this is correct or not,as I always had the impression that the rulings of the ECHR were binding within the EU. :-\
-
David Mellor was interviewed on TV today and said some things which surprised me.He stated that the UK is not in any way legally obliged to adhere to the rulings of the ECHR, that its findings were only actually advisory in law,and this is why France an Italy have acted in complete defiance of its findings in the past.
He said that coalition ministers simply dont have the bottle to do this,so like to give the impression that they have no choice in the matter.
Tbh I dont know if this is correct or not,as I always had the impression that the rulings of the ECHR were binding within the EU. :-\
A quick google seems to imply that is a total load of male cow manure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights
All 47 countries who have signed up to the Council of Europe have ratified the protocol.
Note ECHR has absolutely NOTHING to do with the EU, in any way, shape or form ....
-
To my mind, this fella needs to be dissappeared from the UK by the 2012 Mr Bond and cohorts then reappeared where he needs to be, as if by magic.
We let him in on a false passport, so why not let him out on one?
-
Use him for target practice for new armed forces recruits :y
-
David Mellor was interviewed on TV today and said some things which surprised me.He stated that the UK is not in any way legally obliged to adhere to the rulings of the ECHR, that its findings were only actually advisory in law,and this is why France an Italy have acted in complete defiance of its findings in the past.
He said that coalition ministers simply dont have the bottle to do this,so like to give the impression that they have no choice in the matter.
Tbh I dont know if this is correct or not,as I always had the impression that the rulings of the ECHR were binding within the EU. :-\
A quick google seems to imply that is a total load of male cow manure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights
All 47 countries who have signed up to the Council of Europe have ratified the protocol.
Note ECHR has absolutely NOTHING to do with the EU, in any way, shape or form ....
Strictly speaking,thats absolutely correct.I have the impression though that it has been hijacked/infiltrated by EU minded types just as most other things in Europe have been. They now interfere in all sorts of things which werent what the institution was set up for in the first place.Afaik its main purpose was to help ensure that nothing resembling Nazi Germany could happen in Europe in the future,but it has now got to the point where it interferes in much more minor matters in member states which the people sitting on judgement have often never even visited and know almost nothing about.Like most other large institutions its needs to be seriously overhauled or simply abolished altogether.
Imo the fact that it has a backlog of approx. 140,000 cases tends to indicate that there is something very badly wrong with it.
-
Short version, lets hope Theresa May and Cameron grow a pair between them,and decide to act in the interests of the country,rather than listen to the Limpdems or the ECHR. :)
-
Short version, lets hope Theresa May and Cameron grow a pair between them,and decide to act in the interests of the country,rather than listen to the Limpdems or the ECHR. :)
Is that the equivalent of TORY PORN? ;D ;D ;D
-
I was given to understand yesterday by swmbo, that Australia has one of these problems :(
Been living there for god knows how many years.....guess where they are sending him back to..... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
Short version, lets hope Theresa May and Cameron grow a pair between them,and decide to act in the interests of the country,rather than listen to the Limpdems or the ECHR. :)
Is that the equivalent of TORY PORN? ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D Splendid C :y
-
David Mellor was interviewed on TV today and said some things which surprised me.He stated that the UK is not in any way legally obliged to adhere to the rulings of the ECHR, that its findings were only actually advisory in law,and this is why France an Italy have acted in complete defiance of its findings in the past.
He said that coalition ministers simply dont have the bottle to do this,so like to give the impression that they have no choice in the matter.
Tbh I dont know if this is correct or not,as I always had the impression that the rulings of the ECHR were binding within the EU. :-\
A quick google seems to imply that is a total load of male cow manure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights
All 47 countries who have signed up to the Council of Europe have ratified the protocol.
Note ECHR has absolutely NOTHING to do with the EU, in any way, shape or form ....
All 47 countries who have signed up to the Council of Europe have ratified the protocol.
Yes I agree. There's no point in signing up to legally binding treaties then continue to bitch about decisions made by the very institutions we sanction to adjudicate matters that fall under their purview.
Note ECHR has absolutely NOTHING to do with the EU, in any way, shape or form
It shouldn't have, but needless to say 'Brussels' has made moves to ensure 'it' has some influence within the ECHR decision making process - before matters are tried or, in the event of a less than obvious outcome, afterwards. Protocol 14 affords this 'helpful' step forward.
Successive British governments have, by design or incompetence, signed away our national independence and the right we should have to decide on just who is welcome - or not- within the borders of this country.
Do not complain about Europe - direct those complaints to the sham politicians residing at Westminster who are, at most, merely street walkers for the pimps of 'Brussels’.