View Full Version : Al-Qaeda ringleader free to walk the streets
Al-Qaeda ringleader wins appeal against deportation
I saw this headline on the BBC news and thought, how can a convicted terrorist not be deported from the UK
Closer scrutiny however revealed that this person has not been gaoled or even charged with any offence either here or in Pakistan, and that the term “Al-Qaeda ringleader” was bestowed on him by a “A special immigration court”
The story began in April 2009 when the Metropolitan Police's then head of counter-terrorism, inadvertently revealed details of an "investigation"
Because of the seriousness of this "investigation" it was decided to arrest 11 people in Manchester & Liverpool, under the draconian terror laws we now take for granted in this country.
None of the 11 people were charged with any offence, nor was any terror related evidence found.
It seems that the basis for this persons arrest was an Email he sent/received concerning a wedding date, and that our security /intelligence services decoded this as being a planned terrorist attack.
What is also puzzling about this story is why a so called ringleader of a proscribed organisation is allowed to walk the streets of a country which he planned on attacking.
Our new Home Secretary Theresa May said, 'Protecting the public is the government's top priority.
'We are disappointed that the court has ruled that Abid Naseer and Ahmad Faraz Khan should not be deported to Pakistan, which we were seeking on national security grounds. As the court agreed, they are a security risk to the UK.
'We are now taking all possible measures to ensure they do not engage in terrorist activity.'
Perhaps Ms May would like to inform the residents of the UK just who makes up “this special immigration court” and on what evidence, 11 people were arrested for terrorist offences for.
Or was it because they were Muslims?
Grr what a disgrace saw that on the news to. Would like to say how i feel about it but us british in our own countryy are not aloud to express our opinions dont even get me started .
Anfield, do you really not believe the the anti terror department know these guys are terrorists. Just because there is no ADMISSABLE evidence to convict them. They won't be deported because they appealed on the grounds they may be tortured if returned to Pakistan. These boys are very lucky. In other states they would simply be shot in the head.
Edit. The evidence they do have, will never see the light of day, no matter how much you froth at the mouth.
He may or may not be a terrorist, but there are still plenty of other people who are walking the streets who should be deported or imprisoned.
Mmmmmm I thought in this country you were innocent until proven guilty?#&*$# :eek:
Mmmmmm I thought in this country you were innocent until proven guilty?#&*$# :eek:
So did I, but the problem is even if youre found guilty you only get a slap on the wrist for it.
Non the less is it not a good thing that people who have not been convicted are spared cruel and inhuman treatment? Extreme rendition - waterboarding and the rest just made us and the yanks as bad as the terrorists, no use fighting for principles if you choose when to stick to them.
The Angel Of Death
19-May-10, 00:30
Non the less is it not a good thing that people who have not been convicted are spared cruel and inhuman treatment?
Sure nick berg and a few other chaps who have had their heads parted from there body's agree with that one they didn't suffer cruel and inhuman treatment did they ? Hang about they were never tied in a court of law or given any kind of fair hearing were they
I am of the opinion if you’re in our country you live and abide by our rules you don't like it simple leave no one is keeping you hear annoys me with all this I can’t be deported because it’s not safe back home much the same as I would do in another country if I was visiting there
How come were the country they all come to for asylum ? what's wrong with a country closer to home a cynical person would say lots and lots of free benefits nice cosy house etc etc has something to do with it
As for breaking the law its simple any terrorist activity then we will ship you back there might even act as a deterrent if nothing else fly you over the border dump you out of a plane with a parachute and leave you to get on with it
For instance I could sanction an act of torture if it saves or prevents a terrorist activity my way if thinking is if the shoe was on the other foot do you think they wouldn't do the same
Do you think they treat solders (British American etc etc) with nice furry slippers and a cup of tea before the go till there warms beds and fluffy pillows etc sure prison is no easy place but 3 square meals a day and all the perks you can claim for doesn't sound as bad as getting your head chopped off does it ?
Water boarding all the way I say could even send out a message were not to be toyed with any more and take us off the namby pamby state list were on at the moment where you can get anything you want if you play the right cards
Boozeburglar
19-May-10, 00:41
Seems obvious to me that if he was as suggested it is better for him to be here where we can keep and eye on him rather than back over there where he can be actively fighting our troops.
Sorry for the poor Tories trying to act all tough and that. He he.
Al-Qaeda ringleader wins appeal against deportation
I saw this headline on the BBC news and thought, how can a convicted terrorist not be deported from the UK
Closer scrutiny however revealed that this person has not been gaoled or even charged with any offence either here or in Pakistan, and that the term “Al-Qaeda ringleader” was bestowed on him by a “A special immigration court”
The story began in April 2009 when the Metropolitan Police's then head of counter-terrorism, inadvertently revealed details of an "investigation"
Because of the seriousness of this "investigation" it was decided to arrest 11 people in Manchester & Liverpool, under the draconian terror laws we now take for granted in this country.
None of the 11 people were charged with any offence, nor was any terror related evidence found.
It seems that the basis for this persons arrest was an Email he sent/received concerning a wedding date, and that our security /intelligence services decoded this as being a planned terrorist attack.
What is also puzzling about this story is why a so called ringleader of a proscribed organisation is allowed to walk the streets of a country which he planned on attacking.
Our new Home Secretary Theresa May said, 'Protecting the public is the government's top priority.
'We are disappointed that the court has ruled that Abid Naseer and Ahmad Faraz Khan should not be deported to Pakistan, which we were seeking on national security grounds. As the court agreed, they are a security risk to the UK.
'We are now taking all possible measures to ensure they do not engage in terrorist activity.'
Perhaps Ms May would like to inform the residents of the UK just who makes up “this special immigration court” and on what evidence, 11 people were arrested for terrorist offences for.
Or was it because they were Muslims?
Is the bit in bold type quoted from a site?
So A of D that is a reasoned argument? Well, two wrongs obviously make a right.
Seriously even if there could be any justification - information gained under torture is not reliable, if you allow the actions of others to lower standards of justice and decency they are winning - as simple as that.
My solution? Internment of suspected terrorists. Unlimited right of appeal anytime evidence can be presented. Some would stay locked up forever and that would suit me fine.
The Angel Of Death
19-May-10, 08:51
information gained under torture is not reliable
I get what your saying but surley some information and the possible chance to prevent a 9/11 style attack justifies it if the intelligence points towards a credible threat and you catch the ringleader / cell leader in my opinion doing nothing and the event happening would leave me asking myself could I have done more to prevent it yes torture might not always be 100 % reliable but the information gained could lead to an attack being prevented
My solution? Internment of suspected terrorists. Unlimited right of appeal anytime evidence can be presented. Some would stay locked up forever and that would suit me fine.
Within an already bursting at the seems prison system where the prisoners seem to have more rights than victims these days I mean prison isn't meant to be a holiday camp but that's what it is to some people
Chain gangs breaking rocks anything involving hard labour is what's needed but we cant do that cause prisoners have rights my suggestion is a two tier rights system break the law and get jailed for it you loose part of your rights keeping the basic ones once you served your time you get them back would at least show people your not getting an easy ride in jail no tv's play stations etc just basic conditions
That way people would seriously think about re offending and going back these days jail isn't far off a butlins holiday camp with extra bars on the windows
The Drunken Duck
19-May-10, 09:12
Why is this one guy claiming that to return him to Pakistan would put him in danger ??, did he declare this "fear of torture" when he arrived as one of his reasons for arriving on our doorstep ??, if not why not ?? I mean, one of the other guys held has returned and no harm has come to him. Methinks someone started singing like a canary (hence the outright claim that he is an Al Qaeda operative) and to return him would mean his "handlers" would want a word. With a blowtorch and some pliers. If he is coughing up information valuable to us then we would keep him here, it would also explain why the reasons are a bit hush hush. The bottom line is if we REALLY wanted to deport him we could. And he wont be allowed to "walk the streets", he wont be able to have a poo with MI5 knowing what colour it is.
Just because the reasons and/or evidence are not made public does not mean they do not exist. The Intelligence game involves COUNTER Intelligence and that means bluff and double bluff, you don't publish the cards you are holding in the blinking media !!, But you WOULD let Al Qaeda see that we have their guy, therefore any plans, intentions and even other Al Qaeda members he knew about would have to be considered "blown" whether he is actually spilling his guts or not.
I get what your saying but surley some information and the possible chance to prevent a 9/11 style attack justifies it if the intelligence points towards a credible threat and you catch the ringleader / cell leader in my opinion doing nothing and the event happening would leave me asking myself could I have done more to prevent it yes torture might not always be 100 % reliable but the information gained could lead to an attack being prevented
So, a British student is back packing across the Middle East, the police in Iran suspect he may be a spy but have no evidence. Would the Iranian government be justified in torturing this student to determine if he has evidence which might prevent an attack by one of the Western backed dissident groups in Iran?
So, a British student is back packing across the Middle East, the police in Iran suspect he may be a spy but have no evidence. Would the Iranian government be justified in torturing this student to determine if he has evidence which might prevent an attack by one of the Western backed dissident groups in Iran?
Well of course they would-justified or not, but that's OK, then we would invade, regime change, get the oil, stabilise the middle east, keep Israel happy, send a stern message to Syria and North Korea........
The Angel Of Death
19-May-10, 10:15
I get your point Fred but how many British back packers out there are conspiring against Iran in comparison to middle eastern residents coming to GB and living within the UK conspiring against us ?
As for the torture part there is a difference between having an inkling and knowing someone is involved in a plot
My main point really is if the uk is such a hole then why come here in the first place I mean using Pakistan as an example I don't dislike the place but I certainly wouldn't move over there and start campaigning for British rules and regulations to be brought in there I would have the respect to abide by there rules and the common sence not till as well knowing the end results
Using Abu Hamza as an example why do we continue to house cloth feed him within our prison system creating another drain on an already stretched system get rid i say
I get your point Fred but how many British back packers out there are conspiring against Iran in comparison to middle eastern residents coming to GB and living within the UK conspiring against us ?
There are more British nationals living in other countries than there are foreign nationals living in Britain.
As for the torture part there is a difference between having an inkling and knowing someone is involved in a plot
Well we don't exactly have a good track record for getting it right now do we? Those WMD we were so sure about? How about that young Brazilian we blew away on the underground? How can the Government and the Security Services say "trust us" when they have a long history of getting it wrong? The American government had all the information they needed to prevent 9/11 yet they didn't prevent it, they ignored the information. What is the point of torturing people to get dubious information which will then be ignored?
My main point really is if the uk is such a hole then why come here in the first place I mean using Pakistan as an example I don't dislike the place but I certainly wouldn't move over there and start campaigning for British rules and regulations to be brought in there I would have the respect to abide by there rules and the common sence not till as well knowing the end results
I expect people come here from Pakistan because they have relatives living here. When we had an Empire we kept the peace in India in exchange for stealing all their natural resources but when the Empire fell there was civil war and a lot of refugees. After WWII Britain was very near bankrupt and needed a huge manufacturing base so we could make things to export to get currency to pay for the things we needed to import. So we encouraged people to move here from Pakistan and India to work in the mills and factories. Thus we have the same cultures in parts of Britain as they do in Pakistan so it is natural that someone who had to leave Pakistan would come here.
Using Abu Hamza as an example why do we continue to house cloth feed him within our prison system creating another drain on an already stretched system get rid i say
Wouldn't that apply to anyone in prison? Why single out one?
Anfield, do you really not believe the the anti terror department know these guys are terrorists
Our anti terror department appear to be a bit of a shambles.
The 07/07 bombers were under surveillance but were allowed to travel together to London to carry out their deadly mission.
Was the killing at Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell a properly carried out "anti terrorist" exercise led by experienced officers?
Mmmmmm I thought in this country you were innocent until proven guilty?#&*$# :eek:
Unless you are a Muslim
Is the bit in bold type quoted from a site?
Sorry about that Pegasus, apart from quote by Theresa May at bottom all text arr my observations
My solution? Internment of suspected terrorists. Unlimited right of appeal anytime evidence can be presented. Some would stay locked up forever and that would suit me fine.
Do you think that internment helped the situation in N/Ireland?
I get your point Fred but how many British back packers out there are conspiring against Iran in comparison to middle eastern residents coming to GB and living within the UK conspiring against us ?
For "back packers" substitute the word "aid and security workers". Whilst I would accept that the vast majority of aid workers do a tremendous job, there a few who use their role for more nefarious reasons
Just because the reasons and/or evidence are not made public does not mean they do not exist. The Intelligence game involves COUNTER Intelligence and that means bluff and double bluff, you don't publish the cards you are holding in the blinking media !!, But you WOULD let Al Qaeda see that we have their guy, therefore any plans, intentions and even other Al Qaeda members he knew about would have to be considered "blown" whether he is actually spilling his guts or not.
I see the point that you are making, but what if guy is not an Al Qaeda member?
It could be that we are using valuble resources "controlling" all these Al Qaeda suspects, and the real terrorists can not be identified because of the lack of resources.
Perhaps if we withdrew from the war in Iraq & Afghanistan our country would not then be in danger from a terrorist attack from Al Qaeda
Perhaps if we withdrew from the war in Iraq & Afghanistan our country would not then be in danger from a terrorist attack from Al Qaeda
Perhaps if we all went pacifiist/communist/ and hid behind a woman's skirts they would go away and leave us alone [disgust]
The Drunken Duck
19-May-10, 13:43
Using Abu Hamza as an example why do we continue to house cloth feed him within our prison system
Souvenirs mate .. :D
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/8100/abuhamzakeyholder.jpg
Do you think that internment helped the situation in N/Ireland?
While it wasn't very popular with the internees and their families it did what it said on the tin. Locked up known terrorists that could not be convicted for whatever reason and kept them off the street.
Exactly what I am advocating now.
While it wasn't very popular with the internees and their families it did what it said on the tin. Locked up known terrorists that could not be convicted for whatever reason and kept them off the street.
Exactly what I am advocating now.
Wow, what a statement. How could a known terrorist not be convicted? Anyway, it locked up innocent people and resulted in a surge of Republicans volunteering for the IRA, so I'd say it was a massive faux pas on the part of the British Government. By introducing internment they stoked the troubles for years, but maybe that was what they wanted all along..........
annthracks
19-May-10, 18:28
Souvenirs mate .. :D
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/8100/abuhamzakeyholder.jpg
LMAO, where can I get one??
annthracks
19-May-10, 18:30
Souvenirs mate .. :D
Ah ...
(c) The Sun - "The "Abu Hanger" device - a spoof going round on email - is surely a must for every gadget-lover's kitchen.
The Drunken Duck
19-May-10, 19:22
Ah ...
(c) The Sun - "The "Abu Hanger" device - a spoof going round on email - is surely a must for every gadget-lover's kitchen.
I might be able to locate one for you .. leave it with me .. ;)
While it wasn't very popular with the internees and their families it did what it said on the tin. Locked up known terrorists that could not be convicted for whatever reason and kept them off the street.
Exactly what I am advocating now.
But did it stop the killings?
The death of the hunger stikers became one of the best recruitment policies the IRA ever had, handed to them on a plate by the UK authorities
Didn't Abu Hanza loses his limbs whilst removing Russian land mines in Afghanistan?
Land mines which, even now, could be killing British soldiers.
The Drunken Duck
19-May-10, 19:49
Didn't Abu Hanza loses his limbs whilst removing Russian land mines in Afghanistan?
Land mines which, even now, could be killing British soldiers.
Well that's what his supporters claim, whether it is true or not is another matter.
Even if it is it wasn't to benefit us, he hates us. Well everything but our money that he gladly took through the Benefit System while at the same time preaching hate about us.
Was the killing at Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell a properly carried out "anti terrorist" exercise led by experienced officers?
Actually yes, they got the wrong bloke. If he had been the right bloke they acted as they should to avoid a suicide bomber blowing themselves up.
Well that's what his supporters claim, whether it is true or not is another matter.
Even if it is it wasn't to benefit us, he hates us. Well everything but our money that he gladly took through the Benefit System while at the same time preaching hate about us.
Whilst I have no time for Abu Hanza, I do find it difficult to comprehend why he was convicted of stirring up racial hatred, yet the equally odious Nick Griffin was aquitted of similar charges.
annthracks
21-May-10, 17:35
I might be able to locate one for you .. leave it with me .. ;)
s'aright, I'll steal the idea and make my own :) cheers anyway
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.