generalconyers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote...
> 'Britain's efforts to de****t terrorist suspects including the radical
> Muslim cleric Abu Qatada were dealt a serious blow by the European
> Court of Human Rights yesterday.
>
> In a unanimous decision, the court in Strasbourg ruled against an
> attempt by Italy to return a Tunisian to his home country. The Italian
> authorities had sought to have Nassim Saadi de****ted on the ground
> that he had played an "active role" in an organisation providing
> sup****t to fundamentalist Islamist cells in Italy and abroad.
>
> The 17 judges decided that sending Saadi back would violate the
> European Convention on Human Rights because he faced a real risk of
> torture or inhumane treatment. Britain, which is seeking to send Abu
> Qatada to Jordan, had intervened in the case in the hope that the
> court would back the return of suspects regardless of their home
> country's human rights record.
Wouldn't playing an "active role" in a terrorist-related organization
constitute a crime that he could be convicted and imprisoned for? If
he really is a threat then it would be better to lock him up than to
de****t him to some crackpot izlamoid country where he will continue to
plot and scheme against the infidel British.
> Ministers argued that the right of the British public to be protected
> against terrorism should be balanced against suspects' right not to be
> illtreated on their return home. But the court rejected the
> Government's argument and ruled that the protection against torture is
> absolute.
The problem is that letting him live in Britain constitutes a sort of
torture, a nanny state with rotten food and surveillance cameras that
watch you go poo.
>
> The judgment, from which there is no appeal...'
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3455996.ece
>
> Now which ****ing hippy/socialist/denouncer of racists here fails to
> see ironies?...
>
>
