Human rights.

[Worms]

I've read and understand the ruling. My opinion however is based on the fact that he has threatened to kill people in this country. I, you and everybody else in this country has the right to defend themselves against being killed so, why does this SIAC decision over-rule ECHR and British law?

[chesters1]

 

For every radical killed, how many more are recruited into the ranks?

Thats the idea ,more terrorists equals more terror laws binding us at home ,more money for anti terror reasons ,more money for those supplying them ,more money in backhanders making the laws

The gov are stupid they couldnt breath without interested parties telling them what to do ,theres an awful lot of money to be made from gullible mps making laws and only a little needed to grease their palms getting them to do it

Edited March 29, 2013 by chesters1

[nick]

Nick , the individual has on many occasion been filmed spouting his vile racial messages and incitement to murder innocent people. That is proof enough surely ? or was his human rights violated by being filmed whilst he was delivering his hate speeches/sermons.

 

PS

 

Some of my American chums, those who believe in the land of the free and all that stuff, what are they saying.

Send him back to face the music.

Take him to court, if found guilty then dispatch him off to paradise .

 

But you also say "That is proof enough surely ?" which is what my response was to.

[Old geezer]

So..... if it quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, shoot it?

[chesters1]

Land of the free (snigger)

[Andrew]

I've read and understand the ruling. My opinion however is based on the fact that he has threatened to kill people in this country. I, you and everybody else in this country has the right to defend themselves against being killed so, why does this SIAC decision over-rule ECHR and British law?

 

 

And you can bet your last quid if we had stood on a corner spouting vile hatred and incitement to murder, we WOULD be in jail, one for threatening to murder, two for spreading racial hatred.

He has done just that, !

 

Land of the free (snigger)

 

 

I was going to and that with CRAP,

[nick]

I've read and understand the ruling. My opinion however is based on the fact that he has threatened to kill people in this country. I, you and everybody else in this country has the right to defend themselves against being killed so, why does this SIAC decision over-rule ECHR and British law?

 

I'm sorry, but if you have read it you most certainly have not understood it.

 

SIAC does not over rule any british law (which includes the rulings of ECHR). When or If he is charged in UK courts with incitement (which is pretty much what you are accusing him of) he will be tried and found guilty or not guilty on the basis of UK law. That is a different issue all together to what SIAC ruled on.

[Worms]

But you also say "That is proof enough surely ?" which is what my response was to.

Which brings it back to my original argument.

 

Do you want somebody inciting murder? Do you want him to fund murder? Do you want him to fund training for murder?....all illegal things in this country yet an Immigration panel can not let him be deported based on the fact that somebody in his home country might hurt him a bit....It's called common-sense!

[Steve Walker]

Can't we just send him back to his place of birth, given that it is no longer under Jordanian occupation?

 

[Andrew]

I'm sorry, but if you have read it you most certainly have not understood it.

 

SIAC does not over rule any british law (which includes the rulings of ECHR). When or If he is charged in UK courts with incitement (which is pretty much what you are accusing him of) he will be tried and found guilty or not guilty on the basis of UK law. That is a different issue all together to what SIAC ruled on.

 

Does not over rule any British Law, ?

Incitement, yes, we dont know the other half of what he is accused of. We see what the government want us to see.