Because we can't be controlled. Or at least not in the way that they want to control us. Strange that innit :smile:
Replace hookys stump with a trotter .... Go on the US ya know ya wanna ..... It can't get any worse for you do it do it do it ..... Bacon and prawns at meal times ...... Hunger always wins
Ps - I'm not racist or against Islam/Muslims (or any other creed for that matter) in the slightest. I have some good friends that are Muslims. I am just against stupidity and hypocrisy and I treat all religions and people that believe in a fictitious super being in the sky in exactly the same way. :smile:
He was not prosecuted in the Crown Court, true, but all the various aspects of his case have been argued many times before several British courts. It would be highly misleading to imply that he was simply detained and not brought before a court. Since he was an immigrant, his case originally came to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), and it was heard very thoroughly and considered very carefully; I happen to be in a position to know this, because I myself was the manager of SIAC at the time.
Pete, when you say "he" are you referring to Hamsa? I don't have a problem with anything that happens to him. And we did convict him and lock him up for 7 years. I was thinking more of the others. Don't get me wrong. I dislike Jihadis intensely and I don't think anyone should live in the UK whose first loyalties are to Islam rather than the UK. If they are a foreign national, deport them. If naturalised, strip them of citizenship and deport them. But first you should prove they are jihadis. I can't see what the European courts have to do with this. If you commit a crime in the UK, you are tried for it and suffer the punishment if guilty. But surely, on appeal you become "guilty until proven innocent" rather than the other way around. But this whole terrorism thing has banalised locking people up you suspect of being a terrorist but can't prove that to be the case. And that is just wrong. You have to try people within a reasonable time frame. Locking people up without trial is the mark of a totalitarian state. And on reflection, I am against the European Court of Human Rights because, frankly, if you can't get a result in your own country, it ought to stop there. What next, once you don't like what Europe says, a World Court of Human Rights?
If locking up some inocents is what it takes to stop/put off others from become extremists then its a cheap price to pay. When it comes to religion and peoples beliefs I dont have a problem with it, each to there own and all that. I take people on face value regardless of race colour or beliefs. Sadly religion is still in the dark ages and none more so than Islam, it seems to be a case of my way or the highway with Islam and death to the infidels!! Which I do have a problem with, I do have a problem with arranged marrages, I do have a problem with genital mutilation I do have a problem with honor killings all of which are carried out without a trial.
I`d rather have two experienced women that knew what to do with my stiffy, rather than having to show them, 72 times . One blonde and one redhead would do
That's because if they do, they and their families become targets too. They just want to get on with life, like most people. Exactly the same applied in Northern Ireland. Just like every other religion then.
No, not really. Catholics now eat meat on Fridays and most of the priests have stopped fiddling with kids.:wink:
