am I alone in being very heartened that the alquaida operative is not being deported?

I don't see how the way they got into the country is relevant.

The only salient fact is that if they are sent back to Pakistan they will be tortured.

Sophable I don't hate anyone, and I also do not have any rage against anyone, but when you see first hand the atrocities these 'operative' as you choose to call them can wreak on society, you have to ask this? who are you trying to protect, the rights of these two reprobates or innocent people who wish to go about their daily business without wanting to get blown up.

When I see you are when you are heartened, glad, joyful, that these two terrorists are not deported I have to reply to you.
I feel that if one your your relatives had been murdered/blown up, you would feel differently and not so warm and fuzzy towards these lovely fellows. You must have posted this to wind people up, which you have certainly done.

TiggyR - re 22:24:38 - that's why we have a legal system though isn't it? Because all of us sometimes want to act on our gut rather than our head. But we know we shouldn't. So we have a legal framework to keep us honest.

"IIRC the issue is that the college course for which they were granted a visa was bogus, a fake college, if you will."

Some of the men arrested had papers for fake colleges. Others of the 10 were attending real universities. They were here legally but were still arrested, held without charge, released without charge and then deported.

There doesn't seem to have been a torture issue but what do we think about this process having treated people here legally, without evidence of guilt, like this?

That's sad but I think the reality is that things are far more often the other way round. No consolation to you of course, but that's life.

sorry, proponents against illegal wars (was up trying to find the toothbrush charger DS got hold of and now, well, it's gone).

No, sophable, we get it! We are banging our heads against the wall for a different reason!

and, yes, some survivors and surviving relatives of the 911 bombing have become propenents of illegal wars. others have not.

is the former more right because you agree with them?

because that's not very objective.

expat - they came in on visas for John Moores University, dropped out of that, started working and maintained student status by signing up to a fake college (a college that had two classrooms for one and a half thousand "students").

edam - I don't get what the circumstances under which they came in have to do with it. It's the fact that they've turned into official terrorist suspects since they came that makes the difference, surely?

because the first part of your post, soph, indeed the first sentence, generalises why victims don't determine legislation.

when in fact, some of them do.

sarah's law? megan's law? mothers against drunk drivers?

or, on a non-legislative, but still influential level, national center for missing and exploited children? amber alerts? the murder of rebecca schaefer and anti-stalking legislation in the state of california?

'They came on student visas - and then broke the law by getting jobs.'

Point of clarification: people here on Tier4/student visas may work. They may work up to 20 hours/week during term time and full-time during non-term time.

IIRC the issue is that the college course for which they were granted a visa was bogus, a fake college, if you will.

But again, I may be entirely wrong.

Students are indeed often bounced on re-entry to the UK or removed for violating the working restrictions, however.

hates hypocrisy - soz

ooojimaflip - I want to completely agree with your post of 18.50.55. I am usually a very pragmatic, fair-minded person who hated hypocrisy, and the twisting of rules to suit a purpose. I love the impartiality and dogged fairness of British justice, I really do. But I can't think with my head on this one. It has to be my heart and my gut. Whether clever lawyers (and public funds) got them off or not, they were up to no good. They are not our friends. They want to take and not give. I'd like to see them off British soil and I don't really give a fuck what happens to them. Sorry, I'm weak and imperfect.

They may well wish to give up their human rights - but why should we give up ours? Because that's what bending or changing the law to accommodate these extreme cases is. As oojimaflip says - it all hangs together, or it is nothing.

I live in London. I was devastated when the tube bombings took place. Each one of those people killed, injured, traumatised, was a unique life. Each person dead was someone who was irreplaceable, cherished, loved by someone. Everything they were and could have been came to a terrible and irremediable end that day. Each lost human life was and is appalling.

And that is why human rights are so important. Intellectually, I can understand what leads to acts of terrorism, I can even achieve some kind of sympathy, sometimes. But I can't accept it. Because its thinking is to reduce the uniqueness of every human life to a mass and to annihilate the living individual.

I see human rights as standing in opposition to that. It must be extended to all, or it loses what it is.

I despise authoritarianism, and the oppressive regimes that also annihilate individuals, in the name of whatever cause. I do see the encroaching on human rights as steps towards the exact kind of thinking that terrorism demonstrates. And that, I think, is why such encroachments must be resisted.

And i say that as someone who is very aware that the term "human rights" is one riddled with holes, with aporia, with terrible contradictions, and is a work that is not yet complete.

There's been a very long debate about using intercept evidence in the courts. I think, from what I've read, that the argument against is that it would compromise the operations of the security services.

Anyway, the main point is these men did not flee persecution in their home country, nor did they make any attempt to claim they were fleeing persecution. They came on student visas - and then broke the law by getting jobs. They were here under false pretences. Then they behaved in a way that is undesirable, at best. We have every right to kick 'em out. If I'm a guest in someone's home, and they object to my presence, they have every right to tell me to leave. It's my tough luck if I don't really want to go back to my own house.

I would prefer suspected criminals to be put on trial. But when that suspected criminal is a foreigner who has no right to remain in the UK, we can choose to throw them out. Just as the French or the Americans could throw me out if they found my presence in their country objectionable.

'Hate and rage solve nothing.'

How presumptuous and patronising to assume all victims cannot move past feeling that.

More than a few have even moved to forgiveness and beyond. Ever read 'Dead Man Walking'?

Human experience does not render one incapable of sound judgement, fgs.

That girl was originally from Bangladesh. She was on her way to work when she was murdered. The bomber was standing next to her. Someone on here recognised her as an employee she'd often work with at the bank and who'd helped her get a loan.

That girl, an only daughter, was someone's world, someone's pride and joy. Her parents couldn't even speak of it, her uncle and brother gave statements to the press.

To them, she was everything.

To her murderer, she was nothing.

Wasn't it because it was intercept evidence, and that can't (yet) be used, although the government is working on making it allowable?

Complimentary - you can't 'give up' your human rights, they are not something that belongs to a person. They are a set of minimum standards for civilised behaviour towards other people. We would be giving up human rights not them.

It has not been possible to prove that they were guilty of terrorist offences. But the evidence available to the tribunal did convince them. This is maybe where the issue is.

Sophable A young muslim girl aged 19 or 20 was also murdered on 7/7 I believe it was on the bus,and I saw a framed photo of her ouside of St. Pancras Parish Church for some weeks. I believe she may have been from Pakistan as the scarf with the colours of Pakistans' flag was also left over the photo, someone had also left Rosary beads over the photo. It was really touching. All the artefacts from around the church I believe have been given to relatives or have been archived and I'm sure will be available for people to see, one day.

I believe you give up 'your human rights' when you decide to murder other people in this way. That is why they should have been deported.