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

[Heathcliffscathy]

because we absolutely should not deport anyone under any circumstance who we know will be tortured.

a victory for justice and human rights today imo.

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?

vesela, the lack of understanding of that basic fact of this case makes me want to throw my hands up. brick wall/head anyone?

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").

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.

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

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

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.

"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?

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.

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.

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.

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

If you worked in immigration and knew the changes that are afoot with regards to this, especially Tier 4, Tier 5 and Tier 1 visas, you would.

oooj - yes but I feel the law should be changed to allow for times like these. We may not have enough evidence to convict them, but we have enough evidence to feel sure in all probability that they meant us harm of the worst sort, and they broke rules and lied (that is not contested). Our laws on civil liberties are too easily manipulated.

it's like arguing with george bush! (you're either with us or with the terrorists)

saying I'm heartened at the fact that british law has withstood kneejerk daily mail reactive govt that has eroded civil rights does NOT equate with feeling fuzzy towards terrorists.

and expat, i think that i can objectively state that an illegal war is...um...illegal.

and yes I am protecting the rights of reprobates because that is the only way that rule of law can work: it doesn't only apply to nice people.

I wondered how long it would be before someone slung the DM insult!

complimentary - it winds me up that people think human rights can be dispensed with.

i posted this thread, because I saw this on the news and turned to my husband and said 'oh thank god, something still works despite all of the shit that has happened to our legal system in the name of protecting us from terrorism'.

and yes, i do still (like i did many many posts ago on this thread) believe that a measure of a country's civilisation is how it treats it's most despised and reviled. and yes I do believe that torture is wrong under any circumstances. and yes i do believe that sanctioning torture by deporting someone that you KNOW WILL BE TORTURED by pakistani security services is wrong. even though he may or may not (we don't know remember) have been planning to blow us up (remember I commute into central london? i live in london? it's not like the terrorist threat is something i'm immune from).

tiggyr, unfortunately the blair government was very dailymail reactive. this was a very bad thing indeed.

BTW - Nasser was a computing student at LJMU, not a fake college. So he's one of those here legally it seems.

Tiggy, how would you justify changing the burden of proof in cases where someone is suspected of being a terrorist, but not other cases which could lead to loss of life or serious harm? Is one kind of death more serious than another kind of death?

and yes i do think that the 'i don't give a fuck torture him he is a bad man' is a pretty daily mail attitude.

because what it is saying is human rights are all very well but only for good law abiding people, and anyone else can go hang (literally) and unfortunately the line you draw about who is or isn't worthy of human rights is a moveable one if you think like this, and one day it may include you.

Thank you so much for comparing those who disagree with you to war criminals like George Bush!

That seals it.

sorry, mistaken; thought I remembered from press at the time that Nasser was the one arrested at LJMU. But it was a different student, just googled it.

expat, lots of the argument on this thread runs along the lines of: you're glad that we don't deport suspected terrorists to be tortured therefore you love terrorists.

so i think the comparison is absolutely fair as that was exactly the bush administrations stance when it was riding roughshod over the human rights of iraqis and US citizens both. if you don't approve of shitty dodgy legislations brought in in the name of protecting you, you must be a terrorist lover.

same same.