Emigrate & leave England to the terrorists.... & new labour

richard, Bucharest,

Now he can go back to plotting more bombings in London
These attacks are all by the same type of people. On bail living on benefits .
British justice is the lauging stock of any civilzed society--it protects no one and insults everyone.

John, clifton, nottingham,uk

This is British Justice, not the best that money can buy, but the best in terms of learned & arcane arguments.

Ian cheese, London, UK

There is no reason why Mr Abu Qatada should need to live on benefits.
All he has to do is go to the local Jobcentre or look at the small ads in his local paper.
Say, 40 hours p.w. @ minimum of £5.50 per hour and 5 weeks holiday p.a.= £861.7 p.m.
But he's here illegally, so we can't employ him.
Is there no country in the Muslim world (51 states to date) who will take him?
The only reason for letting him stay is if he has been "turned" and can supply useful information voluntarily.
He is very lucky that, as an illegal immigrant who made a false declaration on his application for asylum, he is allowed to stay.
Some gratitude and respect for the host nation would be appreciated.

Robert, Stevenage, England

What we have to accept is this. There are places in the world which have different values and mores to us.
The people from those countries know what the countries they come from are like, and some are willing to play on our squeamishness to gain a benefit.
We either have to accept our moral high ground, whatever the price, and without naivety, or be harsh in our decisions that no-one is above the law, and people are responsible for their actions.

My personal feelings are this: Quite simply, if you commit a crime in England and are not a British National, you should be deported regardless of where you came from, you should have thought about that BEFORE you committed the crime.

I believe this attitude will become a deterrent to criminals who see this country as a soft touch...

Patrick Davis, Watford, England

Yes "Nick Ferriman" excuses Arab/ Islamic countries from
morality as we know it . According to him only the West is capable of it. They can't be trusted to treat their citizens decently can they. Perhaps Quatada would like to disavow
Islam as he does not wish to be subject to its justice.

Julian, Bridgewater, UK

Since when did being a British citizen or having the rights of one have anything to do with receiving our benefits? Get real Minette!

Neil, High Wycombe, UK

The first commentater got it right. By this argument once someone has managed to stick a foot on British soil all of a sudden you are arguing they become entitled to protection they would not receive if the customs officials had spotted the fake passport he came on and prevented him from entering the country in the first place. This makes no logical sense.

As for Nick Ferriman's remarks, what a tiresome irrational rant. By the lofgic you show Nick it seems you do not rate any other races with the exception of anglo-saxons to be smart enough to take responsibility for their own part in all the events you mentioned as well.

DW, Beijing, China

Maybe there are some that are happy to see radical
Isalmist stirring things up.

Things will only start to make sense, when our media
start telling us who is really running our country.

Its not suprising people want to leave when they don't
understand the place they live in.

A new name for this place we live, would be more
appropiate, any suggestions.

Not england or britain .... they're a bit past it.

M walker, Nr Bromsgrove, worcs

Human rights sometimes collide with each other. As the old saying goes, my right to swing my fist stops at the end of your nose. This man's "right" to be in this country collides with the rights of decent people to be left to get on with their lives, free from concern about the rantings and plottings of murderous bigots. The government and the judiciary make explicit choices in ranking such rights. Sadly, they always seem to rank the rights of scum like this above the rights of British citizens. Time for a change.

Nick, Rotherham, UK

I agree with Ms Marrin. There is no getting away from the strictures of law, and even if you don't like judges you must accept that they must follow the legal framework in place - even if ultimately that means the avoidance of common sense.

However the provision of benefits is primarily an executive decision (admittedly perhaps later subject to legal scrutiny) rather than a legislative decision so could easily be tailored to meet exigencies such as this. If our government were of a mind to!

Mount J, dorset, gb

Try mentioning the phrase "Human rights" to the relatives of the 3000 people of the World Trade Centre attacks.

D.C. Oats, Lincs.,

Paradoxically, peaceful and moderate muslims I have met throughout the middle east sometimes see the British government as hostile to the region BECAUSE Britain is so happy to give sanctuary and funding (through benefit) to some of the wickedest rejects from the region. Often the people we harbour are wanted for all sorts of violent acts against their own people. What message does it send to those people if we fund the extremists and give them safe haven to continue promolgating their vile and violent philosophies?

David Crompton, Birmingham, UK

The reasoning behind the refusal to deport this man is very simple: it would constitute a positive act by the UK which would condone torture. Agree with it or not, the UK cannot profess ignorance, because it is not ignorant of the situation.

And thank you to those telling us the Americans have a fair legal system. One which ignores the principle of sovereignty and condones international abduction, forgets its international obligations under the Geneva Convention, places suspects (with little or even no evidence) beyond the reach of the rule of law, up until recently with no recourse to any legal system, even now with a limited appeal to a military tribunal with the power of sentencing to death, and no reparation for the numerous wrongful incarcerations.

If Qatada is found guilty of an offence by the UK, or by a civilised legal process, he will be imprisoned. Until then, I am glad criminal due process means something.

Edward Murdoch, Glasgow, UK

What right thinking fundamentalist believes for one minute that Islamic countries torture people? Or, if they do, that the people so tortured don't deseve it?

E Skelton, Cardiff, Wales

"British law should excuse it or overlook it or fail to protect someone from it" Yes, so we rightly should not allow torture... in Britain! Send this man back to where he belongs. He knows the consequence of his actions in his home land and thus gave up all rights when he chose to continue. By the standards indicated here we should be accepting applications from criminals world wide and protecting them from the justice of their homeland while permitting them to conduct crimes in our land. Crazy!

The beginning of the end of justice!?!? Wake up and smell the coffee Minette, justice died in this land a LONG time ago. You yourself compared the case of an innocent woman with cancer being deported to die in her homeland and there are a plethora of similar cases of injustice at the hands of our illustrious Judges.

Where has Britains backbone gone? If someone commits a crime they should be punished, period! Human rights should not come into it and will be the downfall of our country!

Colin Nunn, Newcastle upon Tyne, England

It is beyond irony that people who completely reject our way of life openly stating that they reject our government and legal systems and seek to destroy us can cynically use the very legal systems they flout to escape justice.
What is even worse is the cynical treachery of barristers who line their pockets to help them achieve it

plato, ely, uk

"However, the principle holds; it is wrong for British law to wink at torture."

How very righteous of you, Minette. It is also wrong for British law to wink at those who would gladly and very happily torture and blow up innocent Brits. As an American who has been living in the UK for seven years I will be glad to get back home to the USA. The UK no longer has any pride and they have become a slave to the EU. The things going on in this country are a shocking disgrace. The UK ceased to be a civilized country many years ago.

Cindy, Newcastle, UK

"Unfair trial in a country where evidence obtained under torture may be used." That'd be America , then. What about our VERY unbalanced extradition treaty with them?

Bill Peter, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

I am afraid that the judges have it completely wrong, as usual: it should be totally irrelevant what standards of justice exist in the man's home country. That simply is not the business of English judges to know. The man comes from a country whose laws he has grievously offended: and he is a clear and present danger to the UK: as such a danger, why should Britain extend to him the right to protection from his own country when he does not have the right to be here ? But if is the law now that he must be so protected, this law should reversed immediatley, as ultimately judges, like politicians, should not take the consent of the people to allow them to exercise the powers they do, for granted. If their decisions depart too far from ordinary morality and justice and put the public at risk, then their decisions will cease to derserve, or have, any respect. Civilization depends on the rule of law, decisions of this kind undermine that civilization by bringing the law into contempt.

Victor, London,

I hope you, or your family, Minette, never suffer from a terrorist attack, or any other kind of attack, because britain would not deport someone who should not be here. Maybe you wont feel the same then.

Arthur, Newcastle,

Nick Ferriman, of Thailand curiously, offers us a page from the Karl Marx text book of history, then says those now who think a terrorist should not be deported are arrogant? Is the rosy glow view of terror attacks a sort of belated punishment on all the horrid people who live in the West? Is this a sort of Marxist moral 'they had it coming' doctrine?
And of course Nick's history is simply hatred dressed up - why does the Commonwealth still exist if Nick is correct?
Did the British Navy not stop Arab slaving in the mid 19th C?
The islamic conquest of vast tracts of the earth, eradicating the infidel, seems to be omitted.
Still, have a great time in Thailand.

Fati, Dalston, UK

Hi,
The decision of the judges is difficult to understand without substantiation. Please remember the purpose of the law is not to deliver justice its to protect itself from injustices.
Regards Dr. Terence Hale

Terence Hale, zandvoort, Holland

Wrong, wrong, wrong!. Britain has no moral imperative to worry what happens to an unwanted criminal like Qatarda who has no right to live here. What happens to him in Jordan is between the Jordanians, himself and Allah.

William Thomson, Guildford, UK

Nick Ferriman: A shining example of why the UK can no longer take action to protect itself and it's citizens against terrorist threats and men like Qatada.

It would be nice to see Nick demonstrating some solidarity with his own country and it's citizens that are dying in bomb attacks organised by men like this. It would also be nice if he could see through his own arrogance that it is men like Qatada who are abusing their own people in the Middle East. Thailand is welcome to him...if only we could export the rest of the lunatic Human Rights lobby.

Claire , London, UK

The Anglo-Saxon sense of manifest destiny allowed them to slaughter millions of indigenous North Americans, nearly wipe out the Australian aboriginals, enslave millions of black Africans, subjugate tens of millions under Empire, kill millions of unarmed civilians in the war in Indo-China, kill hundreds of thousands in Central and Latin American, and then respondents here have the insufferable arrogance to complain about one man, from a region whose people we continue to abuse today, sponging off us! Staggering.

Nick Ferriman, Bangkok, Thailand

Terrorists' actions put them beyond the pale of acceptable human behaviour. Therefore they should not benefit from 'human rights' laws.

AA, New York,

Nonsense. No state can absolutely guarantee the behaviour of another, but can obtain undertakings. We live in a world of relativities. Thsi terror merchant has forfeited his rights to appeal to western law and morality by working to destsroy them. That principle should become part of 'rights' industry 'law' - or let the judge accommodate this man in his own home, not tell us to do so. Maybe Ms Marrin should offer?
We owe him no duty of care at all.

Tom, Witney, UK

I'm surprised that this most legislative of governments has not resorted to the simple expedient of an Act of Parliament to address this problem. Qatada is an undesirable and would be deported if the courts would allow it. He has no right to be here and we do not want him here. So a simple law should be passed which allows, under such limited circumstances, the government to allow such persons to remain if necessary but under lock and key. Anyone claiming the right to stay because of the fear of torture where they would normally be deported because of their criminal activities would lose all rights enjoyed by law abiding citizens with a right to be here. The human rights of the majority would thus prevail over this vicious and cynical minority.

Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK

Well perhaps he has been "turned" and can supply useful information about the 30 plots being tracked. If this is the case
his chums might not like him much. And of course every time he sneezes or speaks to anyone a note will be made of it. He should not have access to health, education, benefits etc. He has no busisness being here at all and lied to get in. It is absurd isnt it. The first duty of Government is to protect us and they seem to be failing to do so.

Julian, Bridgewater, UK

What a pity we cant send him to America, they have a good fair legal system, they have courts set up just for the likes of these evil obsessed people.
We should have courts just for 'terrorists' that would give them the same human rights that they give to the people they go out to kill.
They know we in this country will look after them (more than their own countries would) .

Sid james, Lancashire, united Kingdom

Europe seems to feel that to fight a terrorist is to violate his rights. In America, far fewer people think in this way. Our liberty is not obligated to be a suicide pact. We are not required to tolerate those who would destroy us. Those who would destroy tolerance.

mike fox, chicago, USA

If you believe that Britain must morally protect this man from the laws of his own land because he managed to put his foot on British soil - then how can you not insist that any Jordanian in trouble with his legal system be allowed free entry to Britain, and welfare for life once there?

I do not get your argument.

Kris, pass,