Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:12 pm  

Make sure it's a single and not a return, enough money wasted.

[Durham Giant]

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:33 am  

Him wrote:

I thought they were accused of setting up extremist websites on US servers?

The first UK judge who examined the case said it was a "difficult and troubling case" because the alleged crimes all took place on websites allegedly run in London, not the US.

But the US says the websites were technically hosted by a company based in the US state of Connecticut, giving them jurisdiction.

There would be more than enough evidence to charge them and try them here.

They are British citizens and should not be sent to a foreign country for alleged crimes committed in this country.

There is a world of difference from extraditing foreign citizens who live here and extraditing British Citizens.

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:22 am  

I've been Overseas for years and don't really know who this Hamza is, so I looked up the story. http://www.itn.co.uk/UK/57542/abu-hamza ... -to-the-us Out of interest. Why aren't people who hold signs saying "Muslims RISE UP" done for inciting hatred? What is meant by rise up? Or this in Sydney recently. The pic of a mum taking a photo of her child. And then when found and questioned by the old bill a few days later, claimed she didn't realise what the sign meant. http://i.imgur.com/zWQjZ.jpg I'm laid back about people having religious beliefs, but get uncomfortable when seeing things like this.

I've been Overseas for years and don't really know who this Hamza is, so I looked up the story. http://www.itn.co.uk/UK/57542/abu-hamza ... -to-the-us Out of interest. Why aren't people who hold signs saying "Muslims RISE UP" done for inciting hatred? What is meant by rise up? Or this in Sydney recently. The pic of a mum taking a photo of her child. And then when found and questioned by the old bill a few days later, claimed she didn't realise what the sign meant. http://i.imgur.com/zWQjZ.jpg I'm laid back about people having religious beliefs, but get uncomfortable when seeing things like this.

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sat Oct 06, 2012 12:39 pm  

Boiled-Yed wrote: Make sure it's a single and not a return, enough money wasted. Already in the US and in jail in New York, in court presumably on Monday. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19855380

Boiled-Yed wrote: Make sure it's a single and not a return, enough money wasted. Already in the US and in jail in New York, in court presumably on Monday. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19855380

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:51 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: Already in the US and in jail in New York, in court presumably on Monday. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19855380 One news report indicated it could be at least a year, possibly as long as three before any convictions. I don't suppose they will be worried about reductions for time spent on remand as 3 from 999 years is still a long stretch

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: Already in the US and in jail in New York, in court presumably on Monday. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19855380 One news report indicated it could be at least a year, possibly as long as three before any convictions. I don't suppose they will be worried about reductions for time spent on remand as 3 from 999 years is still a long stretch

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:09 pm  

Whilst I wholeheartedly believe we should be a safe haven for those who are being genuinely persecuted in their homeland and offer them refugee status or British citizenship, I do feel that we should have something in place whereby their citizenship/refugee status could be revoked by a judge should they abuse our goodwill and commit a serious crime in order to hasten their exit from the country after they have served their time. As for the right to a family life, we aren't stopping their family from leaving the country to join them if they so wish.

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:47 am  

Citizenship can be revoked by countries, you see it around form time to time. So why, if these people were so suspect, was it not applied in the UK?



"Like the rest of the public I'm sick to the back teeth of people who come here, threaten our country, who stay at vast expense to the taxpayer and we can't get rid of them."

Interesting to see a world leader saying what a member of something like the BNP would say.

[Kosh]

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:39 am  

Durham Giant wrote:

The first UK judge who examined the case said it was a "difficult and troubling case" because the alleged crimes all took place on websites allegedly run in London, not the US.

And yet he and many successive legal authorities still chose to approve extradition. Over many years and through numerous appeals processes. Maybe you aren't in possession of all the facts?

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:34 am  

Durham Giant wrote:

The first UK judge who examined the case said it was a "difficult and troubling case" because the alleged crimes all took place on websites allegedly run in London, not the US.

But the US says the websites were technically hosted by a company based in the US state of Connecticut, giving them jurisdiction.

There would be more than enough evidence to charge them and try them here.

They are British citizens and should not be sent to a foreign country for alleged crimes committed in this country.

There is a world of difference from extraditing foreign citizens who live here and extraditing British Citizens.

But isn't that similar to say money laundering? I could sit at home in the UK and with the use of the Internet launder money through US or any other nations institutions. I would say that my crime would then be under that nations jurisdiction not the UK's. IIRC there have been a few Brits extradited to Italy recently for something similar, yet there has been no such fuss made over their extradition to a foreign country.
I would also disagree that there is a "world of difference" between our responsibility toward a British citizen or any other nations citizen. If a foreign citizen is on British soil then I would suggest they should be protected under the same laws as British citizens.

Re: Abu Hamza off to U.S.A. : Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:54 am  

Rooster Booster wrote: I've been Overseas for years and don't really know who this Hamza is, so I looked up the story. http://www.itn.co.uk/UK/57542/abu-hamza ... -to-the-us Out of interest. Why aren't people who hold signs saying "Muslims RISE UP" done for inciting hatred? What is meant by rise up? Or this in Sydney recently. The pic of a mum taking a photo of her child. And then when found and questioned by the old bill a few days later, claimed she didn't realise what the sign meant. http://i.imgur.com/zWQjZ.jpg I'm laid back about people having religious beliefs, but get uncomfortable when seeing things like this. I suppose what she really means is don't behead all those who haven't insulted the prophet. The tricky part for us who have no wish to be beheaded, or to behead anyone is knowing just exactly which prophet not to insult.

Rooster Booster wrote: I've been Overseas for years and don't really know who this Hamza is, so I looked up the story. http://www.itn.co.uk/UK/57542/abu-hamza ... -to-the-us Out of interest. Why aren't people who hold signs saying "Muslims RISE UP" done for inciting hatred? What is meant by rise up? Or this in Sydney recently. The pic of a mum taking a photo of her child. And then when found and questioned by the old bill a few days later, claimed she didn't realise what the sign meant. http://i.imgur.com/zWQjZ.jpg I'm laid back about people having religious beliefs, but get uncomfortable when seeing things like this. I suppose what she really means is don't behead all those who haven't insulted the prophet. The tricky part for us who have no wish to be beheaded, or to behead anyone is knowing just exactly which prophet not to insult.