ARmy Rumour SErvice

**sunami** · 17-04-2012, 21:23

Originally Posted by Oyibo

Does this change anything, or is it a sound-bite:

Or this;

But she admitted it may take "many months" as his lawyers could appeal up to the European Court of Human Rights.

BBC News - Cleric Abu Qatada can be deported, says Theresa May

**MrDave** · 17-04-2012, 21:30

Great! bring it on.

**Le_addeur_noir** · 18-04-2012, 01:47

Originally Posted by mcflurry

Being bound by the European Convention on Human Rights is a bad thing?

Obviously-in this case at least-it is.

Was Britain a repressive society in the 1930s and 1940s before the ECHR was set up?.

Britain needs to prioritise the removal of security threats-which this parasite illegal immigrant is-before obeying some European convention.

**sunami** · 18-04-2012, 06:57

BBC News - Jack Straw faces legal action over 'rendition'

Wonder who'll be next.... Tony Bliar?

**mcflurry** · 18-04-2012, 08:42

Originally Posted by Le_addeur_noir

Obviously-in this case at least-it is.

Was Britain a repressive society in the 1930s and 1940s before the ECHR was set up?.

Britain needs to prioritise the removal of security threats-which this parasite illegal immigrant is-before obeying some European convention.

The Convention drafted under the supervision of a British lawyer and MP? I've already posted a response a page back or so to ex-colonial.

Think of it this way- whilst Qatada is here, MI5 are so far up his backside they can see what he's eating for dinner before he even puts it on a fork. I wouldn't trust the justice system of Jordan as far as I can throw it, and I can't throw it at all.

**Kitmarlowe** · 19-04-2012, 08:17

Article 8 does indeed state that "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence."

That's part 1 To my eyes that says that a person has a right to RESPECT for their private and family life. I don't see any unlimited right to a familiy life.

Part 2 adds "There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

That's the rider. Judges have been placing undue regard on part 1 and ignoring part 2. Allowing a man who kills a child in a road traffic accident to remain in this country puts excessive weight on his right under part 1 and no weight on the rights of others or public safety or the law of the country.

On a simple reading of Article 8 the Judges have been ignoring the law as enacted by Parliament. The Dog is not wagged by the tail and it's about time someone explained this.