On 26/05/15 18:03, Adrian wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Do keep up - the whole reason we couldn't deport e.g. Abu Hamza was
on account of years of legal wrangling at a European level, despite
the fact he was not a European immigrant.

Except, of course, it wasn't.

It was because the UK government couldn't be arsed to ACTUALLY
PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM.

"He was later charged by British authorities with sixteen offences for
inciting violence and racial hatred.[4] In 2006, a British court found
him guilty of inciting violence, and sentenced him to seven years'
imprisonment."

So says wiki

How us that not producing any evidence against him?

Or are you saying that our legal system is so corrupt that he can be
tried convicted and sentenced without any evidence being produced?

At this point I have to say you really start to amaze me, if that is the
sort of bare faced Big Lie, you are going to tell to defend The ECHR..



The US did produce evidence, and
gave him in the free and fair trial we refused to give him. He was
later charged by British authorities with sixteen offences for
inciting violence and racial hatred.[4] In 2006, a British court
found him guilty of inciting violence, and sentenced him to seven
years' imprisonment. Oh, and the whole point of Human Rights is to
protect _HUMANS_ from Governments doing bad things to them. All
Humans. No matter their nationality.


I am amazed at this point. You have reversed the order of this and
utterly contradicted yourself: Abu hamza was wanted by the US, already
conivicted on evidence by the UK, and was to be extradited to the US to
face further trials. At that point it was up to the US to provide the
evidence, and for the ECHR to accept it. These were not crimes to which
the British system and evidential access: they took place elsewhere.


I think that's why some people get so exercised about the whole
concept - not because they don't think that Governments should be
stopped from doing bad things, but because they don't think that
EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING deserves to be treated equally and fairly by
the law.


Except that in this case the ECHR was invoked to ensure that every human
being did NOT get equal and fair treatment. Certainly not compared with
his victims. He got a very long, very expensive and very biased set of
delaying tactics applied on his behalf to ensure he would NOT get a fair
hearing in the US against whom the crimes were comnmitted.


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.