Wednesday, 14 November 2012

Tolerating the Intolerable



The smirk on his face tells all one needs to know.  Abu Qatada, a notorious hate preacher and terrorist suspect, has been released on bail.  This follows a successful appeal against deportation to Jordan, where he stands accused of various terrorism offences. 

I’m sure you’ve heard the script before – he will not get a fair trial, say the liberal old judges sitting on the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, proving once again that an ass is far too intelligent an animal to be compared to the law.    It’s not justice denied, it’s not justice delayed; it’s justice mocked.  More than that: we as a nation are mocked, a refuge for every murderous fanatic who knows how to manipulate the system.

Apparently David Cameron, our benighted Prime Minister, shares the nation’s ‘frustration’ at this latest development.  Nick Clegg, his Deputy, says that the government is still “absolutely determined” to deport Qatada. 

Now, here’s a question for you: what does Cameron’s ‘frustration’ and Clegg’s ‘determination’ amount to?  Oh, I know, the answer is just too, too simple.  They amount to precisely nothing, because nothing is what we shall get.  Oh, sorry, that’s not true: we shall get years and years of Abu Qatada. 

I personally would send Qatada off on the next plane to Amman.  No, I don’t care about the asinine judges and I don’t care about the European Convention of Human Rights, adopted wholesale into our own legal system without consideration or reflection by Tony Blair and his toy town government.  I don’t care if the evidence to be used against Qatada in Jordon is based on confessions obtained by torture, the chief objection of the judges.  I don’t even care if he is tortured himself; I just want rid of him; I do not want this appalling man to breathe English air.  I really do not care if he breathes any air at all. 

This is too, too awful of me, don’t you agree?  Taking a more than usually pompous tone in the Telegraph yesterday, Dan Hodges writes that the calls for the immediate deportation of Qatada will rightly receive short shrift –“Once we start simply ignoring the laws of the land, Abu Qatada has won.  Nor do we want politicians muscling aside our independent judiciary.”

Frustrated Dave and Determined Nick most assuredly won’t do that, or anything else, for that matter.  Once the law of the land starts to offer shelter and protection to the enemies of the land then it is worse than useless.  Fine, I’m happy to let Qatada have the victory, just so long as he smirks about it in Jordan.  What I want is a politician less ‘frustrated’ and less ‘determined’; I want a politician with the character of Alexander, one who acts, not talks, one who has the courage to cut through the Gordian Knot and to hell with the consequences.

In essence what I want is to see the loathsome Abu Qatada smirk on the other side of his face.  As it is he is likely to spend years amongst us, all at huge public expense, smiling away at the stupidity of our judges, our law, our politicians and our country, a country that can tolerate the intolerable.  

16 comments:

  1. A real POS, all of his kind are suspect no matter their deception tactics. Stay keen on "Benghazigate" there is a shitstorm brewing on this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now there's a coincidence! Keep watching. :-)

      Delete
  2. That is named "democratie" in French,my dear friend, which is driving us rightly in the gulch or the ravine of our cowardice...That's all: the end of European peoples who let or abandonned everything to the maelström of muslim invasion.
    Have no fear, certainly our countries should become in this century, the first islamic republics in Europe!
    Kisses.
    Respectfully yours
    Ortho.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey, Ortho, how are you? It's nice to see you again. :-)

      I begin to wonder what democracy is other than an increasingly meaningless word. You and I are the subjects of a European Monolith, one that is destroying our respective national traditions.

      Delete
  3. I never thought I would ever disagree with you and agree with someone like Dan Hodges. As much as I agree with the sentiment of your argument and would like to see the scumbag hanging from a lamppost by piano wire I cannot agree that we should put aside law in favour of sentiment or moral indignation. If you do that then it is the thin edge of the wedge and it will not stop at ridding society of just undesirables like Qatada. What democracy we have is today under considerable pressure as daily it is being eroded deporting this distasteful man without due process would be another large nail in the demise of our democracy. We could of course petition to change the law because it favours people like Qatada but the price would be that it would then remove safeguards that protect you and me who may only be guilty of voicing an opinion that another group in society does not like. That dislike could then quite easily be turned into action and protection from unjust action would be that much weakened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Antisethenes, that's a good and valid argument, one that in general I would agree with, one that I have agreed with in the past. But what is the law, who is it meant to protect, who is it meant to serve? My present alienation with an increasingly farcical legal system, even more farcical when we take the European Courts into consideration, is precisely because it is no longer fit for purpose. Yes, you are right, it is possible to change things, but that becomes an increasingly lengthy and more complicated process. Besides how much power do we really have? Parliament could vote to change the law, only to have its ruling overturned by our foreign masters in Brussels. I'm sorry, this whole business makes me so angry.

      Delete
  4. Apparently he has asked to be rehoused, citing press intrusion as the reason. He values his privacy. With all those vast expanses of desert, there must be loads of privacy in Jordan.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/abu-qatada-to-get-new-home-and-taxpayers-will-foot-the-bill-8319773.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would happily chip to give him a passage home. I might even go as far as business class, David. :-) Thanks for the link.

      Delete
  5. It is a pity that your eloquence is so depressingly accurate Ana. So, where do we go from here? Is our moral compass utterly broken?

    Why exactly do we lavish succour and comfort on this (and other) epitomes of evil? I wish I knew.

    To me this decision looks like some narcissistic (or even masochistic) obsession rather than a rational and fair application of justice.

    Can any aspect of our justice system be other than circumspect while palpable travesties like this are allowed?

    There used to be a old fashioned phrase:
    Not only must justice be done. It must be seen to be done.

    The metropolitan elite have failed on both counts here I think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill, that's absolutely right. In this instance our liberal legal system is being manipulated by those who do not share our liberal values, by those who hate us and our way of life. The situation is quite intolerable.

      Delete
    2. Intolerable it certainly is, but it seems to be tolerated by the powers that be.

      Delete
  6. If the Islamification of the UK and Western Europe is not reversed there will be a 'Jizya Tax' imposed on the surviving indigenous population.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

      Delete
  7. As I said in a comment on another of your blog entries on here related to him, I still smell a rat. The government could easily chuck him out if it wanted to. Time will tell what role the government intends him to play in future if they are so keen to keep him here, the legal wrangles are a mere excuse.

    ReplyDelete