British Expats - In To-day's Newspapers

If they are British citizens and the country provides sufficient evidence to commit them for trial then yes they should be extradited. If they are british citizens by naturalisation and they advocate/support terrorism then their British citizenship should be withdrawn and they should be sent back to their country of origin, if they are British by birth and advocate/support terrorism they should be tried for sedition or treason and if found guilty suffer the consequences.
Anyone who encourages others to kill or maim is committing a crime. The Greenham common women were not advocating violence as far as I recall and there is no problem with people who protest within the law.

The UK tried and convicted him for offences against British law, but didn't find enough proof to prosecute for the offences for which he has now been extradited. Apparently. Apparently, the extradition treaty is a bit thin on this point.

To be sure encouraging people to kill or maim others is highly undesirable, and it may be a crime - but is it an offense that warrants extradition?

Lots of people on this forum have spent many merry hours advocating for the mutilation of assorted people, from Mr. Hook to Jimmy Saville. I don't think we'll be deporting them any time soon though. So how do you measure the effect of "hate speech"?

noni	Oct 15th 2012 5:34 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by k800mer (Post 10332227)

:goodpost: totally agree with you.
If they are British by birth and found guilty of treason - send them to the Tower, off with their heads. :eek:

fatbrit

Oct 15th 2012 5:42 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by k800mer (Post 10332227)

Hamza is exclusively a British citizen. He lost his Egyptian citizenship upon his naturalization. International law prohibits making people stateless. This is because it has been proved to be a precursor to ethnic cleansing and genocide. Hence, the British government is left holding the parcel unless another country wishes to offer him citizenship. As LiW pointed out, it really isn't useful to frame laws around single people you object to.

fatbrit

Oct 15th 2012 5:42 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by noni (Post 10332243)

:goodpost: totally agree with you.
If they are British by birth and found guilty of treason - send them to the Tower, off with their heads. :eek:

I'm sure you'd be a lot happier living in a crazy theocracy.

noni	Oct 15th 2012 6:48 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 10332259)

I'm sure you'd be a lot happier living in a crazy theocracy.

Rather than posting disgusting things in TIO yes! It sure must be quiet in there at the moment.

fatbrit

Oct 15th 2012 6:55 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by noni (Post 10332410)

Rather than posting disgusting things in TIO yes! It sure must be quiet in there at the moment.

You confuse me, Noni.

IMO Hamza is undoubtedly a vile man. You seem to agree. He wishes to bring about a theocracy in the UK that will result in people having their hands, heads and other appendages cut off for breaking the law. Yet, you seem to be a keen supporter of these medieval punishments. So why is Hamza bad and you good?

It's confusing for me wherever you post it.

noni	Oct 15th 2012 7:49 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

http://www.navhindtimes.in/business-.../waiting-shack

SHACKS!

fatbrit

Oct 15th 2012 7:56 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

A Met policeman made jokes about having had sex with a suspectâ€™s mother before racially abusing him, a court heard today.

He claimed PC Alex MacFarlane and other officers taunted him as he sat in the back of a police van before telling him: 'The problem with you is you will always be a n*****.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...don-riots.html

dreadsoc

Oct 15th 2012 10:01 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lion in Winter (Post 10332232)

INCORRECT!!!!:thumbdown:

Dread - x

dreadsoc

Oct 15th 2012 10:02 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 10332256)

ALSO NOT TOTALLY CORRECT !!! :thumbdown:

Dread - x

moneypenny20

Oct 15th 2012 11:52 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreadsoc (Post 10333378)

ALSO NOT TOTALLY CORRECT !!! :thumbdown:

Dread - x

Which bit is incorrect? As far as I understand it, whilst there may not be written proof, it was legally agreed that Egypt have removed his Egyptian nationality, thus ensuring that Britain HAD to allow him to keep his British citizenship.

dreadsoc

Oct 16th 2012 1:25 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 10333545)

He would have rights under international law to claim his Egyptian citizenship as a birthright.....that right is generally there when you can prove birthright.
Many immigrants who take British citizenship have their original citizenship revoked when the country of origin does not accept duel citizenship. It is generally not irreversible if that person returns to the country of origin.
However he would have to return at first to reclaim his citizenship, and understandably the Egyptians would make it difficult for him because they probably wouldn't want him...let's face it who would?
The issue is nowhere near as legally simplistic as suggested in that post.
And yes Britain could withdraw his citizenship were he to be charged with treason and a few others terms which he is probably out of time on ..... but then not a lot of people know that Britain still has the death penalty for offences of both treason and piracy - which is possibly why noone ever gets charged with such offences.

Dread - x

Lion in Winter

Oct 16th 2012 1:48 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Meanwhile, in more extradition news...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-19957138

It seems that a good look at our extradition treaty with the US might be in order, with a view to just and consistent application thereof.

fatbrit

Oct 16th 2012 1:53 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreadsoc (Post 10333677)

..... but then not a lot of people know that Britain still has the death penalty for offences of both treason and piracy - which is possibly why noone ever gets charged with such offences.

The UK acceded to the 13th Protocol effective February 1, 2004.

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, concerning the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances

Bipat

Oct 16th 2012 1:54 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreadsoc (Post 10333677)

He would have rights under international law to claim his Egyptian citizenship as a birthright.....that right is generally there when you can prove birthright.
Many immigrants who take British citizenship have their original citizenship revoked when the country of origin does not accept duel citizenship. It is generally not irreversible if that person returns to the country of origin.
However he would have to return at first to reclaim his citizenship, and understandably the Egyptians would make it difficult for him because they probably wouldn't want him...let's face it who would?
The issue is nowhere near as legally simplistic as suggested in that post.
And yes Britain could withdraw his citizenship were he to be charged with treason and a few others terms which he is probably out of time on ..... but then not a lot of people know that Britain still has the death penalty for offences of both treason and piracy - which is possibly why noone ever gets charged with such offences.

Dread - x

True, until abolished by Tony Blair in 1998

All times are GMT -12. The time now is 2:27 pm.

Page 391 of 495

391