Metropol

while i may not agree with everything abu hamza says, i am not entirely comfortable with governments revoking his right to say it by extraditing him for a terror charge relating to an offence that happend some years ago. they've known his whereabouts for sometime. so why now? this is a politically sensitive time for bush, with the recent abuse claims in iraq, this is merely political opportunism.

democracy is dead.

Where as I agree political opportunism appears in many guises (note recent terror alert in US), I really do not think that is the case with Abu Hamza.

This man is an absolute menace and has been trying for the past several years to drive a wedge through the Western/Arab relationship. He is completely embittered with hate against the United States and Britain and I am sorry, for a man who promotes the burning of the Union Jack on the streets of London with all what that symbolises, my sympathies are limited. This is a guy who forces you to ask the question “Why live here?” when he spends the majority of the time in front of the media spot light saying how Britain is a terrible place to live and so on.

It would not surprise me if they have finally slapped a terror charge on this horrendous man. I only hope they give him a life sentence as supposed to the death penalty which would preclude his extradition.

Remember, those hooks and glass eye were not obtained as a fashion statement! The ugly critter that he is.

If Hooky is successfully extradited to the US, all I can say is . . . good riddance to bad rubbish . . .

I dunno about this guy. I think he's just a total nut who's only a threat to anyone within a few feet of his hook. I mean he's a panto villain isn't he.

One thing I'd love to see mind is us refuse to send him over if America doesn't drop the death penalty for him.

Snu wrote:This man is an absolute menace and has been trying for the past several years to drive a wedge through the Western/Arab relationship.

I think you'll find that undesirable men like Hamza emerge because Britain, America and Israel screw the Arabs royally anyway! The Arabs did not pick the fight with the West, we picked it with them a couple of centuries ago and we haven't been able to keep our interfering mitts off it since.

Snu wrote:He is completely embittered with hate against the United States and Britain and I am sorry, for a man who promotes the burning of the Union Jack on the streets of London with all what that symbolises, my sympathies are limited.

Burning the flag as an expression of free speech, that thing we're apparently trying to teach the Middle East. And as we were the second partner in the "Coalition" and sell weapons for Israeli soldiers to murder children, burning the flag (which is a symbol of the establishment, not of the people - it is nothing more than a superannuated branding device) seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do to me.

Snu wrote:This is a guy who forces you to ask the question “Why live here?” when he spends the majority of the time in front of the media spot light saying how Britain is a terrible place to live and so on.

I've never understood this argument. If you don't like what your government does, emigrate? Although I am not her biggest fan myself, why did all the Anti-Thatcherites not emigrate when she was in power?

Snu wrote:It would not surprise me if they have finally slapped a terror charge on this horrendous man. I only hope they give him a life sentence as supposed to the death penalty which would preclude his extradition.

Remember, those hooks and glass eye were not obtained as a fashion statement! The ugly critter that he is.

It smacks of electioneering to me.

johnnyboy wrote:

Snu wrote:This man is an absolute menace and has been trying for the past several years to drive a wedge through the Western/Arab relationship.

I think you'll find that undesirable men like Hamza emerge because Britain, America and Israel screw the Arabs royally anyway! The Arabs did not pick the fight with the West, we picked it with them a couple of centuries ago and we haven't been able to keep our interfering mitts off it since.

Snu wrote:He is completely embittered with hate against the United States and Britain and I am sorry, for a man who promotes the burning of the Union Jack on the streets of London with all what that symbolises, my sympathies are limited.

Burning the flag as an expression of free speech, that thing we're apparently trying to teach the Middle East. And as we were the second partner in the "Coalition" and sell weapons for Israeli soldiers to murder children, burning the flag (which is a symbol of the establishment, not of the people - it is nothing more than a superannuated branding device) seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do to me.

Snu wrote:This is a guy who forces you to ask the question “Why live here?” when he spends the majority of the time in front of the media spot light saying how Britain is a terrible place to live and so on.

I've never understood this argument. If you don't like what your government does, emigrate? Although I am not her biggest fan myself, why did all the Anti-Thatcherites not emigrate when she was in power?

Snu wrote:It would not surprise me if they have finally slapped a terror charge on this horrendous man. I only hope they give him a life sentence as supposed to the death penalty which would preclude his extradition.

Remember, those hooks and glass eye were not obtained as a fashion statement! The ugly critter that he is.

It smacks of electioneering to me.

Yes...not an awful lot you can say to any of that, other than *LOST CAUSE*.

Do you not have any pride in the country you live in? Or is that to much to ask?

My point removing all of your anti-British sentiments is that this man is menace based on the rift he tries to bring between Arabs and non-Arabs. He has gone on record and said he would not be happy until Britain was under complete Arab control. As a non religious man, I find that concept repulsive.

I would treat people like Abu Hamza with the same contempt than those who represent the British National Party for example who would happily create a similar rift from the White Anglo-Saxon view point. The point being, removing any kind injustice committed by either Arabs or Westerners, people like Abu Hamza have no place in democracy if all they plan on doing is stirring up hatred amongst the citizens.

Johnnyboy, you insist on bringing on the same arguments time and time again about the alleged injustices committed by westerners to the Arab world. Quite frankly, your left wing rhetroic bores the pants of me.

Snu wrote:Yes...not an awful lot you can say to any of that, other than *LOST CAUSE*.

Do you not have any pride in the country you live in? Or is that to much to ask?

Are you proud of everything your country does? There's an awful lot to be proud about about being British, but there is also a lot to not be proud about.

This is a rather juvenile argument tactic completely missing the main points of my discussion - attack the speaker and not the argument.

Snu wrote:My point removing all of your anti-British sentiments is that this man is menace based on the rift he tries to bring between Arabs and non-Arabs. He has gone on record and said he would not be happy until Britain was under complete Arab control. As a non religious man, I find that concept repulsive.

Yes, I do not like that idea too, Snu. But it is freedom of speech - a concept we must hold on to at all costs, no matter how many loonies are out there.

Snu wrote:I would treat people like Abu Hamza with the same contempt than those who represent the British National Party for example who would happily create a similar rift from the White Anglo-Saxon view point. The point being, removing any kind injustice committed by either Arabs or Westerners, people like Abu Hamza have no place in democracy if all they plan on doing is stirring up hatred amongst the citizens.

I have as much contempt for the BNP as Hamza, but it is a freedom of speech issue. The whole idea of deporting someone because we do not like what he says troubles me greatly - what next, detention centres for holding a certain point of view?

Snu wrote:Johnnyboy, you insist on bringing on the same arguments time and time again about the alleged injustices committed by westerners to the Arab world. Quite frankly, your left wing rhetroic bores the pants of me.

I am actually more to the right than the left, Snu, but again you resort to the juvenile tactic of attacking the speaker and not the substantive points at hand.

Snu, it would be highly questionable to not wonder why there is a small but significant part of the world hates our guts. Hang on, that's what Bush does.

johnnyboy wrote:

Snu wrote:Yes...not an awful lot you can say to any of that, other than *LOST CAUSE*.

Do you not have any pride in the country you live in? Or is that to much to ask?

Are you proud of everything your country does? There's an awful lot to be proud about about being British, but there is also a lot to not be proud about.

This is a rather juvenile argument tactic completely missing the main points of my discussion - attack the speaker and not the argument.

Snu wrote:My point removing all of your anti-British sentiments is that this man is menace based on the rift he tries to bring between Arabs and non-Arabs. He has gone on record and said he would not be happy until Britain was under complete Arab control. As a non religious man, I find that concept repulsive.

Yes, I do not like that idea too, Snu. But it is freedom of speech - a concept we must hold on to at all costs, no matter how many loonies are out there.

Snu wrote:I would treat people like Abu Hamza with the same contempt than those who represent the British National Party for example who would happily create a similar rift from the White Anglo-Saxon view point. The point being, removing any kind injustice committed by either Arabs or Westerners, people like Abu Hamza have no place in democracy if all they plan on doing is stirring up hatred amongst the citizens.

I have as much contempt for the BNP as Hamza, but it is a freedom of speech issue. The whole idea of deporting someone because we do not like what he says troubles me greatly - what next, detention centres for holding a certain point of view?

Snu wrote:Johnnyboy, you insist on bringing on the same arguments time and time again about the alleged injustices committed by westerners to the Arab world. Quite frankly, your left wing rhetroic bores the pants of me.

I am actually more to the right than the left, Snu, but again you resort to the juvenile tactic of attacking the speaker and not the substantive points at hand.

Snu, it would be highly questionable to not wonder why there is a small but significant part of the world hates our guts. Hang on, that's what Bush does.

But as I understand, that is not what he is being prosecuted for. He has been linked to funding Al Qaeda among the long list of charges. I think its often easier to claim that someones freedom of speech is being crushed in the face of right wing fascism. I do not really think that this is the case with Abu Hamza.

As for your claim of me being juvenile? I don’t remember saying your argument was wrong, I think I said I am simply tired of hearing it as justification for amongst other things, Arab-Western Hatred, Suicide Bombers and so on. There can be no justification for any of that. Our leaders may not always be keen on taking the high moral high ground, but I certainly am and I am not willing to justify any kind of terrorism on behalf of westerners or Arabs alike, as you seem to.

Snu wrote:But as I understand, that is not what he is being prosecuted for. He has been linked to funding Al Qaeda among the long list of charges. I think its often easier to claim that someones freedom of speech is being crushed in the face of right wing fascism. I do not really think that this is the case with Abu Hamza.

As I see it, Hamza does as much damage to race relations as the BNP, but freedom of speech is such a precious commodity, we really can not let go of it. Hamza's lunacy will only appeal to a *TINY* minority of Muslims as does the BNP's lunacy.

There seems little doubt to me that this is a politically motivated arrest and extradition. He is being extradicted on 11 alleged charges of terrorism - he is a citizen of the UK and we have to defend him, no matter how warped his views are.

Look at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib for examples of the US prosecuting terrorism. They are not charging a single person with anything. The American government just wants him in the run-up to the election later on this year.

Snu, this is very worrying for all our civil liberties, because we normally follow what the US does. In point to your semi-slur that I am somehow ashamed of my heritage, it is simply our heritage of fair trails, justice and free speech I want to uphold.

Your other inaccuracy was my supposed left-wing leanings. I am right-wing, but the type of right-winger called a libertarian who believes in the smallest state possible and as little interference in the affairs of others and other nations as possible (except in grave circumstances of course).

Snu wrote:As for your claim of me being juvenile?.

Oh, c'mon Snu, we've know each other for ages, and you will agree with me that this response was far more mature and reasoned than your previous one.

Snu wrote:I don’t remember saying your argument was wrong, I think I said I am simply tired of hearing it as justification for amongst other things, Arab-Western Hatred, Suicide Bombers and so on. There can be no justification for any of that. Our leaders may not always be keen on taking the high moral high ground, but I certainly am and I am not willing to justify any kind of terrorism on behalf of westerners or Arabs alike, as you seem to.

I agree with every single word you say there, except supporting the terrorism bit. What an arsey statement - I have never condoned terrorism. You ruined your post's integrity with that silly little dig.

However, you *know* that we can't absolve ourselves of responsibility for the messes we have created. The only real progress will be made when, like in N Ireland and in S Africa, when both parties admit wrong-doing and immorality in their actions, and seek to work on a solution that might just work.

In my view, if there are two sides in a conflict, one a heavily-armed military machine, the other being armed with little more than rocks and protests all the time, the *moral* responsibility lies on the stronger force to behave with respect for human rights. The minute they do not, an act of state aggression has complete and utter moral equivalence with an act of terrorism.

The minute one side brutalises another, terrorism always happens. It has happened all the way through history, committed by people from all ethnic groups, not just Muslims. That is not an excuse for it, it is simply part of human nature.

This worldwide slurring and denigration of a religion and its followers has precedents in history.

Snu wrote:But as I understand, that is not what he is being prosecuted for. He has been linked to funding Al Qaeda among the long list of charges. I think its often easier to claim that someones freedom of speech is being crushed in the face of right wing fascism. I do not really think that this is the case with Abu Hamza.

As I see it, Hamza does as much damage to race relations as the BNP, but freedom of speech is such a precious commodity, we really can not let go of it. Hamza's lunacy will only appeal to a *TINY* minority of Muslims as does the BNP's lunacy.

There seems little doubt to me that this is a politically motivated arrest and extradition. He is being extradicted on 11 alleged charges of terrorism - he is a citizen of the UK and we have to defend him, no matter how warped his views are.

Look at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib for examples of the US prosecuting terrorism. They are not charging a single person with anything. The American government just wants him in the run-up to the election later on this year.



Can you proove this motivation? Because it still appears to be a far to easy dig at a dominating power to claim they 'they are taking our freedoms'.

And Johnnyboy, are you quite sure you have got any red in your soul? Your're starting to concern me, I am in danger of becoming the one and only Norman Tebitt of the forum.

Snu wrote:Can you proove this motivation? Because it still appears to be a far to easy dig at a dominating power to claim they 'they are taking our freedoms'.

It's the British government who are taking our freedom away, Snu, not the Americans. For some reason, we're simply following their lead.

And, no, I can't prove the motivation - it is simply a judgement based upon the actions of the US regarding the "war on terror". It is an election year, and "security" is the big selling-point for Dubya, and it looks like another victory. Yemen has wanted to arrest Hamza since 1998 - I'm pretty sure the US Govt would have known this, so why wait until now to get him?

Snu wrote:And Johnnyboy, are you quite sure you have got any red in your soul? Your starting to concern me, I am in danger of becoming the one and only Norman Tebitt of the forum.

LOL! I am definitely right-wing, but Bush is no right-winger in my book. He is a prostitute to the business classes of the States, has greatly restricted freedom in his time in office, and if you're worried about religion impinging on the State, Bush has right-wing Christian groups over to the White House every two weeks to discuss policy. He feels that God chose him to be President, and defends Israel because he believes the Second Coming is nigh. Bush wants the Palestinians to have Gaza because it was not part of ancient Israel and therefore will not affect the prophecy.

He is not a right-winger - he is a religious, psychopathic ex-drunk/drug addict running the world's largest superpower.

In the elections I have voted in, I have always voted Tory.