warwickbloke Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Reading the news this morning......... A computer hacker is ordered to go to America to stand trial for hacking into the US armed forces computer & 'fiddling'. The judge says “If the level of punishment in that country is higher, so be it.” Nine Afghans who hi jack an airplane by gunpoint & force it to land in England are allowed to stay here living on benefits because it is 'too dangerous' for them to return to a country where they may be persecuted by a government that was ousted by British forces 4 years ago! This really is an affront to all decent law abiding workers of all nationalities in England. Even more so since the Prime Minister condemns the decision but is powerless to overturn it. Or am I trivialising some higher purpose here, or not in command of the full facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnd Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 "Human Rights" legislation if I'm not mistaken? AFAIK it overrides all other laws - so why bother having them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Immigrant of any kind are always treated better then us locals who are paying for it all no matter what they do wrong and they think we are the racists I Voted BNP the other week and they picked up more seats and i will continue to do so untill the things change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lesley Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Reading the news this morning......... A computer hacker is ordered to go to America to stand trial for hacking into the US armed forces computer & 'fiddling'. The judge says “If the level of punishment in that country is higher, so be it.” Nine Afghans who hi jack an airplane by gunpoint & force it to land in England are allowed to stay here living on benefits because it is 'too dangerous' for them to return to a country where they may be persecuted by a government that was ousted by British forces 4 years ago! This really is an affront to all decent law abiding workers of all nationalities in England. Even more so since the Prime Minister condemns the decision but is powerless to overturn it. Or am I trivialising some higher purpose here, or not in command of the full facts? It is very unlikely and highly inprobable that the computer hacker will face the death penalty or torture. However, after we invaded Afghanistan, it is highly likely that the hi-jakers would be persecuted or at the very least be venerable in their own country. There is no comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurejon Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I disagree, the Hijackers should be executed. They endangered the lives of innocent people by taking on board explosives, they should either be shot at dawn, or locked up for life. They are a danger to the public. Afghanistan is safe enough for our soldiers to be stationed there, the country is liberated by the good old US UK alliance, so it should follow that they should be returned home to where they came from. Why should I as a taxpayer, pay for international terrorists to live the life of old reilly whilst I work my guts out to be told I wont get a pension, and I cannot go to hospital because there is no money!!!. As for the Computer Hacker, so what!!!. He is a British Citizen, the US defence people should thank their lucky stars that it was a harmless geek logging into their systems, and not the terrorists who lurk on every street corner, so we are told. The law here is being abused, extradition should not be used in such cases, it is pure fancifullness for the British Government to grant an extradition order for such a lame excuse, another abuse of power by the Champagne Socialists. Lets put it into perspective shall we, our Prime Minister lies to the house leading to the deaths of many thousands of innnocent Iraqi women and children, yet he signs extradition papers for a computer hacking geek. Roll on election time!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karen Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Reading the news this morning......... A computer hacker is ordered to go to America to stand trial for hacking into the US armed forces computer & 'fiddling'. The judge says “If the level of punishment in that country is higher, so be it.” Nine Afghans who hi jack an airplane by gunpoint & force it to land in England are allowed to stay here living on benefits because it is 'too dangerous' for them to return to a country where they may be persecuted by a government that was ousted by British forces 4 years ago! This really is an affront to all decent law abiding workers of all nationalities in England. Even more so since the Prime Minister condemns the decision but is powerless to overturn it. Or am I trivialising some higher purpose here, or not in command of the full facts? What is he (?) going to be charged with? The UK has done better by it's citizens held a gitmo than for example Australia. Google David Hicks and you will see what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
null_nil Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Reading the news this morning......... A computer hacker is ordered to go to America to stand trial for hacking into the US armed forces computer & 'fiddling'. The judge says “If the level of punishment in that country is higher, so be it.” Nine Afghans who hi jack an airplane by gunpoint & force it to land in England are allowed to stay here living on benefits because it is 'too dangerous' for them to return to a country where they may be persecuted by a government that was ousted by British forces 4 years ago! This really is an affront to all decent law abiding workers of all nationalities in England. Even more so since the Prime Minister condemns the decision but is powerless to overturn it. Or am I trivialising some higher purpose here, or not in command of the full facts? I don't believe that you do not see the difference . It's all about "The right to a fair trial". from the point of view of the "Human Rights Act" the USA is assumed to be fair a country , when Afganistan is not. Anyway I'm dissapointed that the afganies were not fairly tryed here ander the antiterrorist act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePiltdownMan Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I still find it incredible that the plane was allowed to land in the UK. At the time nobody could have forseen that it would end relatively peacefully. It's just outrageous that politicians spend our tax money and risk the lives of the police/army for absolutely no benefit to the British people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ʎqɐqɹǝʞɐɥs Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I still find it incredible that the plane was allowed to land in the UK. At the time nobody could have forseen that it would end relatively peacefully. It's just outrageous that politicians spend our tax money and risk the lives of the police/army for absolutely no benefit to the British people. I think Stansted is the airport where most hijacks are suppossed to be directed as they have specialist resources there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guy_Montag Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I think Stansted is the airport where most hijacks are suppossed to be directed as they have specialist resources there. Put your pants back on Shaker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickbloke Posted May 15, 2006 Author Share Posted May 15, 2006 It is very unlikely and highly inprobable that the computer hacker will face the death penalty or torture. However, after we invaded Afghanistan, it is highly likely that the hi-jakers would be persecuted or at the very least be venerable in their own country. There is no comparison It wasn't as if the plane landed & these hi jackers climbed out of the plane & kissed the ground! The SAS had to extract them. I truly sympathise with individuals existing in crappy conditions in other countries. But endangering the lives of over 100 people, breaking several international laws & costing the host country millions of pounds in benefits & legal expenses should not be rewarded by "OK then, stay & bring your families here as well". Money could be better spent attacking the root cause of problems in those countries. There are legal, organised immigration channels & these should be followed & the fortunate few will succeed. Any other approach is anarchy & chisels away at ordered society. We cannot be held accountable for every single persons misfortune!! Such a dangerous precedent has been set here. You would have us house anybody from any other country who is prepared to threaten anybody with a gun? Doesn't exactly meet my criteria of ideal immigration calibre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solvent Celt Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 My understanding is that a US citizen could not be extradited to the UK in similar circumstances. Therefore IMHO we should not be extraditing our guy there. (Unless it is in our interest to do so). In general we should seek reciprocity of any arangement with the US. They weren't so quick to hand over wanted IRA terrorists to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.