generalspeaking

The Law Is An Ass

Western notions of justice reflect what should occur in a perfect world. Where everyone behaves well, and there are no imminent threats against civil society. Currently, this is not the case. Nor, likely, would it ever be so in its totality. But as things now stand, the rights of individuals must be protected. That the state must also be protected, and that other individuals who inhabit that state have a right to be protected sometimes seems to impress the arbiters of justice less than their focus on specific individual rights.

How just is it, after all, to protect the rights of someone whose focus and deliberate intention is to do harm to general society, and who harbours no compunction whatever about inflicting violent and lasting physical harm on others? It is an actual travesty of just determination to declare on the side of the potential inflicter of harm, to argue that his rights are being trampled upon when government, on behalf of the larger society, seeks to repress his strategies.

A man recognized as a radical cleric, living in Britain, and held to be a former close aide to al-Qaeda's former chief, Osama bin Laden, has had his deportation to Jordan refused, on appeal. A British judge, hearing the appeal, ordered Abu Qatada's release on bail. The British Home Office is aghast, claiming the man to be "a dangerous man who we believe poses a real threat to our security and who has not changed in his views or attitude to the U.K."

For the past six years Britain has been attempting to deport the man to Jordan. Last month the European Court of Human Rights claimed evidence against him, while incriminating, may have been obtained through torture. Such being the case, they reasoned, it would be inadmissible. And Britain, as a result, was not within its legal rights to proceed with deportation.

Typical of Western interpretation of liberal justice in the current atmosphere where justice bends over backwards to accommodate the human rights of those for whom human rights represents a gross interference in their own fixed ideas of the overriding imperatives of radical Islam. The European ruling encouraged Abu Qatada to apply to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Britain.

It was his understandable wish to be released from the high-security Long Lartin jail in Worcestershire, central England. He has grown impatiently weary with his incarceration, and knows he may call upon British justice to release him. And his lawyer informed the commission that his client's 6-and-a-half-year detention "has now gone on for too long to be reasonable or lawful ... "mThe dimension of outright stupidity involved in this situation is mind-boggling.

Balancing and weighing the 'rights' under the law of someone whose malevolent and very real intrigues meant to destroy that society and that would result in great lasting harm to British society, against the government's security and executive arms desires to rid the country of his presence. And coming to the conclusion that he should remain free to further his Islamist jihadist agenda at his leisure.

Because this is such a typical instance of blind-sight on the part of legal authorities who pride themselves on their interpretation of the law, and their liberal-humanist outlook on applying the letter of the law as they see it, eager to prove how open-minded they are, those of the ilk of Abu Qatada can hardly believe their good fortune. Islam gives them permission to manipulate, to further their aims to engage in jihad if it advances Islam.

And those whom they plan to convert to Islam through means abhorrently violent, or by grimly useful stealth by infiltrating government agencies and manipulating the system to reflect their initial inroads, invite their own fate. How much better could things possibly get for those planning to destroy democracy and supplant it with tyrannical theism intent on controlling every aspect of life?

The chair of the parliamentary home affairs select committee responded by saying most people would be "astonished by this decision considering Abu Qatada is wanted on terrorism charges in eight countries". And he said "The only way to avoid the situation occurring again is a fast-tracked system in the U.K. and EU courts so that those who pose a threat to the British public are deported as swiftly as possible."

Obviously. Is that not the issue? Problem appears to be that the U.K. and EU courts are not amenable to that solution, simple enough as it is. "This is a man who is seeking to undermine our country at every turn", added another British Member of Parliament. Well, what are the lawmakers doing about it then? If established laws are incapable of allowing government agencies to rid the country of threats, why aren't those laws amended?

In the meantime, Abu Qatada is enabled to claim up to $1,500 monthly in state benefits. And his security surveillance will cost the British taxpayer $790,000 a year.

The British ass brays loudly.

Labels: Britain, Islamism, Justice, Terrorism

posted by Pieface @ Wednesday, February 08, 2012