|Hi Forrest Grump,|
Some might read this that you think Abu Hamza’s rights were violated, whereas I feel most peoples would be of the opinion that the UK Government have bent over backwards to ensure that his rights under UK Law and ECHR Law were fully complied with.
I can’t therefore see why you feel Martin Niemoller’s poem is applicable (unless you don’t agree with the charges brought against him).
Some people might indeed read that interpretation into what I wrote if they so choose as it is always difficult to write in such a way that whatever you write is not open to mis-interpretation, but they would in this case be wrong. I have little or no sympathy for the man as he is a nasty piece of work and is deserving, if he is found to be guilty of the charges against him that is, of everything that comes his way. My comment was about the rank and file calls for the abolition of the Human Rights act and the other legal protections to which, as you rightly say, he was afforded full and complete access. All our laws, without exception, are written pedantly and all too often in undue haste to meet a current newly arisen problem or perceived problem. Although they are quickly added to the statute when written and signed off by the queen, it is not until they have been fully tested in the highest courts we have that we can be fully confident that they will be properly able to do whatever it was they were intended to do and give us the protetions they were intended to do. The case of Abu Hamza is such a necessary test of our HR laws. Whilst it can and should be argued that weaknesses in the legislation have been exposed by this case, that is arguably a good thing and will enable us to review and amend the law as deemed necessary to make it work properly.
That Abu Hamza is a radical cleric, a terrorist / sympahiser, a thoroughly objectionable person etc etc has no bearing on it and to call for the abolition of the ECHR and HR laws just because his case has tested the laws and courts to the limits and found them to be wanting is fundamentally the wrong thing to do. If such laws and protections are removed or weakened instead of being strengthened because of him then they are removed or weakened for us all. Hence the poem.
Do you really feel that Gary McKinnon will be subject to torture and inhumane treatment in the US?
Abu Hamza will be dealt with in a Civilian Court. I very much doubt that his Legal team will let any torture or inhumane treatment go unnoticed. The very fact that the Court case will be seen by the public (and no doubt discussed ad nauseam in the media) should satisfy even those who feel that the US Court system is a Kangaroo Court.
Yes I do. Gary McKinnon is a disabled and vunerable person and if you have ever watched any of the fly on the wall documentaries about life in an American prison then you too would have a great difficulty coming to any other conclusion IMO.
Under the terms of his incarceration as I understand it, Abu Hamza with spend 23 hours a day in a soundproof box. He will get to walk around in an ajoining cage for I hour a day. He will be denied visits from anyone but his immediate family, who are 6,000 miles away and unlikely to be given visas even if they applied for them and by his council. His council and any other visitors are forbidden to make any public comment as to his treatment or any comments he might make under threat of arrest if they do. In fact the court appointed Septuagenerian council, a cancer survivor to boot, of a person similarly accused and incarcerated has just received a 70 year jail sentence in America for commenting to the press some satements made by her client and remarking as to his health and well being when asked. She will die in prison so I for one do not hold out much hope for any detailed updates on how he is doing in his American prison.
Come on GP. You make the UK seem like a South American country where busloads of people were rounded up, held in a football stadium and then” disappeared”, never to be seen again. Bit over the top!
My comment was to ask the person to whom I addressed the question if they would be happy with such a situation not to suggest that it is the case here in the UK right now. We don't do that to any great scale here in the Uk right now, for those things we go to places like Iraq and Afghanistan to do them, but if we were to leave the jurisdiction
of the ECHR and strike our HR laws fro the statute, who's to say how long it would be til we did do it here again as we have so done often in the past.......All IMHO of course............GP