From: Geoff Sweeting, Station Road, Wressle, Selby.
THE farcical situation with Abu Qatada exposes once and for all the lies regarding who rules this country of ours. The Government states time after time “we’re in Europe, but not ruled by Europe”. What rubbish!
Abu Qatada is one of the most dangerous men in the world and yet the authorities are about to set him free. Why? Because the European Court of Human Rights says so. We cannot protect our citizens from the hatred stirred up by this man, because we do not rule our own country.
It is time to say goodbye to the ECHR and EU, or at least to take back our rights to determine our own laws and who we wish to live in our country.
Theresa May says that the Government will do everything in its power to deport this man, thus inferring that if we don’t deport him, we do not have the power. When will we have a Prime Minister who will stand up for the rights of the citizens of the UK and ignore the discredited European Court of Human Rights? Abu Qatada should be put on the next plane to Jordan – I’m sure that there will be plenty of people prepared to contribute to his air fare.
From: Phil Hanson, Beechmount Close, Baildon, Shipley.
when is a political party in the UK going to have the guts to take responsibility for our security and laws?
Why has Muslim cleric Abu Qatada not been booted as far as British Airways can chuck him?
From: Alan Carcas, Cornmill Lane, Liversedge.
DO any of our judges ever look at the figure above the dome at the Old Bailey, at the scales of justice, and think about the balance of some of the verdicts they are handing down, especially in relation to human rights?
It seems hardly likely, because time and again their verdicts seem to have no balance at all, and are weighted very severely against the general public going about their lawful daily lives.
More and more we find judges putting the rights of terrorists, and general wrongdoers, above those of the public.
From: Jim Beck, Lindrick Grove, Tickhill, Doncaster.
WE are told that Abu Qatada has already been convicted of terrorism, albeit in absentia, in his native Jordan, so we would only be returning him for sentence, with no need for a further trial, with or without tainted evidence. So what’s the problem?