View Full Version : Afghan aircraft hi-jackers allowed to stay in the UK
Just heard this on the news.
WTF is going on? People hijack an aircraft and fly it to the UK then claim asylum!!!!
Then the High court says they can stay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When did we start allowing terrorists to stay, what ever happened to the 'We don't do deals with terrorists' policy the UK has (had)?
This is utter $hite and yet another example of how crap this country of ours has become. Words fail me at the moment.
If you commit a terrorist act, then you face the consequences, not be allowed to stay at our expense. :PDT_Xtremez_32:
MyShineyAr$e
11-05-2006, 12:22
Did you also hear that the whole process has cost the british public approx £15 million?
Almost_done
11-05-2006, 12:27
Ah, yup, the tozzers are staying and at our expense too. But apparently they have rights too, just like that murder who was freed from jail to go and kill.
But from the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4760873.stm)'Home Secretary John Reid says he will appeal against the decision to let Afghan hijackers stay in Britain.'
FFS when will the judges etc start to see that the Law is to protect the Innocent and NOT reward the guilty.
Arggh better stop here
I'd agree with you all on this one.
We spend billions trying to stop the sods out in Afgan/Iraq and they just hijack a jet and bimble over for an all expenses paid entry into the UK under the 'human rights' banner. Another Gay PC tree hugging Labour shambles I think.
I'm no racist (my father is from the Caribbean) but you can see why people are joining the BNP, they are trying to protect their Country because Gay Labour is not doing it!
Tossers.
Rant off, time for lunch.
gemarriott
11-05-2006, 12:53
Can't blame Clarke for this one!
Looks like Reid has started as he means to go on fcuked up
Surely if we can't send em back we can shoot em?
The policy 'we' operated under in the 80's did wonders, sent out the right message IMHO. Nowadays - well.......
I think the rot sarted to set in when'Grey' John Major started 'secret' talks with PIRA, you negotiate with one terrorist, you have to negotiate with them all. Nowadays and mainly due to the European Human Rights Bill (Which I think needs radically rethinking - how someone from OUTSIDE europe can use it, just because he's here due to hijacking a jet - is beyond me) which is twisted beyond belief by savvy lawyers who defend this people
To quote a line from Pheonix Nights......
Send the buggers back. Chaka is right about the BNP and unless someone puts their foot down soon and stamps on this lunicy, The rise from the far right is not far away.
Bluntend
11-05-2006, 15:46
An interesting point was made on Radio 2 this lunch time by a guy who is in the Army. He rang into the Jeremy Vine show and pointed out that at present, we have thousands of British Forces personnel deployed around the world doing some pretty unpleasant jobs. Some won’t come home. As a ‘Force for Good’, our role in many of these places is to restore peace and stability to regions where for too long there has been none – ie Afghanistan and the removal of the Taliban regime. Our government claims that in Afghanistan at least this has been succeeded and that the Taliban is no longer in power. Therefore it is now safe for all those who fled the Taliban to return to their Country. This should include the Afghanis who hijacked the aeroplane, irrespective of whether the Judge found them guilty or not. If they are now not required to go home, despite their country being made safe, why in Gods name are British Troops deployed there? What was the point? British forces personnel have died trying to make countries safe so that refugees can return home! IMHO if they want to become British they should be deported and then made to reapply for citizenship through the accepted channels.
Twonston Pickle
11-05-2006, 17:41
Well said, Bluntend. I heard a comment on the news that went something like "the judges feared that the defendants would be tortured if they were returned [to afghanistan]".
What about the terror and suffering by the passengers on the plane? What about the rights of your average British citizen not to live with people who are quick to threaten violence to get their own way? What message does this send to the world? I'll tell you; it says "get to Britain by any means possible and we have to take you and give you pots of taxpayers cash", that's what.
Complete bullocks
Bluntend
11-05-2006, 17:57
Apparently hacking into the US DoD's computer system and then leaving them messages along the line of "hey, did you know your system is really easy to hack into - you should do something about this!" is an act of terror – at least in the eyes of the US Government. That is why this government has agreed to deport a man for trial in the States under their terrorism laws which could land him an all inclusive holiday to Cuba.
According to our laws though, taking control of a flight deck of an airliner, holding its crew and passengers at gun point, forcing it to enter another sovereign state’s airspace and then landing it at one of the busiest airports in the country, does not quite qualify as an act of terror.
Go figure...
i seem to have missed this one- can some post a link to the news story so i can catch up please?
Almost_done
11-05-2006, 19:19
i seem to have missed this one- can some post a link to the news story so i can catch up please?
See post #3 and click on BBC
The Gimp
20-05-2006, 04:57
The flight had to land at London Stansted as it is the only nominated Hi-Jack airfield.
The gents in black could have saved the taxpayers a fortune for the price of a few rounds of 9mm and got the message across clear...live as a terrorist DIE as a terrorist!
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.