So you want us to behave just like them? What is it we are fighting for then?
How is that behaving just like them? If we were going around executing innocent journalists, killing men who refuse to convert to Islam, and burying women and children alive then yes, that would be behaving just like them. By shooting him dead we would simply be meting out justice for the murderous act he committed in the first place. There is an enormous difference.
Thanks for finding that it was incredibly interesting.
I wonder what Victoria Brittain thinks of her investigative journalism now.
The mother seemingly took most of her 6 children out of school and taught them at home for GCSEs, despite barely speaking English herself even though she had been living in England for years (her husband did everything for her apparently). I wonder if Jihad John was one of those she removed from school?
Personally, I think I would have found the article a piece of apologist propaganda fluff even if I had seen it last year, but I guess this is with the benefit of hindsight and so I can't be sure.
It could very well have been a coincidence. I have no negative feelings towards that monster's family because we don't know if they support IS or whatever.
If it is a coincidence, the logical extension of that would be that many more Muslims are extremists than is currently touted about.
That's quite a story. Thank you I hadn't seen it before. Anyone held for 11 years without trial is the victim of a miscarriage of justice. From what is written and that's all we have to go by, he seems to be have been the victim of one injustice after another. I'm not convinced that she would have been fully aware of his activities.
However the evidence against him, as stated, seems scant. It's a huge leap from that evidence to him being labelled a lieutenant of Osama Bin Laden, by the press. Where did that come from?
All because of the EU Human Rights Act. Well other countries in Europe are involved in this mess now so lets see what happens.
The Human Rights Laws are International not just EU based. We abide also by UN policy as signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, from which EU and UK policy/laws derive.
I see a lot of people thinking if we just got out the EU we could repeal the Human Rights Act but I don't think it's that simple unless we're also going to walk away from the UN too.
Thanks for finding that it was incredibly interesting.
I wonder what Victoria Brittain thinks of her investigative journalism now.
The mother seemingly took most of her 6 children out of school and taught them at home for GCSEs, despite barely speaking English herself even though she had been living in England for years (her husband did everything for her apparently). I wonder if Jihad John was one of those she removed from school?
Personally, I think I would have found the article a piece of apologist propaganda fluff even if I had seen it last year, but I guess this is with the benefit of hindsight and so I can't be sure.
I'm applying the requisite Guardian filter when reading that article), and whilst there is clearly a lot of detail missing which I suspect would take the gloss off the "woe is me" vibe, at least it does have more body to it than the superficial articles in the tabloids. I don't know whether Adel Bary did have any involvement in the US Embassy bombings, but that article does seem to suggest that there has been an awful lot of doubt over the years and that he has most likely been lobbed into what is effectively a "grouped" terrorism trial in the US based on his political opposition to Mubarak and some rather circumstantial points.
Which is more information than the "His father, the al-Qaeda Mastermind"
Hopefully if the Americans find him they will shoot him dead on sight - job done. If the Brits get to him first, he'll no doubt be given access to a human rights lawyer (at the tax payer's expense) and the case will be dragged through the courts for years. His family should be kicked out of their council house and deported back to where they came from.
I agree with this. Two terrorists from the same home is two too many.
It wasn't proffered as an explanation for the actions of Foley's killer.
It arose from a discussion of whether the Bary family were all terrorists.
Well, to be devil's advocate, surely it could be argued that it is at least in part an explanation for the actions of Foley's killer? How would you feel towards the West if your father was dragged from the family home and imprisoned for 11 years without trial?
Thanks for finding that it was incredibly interesting.
I wonder what Victoria Brittain thinks of her investigative journalism now.
The mother seemingly took most of her 6 children out of school and taught them at home for GCSEs, despite barely speaking English herself even though she had been living in England for years (her husband did everything for her apparently). I wonder if Jihad John was one of those she removed from school?
Personally, I think I would have found the article a piece of apologist propaganda fluff even if I had seen it last year, but I guess this is with the benefit of hindsight and so I can't be sure.
How is that even possible? Why has she not learnt to speak English?
It seems to me, from reading that article, that part of her 'hard life' she has had to endure, is actually down to her, her husband and family.
No doubt this one-sided account will be used by human rights lawyers at his trial to argue for a reduced sentence though - you watch.
I should think Bary's defence lawyer will be aiming to use a set of accounts in order to disprove guilt.
What, exactly, do you think the purpose of a lawyer/barrister is?
Its kinda weird how many people here seem to despise the Human Rights Act and the EU charter seeing its purpose is to protect each citizen from governments trying to erode their citizens right. They come across as wanting to ditch the whole thing and don't seem to have anything to replace it with.
Totally different to the US were the Bill of Rights is held with an almost religious reverence. I've heard it described as the most important legal document in history. Strange that rights legislation is viewed totally differently in each country
Well, to be devil's advocate, surely it could be argued that it is at least in part an explanation for the actions of Foley's killer? How would you feel towards the West if your father was dragged from the family home and imprisoned for 11 years without trial?
That's not a valid legal or moral argument for any person. It's entirely possible that that is how Abdel Bary feels; it is entirely possible that he is Foley's killer and it is entirely possible that he did so because he felt aggrieved about his father's treatment. If that is the case, it won't be any *justification* though.
However, it has no bearing on whether Ragaa Bary or her other children should be deported back to Egypt.
Its kinda weird how many people here seem to despise the Human Rights Act and the EU charter seeing its purpose is to protect each citizen from governments trying to erode their citizens right. They come across as wanting to ditch the whole thing and don't seem to have anything to replace it with.
Totally different to the US were the Bill of Rights is held with an almost religious reverence. I've heard it described as the most important legal document in history. Strange that rights legislation is viewed totally differently in each country
Its kinda weird how many people here seem to despise the Human Rights Act and the EU charter seeing its purpose is to protect each citizen from governments trying to erode their citizens right. They come across as wanting to ditch the whole thing and don't seem to have anything to replace it with.
Totally different to the US were the Bill of Rights is held with an almost religious reverence. I've heard it described as the most important legal document in history. Strange that rights legislation is viewed totally differently in each country
Only when faced with such a threat from such savages, that are here, living amongst us, who would, in a blink of an eye, erode those rights to suit their hideous beliefs and 'rights'.
The Human Rights Laws are International not just EU based. We abide also by UN policy as signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, from which EU and UK policy/laws derive.
I see a lot of people thinking if we just got out the EU we could repeal the Human Rights Act but I don't think it's that simple unless we're also going to walk away from the UN too.
The Human Rights Act (HRA) was introduced in 1998 to “bring rights home”.
Essentially, it allows UK nationals to rely on rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights before the domestic courts.
This article suggests amendments can be made as a Bill of Rights.
And
Replacing the Human Rights Act?
Some have argued that the HRA does little to protect historic constitutional rights and liberties, such as the right to trial by jury or free speech. The Conservatives have suggested a new Bill of Rights to replace the HRA. Exactly how this would operate in practice in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights is unclear, though the Conservatives have indicated that they would seek a greater national “margin of appreciation” in how the rights were applied in a domestic context
Only when faced with such a threat from such savages, that are here, living amongst us, who would, in a blink of an eye, erode those rights to suit their hideous beiefs and 'rights'.
So you want to scrap the Human Right legislation in order to protect our human rights....? Okay....
And if your fear is that they would be eroded. .then shouldnt we be strengthiing the act... making it part of constitutional legislation so it would be harder to drop or change the act? Scrapping completely seems like the last thing you'd want to do.
Comments
How is that behaving just like them? If we were going around executing innocent journalists, killing men who refuse to convert to Islam, and burying women and children alive then yes, that would be behaving just like them. By shooting him dead we would simply be meting out justice for the murderous act he committed in the first place. There is an enormous difference.
I wonder what Victoria Brittain thinks of her investigative journalism now.
The mother seemingly took most of her 6 children out of school and taught them at home for GCSEs, despite barely speaking English herself even though she had been living in England for years (her husband did everything for her apparently). I wonder if Jihad John was one of those she removed from school?
Personally, I think I would have found the article a piece of apologist propaganda fluff even if I had seen it last year, but I guess this is with the benefit of hindsight and so I can't be sure.
If it is a coincidence, the logical extension of that would be that many more Muslims are extremists than is currently touted about.
That's quite a story. Thank you I hadn't seen it before. Anyone held for 11 years without trial is the victim of a miscarriage of justice. From what is written and that's all we have to go by, he seems to be have been the victim of one injustice after another. I'm not convinced that she would have been fully aware of his activities.
However the evidence against him, as stated, seems scant. It's a huge leap from that evidence to him being labelled a lieutenant of Osama Bin Laden, by the press. Where did that come from?
I found this article about Abdel Barry.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/how-london-rapper-l-jinny-became-jihadi-john-suspected-of-beheading-james-foley-20140825-107zdz.html
The Human Rights Laws are International not just EU based. We abide also by UN policy as signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, from which EU and UK policy/laws derive.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
I see a lot of people thinking if we just got out the EU we could repeal the Human Rights Act but I don't think it's that simple unless we're also going to walk away from the UN too.
I'm applying the requisite Guardian filter when reading that article), and whilst there is clearly a lot of detail missing which I suspect would take the gloss off the "woe is me" vibe, at least it does have more body to it than the superficial articles in the tabloids. I don't know whether Adel Bary did have any involvement in the US Embassy bombings, but that article does seem to suggest that there has been an awful lot of doubt over the years and that he has most likely been lobbed into what is effectively a "grouped" terrorism trial in the US based on his political opposition to Mubarak and some rather circumstantial points.
Which is more information than the "His father, the al-Qaeda Mastermind"
Ah, so that explains why James Foley's killer went off the rails. Call off the search and welcome him back to Britain with open arms.
But that is just silly.
I agree with this. Two terrorists from the same home is two too many.
Not for this type of offence.
Assuming they are both terrorists of course. The father hasn't yet stood trial.
It arose from a discussion of whether the Bary family were all terrorists.
No doubt this one-sided account will be used by human rights lawyers at his trial to argue for a reduced sentence though - you watch.
Well, to be devil's advocate, surely it could be argued that it is at least in part an explanation for the actions of Foley's killer? How would you feel towards the West if your father was dragged from the family home and imprisoned for 11 years without trial?
How is that even possible? Why has she not learnt to speak English?
It seems to me, from reading that article, that part of her 'hard life' she has had to endure, is actually down to her, her husband and family.
I should think Bary's defence lawyer will be aiming to use a set of accounts in order to disprove guilt.
What, exactly, do you think the purpose of a lawyer/barrister is?
Totally different to the US were the Bill of Rights is held with an almost religious reverence. I've heard it described as the most important legal document in history. Strange that rights legislation is viewed totally differently in each country
We don't even know that he is the killer.
That's not a valid legal or moral argument for any person. It's entirely possible that that is how Abdel Bary feels; it is entirely possible that he is Foley's killer and it is entirely possible that he did so because he felt aggrieved about his father's treatment. If that is the case, it won't be any *justification* though.
However, it has no bearing on whether Ragaa Bary or her other children should be deported back to Egypt.
Indeed. Did Magna Carta die in vain?
Only when faced with such a threat from such savages, that are here, living amongst us, who would, in a blink of an eye, erode those rights to suit their hideous beliefs and 'rights'.
I have to admit I'm confused about this.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/key-issues-for-the-new-parliament/security-and-liberty/from-the-human-rights-act-to-a-bill-of-rights/
This article suggests amendments can be made as a Bill of Rights.
And
Any patient person around to explain this to me?
The security services will likely have technology that will be able to match the pattern of people's eyes to find out who they are.
So you want to scrap the Human Right legislation in order to protect our human rights....? Okay....
And if your fear is that they would be eroded. .then shouldnt we be strengthiing the act... making it part of constitutional legislation so it would be harder to drop or change the act? Scrapping completely seems like the last thing you'd want to do.