Posted on 06/28/2008 4:35:26 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Secret negotiations have taken place to arrange the release from a British jail of one of al-Qaeda’s most important operatives in Europe, The Times has learnt.
The prisoner, who can be identified only as U, is expected to be released from the high-security wing at Long Lartin jail next week.
Appeal Court judges ruled in April that the man, a 45-year-old Algerian veteran of al-Qaeda’s Afghan training camps, should be freed on bail. But discussions between security agencies and U’s lawyers became deadlocked over the conditions restricting his movements and whom he can meet when he leaves prison.
The authorities are understood to have sought bail terms more stringent than the 22-hour curfew imposed on the radical cleric Abu Qatada when he was freed last week. These conditions would require U to spend all his time indoors.
Security agencies blocked requests for U to live in London claiming that he has extensive contacts among extremist Islamist groups there. They also objected to an address in Brighton. U will be required to wear an electronic tag, subjected to round-the-clock monitoring and forbidden to use the internet or a mobile phone.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Yeah, but I’m sure the legal system will take care of these guys if they try anything.
To all Brits! You are now on your own.
Let’s see 911 and 411 have been taken.... how about a 511 or perhaps a 611... there’s still a lot left.
Cannot use 611, in America used to be telephone repair. But do to our great leaders it now means no service no how, but we will increase your bill.
I cannot figure out what the people of England are doing. They know that the horde is within their country, yet they allow their leaders try to pacify them!
You know, a guy like this fellow, out on bail, could fall down the stairs and break his neck...or something.
Bump
From the article:
“But rather than prosecute U in the British courts, the authorities agreed to an extradition request from the US where one of his recruits had given detailed statements implicating him in the plot to attack Los Angeles airport.”
“Two years later the US abandoned its extradition attempt...”
The problem is, who in Not-So-Great Britain would have the courage to do it? They would be arrested for committing a “hate crime.” That’s worse than murder!
“I cannot figure out what the people of England are doing.”
I think that, before making derogatory remarks about the Brits, we should realize that there is the possibility that the US may inaugurate a Muslim marxist as the next president. And percentage-wise we have a much smaller number of the horde in our country than the Brits have.
Now ask yourself where Islam is making faster progress — the UK or the US?
What we need is an off-the-books intelligence agency to deal with “people” like this. To hell with the judges and lawyers. If they don’t have any intelligence use and if they’re associated with or even sympathetic to al-Qaeda or its cause we should just off them, wherever they might be.
Did they ever catch that guy that walked away earlier this week, leaving a “suicide note”?
Well yes, but I’d sure like to encourage British soldiers who catch hell at both ends, in Iraq, Afghanistan and then at home.
By all means let’s fight the War on Terror in the courts /UltraMegaGigaGoogleplexDrippingSarc
“The problem is, who in Not-So-Great Britain would have the courage to do it?”
Oh, I don’t know, maybe a visiting fireman on a vacation! :)
“Two years later the US abandoned its extradition attempt...”
Thanks to the media, the Democrats and the Supreme Court, it is, unfortunately tragically, going to require another attack worse than 9-11 before the country gets serious about fighting those who would destroy us.
Wait, maybe this guy was a snich!
sometimes you get what you ask for, and england has been BEGGING for it... maybe this time
“The judges reversed (the conviction of “lyrical terrorist” Samina Malik, accused of the unlawful possession of jihadi literature) ... because they decided that information “useful” to a terrorist had to offer practical assistance. While the terrorist manuals in her possession plainly did just that, the judges decided that other jihadi literature did not, and so it was not unlawful to possess such literature. They then concluded that the jury may have been “confused” and wrongly convicted her for possessing the jihadi literature – as opposed to convicting her for possessing the terrorism manuals that did constitute an offense.”
This sounds a lot like some of the contortions that out activist Supreme Court majorities went through in recent pro-terrorist decisions order to achieve desired outcomes. These weird rulings begs the question of what is the agenda of our leftist judiciary. And by subjecting national security cases involving foreign combatants and terrorists to the same constraints as domestic criminal cases (against all precedent), are these judges trying to “prove” that freedom in modern societies is impractical?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.