General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFrance shows us how to deal with jihadis
Why the contrast? Many of those packed off by France were sent to countries such as Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt, whose judicial systems are not widely thought to be paragons of compassion. Many of the deportees from France were Islamists whose only offence was to make disparaging remarks about the country rather than fanatics bent on fomenting violence.
Yet we are apparently unable to remove Abu Qatada, who arrived here under false pretences and was identified by MI5 as the most significant Islamic fundamentalist in Britain and an inspiration for terrorists both in this country and abroad. He chose his destination well when he came to Europe in 1993. Had he settled in Paris, he would certainly not still be there making a mockery of the French judicial system.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10025512/France-shows-us-how-to-deal-with-jihadis.html
demosincebirth
(12,529 posts)Pelican
(1,156 posts)... as is the case with the guy in Britain, I see no reason they should have the same rights as a full citizen.
demosincebirth
(12,529 posts)deport them back to their country of origin. If they are naturalized citizens, they took an oath to defend this country and our laws. Breaking that oath, in it's self, to me, is Treason.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)As far as Islamic or any other suspected radicalization in the EU or anywhere, the problem is they are married to natives in some cases. They can't be sent away, nor can their children or extended families that they sponsored to become citizens.
So the problem will continue to be confronting them close up. I'm betting those French allies which were once linked closer to the French government, have the same standards the French. Although I have no idea what their system is. They may not as rough as the author is alleging them to be.
The British are against the death penalty and not sending people where they might be tortured or killed is a logical extension of that. This guy likely has kids and family in the UK pushing to keep him there.
What I don't get is why the USA is stuck with housing that other well-known radical from the UK as they should have kept him in the UK. It's confusing.
We hear a lot about people saying the UK and USA are doing all sorts of things, but this is allowed to continue, which disproves that. It's all protected under Freedom of Speech or Religion in some form in both nations We have a variety of homegrown terrorists that we've suffered from over time.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)That's the example you're citing?