Streetlife

There isn't a soapbox big enough for me.Shall we just let everybody into this country?No doubt they will pull the 'human rights' card.

What the hell are you talking about??? These guys are British born-and-bred and are being extradited to the US. They have spent 8 and 6 years respectively in a British prison WITHOUT charge.

'What the hell am I on about'?Eerrr,well considering that 69% of people covicted of terrorist charges in the UK are born in this country,it actually makes the case worse!
Mohammed Chowdhury,Shah Rahman,Gurukaath Derai,Abdul Mish,Richard Reid(the shoe bomber),all British born,I could go on and on,all convicted for terrorism charges..........need I say more?
Not saying your man is guilty,but if he isn't then what does he have to worry about?
There is nothing wrong in protecting our country.

Just for balance here.  These men have not been found guilty and yet are imprisoned indefinitely under extreme laws, passed when Britain was gripped by neo-con hysteria.  In the case of Babar Ahmed, the CPS have already said there is insufficient evidence to prosecute. 

Streakbacon asks 'what does he have to worry about'?  What he has to worry about is the US justice system which, in respect of people of islamic persuasion, is in the grip of paranoid delusion.

Here is what I onsider to be an intelligent piece of reporting http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2012/04/23/babar-ahmad-and-talha-ahsan-why-its-time-to-scrap-the-us...

@Streakybaconkeks : it would be of great help that instead of talking based only in your obvious prejudices, bordering in something nastier, you would talk based on the facts of the matter.

The real problem in this country is that some people are quick to judge based on prejudice instead of the merits of each individual case.

A far greater danger to our security and freedom is that we have allowed politicians to pass laws that allow for the  imprisonment of British citizens without due process and under secrecy (it should worry us regardless of the nationality of the people affected, human rights, which you have been suitably brain washed to deride, apply to all, the clue is in the name).

If there is 'insufficient evidence to prosecute',then he has nothing to worry about in the U.S
A far greater danger to our security are politicians??How do u work that out?Dont see them wanting to blow up The London Stock Exchange,The Underground,etc,etc.
Wake up and smell the coffee!

Streakybaconkeks, a country is a country, not your country, not my country, no-ones country, just a country of the world. We are born somewhere, live somewhere and die somewhere and yes it is a human right to have free movement between countries if there is no cause for concern about your entry.

As mentioned above, just stick to the facts of the case and leave all other things aside. I'm not clued up on the cases, although I have spoken to a brother of one of the imprisoned. I am only commenting because I don't like prejudice and claiming ownership of countries causes just as many problems as religion can.

My only feeling is that to imprison someone without sufficient evidence is unjust and a breach of basic human rights. Anyone who is held for years when there is not sufficient evidence has a lot to worry about! Clearly the system doesn't care about the possibility that they are innocent, hence there being insufficient evidence. They continue to be imprisoned regardless!

@Streakybaconkeks : civilized countries don't imprison people without due process. These chaps are not imprisoned in the US, they are detained without trial here in the UK.

If there is evidence to jail them in the UK they should be jailed.

If there is evidence that they should be deported then they should be deported.

What is completely unacceptable is to hold them neither here not there without going through a proper judicial process *for years*. Franz Kafka, George Orwell saw these problems with authoritarian societies decades ago, now we have examples of that kind of behaviour and there are people that can't stand for their neighbours to be treated fairly. Really shameful.

They put *citizens* in detention without trial, they want to snoop in our communications, they have already abused the powers given by anti-terrorist legislation by using it against photographers, protesters and even hecklers in political conventions.

But here you are, giving them a pat in the back for a "job well done".

When I refer to dangerous politicians I am not referring to bombing buildings ( although I am sure many people in Iraq and Afghanistan may have something to say about that), I am referring to the threat (that with the excuse of protecting us against terrorism) of politicians creating a society where we won't be free.

 Get yourself the excellent German movie "The lives of others" if you want to see how it is like to live under constant surveillance by an overbearing state with the permanent threat of being thrown in a cell for no good reason whatsoever. I don't want this country to go there!

@Streakybaconkeks: Thanks for your comments, its good to have a debate. I'd like to respond to your statement: "If there is 'insufficient evidence to prosecute',then he has nothing to worry about in the U.S"

The families of Babar Ahmad and Talha Ahsan have called for both of them to face a fair trial in the UK. They would welcome the opportunity to stand up and answer to any allegations and alleged evidence presented to them in front of a British court in the UK. The fact that they are asking to do so is definitely a credit to our own system.

However there have been a large number of criticisms of the US Justice system which lead to the suggestion that it will be impossible for either men to face a fair trail in the US.

Gareth Peirce has written about the US Justice system and the cases here: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n09/gareth-peirce/americas-non-compliance

One major issue is the way that the US automatically deem suspects accused of terror-related charges as 'enemies of the state'. There has been talk about how it is 'ok' to have extraordinary trials that function outside of the US legal system for such charges. http://freetalha.org/2012/06/statement-of-support-noam-chomsky/

Connected to this is the 'plea bargaining system' where about 97% of people on trial plead guilty in order to have a lesser sentence. This is the norm, however, lets say you are innocent and have been accused of something that makes you an 'enemy of the state'. How can you plead guilty? it's a Catch 22 situation.

On top of this, both men are likely to spend up to 3 years in solitary confinement pre-trial if they are sent to the US. The UN rapporteur has stated that this constitutes torture and psychiatrists have warned of the damaging effects of such conditions.

If Babar and Talha are sent to the US it will be very difficult to ever prove whether they are innocent or not. Imagine that they are innocent, 70 years in Super Max Prison is so long. It is especially important that people accused on such a serious scale receive the fairest possible trial, otherwise we risk severe miscarriages of justice.

(On another note, the US is asking for them to be extradited on web-based activity where the server was briefly in the US but all activity took place in the UK. Although evidence has not been provided, what has been conveyed so far would appear not to constitute a crime here in the UK. Its a clear issue of sovereignty. How can the UK send over its citizens to the US for things that may or may not have taken place in the UK, but that are not deemed to be a crime here?)

It is appalling that the US have a law that enables anyone anywhere in the world who is perceived to have committed a crime against the US to be prosecuted in the US, without this being reciprocal.

The US has protected its own citizens who have committed crimes all over the world and is still protected its forces who have committed crimes.  I am sure that Streakybaconkeks is happy that a US citizen who brings down the UK banking system by fraud may not be extradited from the US!  

This is just another example of the arrogance of the US in defining itself as 'the greatest democracy in the word' and the sycophantic nature of the British Government in reducing us to a mere colony of the US.

The problem is not the US, they can pass whatever laws they like.

The problem is how compliant the UK political establishment has been, and how biased the extradition treaties between both countries seem to be. This is a typical example of how the bigger news, that apparently will never affect us, are actually affecting people like us, living in our neighbourhood.

It is most concerning how the establishment fought tooth and nail for Chile's former dictator, General Pinochet, to avoid his extradition to Spain on serious alleged human rights abuses,  but are just all too willing to send our own citizens to the US based on the flimsiest of evidence, which the US doesn't need to defend here btw, the political establishment has decided that the US"s word is gold and let the poor people affected fend by themselves against a foreign  judicial system that is clearly flawed.