Due to be executed in Pakistan Nov 1, cleared by the secular courts, retried and convicted of murder by a sharia court.
It's rarely I link to those snivelling lefties at Amnesty International, who didn't lift a finger to help Harry Hammond, but I'll make an exception here. Not often I'm on the same side as George Galloway, either.
The guy was 18, on his first visit to Pakistan, getting a taxi from the airport to his ancestral village. Is it likely he'd decide to rob and kill his taxi-driver en route ?
You can email Tony Blair here.
(Note that the website of the socially inclusive, on-the-side-of-the-little-guy Prime Minister doesn't work with Firefox. It's the same incompetence that leads Government departments to reply to information requests with data in the latest format of Excel or Word . You mean some people haven't got Office 2003 ?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Laban,
I don't wish to seem unsympathetic, but if you travel abroad you take the consequences.
Last year, a plague of British fools went on holiday to New Orleans, which is after all in a hurricane zone, at the height of the hurricane season. Consequently, they were caught in a hurricane, and discovered that there are some parts even the welfare state can't reach. Not only did we have to act as their travel agent of last resort, relieving their humanitarian crisis which, by most reports, seemed to be on the scale of the Berlin Airlift, but we also had to endure their moaning and whinging; just as we must also endure the constant whinging of those who go to Sharm al-Shaykh and seem surprised when Muslim terrorists try to murder them, and sometimes succeed, or the pleas on behalf of every single stupid underclass female caught smuggling drugs into Thailand.
Why should I care less what happens to this guy? Did he go to Pakistan with a gun at his head? Did he? No.
In which law, convention or treaty is it written that no British citizen will suffer harm when they travel overseas?
For the past year the press have been assiduous in their reporting of the miscarriage of justice suffered by the 'innocent Brazilian' Jean Charles de Menezes. Never mind that the hallowed one was an illegal immigrant with a forged stamp on his passport, who had no compunction about displacing British electricians during his life.
Yet coverage of the case of Craig Alden, a Briton alleged to be wrongfully imprisoned in Brazil, has been sparse, to say the least.
By what law, convention or treaty is it written that a British citizen shall suffer no harm when they travel overseas? And who are we to interfere in the judicial processes of other nations?
That's Sharia law for you...the law that many British people of Pakistani origin want to see introduced into Britain.
Chip.
I don't wish to seem unsympathetic
Well you failed.
"Is it likely he'd decide to rob and kill his taxi-driver en route?"
Is it likely his taxi driver would pull over, pull a gun & try to sexually assault him (his reason for the struggle that saw the gun go off)?
Is it likely his taxi driver would pull over, pull a gun & try to sexually assault him (his reason for the struggle that saw the gun go off)
It does sound more likely. After all, whatever his financial situation (and he did have enough money to fly to Pakistan) a Brit would not find a Pakistani Taxi Driver worth robbing.
First bear in mind he took the police to the body within hours of the incident, not normally the actions of a thief.
Where did he find a gun? He is completely new to the country, and I am sure that British Airways didn't allow him to put one in his suitcase.
He was found not guilty by the proper courts (based on the British system) and then guilty by a religious court. Which one do you find more credible?
I'd like to hear Mr. Hussain's family condemning the unjust decision of sharia law and the fact that they were allowed to overturn the decision of proper courts.
Post a Comment