Let’s see. Pamela Geller and I were banned from Britain because, we were told, our presence would be “not conducive to the public good.” The grounds for my ban, according to the Home Office’s letter to me, was that I have said that Islam has a doctrine of warfare against unbelievers, which is like banning me because I say that the sky is blue. I have never advocated for or approved of any violence or hatred, and the Home Office’s letter, contrary to claims from Leftists and Islamic supremacists in the UK and the US, did not claim otherwise. Now here is YM, a convert to Islam and a convicted jihad terrorist — in other words, someone whose entire life is dedicated to violence and hatred. He was ordered deported from Britain because his presence, like mine, was deemed “not conducive to the public good.”
The howling absurdity of banning both me and a convicted jihad terrorist on the same grounds — that we are “not conducive to the public good” — is blazingly obvious, but the British government, under pressure from Leftists and Islamic supremacists, was trying to show that its actions against jihad terrorists, such as they were, were not “Islamophobic,” and that they were equally set against “extremists on both sides.” Thus it has become commonplace among British Leftists to refer to me as if I were the equivalent of jihad preacher Anjem Choudary, a Big Lie that endeavors to obscure the fact that Choudary has frequently and cheerfully stated his approval for various acts of jihad mass murder and openly calls for the imposition of Sharia and the consequent denial of basic rights to women and non-Muslims, while I have never approved of or called for the murder of anyone, and believe that societies should work to secure equality of rights for all people.
Now to compound that absurd equivalence comes this news: while we are still banned (although our appeal is still under consideration), the jihad terrorist YM, a man who trained to commit jihad mass murder, cannot be deported after all. To do so would violate his human rights.
And so Britain takes one more jolly step toward chaos and civil war and blood in its streets, in yet another demonstration of the British intelligentsia’s abject surrender to Islamic supremacists who wish to destroy them.
“Convicted terrorist wins new round in human rights battle,” by David Barrett, Telegraph, October 10, 2014:
A Muslim man who attended two terrorist training camps and went to meetings at the home of a “fanatical Islamist” has used human rights laws to secure a further delay of his deportation by the Government.
The Telegraph disclosed last year how the 30-year-old Ugandan, who can only be identified by the initial YM, had been using the “right to family life” to avoid being removed to his home country.
Now, in a further controversial development, the convicted terrorist has won a new application in the Court of Appeal.
YM’s lawyers argued the married father-of-three has weak ties to his homeland and his removal would breach his rights to “private and family life” under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Three senior appeal judges – Lord Justice Aikens, Sir Colin Rimer and Sir Stanley Burnton – ruled YM was now entitled to have his case reconsidered by the Upper Tribunal of the Asylum and Immigration Chamber.
Sir Stanley said: “It would in general be difficult to see that in the case of someone who had committed offences as serious as those of the appellant the lack of ties to his country of nationality would lead to a breach of his Article 8 rights, since the public interest in his deportation is so strong.”
But the judge said he was “persuaded in this case that the right course is to remit his appeal to the Upper Tribunal” because of changes to legislation and the immigration rules since the tribunal last considered his case.
YM was born in Uganda in June 1984 and came to this country with his mother and her other children in 1991, aged six.
At the age of 14 he was convicted of robbery. He was later convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he was 15; three assaults on police constables when he was aged 18, and aggravated burglary when 19.
Despite his earlier convictions YM obtained indefinite leave to remain in Britain when he was 16, but never obtained British citizenship.
The court heard YM began practising Islam in a youth offender institution.
After his release in 2005 he attended a mosque in Croydon, south London, and later attended meetings at the house of a man called Hamid “whom YM subsequently admitted was a fanatical Islamist”, said Lord Justice Aikens.
“These encounters resulted in YM attending two terrorist training camps (in southern England) in 2006,” he added.
After going to the camps he arrested and charged under the 2006 Terrorism Act, which makes it an offence to attend a place where instruction or training, including with weapons, is given for terrorist purposes.
YM pleaded guilty to two charges and in February 2008 at Woolwich Crown Court was sentenced to three years and five months imprisonment to run concurrently on each count.
A month before his release on licence in June 2008 the home secretary issued him with a deportation notice stating that his presence in the UK was “not conducive to the public good” because of his terrorist-related convictions.
The lower immigration tribunal allowed YM’s initial appeal against the notice on human rights grounds in July 2009, but that decision was overturned by the upper tribunal.
In the latest legal action, YM’s lawyers challenged the upper tribunal’s decision and judges decided he was entitled to a rehearing by the tribunal on his Article 8 grounds….
AnneCrockett says
This is why we refer to them as Perfidious Albion.
Michael Garfield says
And who do you mean by ‘them’? Perhaps it might help if you differentiated between the ordinary folk and the government, High Court judges, etc. I’m sure I’d be considered somewhat idiotic if I saw the actions of your government and the wishes, hope and aspirations of your countrymen as one and the same. I find it bemusing that we have a common enemy, yet Americans can’t seem to comment without making some Anglo-phobic aside. Stop being taken in by the baloney that Hollyweird and your media feeds you in its portrayal of England and the English. Using the logic of some on here, I would have to regard the average American as someone who wears cowboy boots, a ten-gallon hat and a pair of six-shooters dangling from his hip, while shouting ‘yee-haw, howdy pardner’ at every opportunity. Thankfully I’m a little more clued up to fall for ridiculous stereotypes. While I’m sure the same can be said for many Americans, it is a sad fact that many still believe we’re 200 years behind the times, take afternoon tea & crumpet – which is of course brought to us by our very own butler – and live in mansions and country estates with a beefeater standing guard outside the door. Same goes for those soldiers you see standing guard outside Buckingham Palace, or when the Household Cavalry ride past in all their finery. It amazes me that many tourists seem to think that they’re nothing more than over-sized chocolate soldiers who dress up especially for the tourists, when in fact they’re real soldiers who go through some of the toughest training in the world – and all serve as real soldiers, doing their tour of duty in some the world’s most dangerous places. Sorry to burst your bubble concerning the stereotypes you use to lampoon and insult us with but it’s all bullshit.
Now getting back to Muslims and our government, court system, etc. Do you not think we hate and despise them as much as they deserve? Do you not think that the average indigenous inhabitant of these isles isn’t clued up and fully aware of the Muslim threat and the role our weak government plays in all of this?? As I said, drop the stupid, untrue stereotypes and try looking at us as you would regard yourselves. The events of 1776 are over and done with if you hadn’t noticed. Time to start respecting those you share so much common ground with. A great country doesn’t need to be backed up by shallow egos that require them to insult others. It does you no credit.
CharlieGriffith says
Relax. Take a few very deep breaths. Remember that there is a very healthy anti-Ameddican [sic] attitude in England, and has been since WWII.
Rob says
I think this judge is showing off to his colleagues just how erudite and liberal he is.
Serving the people is the last thing on his mind.
Nigel Davis says
Rubbish..What a load of crap you are speaking
nothosaur says
Michael Garfield,
Well said. We Americans need to seek out allies among our British cousins. It is inexcusably lazy to generalize as you described.
Consider, for example, that Pat Condell is more passionately devoted to defeating Islamic supremicism than anyone in the Executive Branch of the US Government and a very large majority of the Legislative Branch.
And, what if a British observer judged the entire US by the ridiculous decision of the Pennsylvania trial judge, Mark Martin, who granted a motion to dismiss in the battery case against a Muslim who was caught on video attacking an atheist, and then lectured the atheist about cultural sensitivity.
The British people are our allies. Allies reinforce each other’s strengths, and help each other through difficulties. Both of our governments are under attack from within.
In fact, we (on both sides) should get penpals on the other side of the pond to help us more closely understand what is happening with our allies. It would help to put a personal face on the unfolding story, sidestep the pre-cooked media drama, and be fatal to our prejudices. (Plus, I’ve always wanted to learn more about Great Britain than what the history books and media tell me).
Any interested, British, liberty-loving opponent of Islamic supremicism may go to my You-tube channel: Nothosaur. Send me a private message, and I’ll send you my email address.
terry says
Here! Here!
Bob says
Excellent post — and I don’t think that most Americans see you Brits the way you described it. I guess the problem I see ‘over there’ is the same problem that I see here — the average American (i.e., not from the northeast or the left coast) fully realizes that Islam is insidious and that, contrary to our Prez, we ARE in a war with them. And we, in both countries, are losing.
John C. Barile says
It’s a good thing that Spencer and Geller aren’t allowed into the UK, or an epidemic of rational thinking might break out.
Shane says
What the dhimmi court is saying is that you can’t deport a fanatical jihad terrorist until he actually acts on his beliefs. Advocating the imposition of sharia law on a country should be enough to deport any citizen.
jihad3tracker@gmail.com says
I bet a sack or two of Euros that the photo atop this post is oogled by Allah’s petitioners at ISIS command camps.
A 21st century version of WW II’s “pin up girls” — Betty Grable was probably the most famous.
Pin-up barristers — willingly / idiotically / Eton-Oxford certified, and enabling the advance of self destruction in a too-far-gone-for-remedy U.K.
tpellow says
It is seven months to the U.K General Election, and the Government is doing all it can to appease Islamic interests; however, the British people are increasingly disillusioned with all three main political parties on issues to do with uncontrolled mass immigration, and subservience to European Union.
As I have said before: it should be taken as a litmus test of UK political parties:-
British people should not vote for any party which opposes the freedom of entry into Britain of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer.
Rob says
Can’t wait for UKIP to get into a position where they can stymie the rubbish.
dumbledoresarmy says
UKIP have got their first man into Parliament.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-10/anti-eu-ukip-wins-first-seat-in-british-parliament/5804764
“UKIP wants a British withdrawal from the European Union and strict curbs on immigration.”
The other party to watch is Paul Weston’s nascent “Liberty Great Britain”.
Rob says
Great!
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Looking at this photo of the judge, one understands what deep trouble England all and all the UK are in. Ironic, he’s all gussied up in a costume from two hundred years ago as a genuflection to England’s great tradition. But, inside the costume, the judge is working against that very tradition. Chairman Mao said that justice comes from the barrel of a gun, as is the case for judges in particular as they mete out justice. But this guy is distributing injustice as atonement for the very ideas invoked by his antique presentation.
Oppression is as old as the hills; freedom is a modern invention. In England we see the snake swallowing its tail.
Beagle says
Mao and Thomas Jefferson agreed on that one point. Mao reveled in it and created a cult of personality while Jefferson attempted through his writing to warn about, and through his actions limit, that human tendency.
Sadly those in charge in the modern West are more from the Mao camp.
This poncy judge is enjoying the end of a great civilization he had nothing to do with creating, but a great deal to do with destroying.
KrazyKafir says
Twenty first century Quislings. Nothing less.
Mark says
Easy solution, send his family with him. After all of they live Islam so much why should they suffer living on a secular democracy?
Jay Boo says
Muslims will never ‘check-out’ of their rooms as long as judges are offering them free maid service at Hotel Islamophobia.
Salah says
That’s what they do best. They use human rights laws to destroy human rights laws. They use democracy to destroy democracy. They use free speech to destroy free speech. They use our STUPIDITY to destroy us.
Being that stupid…we deserve it!
Jen says
Exactly.
MacUalraig says
Perfect summary.
Charlie Griffith says
That English judge looks so enormously pleased with himself.
A Pulitzer for that photo.
Jerry says
If the pic was not cropped below, maybe you could have noticed that he was pleasing himself while watching a picture of a girl of Aisha’s age as when Mo was first pleasing himself with her.
Horace Yo says
Hey Judge, your dishonor, take the doormat off your head and let some common sense trickle in, and wipe that s*it eating grin off too. Toleration of the intolerant is like a double negative. It is being intolerant of civilized Brits yourself. British culture on the skids personified.
somehistory says
Why does looking at the photo and reading what he said make a certain song from the Wizard of Oz, sung by a man of tin but wiser than this judge, go through my head?
Kelfin Planck says
Robert Spencer got it wrong this time. The judges did NOT “rule that he can’t be deported.” They only ruled that the matter must be remitted and reheard, due to changes in the law.
gravenimage says
This foolish judge ruled that this Jihad terrorist can’t be deported now—and on grounds that that may lead to a ban on him and his fellow Jihadists ever being deported.
Robert Spencer got nothing wrong here.
Kelfin Planck says
Mr. Image, there is difference between a RULING and the CONSEQUENCES of a ruling.
The judges’ RULING was that YM’s case must be remitted to a tribunal and re-heard, due to changes in the law.
One CONSEQUENCE of this ruling is that YM will not be deported yet.
NOWHERE did the judges rule that deportation would breach YM’s rights, as stated in Spencer’s title. The case must re-heard by a tribunal to determine that and the judges expressed no opinion on that. They only ruled that the case must be re-heard by a mew tribunal, due to changes in the law. Nobody knows what the new tribunal will say and the judges made no prediction.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1292.html
Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Me) says
O Kafirs! Your Robert Spencer got it wrong this time. The judges did NOT “rule that he can’t be deported.” They only ruled that the matter must be remitted and reheard, due to changes in the law:
IV. Disposal
For the reasons given above, I would allow the appeal on the Article 8 ground, but dismiss it on the Article 3 ground. The matter must be remitted to a differently constituted UT, in order to reconsider the Article 8 issues. The UT will have to re-find the necessary facts and apply them to the new statutory provisions and the 2014 Rules.
Jay Boo says
Wrong
The judges did “rule that he can’t be deported YET
( while legalistic shenanigans are going on to delay it)
Jerry says
In Islamic Law, he cannot be punished if he killed his wife and his children, but that may lapse the grounds upon which he cannot be deported.
Jay Boo says
Do British judges still wear that floor-mop headdress?
Omar BEDDALI says
I’m an atheist algerian and I’m so sad that the country of NEWTON, DARWIN and RUSSEL become so indecisive.
Charli Main says
Britain and Europe continuing on their merry way to suicide by Islam.
Nicu says
Yes, they do .
They care about them more than about their own people !
Jade says
As Rabbi Shalom from Atlanta said recently: If you want to visit Europe, do it now because it will soon be unrecognizable. Idiots placating the Muslim monsters.
Beagle says
“Do it now”?
That’s insane. Europe is far too dangerous for anyone who is visibly Jewish. Do it in the 1980s with a time machine.
Jen says
It makes me sad and angry at the state of affairs and not being able to do enough about it. Islam trying to destroy our countries, bit by bit.
Beagle says
The biggest joke is that “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” Even full-time attorneys can’t keep up with the mass of new regulations which come out every year in one subtopic of the law.
I could spend a couple hours diagramming that opinion and researching the human rights law and it would still come down to the fact Robert Spencer was banned from the UK whilst jihadis run free in droves, even returning conspirators and actual genocidal murderers from IS.
You can cloak it in a wall of text, as here, but that is reality.
nacazo says
David wood: Is that judge your long lost uncle????
– sorry couldn’t resist.
gravenimage says
UK: Judges rule that convicted jihad terrorist can’t be deported, it would breach his rights to “private and family life”
………………………………
More jaw-dropping suicidal madness from once great Britain.
jacquethelad says
I am English and believe you me we are sick to death of these bewigged unsackable fools who wreak such devastation on the lives of ordinary Brits. We cannot get rid of them no matter what the stupidity if their decisions.
pdxnag says
What a mess. Remanded in light of changes in law. Not yet final.
Dave J says
These stories from Europe and Great Britain have an upside down, through the looking glass quality to them. Suppressing non-violent free speech while enabling extremely violent speech and actions? What has happened here? (The photo does explain some of this – they are ruled by twits).
Michael Copeland says
Time for “a ‘symbolic’ political gesture”?
“Judge Denniss agreed that the act of shoe-throwing should not be considered in a charge of violent disorder against the student because it was “a symbolic” political gesture.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/04/uk-police-bow-to-islamic-sensitivities-allow-muslim-protesters-to-throw-shoes
Rob says
Giving the 2-fingered salute is my political gesture Judge and it’s comin to you right now!
Wellington says
Legal theory, when functioning in a vacuum and devoid of common sense, can quickly add up to stupid. As here.
Jen says
Right. I’d like a few judges to set precedents on these Muslim issues. Once the ball gets rolling, it will slide back in our favour. Or at least, we will have a body of case law to refer to.
Alice says
How did that man manage to make it through college?
gerard says
“…his rights.”
What about our rights?
Don’t we matter?
Apparently not!
robert says
Could it be that these judges have been threatened, or paid off?
Dumbledoresarmy says
Perfectly possible.
Islam operates very much as the Mafia did, and both the Iranians (Shiite branch of the Ummah or Mohammedan Mob) and the Saudis and Qataris (Sunni branch) are simply *swimming* in oil and gas money…they are *far more* cashed-up than the richest mafia bosses could ever *dream* of being.
Plenty of money there to “reconcile hearts” (as I think the Hadiths put it, speaking of bribes to grease the way of Islam into infiltrated/ subverted societies)…and also to pay “hitmen”.
Cicero says
This just a tip of the iceberg as far as the Immigration &Judicial system of the. UK is concerned. A fact little known to the tax paying British public is the number of unaccompanied Minors turning up at the Home Office . They are usually male and from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, Iran, Chechnya, Libya , Afghanistan, Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Sudan and latterly Albania.
They state they are abandoned and under ECHR regulations have rights as children to be looked after by the British. State.
They are then given leave to remain I the UK and whilst their claim to remain in the UK is being examined ( this takes years and years) they are cared for by British families . They are given pocket money weekly, lunch money daily, a free travel card,education bursaries and regular clothing money amounting, to hundreds of pounds.. They have free access to education and to NHS health card. They are also given hundreds of pounds to celebrate their Islamic festivals of Eids.
These are al Muslim young men who if they are practising Muslims quickly make links with he existing settled Muslim communities I the Uk. If they arriveas secular Muslims they quickly become practising Muslims because the state. Authorities insist on providing them with a copy of the Koran and a prayer mat. And the professionals working , with these young men strongly encourage them to attend the local mosque.
All this largesse is thrown at potential future enemies of British society and British values whilst working British families can hardly afford a fifth of what these Muslim young men are given via taxpayers monies whilst their own children struggle daily with deprivation and deficit.
Usually. see young men are give indefinite leave to remain in the UK which leads eventually to full British citizenship. How long must Brtish people and thosewho subscribe to her values endure in silence -Whenwill they rise upand say enough is enough?
dumbledoresarmy says
I wonder how old they actually are?
Does anybody examine their teeth? A good dentist can tell someone’s approximate age from their teeth. And I think it’s also possible to do a bone scan or an x-ray and get a pretty good idea of someone’s real age; the bones show whether they have finished growing, or not.
Cicero says
You have a good point there. Just by looking at them you can see that they are years older than they claim. However what is puzzling is that the UK BA and the Home Office managers accept on face value the age they claim they are. The officers appear strangely reluctant to challenge the age claims by referring for an Age Assesement. It feels. As if the porous borders claim is evident in the managerial ranks of the Home Office
Dennis says
Easy solution. Considering the circumstances and past history then he has two chouices, deportation or the death penalty. Choose!
Beth says
One word for that judge:
Hypocrite.
gerard says
Does anyone else think the judge’s wig looks a little bit like the Arab keffiyeh? (headdress thingy.)
SMG says
I cannot comprehend why civilized societies cannot enact laws that would allow for deportation of not only the individual, but his entire family as well. After all they are aiding and abetting a criminal or someone with criminal intent. Also, all of their assets should be confiscated and used to support the fight against this type of crime.