Abu Hamza extradition halted .. again
Discussion
zcacogp said:
RedTrident said:
I'd hate to see an elderly woman kicked out of her 2 bedroom flat after her husband dies.
A specious comment if ever there was one; Abu Hamza married Nadjet in 1984 when she was 17. She's 45 now. Discussions about elderly people are kind-hearted but not relevant in this case. Oli.
zcacogp said:
A specious comment if ever there was one; Abu Hamza married Nadjet in 1984 when she was 17. She's 45 now. Discussions about elderly people are kind-hearted but not relevant in this case.
Oli.
You misunderstood. My comment was in reference to the wider issue of local authority houses becoming larger than necessary and that if such a rule was to be brought in I'd want safeguards for say an elderly woman who's husband has died. Hence my reference to a 2 bedroom flat and not a 5 bedroom house. Oli.
From the Standard:
Doesn't sound like much council forcing imho, lots about fairness and the size of home a family needs in an area with an over demand for family housing:
"Neighbours of hate preacher Abu Hamza today urged his wife to vacate their £1 million London council home to make way for young families.
Najat Mostafa, 53, still lives in the five-bedroom home in Shepherds Bush where the couple raised their eight children, despite six of their offspring having left, according to residents.
Now, residents and the local MP want Mrs Mostafa to “downsize” and make way for others in need of housing. There are more than 10,000 people on Hammersmith and Fulham council’s waiting list and the council says that “under occupation” is a growing problem.
The Standard understands council housing officers are negotiating with Moroccan-born Mrs Mostafa to move into a smaller property."
Sounds like she's had to put up with a lowly (£1m value quoted) home though:
"Greg Hands, the Conservative MP for Fulham and Chelsea, told The Daily Telegraph: 'I would strongly welcome any move by the council to take a look at Hamza's wife's status and the large council house in one of London's wealthiest neighbourhoods to see whether something might be done to move Hamza's family on.' One of the family's neighbours is former Labour cabinet minister John Hutton while others include bankers and television producers.
Doesn't sound like much council forcing imho, lots about fairness and the size of home a family needs in an area with an over demand for family housing:
"Neighbours of hate preacher Abu Hamza today urged his wife to vacate their £1 million London council home to make way for young families.
Najat Mostafa, 53, still lives in the five-bedroom home in Shepherds Bush where the couple raised their eight children, despite six of their offspring having left, according to residents.
Now, residents and the local MP want Mrs Mostafa to “downsize” and make way for others in need of housing. There are more than 10,000 people on Hammersmith and Fulham council’s waiting list and the council says that “under occupation” is a growing problem.
The Standard understands council housing officers are negotiating with Moroccan-born Mrs Mostafa to move into a smaller property."
Sounds like she's had to put up with a lowly (£1m value quoted) home though:
"Greg Hands, the Conservative MP for Fulham and Chelsea, told The Daily Telegraph: 'I would strongly welcome any move by the council to take a look at Hamza's wife's status and the large council house in one of London's wealthiest neighbourhoods to see whether something might be done to move Hamza's family on.' One of the family's neighbours is former Labour cabinet minister John Hutton while others include bankers and television producers.
Edited by Lost_BMW on Tuesday 9th October 19:54
RedTrident said:
zcacogp said:
A specious comment if ever there was one; Abu Hamza married Nadjet in 1984 when she was 17. She's 45 now. Discussions about elderly people are kind-hearted but not relevant in this case.
You misunderstood. My comment was in reference to the wider issue of local authority houses becoming larger than necessary and that if such a rule was to be brought in I'd want safeguards for say an elderly woman who's husband has died. Hence my reference to a 2 bedroom flat and not a 5 bedroom house. 
So, back on topic ... how long until AH makes his next appearance in front of a judge state-side? And will he be given his hooks back, or assigned a Mexican immigrant worker to
Oli.
The way this thing has panned out it wouldn't surprise me if he was acquitted and sent back here before Christmas.
Ref his wife's house, no publicly paid for service should be guaranteed for life. They should always be at the discretion of the council/government so they have room to manoeuvre in the event that costs need cutting. If people want more stability, become less State dependent. If you can't do this, whether your house has 5 bedrooms or 2 shouldn't be high up the priority list.
I wonder how much that family has cost us over the last decade. And who it was that granted them citizenship and on what basis.
Ref his wife's house, no publicly paid for service should be guaranteed for life. They should always be at the discretion of the council/government so they have room to manoeuvre in the event that costs need cutting. If people want more stability, become less State dependent. If you can't do this, whether your house has 5 bedrooms or 2 shouldn't be high up the priority list.
I wonder how much that family has cost us over the last decade. And who it was that granted them citizenship and on what basis.
Breadvan72 said:
Hamza obtained citizenship when married to his first wife, a British citizen, back in the 80s or 90s. He was not a radical Islamist back then, and did various jobs including bouncer in a Soho titty palace.
Didn't he come here on a false passport anyway ?Breadvan72 said:
The trial in the US won't happen this year, I think.
A commentator from the US on BBC America thought it would take up to two years to get to trial. There was an American lawyer commentating on tv over the weekend who thought it might be a year or two before a trial. Given what's happened to date, I wouldn't be surprised. But of course as soon as he's thrown into ADX Florence this thread will die and that's going to be a shame, as this has been an interesting thread.
Trial next August then http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19889820
zcacogp said:
Eight sons (not including stepsons).
- One imprisoned in Yemen on terrorism charges
- Three convicted in the UK of fraud relating to car theft
- One convicted in the UK for violent disorder
- One convicted in the UK for theft from a jewellery shop
I struggle to muster even the slightest shred of sympathy for any member of the family, and suggest that if so many of his sons are being given accommodation elsewhere at Her Majesty's Pleasure then we most certainly shouldn't be funding big houses in one of the most expensive parts of London for Abu Hamza's wife.
Oli.
I find it ironic that if this country was ruled as Hooky would like, four of his eight sons may have had hands chopped off for being thieving barstewards - One imprisoned in Yemen on terrorism charges
- Three convicted in the UK of fraud relating to car theft
- One convicted in the UK for violent disorder
- One convicted in the UK for theft from a jewellery shop
I struggle to muster even the slightest shred of sympathy for any member of the family, and suggest that if so many of his sons are being given accommodation elsewhere at Her Majesty's Pleasure then we most certainly shouldn't be funding big houses in one of the most expensive parts of London for Abu Hamza's wife.
Oli.
Breadvan72 said:
One point of detail: Shepherd's Bush is not "one of the most expensive parts of London". Parts of the area are quite scuzzy. I agree with the principle that social housing should reflect need, and Mrs Hamza is overhoused.
I'm sure Mrs Hamza would be much happier 'banged up' in the White City Estate - as scuzzy as they come IIRC.Dixie68 said:
I find it ironic that if this country was ruled as Hooky would like, four of his eight sons may have had hands chopped off for being thieving barstewards
If that was the case I suspect that they would have no need to go out thieving, they would be up there in the hierarchyBreadvan72 said:
I asked you who you would turn to do if falsely accused of something, but you didn't answer that question. Suppose you were falsely convicted of a reprehensible crime. By your logic, no lawyer should act for you. Is that just?
The question you should be asking is what is the greater injustice - failing to defend the small number of people convicted of something they didn't do, or defending a terrorist convicted in seperate trials under seperate legal systems?You seem to willingly overlook the injustice in the legals systems treatment of Hamza.
Breadvan72 said:
What system would you design? Who decides what is in the interests of justice, and how? It is easy to condemn a system that has been worked out over many years, but what do you put in its place?
You begin with who do you put in its place. The biggest problem with the legal system is the people working within it - everyone from money grubbing defence teams, through the incompentent cps, and onto the hopelessly out of touch judiciary.The current legal system causes more injustice than justice. There's too many cases of people like Hamza runnign rings around the system, or of rapists getting off with trivial sentences (in part due to their legal team overplaying mitigation where none can be justified), and people escaping proper jail based punishment in favour of community rehabilitation that plainly doesn't work.
The legal system has proven itself incapable of providing justice and it must be dismantled and replaced with something better if people are not to continue to withdraw from it and seek their own justice. My own experience of it has led me to refuse to engage with the legal system at any level: I don't feel bound by the law as it can't achieve its primary goal.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff