What's the point of posting when moderators either edit what you've typed, change your thread titles or just delete your posts?

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

why not indeed

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

Because we don't have the death penalty?

Because we don't have the death penalty?

A crying shame. Our ancestors had it wrapped up (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/ukpga_19980037_en_4#pt2-pb3-l1g36) :thumbsup:

the death penalty was removed for treason in 1990 .

Bet his religion and his "beliefs" still let him claim benefits tho'?

"Jailed indefinitely for public protection." What kind of state do we live in.

One where part of the media and the general public have been demanding harsher sentences and as a result politicians have introduced harsher sentences.

Bet his religion and his "beliefs" still let him claim benefits tho'?

Not whilst he's in prison it doesn't!

It won't be long before some do-gooder alters that though will it?

"A man convicted as a major recruiter for Islamist extremism has been jailed indefinitely for public protection.
Mohammed Hamid, 50, of east London, organised secret training camps, one of which was attended by the four failed suicide bombers of 21 July 2005.

Hamid was jailed for seven-and-a-half years - but told he would not be released until he had reformed.

His accomplice, Atilla Ahmet, who made hate speeches alongside Hamid, was jailed for six years and 11 months.

The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence against Hamid was the first use of the powers in a terrorist case. "
--------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell is this "Imprisonment for Public Protection"? Why not just lock him up for the sentence Parliament has decreed for his crime? This indefinite sentencing until you change your ideas smacks of totalitarianism and is something I would have associated with the old USSR.


It's basically an open ended life sentence that can keep him in jail for the rest of his natural. All sentences have a tariff, in his case he got 7 1/2 years. but that wasn't considered enough so he got the public protection sentence.

See this. (http://www.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/adviceandsupport/prison_life/lifesentencedprisoners/)

I reckon that it's quite a good sentence.

I agree with him being locked up for his crimes, but not the element of Thought Crime involved in his release date. We are saying alter your beliefs or we wont ever let you out of jail.

Any muslim is welcome to believe that we are all worthless kaffirs only worthy of being slaughtered. It's only when they actually do something about it that it should ever become a crime.

I agree with him being locked up for his crimes, but not the element of Thought Crime involved in his release date. We are saying alter your beliefs or we wont ever let you out of jail.

Any muslim is welcome to believe that we are all worthless kaffirs only worthy of being slaughtered. It's only when they actually do something about it that it should ever become a crime.

Thought has a habit of becoming a crime though.

As for claiming benefits.... he is getting more from the taxpayer for being in prison than he is ever likely to get in benefits from the outside....

Where is "our" justice in that?

I agree with him being locked up for his crimes, but not the element of Thought Crime involved in his release date. We are saying alter your beliefs or we wont ever let you out of jail.

Any muslim is welcome to believe that we are all worthless kaffirs only worthy of being slaughtered. It's only when they actually do something about it that it should ever become a crime.

Maybe you should give Shami Chakrabarti a call, Im sure theres a position for you somewhere :rolleyes:

Maybe you should give Shami Chakrabarti a call, Im sure theres a position for you somewhere :rolleyes:

There's a thought. What position does Shami Chakrabarti like best?

There's a thought. What position does Shami Chakrabarti like best?

Doggie? :hihi: Ooops! dogs are dirty.

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.

"A man convicted as a major recruiter for Islamist extremism has been jailed indefinitely for public protection.
Mohammed Hamid, 50, of east London, organised secret training camps, one of which was attended by the four failed suicide bombers of 21 July 2005.

Hamid was jailed for seven-and-a-half years - but told he would not be released until he had reformed.

His accomplice, Atilla Ahmet, who made hate speeches alongside Hamid, was jailed for six years and 11 months.

The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence against Hamid was the first use of the powers in a terrorist case. "
--------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell is this "Imprisonment for Public Protection"? Why not just lock him up for the sentence Parliament has decreed for his crime? This indefinite sentencing until you change your ideas smacks of totalitarianism and is something I would have associated with the old USSR.


is he the 1 convicted for chopping a water melon?
or did he use some sticks as pretend gun or something??

me as a muslim will most definately avoid cutting any water melon in case i too receive IPP

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.
Unbelieveable!!!!!!From out of the mouths of children

Unbelieveable!!!!!!From out of the mouths of children

more beleivable from outs of the gobs a black hearted racists.

he cut up a melon?
then did something with sticks??

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.

He's been recruiting, indoctrinating and training terrorists. Including the 4 who tried do do the "things that make you go boom" bit on 21/7.

By your logic Osama bin Ladin's a grossly malaigned innocent chap as he's never actually got round to strapping on the old bomb belt himself.

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.



he was a muslim.
he shouldn't cut watermelons or play with sticks.

however...if he dropped urinium warheads on muslim children...he would've been a hero

He's been recruiting, indoctrinating and training terrorists. Including the 4 who tried do do the "things that make you go boom" bit on 21/7.

By your logic Osama bin Ladin's a grossly malaigned innocent chap as he's never actually got round to strapping on the old bomb belt himself.

where does your info come from...don't u ever question all the muslims they seem to lock up are released after a few months with mimimal media coverage

All they were doing was practising to attack innocent people, whats so wrong with that?
I think they should have been given a medal.


Jesus wept.

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.

better be careful, or you'll be next :suspect:

where does your info come from...don't u ever question all the muslims they seem to lock up are released after a few months with mimimal media coverage

From the transcripts of the trial.

If your big concern is muslim terrorists being released then this indefinate sentance should come as a welcome relief for you. :)

he was a muslim.
he shouldn't cut watermelons or play with sticks.

however...if he dropped urinium warheads on muslim children...he would've been a hero
No he wouldnt have been an hero ,he is muslim ergo he would have been a traitor

where does your info come from...don't u ever question all the muslims they seem to lock up are released after a few months with mimimal media coverage

You need to remember to judge every case on its own merits, not every Muslim is a mudering suicide bomber; not every convicted muslim has been stitched up by the state. It is not about taking sides. This criminal knew the risks that he ran, he was caught and now he needs to serve his time.

is he the 1 convicted for chopping a water melon?
or did he use some sticks as pretend gun or something??

me as a muslim will most definately avoid cutting any water melon in case i too receive IPP

Make sure you don't grow one of them big ****off beards then :hihi:

You need to remember to judge every case on its own merits, not every Muslim is a mudering suicide bomber; not every convicted muslim has been stitched up by the state. It is not about taking sides. This criminal knew the risks that he ran, he was caught and now he needs to serve his time.
He wont serve long especially if he's in the general prison population the non muslims in prison dont adhere to the mamby pamby PC stupidity,he'll be falling down a few times

He wont serve long especially if he's in the general prison population the non muslims in prison dont adhere to the mamby pamby PC stupidity,he'll be falling down a few times

Indefinatly is quite a long time I think.

Make sure you don't grow one of them big ****off beards then :hihi:


have u been sexually abused by...say..a muslim with a beard?:hihi:

He'll be out in a few days, some do-gooder will have him out in no time so he can carry on taking the p*ss out of the country and think up some terrorist plot.

IMO he should not only stay in jail for the rest of his life, but be beaten to a pulp by the likes of Charlie Bronson each and every day

No he wouldnt have been an hero ,he is muslim ergo he would have been a traitor

you would've worshipped him for it

He'll be out in a few days, some do-gooder will have him out in no time so he can carry on taking the p*ss out of the country and think up some terrorist plot.

IMO he should not only stay in jail for the rest of his life, but be beaten to a pulp by the likes of Charlie Bronson each and every day

but ofcourse...he shouldn't go around cutting water melons

You need to remember to judge every case on its own merits, not every Muslim is a mudering suicide bomber; not every convicted muslim has been stitched up by the state. It is not about taking sides. This criminal knew the risks that he ran, he was caught and now he needs to serve his time.

Caught doing what exactly? all hes done is train like minded people in combat training,whats so bad about that?
This country is going to turn into a facist state if were not very careful.

Indefinatly is quite a long time I think.
Long and he will learn the meaning of a typical English phrase...Doing hard time

have u been sexually abused by...say..a muslim with a beard?:hihi:

Muslim pedophiles ate my hamster....

Long and he will learn the meaning of a typical English phrase...Doing hard time

Hope you are right, but wouldn't put money on it. He'll be in a single cell with the internet and his playstation, ordering Turkish Delight from Argos!

He'll be out in a few days, some do-gooder will have him out in no time so he can carry on taking the p*ss out of the country and think up some terrorist plot.

IMO he should not only stay in jail for the rest of his life, but be beaten to a pulp by the likes of Charlie Bronson each and every day

I never realised there were so many hopeless rednecks on Sheffield Forum.

why not pay a muslim country to keep him locked up give them £50 week they will feed him for £3 & keep the change for themselves

Caught doing what exactly? all hes done is train like minded people in combat training,whats so bad about that?
This country is going to turn into a facist state if were not very careful.

It is illegal to plan to break the law you know?

I never realised there were so many hopeless rednecks on Sheffield Forum.

There are'nt, just people who want to protect their country from morons

you would've worshipped him for it
might have shook his hand ,but worshipped...nahhh

JOKE

I never realised there were so many hopeless rednecks on Sheffield Forum.
If having a go at somebody whose intention is to kill and maim innocent people is being a "hopeless redneck" well you have my permission to call me one anywhere on the forum without fear of reprisals or reporting

There are'nt, just people who want to protect their country from morons

How is torturing someone in prison protecting the country?

i never realised there was so many people sympathetic to terrorist ..funny old world

How is torturing someone in prison protecting the country?

This a very valid question and worthy of an answer.

i never realised there was so many people sympathetic to terrorist ..funny old world

THEY should realise there are lots of good airports in this country- many with easterly facing runways.
Odd that they dont use them isnt it? A pity too in some cases.

How is torturing someone in prison protecting the country?
If you are talking about the general prison population then you are mistaken,they dont torture anybody,they just live their lives without the fear of upsetting anybody due to political correctness,they have there own laws inside and treat people accordingly,the funny thing is an offender inside who has recieved "punishment" for his "crimes" from his fellow inmates very rarely re-offends,MAYBE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULD HAVE A GOOD LOOK AT PRISON JUSTICE,THEY MAY BE ABLE TO LEARN A FEW THINGS

Alistair, you and I are soooo on the same wavelength!

,the funny thing is an offender inside who has recieved "punishment" for his "crimes" from his fellow inmates very rarely re-offends,MAYBE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULD HAVE A GOOD LOOK AT PRISON JUSTICE,THEY MAY BE ABLE TO LEARN A FEW THINGS

Abject nonsense and utterly unsupported by any objective evidence; try that line on the family of the young asian lad who was beaten to death having been placed in the same cell as a known racist by the PO's who did it for 'sport' and a 'laugh'.

How is torturing someone in prison protecting the country?

How is putting someone in prison torture? He will have access to his religion he will be given a copy of the Koran a prayer mat and anything else he needs to follow his faith. he will be fed and clothed, he will be given food that will not be against islam.

Or is the torture your saying he will have is simply not being able to pander his message of hate to people, to train others to murder innocent british people by blowing themselves up?

An indeterminent sentence is the best that this country's judicial system can impose on this type of person

Or do you believe he has the right to plot to kill British people and to train others to do so?

How is putting someone in prison torture? He will have access to his religion he will be given a copy of the Koran a prayer mat and anything else he needs to follow his faith. he will be fed and clothed, he will be given food that will not be against islam.

Or is the torture your saying he will have is simply not being able to pander his message of hate to people, to train others to murder innocent british people by blowing themselves up?

An indeterminent sentence is the best that this country's judicial system can impose on this type of person

Or do you believe he has the right to plot to kill British people and to train others to do so?


You need to take a long deep breath.

I am very happy this person is to be locked up indefinately, so I do not know where you got the above rant from. When I mentioned toture I was on about this post below:


IMO he should not only stay in jail for the rest of his life, but be beaten to a pulp by the likes of Charlie Bronson each and every day


When challenged the poster said:

There are'nt, just people who want to protect their country from morons

So I said:

How is torturing someone in prison protecting the country?

Are you any clearer now? As I said earlier, I am very happy the person is locked up indefinitely. Sorry if that has disapointed you.

Has he killed anyone NO,has he purchased any explosives NO,his only crime is to play solgers in the forest and he gets life for that??? something is wrong here.

Has he killed anyone NO,has he purchased any explosives NO,his only crime is to play solgers in the forest and he gets life for that??? something is wrong here.

Your brain is wrong love.

Abject nonsense and utterly unsupported by any objective evidence; try that line on the family of the young asian lad who was beaten to death having been placed in the same cell as a known racist by the PO's who did it for 'sport' and a 'laugh'.well he never re offended did he? which makes rotherhammer correct

i doubt 90% of posters know about prison rules, not the governors rules,the people who run the prisons,the convicts,they have a code,any one involved with harming children,women or causing acts of terrorism are usually dealt with in a painfull way,hence the authorities having the rule 43 section where such people have a seperate wing away from the mainstream prisoners, those on segregation eventually have to mix with the others for one reason or another,this is when they usually get their punishment metered out to them, the warders often being occupied elswhere for a moment,where there's a will there's a way,and the prisoners have all the time in the world,they just wait..sometimes if they cant get to the one they want they will spike his food as all food is brought from the same place,other times they will shout his name out and let him know they are waiting,it plays on the nerves, some are driven to suicide but there arnt many that can say they got away scott free

so halibut,its not abject nonsense at all,and i can get you all the supported evidence you need from ex prisoners ,if you want it

+all hes done is train like minded people in combat training+

'combat' training that led indirectly to the deaths of 50+ people in London in July, 2005. The seven and a half year recommended tariff is rather lenient in my opinon. He just has to persuade the parole board that he's not a danger to the public after that time. So maybe it might not be a good idea for him to hang out with all the other jihadis in prison and praise terrorist attacks on innocent civilians when they come over on the news.

Had he done what he did in the UK in Syria, or Egypt, he would have been executed without trial.

this guy laughed when the planes flew into the WTC, he laughed when he heard about Bali, and he laughed when the buses and the tube trains blew up in London and Madrid. I'm glad we got him.

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.

Another Muslim contribution.....*YAWNS*

+all hes done is train like minded people in combat training+

'combat' training that led indirectly to the deaths of 50+ people in London in July, 2005. The seven and a half year recommended tariff is rather lenient in my opinon. He just has to persuade the parole board that he's not a danger to the public after that time. So maybe it might not be a good idea for him to hang out with all the other jihadis in prison and praise terrorist attacks on innocent civilians when they come over on the news.

Had he done what he did in the UK in Syria, or Egypt, he would have been executed without trial.

this guy laughed when the planes flew into the WTC, he laughed when he heard about Bali, and he laughed when the buses and the tube trains blew up in London and Madrid. I'm glad we got him.

He'll never get out. That's the good thing about these indefinate orders..who on the parole board can genuinely determine he has refromed his islamic views in line with mainstream thinking?

He'll rot, as he should.

Abject nonsense and utterly unsupported by any objective evidence; try that line on the family of the young asian lad who was beaten to death having been placed in the same cell as a known racist by the PO's who did it for 'sport' and a 'laugh'.

The young Asian lad wouldn't have found himself in that situation in the first place if he hadn't broken the law enough in the first place to warrant a custodial sentence....

I wonder what your view would be if it was an Englishman in a Muslim jail?

How is putting someone in prison torture? He will have access to his religion he will be given a copy of the Koran a prayer mat and anything else he needs to follow his faith. he will be fed and clothed, he will be given food that will not be against islam.

Or is the torture your saying he will have is simply not being able to pander his message of hate to people, to train others to murder innocent british people by blowing themselves up?

An indeterminent sentence is the best that this country's judicial system can impose on this type of person

Or do you believe he has the right to plot to kill British people and to train others to do so?

He will not be released until he renounces his faith in Islam. His faith compels him to want to kill us kaffirs.

He can't 'indoctrinate' anyone in prison, can he? So he'll be lesser threat than the millions of people who aren't in jail.

Alistair, you and I are soooo on the same wavelength!

How dare you steal my wavelength, give it back right now!

He can't 'indoctrinate' anyone in prison, can he? So he'll be lesser threat than the millions of people who aren't in jail.it's possible he can..http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20051111/ai_n15844305

He will not be released until he renounces his faith in Islam. His faith compels him to want to kill us kaffirs.

Are you one of those really rubbish defence barristers that get's foisted on people who can't be bothered to hire someone who might get them off?

it's possible he can..http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20051111/ai_n15844305

I understand where the article is coming from but it begs the question as to why so many people (as the authorities imply) are being forced to subdue to Islam or the dubious criminal version of it in our prison system?

Could it be that there are copious amounts of Muslims in our prison system? They count as 0.6% of the British population (if you believe that) and have one of the highest per ratio of people in prison by statistics after the Somali's who are 75% unemployed in this Country....

Muslim men can claim welfare benefit for up to four wives in this Country when bigamy is rewarded by up to seven years imprisonment for the Brit.....

Shall I go on?

Abject nonsense and utterly unsupported by any objective evidence; try that line on the family of the young asian lad who was beaten to death having been placed in the same cell as a known racist by the PO's who did it for 'sport' and a 'laugh'.
Ever been inside Halibut if not you dont know what your on about so please dont call my comments nonsense,when you have been ther then your comments may stand looking at,until then dont insult people with your no knowlege comments

I understand where the article is coming from but it begs the question as to why so many people (as the authorities imply) are being forced to subdue to Islam or the dubious criminal version of it in our prison system?

Could it be that there are copious amounts of Muslims in our prison system? They count as 0.6% of the British population (if you believe that) and have one of the highest per ratio of people in prison by statistics after the Somali's who are 75% unemployed in this Country....

Muslim men can claim welfare benefit for up to four wives in this Country when bigamy is rewarded by up to seven years imprisonment for the Brit.....

Shall I go on?

Saying no doesn't usually stop you.

Saying no doesn't usually stop you.

You need your facts to go there.

You need your facts to go there.

I just get bored with you going round in circles, especially with "muslim men can marry more than one women where brits go to jail bla bla bla". You don't seem to be bothered by other cultures that practice Polygamy, in fact have you ever made one post about them?

OK then, are you ready? In other countries where polygamy is aloud and legal, our courts will recognize those legal marriages. Those are the facts.

Because we don't have the death penalty?

Wronge, behind the times it seems.

the death penalty was removed for treason in 1990 .

Shame..............

OK then, are you ready? In other countries where polygamy is aloud and legal, our courts will recognize those legal marriages. Those are the facts.

I don't like second guessing other people but I think that maybe what the Rat is concerned about is that whatever the legalities of 'marriages' in other countries, we shouldn't be encouraging men to immigrate here if they have multiple wives by paying them benefits for the extra wives.

It's a difficult one because why should these poor women be made to suffer any further by their status being unrecognised, but we shouldn't have to start acknowledging and endorsing customs which are outside our own legal system. Men with multiple wives shouldn't come here and expect us to be happy about it. In fact, please name me a western country where polygamy is legal. Even the mainstream Mormons frown upon it and, iirc, the USA has brought successful prosecutions against that part of the cult in Utah.

Your brain is wrong love.

Her spellings not that fantastic either. But I think her posts prove the limitations to her intelligence. Do she really think they were not going to harm anyone given half the chance?

Would all you pro terrorist show as much sympathy if it was a bunch of whites caught training to kill non whites? I'm sure you wouldn't, just as the majority of white people wouldn't either.

Her spellings not that fantastic either. But I think her posts prove the limitations to her intelligence. Do she really think they were not going to harm anyone given half the chance?

Would all you pro terrorist show as much sympathy if it was a bunch of whites caught training to kill non whites? I'm sure you wouldn't, just as the majority of white people wouldn't either.

lol her SPELLINGS:hihi:yeh right you know how to spell dont you.;)

I agree with him being locked up for his crimes, but not the element of Thought Crime involved in his release date. We are saying alter your beliefs or we wont ever let you out of jail.

Any muslim is welcome to believe that we are all worthless kaffirs only worthy of being slaughtered. It's only when they actually do something about it that it should ever become a crime.
he wasnt locked up for his beliefs......he was locked up for being a recruiter to commit acts of terrorism and mass murder.
you saying he should only be locked up if he / his recruits actually succeed and kill hundreds of people?

The young Asian lad wouldn't have found himself in that situation in the first place if he hadn't broken the law enough in the first place to warrant a custodial sentence....

sure about that?
plenty of "innocent" people have been locked up over the decades.
and just cos somebody commits a crime DOESNT mean they deserve to die...depends on the crime.
also being asian DOESNT mean you deserve to die either.

I don't like second guessing other people but I think that maybe what the Rat is concerned about is that whatever the legalities of 'marriages' in other countries, we shouldn't be encouraging men to immigrate here if they have multiple wives by paying them benefits for the extra wives.

It's a difficult one because why should these poor women be made to suffer any further by their status being unrecognised, but we shouldn't have to start acknowledging and endorsing customs which are outside our own legal system. Men with multiple wives shouldn't come here and expect us to be happy about it. In fact, please name me a western country where polygamy is legal. Even the mainstream Mormons frown upon it and, iirc, the USA has brought successful prosecutions against that part of the cult in Utah.

Hey I think that polygamy is wrong as well I am not sticking up for it. However, if people are legally married in other countries I think it is right for our country to recognize those marriages. I don't think we can pick and choose what legal marriages we agree with.

Anyway after a quick scoot of wikki I found these areas in Canada, the States and Mexico where there are polygamous communities exist that range from a few hundred members to around 10,000.

Bountiful - British Columbia, Pringle - South Dakota, Ozumba - Mexico, Centennial Park - Arizona, Colorado City- Arizona, Bonners Ferry - Idaho, Rexburg - Idaho, Lovell - Wyoming, Pinesdale - Montana, Davis County - Utah, Salt Lake County - Utah, Tooele County- Utah, Utah County - Utah, Motaqua - Utah, Cedar City - Utah, Hanna - Utah, Hildale - Utah, Manti - Utah, Rocky Ridge - Utah, Sanpete Valley - Utah, Modena - Nevada, Eldorado - Texas

Because we don't have the death penalty?

But we do have IPP...live with it.

It won't be long before some do-gooder alters that though will it?

Hopefully not, but we wouldn't want the do-badders to start thinking it was ok to send kids up chimneys again!

Another Muslim contribution.....*YAWNS*

If that is so, it doesn't demean their argument..it's as irrelevant as a Muslim disregarding your argument, purely because you're non Muslim, the fact your non Muslim doesn't mean you can't view a debate objectively and respond accordingly.

"A man convicted as a major recruiter for Islamist extremism has been jailed indefinitely for public protection.
Mohammed Hamid, 50, of east London, organised secret training camps, one of which was attended by the four failed suicide bombers of 21 July 2005.

Hamid was jailed for seven-and-a-half years - but told he would not be released until he had reformed.

His accomplice, Atilla Ahmet, who made hate speeches alongside Hamid, was jailed for six years and 11 months.

The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence against Hamid was the first use of the powers in a terrorist case. "
--------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell is this "Imprisonment for Public Protection"? Why not just lock him up for the sentence Parliament has decreed for his crime? This indefinite sentencing until you change your ideas smacks of totalitarianism and is something I would have associated with the old USSR.

Seems pretty sensible to me. The longer he is in jail the less harm he can do. Don't really see your problem.

I don't like second guessing other people but I think that maybe what the Rat is concerned about is that whatever the legalities of 'marriages' in other countries, we shouldn't be encouraging men to immigrate here if they have multiple wives by paying them benefits for the extra wives.


I've previously pointed out to Rat, that the 1988 Immigration Act effectively ended the opportunity for men to enter this country with more than one wife and have that union recognised, in addition, the DWP advised that there are fewer than 1000 polygamous marriages in the UK and of those only a few are in receipt of benefits. :)

Hey I think that polygamy is wrong as well I am not sticking up for it. However, if people are legally married in other countries I think it is right for our country to recognize those marriages. I don't think we can pick and choose what legal marriages we agree with.

Anyway after a quick scoot of wikki I found these areas in Canada, the States and Mexico where there are polygamous communities exist that range from a few hundred members to around 10,000.

Bountiful - British Columbia, Pringle - South Dakota, Ozumba - Mexico, Centennial Park - Arizona, Colorado City- Arizona, Bonners Ferry - Idaho, Rexburg - Idaho, Lovell - Wyoming, Pinesdale - Montana, Davis County - Utah, Salt Lake County - Utah, Tooele County- Utah, Utah County - Utah, Motaqua - Utah, Cedar City - Utah, Hanna - Utah, Hildale - Utah, Manti - Utah, Rocky Ridge - Utah, Sanpete Valley - Utah, Modena - Nevada, Eldorado - Texas

You are wrong.... plain and simple. Polygamy is illegal here so we shouldn't even recognise it. What others do in their own Country is fine by me but if its illegal under our law for the rest of us it shouldn't be legal for anyone else no matter where they come from. Let them have 20 wives here if they want but the law should only recognise one.... the same as the rest of us.

One law for all and no exceptions.

I've previously pointed out to Rat, that the 1988 Immigration Act effectively ended the opportunity for men to enter this country with more than one wife and have that union recognised, in addition, the DWP advised that there are fewer than 1000 polygamous marriages in the UK and of those only a few are in receipt of benefits. :)

As has been previously pointed out to you.... you talk bottom burps.

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/510221-uk-legally-recognises-multiple-Islamic-wives

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/gaia/february_2008/polygamy_exists.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nbenefit103.xml

Edit...........

You are wrong.... plain and simple. Polygamy is illegal here so we shouldn't even recognise it. What others do in their own Country is fine by me but if its illegal under our law for the rest of us it shouldn't be legal for anyone else no matter where they come from. Let them have 20 wives here if they want but the law should only recognise one.... the same as the rest of us.

One law for all and no exceptions.

The law is the same for the rest of us.

You are allowed to marry more than one person if you choose to, you would have to move to a country where it is legal, become an accepted member of one of the communities that allow it; and then live by their laws. You could even move back here to this country. There you go, one law for every one with no exceptions.

Also under your proposals wouldn't we lock up any state executioner who visited our country for pre-meditated murder?

once this prosecution is out of the media i wonder when the next one is brought up to keep the fear of the people going................

You need to remember to judge every case on its own merits, not every Muslim is a mudering suicide bomber; not every convicted muslim has been stitched up by the state. It is not about taking sides. This criminal knew the risks that he ran, he was caught and now he needs to serve his time.

If he is guilty and has been proven/ or the accussed has admitted- fair thing. They deserve what they get: but i know alot of friends who have been to camps/paint gun shooting adventures, training etc and there is very little done here except to build unity and get fit (have been myself to one years ago). If these guys had a negative motive to try and cause some harm to innocents, then no muslim in their right mind will stand by and defend them.

If he is guilty and has been proven/ or the accussed has admitted- fair thing. They deserve what they get: but i know alot of friends who have been to camps/paint gun shooting adventures, training etc and there is very little done here except to build unity and get fit (have been myself to one years ago). If these guys had a negative motive to try and cause some harm to innocents, then no muslim in their right mind will stand by and defend them.

Muslims dont need to defend them theres enough people on here to do that, that are not even muslim

Muslims dont need to defend them theres enough people on here to do that, that are not even muslim

Why is it wrong for someone who isn't a muslim to defend them? In your world can you only defend some one if they are from the same race and religion as you?

Why is it wrong for someone who isn't a muslim to defend them? In your world can you only defend some one if they are from the same race and religion as you?

No, but i dont see the point of defending someone who has been tried and convicted by the British judicial system of a crime to the point people like you do.

99% of Muslims will probably be thankful that this person is going to be locked up, why? because most Muslims are decent law abiding people who wish to live their lives in accordence with their religion, A religion not corrupted by fanatism to murder other people just because they are of a different religion. But thats the kind of person you yourself are defending!

As has been previously pointed out to you.... you talk bottom burps.

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/510221-uk-legally-recognises-multiple-Islamic-wives

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/gaia/february_2008/polygamy_exists.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nbenefit103.xml

...please read the entirety of the articles you post (incidentally one of which is simply a readers letter), then read again what I've written.

I didn't say there were no polygamous relationships in the UK, I said there were under 1000.
What I said was following the 1988 Act, new polygamous marriages are not recognised from a UK law perspective.

No, but i dont see the point of defending someone who has been tried and convicted by the British judicial system of a crime to the point people like you do.

99% of Muslims will probably be thankful that this person is going to be locked up, why? because most Muslims are decent law abiding people who wish to live their lives in accordence with their religion, A religion not corrupted by fanatism to murder other people just because they are of a different religion. But thats the kind of person you yourself are defending!

(my bold)- good point and appreciate you looking with an open mind. :)

He hasnt actually comitted any crime has he? all hes done is orgainise a little fun in the forest.Since when has this country locked people up for thinking things?? its so wrong.

I do know how to spell thanks (I at first thought you were trying to give them an urban feeling). I also know how to construct sentences that reflect my age. My seven year old noticed several mistakes with this quote.

But that's not the point, do you people really think they would get the sentence they did for running around with sticks, come on, there's more to it than that.

Also, they did no harm? Only because they were caught first.

...please read the entirety of the articles you post (incidentally one of which is simply a readers letter), then read again what I've written.

I didn't say there were no polygamous relationships in the UK, I said there were under 1000.
What I said was following the 1988 Act, new polygamous marriages are not recognised from a UK law perspective.
i think your a bit out,maybe the marriages arn't recognised but it looks like the kids are,34.000 receiving benefit of £28 million is quite a lump of tax payers money,these figures may not count just for muslims but never the less its a travisty that britain's tax payers can be used in such a way
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=528630&in_page_id=1770

No, but i dont see the point of defending someone who has been tried and convicted by the British judicial system of a crime to the point people like you do.

99% of Muslims will probably be thankful that this person is going to be locked up, why? because most Muslims are decent law abiding people who wish to live their lives in accordence with their religion, A religion not corrupted by fanatism to murder other people just because they are of a different religion. But thats the kind of person you yourself are defending!

You're post wasn't complaining about this the convicted criminal, in my opinion he's beyond defence. But you said:

Muslims don't need to defend them theres enough people on here to do that, that are not even muslim

So why is it wrong for a non-muslim to defend them?

However, if people are legally married in other countries I think it is right for our country to recognize those marriages. I don't think we can pick and choose what legal marriages we agree with.

Anyway after a quick scoot of wikki I found these areas in Canada, the States and Mexico where there are polygamous communities exist that range from a few hundred members to around 10,000.

I do't think we should give them any legal recognition or endorse them in any way at all. They're sexist and gender biased just for a start. If there were a level playing field it wouldn't be so bad, but the multiple marriage goes only one way. You may say most women have enough to put up with just having one husband, but some of us might prefer more, even if only for the extra wages coming in ;).

I think I commented that the US frowns upon multiple marriages and I don't think they're legal marriages, just religious ones?

i think your a bit out,maybe the marriages arn't recognised but it looks like the kids are,34.000 receiving benefit of £28 million is quite a lump of tax payers money,these figures may not count just for muslims but never the less its a travisty that britain's tax payers can be used in such a way
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=528630&in_page_id=1770

Forgive me, I can't immediately see the relevance to the Daily Mail article you've posted a link to, Muslims and polygamous relationships.

*coffs* off topic, wayyyy off topic *coffs*

Forgive me, I can't immediately see the relevance to the Daily Mail article you've posted a link to, Muslims and polygamous relationships.
i'll try to explain, £ 28 million of british tax payers money goes abroad,it would be better served it was returned to the payee or the british system here such as education or health rather than pay it to someone who has done nothing towards earning it,

muslim brides,polish children included should not be able to claim off the british tax payer when we have sick and homeless people here

that will do for me

heres another one that scotches the myth of poligamous marriage in britain not being recognised,its from 04

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article405864.ece

No, but i dont see the point of defending someone who has been tried and convicted by the British judicial system of a crime to the point people like you do.

99% of Muslims will probably be thankful that this person is going to be locked up, why? because most Muslims are decent law abiding people who wish to live their lives in accordence with their religion, A religion not corrupted by fanatism to murder other people just because they are of a different religion. But thats the kind of person you yourself are defending!

You just don't get the point of this thread, do you?

It's not the crime, the criminal or even muslims I am criticising, it's the nature of the sentence. It's the fact that someone can be locked up indefinitely until they alter their beliefs. I can understand it for the criminally insane, but not for common criminals.

By all means punish people up for the crimes they have committed, but to expect them to renounce their beliefs or forever stay in prison is wrong. It's the way totalitarian governments work and not something I want to see a precedence for here.

Funny that you should choose the meshrcemit for an example of a plane, surly not a Freudian slip?

Funny that you should choose the meshrcemit for an example of a plane, surly not a Freudian slip?

You come across as a guardianista too.

A messerschmitt with its right wing shot off would be constantly spinning and lurching to the right.

now who does that remind you of?

A messerschmitt with its right wing shot off would be constantly spinning and lurching to the right.

now who does that remind you of?

Your location is a symbol that hasn't been used for a couple of thousand years. I think it's fair to guess you're a civvy with an over inflated view of yourself?

Your location is a symbol that hasn't been used for a couple of thousand years. I think it's fair to guess you're a civvy with an over inflated view of yourself?
nope, but your simile made me smile.

By all means punish people up for the crimes they have committed, but to expect them to renounce their beliefs or forever stay in prison is wrong. It's the way totalitarian governments work and not something I want to see a precedence for here.

So what? Should this 'person' be allowed to train muslims to kill none muslims? Do you believe he is right?

He believes that all none muslims deserve nothing more to be murdered, so if he does believe this then it is right to keep him locked up as i said in the post you have quoted 99% of Muslims will be ok with this sentence because it locking up someone who has turned the peaceful religion of Islam into one of hate, to kill, something that Islam does not teach its followers. But people like you and jfk are at the best, apologists. Why not ask a Muslim what they think of this person taking their relgion and turning it into a tool of hate.

...please read the entirety of the articles you post (incidentally one of which is simply a readers letter), then read again what I've written.

I didn't say there were no polygamous relationships in the UK, I said there were under 1000.
What I said was following the 1988 Act, new polygamous marriages are not recognised from a UK law perspective.

You and Nixon are the biggest apologists of all time for the Muslim way of life and a great comfort to all those Muslim men who want a wife for each day of the week....

I have proven to you in other threads that this Govt. recognises polygamous marriages for Muslims in this Country but not for Christians (JUST LOOK THE LAW UP).... Muslims can even claim tax breaks and social security benefits for each of them.... one law under Sharia for them and one law under UK law for us.

Polygamy is illegal here under the law and the law should be the same for all, no exceptions.... if someone wants to move here they should expect to live under the law of the land and not have it changed to suit their religion or their preferences.... you and Nixon want them to be granted extra rights...... why?

You just don't get the point of this thread, do you?

It's not the crime, the criminal or even muslims I am criticising, it's the nature of the sentence. It's the fact that someone can be locked up indefinitely until they alter their beliefs. I can understand it for the criminally insane, but not for common criminals.

By all means punish people up for the crimes they have committed, but to expect them to renounce their beliefs or forever stay in prison is wrong. It's the way totalitarian governments work and not something I want to see a precedence for here.the truth is he was locked away for the safety of the people,he had intentions to harm others,i doubt very much that he will be unsetled in prison,as a person who is on one hand willing to die for his beliefs and take others with him has been saved from suicide, that in its self is illegal,he now is being clothed and fed and has a roof over his head with plenty of time to contemplate his religion,he will how ever be alone as other muslims have repeatedly said islam is a peaceful religion so he will be an outcast from the true moslems,those that may talk to him must consider themselves hypocrites as he has broken islamic law and british laws

What the hell is this "Imprisonment for Public Protection"? .

An idea not quite as good as hanging a stupid man who seems to think it's fine to kill people at random.
We are talking about someone who has no problem will bombing a tube train with no idea who is on board. Maybe if we let the pillock out it may be you or someone in your family that is his next victim.

I wonder if your ideals about human rights would hold up if your child was his next target.
If it was mine I would make it my goal in life to kill him and the daft sods who let him out to do it again.

You and Nixon are the biggest apologists of all time for the Muslim way of life and a great comfort to all those Muslim men who want a wife for each day of the week....

Apologist? We're not talking about Holocaust denial here, if Muslims have anything to apologise for, they don't need me to do it on their behalf.

I've responded several times to your remarks re polygamous marriages, I'll not take this thread any further off topic by continuing it further.

You and Nixon are the biggest apologists of all time for the Muslim way of life and a great comfort to all those Muslim men who want a wife for each day of the week....

I have proven to you in other threads that this Govt. recognises polygamous marriages for Muslims in this Country but not for Christians (JUST LOOK THE LAW UP).... Muslims can even claim tax breaks and social security benefits for each of them.... one law under Sharia for them and one law under UK law for us.

Polygamy is illegal here under the law and the law should be the same for all, no exceptions.... if someone wants to move here they should expect to live under the law of the land and not have it changed to suit their religion or their preferences.... you and Nixon want them to be granted extra rights...... why?

Yawn, I told you that you would act like this:

I just get bored with you going round in circles, especially with "muslim men can marry more than one women where brits go to jail bla bla bla". You don't seem to be bothered by other cultures that practice Polygamy, in fact have you ever made one post about them?

OK then, are you ready? In other countries where polygamy is aloud and legal, our courts will recognize those legal marriages. Those are the facts.

I've highlighted this as you have obvious missed it

Hey I think that polygamy is wrong as well I am not sticking up for it. However, if people are legally married in other countries I think it is right for our country to recognize those marriages. I don't think we can pick and choose what legal marriages we agree with.

Anyway after a quick scoot of wikki I found these areas in Canada, the States and Mexico where there are polygamous communities exist that range from a few hundred members to around 10,000.

Bountiful - British Columbia, Pringle - South Dakota, Ozumba - Mexico, Centennial Park - Arizona, Colorado City- Arizona, Bonners Ferry - Idaho, Rexburg - Idaho, Lovell - Wyoming, Pinesdale - Montana, Davis County - Utah, Salt Lake County - Utah, Tooele County- Utah, Utah County - Utah, Motaqua - Utah, Cedar City - Utah, Hanna - Utah, Hildale - Utah, Manti - Utah, Rocky Ridge - Utah, Sanpete Valley - Utah, Modena - Nevada, Eldorado - Texas

Here I explain how you could possibly have the same right as the rights you think only muslims have.

The law is the same for the rest of us.

You are allowed to marry more than one person if you choose to, you would have to move to a country where it is legal, become an accepted member of one of the communities that allow it; and then live by their laws. You could even move back here to this country. There you go, one law for every one with no exceptions.

Also under your proposals wouldn't we lock up any state executioner who visited our country for pre-meditated murder?

So I haven't defended muslims, have I? All I have said is why polygamous marriages are accepted. I do not like it myself. I find it interesting that you have said that I am a muslim apologist. Do you see all muslims as the enemy then?

Edit:
You also haven't seemed able to read that I am very happy that this criminal is locked up for the rest of his natural life.

I think in this occurance the law was used for the right reasons, however it needs close scrutiny to ensure that people are not jailed because of their beliefs.

Training and recruiting for the purposes of terrorism can lead to mass murder, so should be punished. As prison should reform criminals, I think if he does not show remorse then he should stay there.

Apologist? We're not talking about Holocaust denial here, if Muslims have anything to apologise for, they don't need me to do it on their behalf.

I've responded several times to your remarks re polygamous marriages, I'll not take this thread any further off topic by continuing it further.

You know I'm right and you are wrong over the fact that polygamous marriages are recognised here under the law for Muslims only and you can't swallow the fact you have been talking in bottom burps all this time. :hihi:

Difficult one this. I disagree with any convictions purely on a thought crime basis however the ruling does make sense. Normally you will see someone being released "when they are no longer a danger to the public". As long as this guy remains a true Jihadist believer he is a danger, as in his own words he will plot and try to kill people. Therefore it makes sense and is not too Orwellian.

You know I'm right and you are wrong over the fact that polygamous marriages are recognised here under the law for Muslims only and you can't swallow the fact you have been talking in bottom burps all this time. :hihi:

The fact that benefits are officially available, with advice documents for staff etc, for the "other" spouses was somewhat of a watermark moment for me.

Yet another watermark in this countries decline I'm afraid though. :(

The fact that benefits are officially available, with advice documents for staff etc, for the "other" spouses was somewhat of a watermark moment for me.

Yet another watermark in this countries decline I'm afraid though. :(

I agree but some misguided people seem to think this okay that Muslims have rights outside the rest of us and the state should fund their religious views.... one more law for one and plenty more on the way for sure.

Although I'm not keen on the policy of giving benefits to for multiple wives, I do think that it's important to ensure that such families live above the poverty line.

In a very generalised view, the benefit money does go back into the economy.

Also, I'm not overly keen that families who irresponsibly have alot of children get more benefits, however it's a disadvantage of a system that in it's wider use brings alot of benefits.

I'd much rather debate on the use of government money in the Northern Rock crisis which completely eclipses the amount given for multiple wives.

I agree but some misguided people seem to think this okay that Muslims have rights outside the rest of us and the state should fund their religious views.... one more law for one and plenty more on the way for sure.

You're obviously very devoted to this cause and I agree with you. But, really, you ARE wasting your time posting about it on here ... the ones that can see what you're driving at, already agree with you. And the others, for whatever motive, will never be brought to change their publically stated opinions.

What's required is something totally outside the rarefied air of Sheffield Forum. Someone like that Chakrabarti woman, maybe, in reverse! It always amazes me that people who would never stand still for anything like this being allowed to occur in their own lives will argue till they're blue in the face for it to occur in the name of someone else's 'culture' or 'religion'. It's totally bizarre.

now, now, gentlemen, please calm down. Once you start with the swearing and insults, masked or otherwise, rationality goes out of the window.

So what? Should this 'person' be allowed to train muslims to kill none muslims? Do you believe he is right?

He believes that all none muslims deserve nothing more to be murdered, so if he does believe this then it is right to keep him locked up as i said in the post you have quoted 99% of Muslims will be ok with this sentence because it locking up someone who has turned the peaceful religion of Islam into one of hate, to kill, something that Islam does not teach its followers. But people like you and jfk are at the best, apologists. Why not ask a Muslim what they think of this person taking their relgion and turning it into a tool of hate.

I'm not an apologist. If he wants to believe I should be slaughtered as a kaffir then he's welcome to believe that. It's only when he does something about it that it becomes a crime.

You're obviously very devoted to this cause and I agree with you. But, really, you ARE wasting your time posting about it on here ... the ones that can see what you're driving at, already agree with you. And the others, for whatever motive, will never be brought to change their publically stated opinions.

What's required is something totally outside the rarefied air of Sheffield Forum. Someone like that Chakrabarti woman, maybe, in reverse! It always amazes me that people who would never stand still for anything like this being allowed to occur in their own lives will argue till they're blue in the face for it to occur in the name of someone else's 'culture' or 'religion'. It's totally bizarre.

Hey, as I said numerous times I agree with you that I think that practice of polygamy is morally wrong; as I also do with lots of other things that are legal in other countries.

You're obviously very devoted to this cause and I agree with you. But, really, you ARE wasting your time posting about it on here ... the ones that can see what you're driving at, already agree with you. And the others, for whatever motive, will never be brought to change their publically stated opinions.

What's required is something totally outside the rarefied air of Sheffield Forum. Someone like that Chakrabarti woman, maybe, in reverse! It always amazes me that people who would never stand still for anything like this being allowed to occur in their own lives will argue till they're blue in the face for it to occur in the name of someone else's 'culture' or 'religion'. It's totally bizarre.

I get the impression this is true ruby.... my objection to this is not out of hatred but born out of injusice to the Briton in his/her own homeland.... I hope the average Briton has been informed of new developments in "Sharia" law here to be able to object to any more further developments down that path.

"A man convicted as a major recruiter for Islamist extremism has been jailed indefinitely for public protection.
Mohammed Hamid, 50, of east London, organised secret training camps, one of which was attended by the four failed suicide bombers of 21 July 2005.

Hamid was jailed for seven-and-a-half years - but told he would not be released until he had reformed.

--------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell is this "Imprisonment for Public Protection"? Why not just lock him up for the sentence Parliament has decreed for his crime? This indefinite sentencing until you change your ideas smacks of totalitarianism and is something I would have associated with the old USSR.

Having read the newspaper accounts of the trial of Mohammed Hamid, convicted on terrorism charges - which included organising training camps which were attended by four (failed) suicide bombers - I feel quite relieved that he got an indeterminate sentence, with a minimum tariff of 7.1/2 years.

A very satisfying sentence that puts a convicted terrorist out of harms way until such time as it can be determined that he no longer poses a threat to society.

Having read the newspaper accounts of the trial of Mohammed Hamid, convicted on terrorism charges - which included organising training camps which were attended by four (failed) suicide bombers - I feel quite relieved that he got an indeterminate sentence, with a minimum tariff of 7.1/2 years.

A very satisfying sentence that puts a convicted terrorist out of harms way until such time as it can be determined that he no longer poses a threat to society.

A voice of reason at last.

A voice of reason at last.

Makes a change, LOL.

Makes a change, LOL.

A refreshing one at that.

I'm not an apologist. If he wants to believe I should be slaughtered as a kaffir then he's welcome to believe that. It's only when he does something about it that it becomes a crime.

Like training others to slaughter you and your family?

Islam doesnt say that muslims have to kill none muslims! This person has twisted a peaceful religion for their own ends.

As long as he is able to train others and/or pass on his knowledge of guerilla tactics/warfare, he will be a danger to the people of this nation

Having read the newspaper accounts of the trial of Mohammed Hamid, convicted on terrorism charges - which included organising training camps which were attended by four (failed) suicide bombers - I feel quite relieved that he got an indeterminate sentence, with a minimum tariff of 7.1/2 years.

A very satisfying sentence that puts a convicted terrorist out of harms way until such time as it can be determined that he no longer poses a threat to society.

Again who has he killed? since when has training in the forest classed as terrorism? its ridiculous.he hasnt actually done anything has he.

who has he killed

nobody. That's wjy he's recommended to serve only 7 and a half years rather than 25. But of course, it's not like he isn't familiar with UK prisons :

here's his CV

Born 1957, Tanzania, to Indian family
Grew up Batley, Yorkshire
Moved to London aged 12
Various manual jobs
Sent to borstal
Jailed for robbery
Two marriages, five children
Reformed crack addict
Found religion in 1990s

with form like that, the sentence is comparitively light.

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

Sounds good to me.

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

If you would like to have seen Mohammed Hamid dangled from the end of a rope consider this possibility: Mohammed Hamid might have liked to have been dangled from the end of a rope. He was a fanatical Muslim extremist who set out to persuade others with a similar view to him but who were not as clever as him to carry out acts of terrorism in which they would die, making them martyrs and assuring them passage to heaven. If the British criminal justice system had executed him he would have become a martyr to like-minded people.

So what would be better: giving this fanatical cult more fuel by executing him and making him a martyr or imprison him and make him out to be a cowardly hypocrite who sent other younger Muslims to die for their shared cause but has not taken the same path to martyrdom himself?

Better still why not try him for treason & dangle him from the end of a rope?

Id pay to be able to swing on his legs.. lol What a waste of money keeping this sucker alive... cant we change the law and go old school on this guy.

1000 lashes with the birch
then hung drawn and quartered

that would keep him qiuiet for a while

Id pay to be able to swing on his legs.. lol What a waste of money keeping this sucker alive... cant we change the law and go old school on this guy.

1000 lashes with the birch
then hung drawn and quartered

that would keep him qiuiet for a while

But what if a passing mad scientist with al qaeda tendencies takes the various body parts, reassembles them and brings him back to life?
We need something more permanent than the death penalty to address situations such as this.

If you would like to have seen Mohammed Hamid dangled from the end of a rope consider this possibility: Mohammed Hamid might have liked to have been dangled from the end of a rope. He was a fanatical Muslim extremist who set out to persuade others with a similar view to him but who were not as clever as him to carry out acts of terrorism in which they would die, making them martyrs and assuring them passage to heaven. If the British criminal justice system had executed him he would have become a martyr to like-minded people.

So what would be better: giving this fanatical cult more fuel by executing him and making him a martyr or imprison him and make him out to be a cowardly hypocrite who sent other younger Muslims to die for their shared cause but has not taken the same path to martyrdom himself?

kill him, then kill the ones that follow him... England was once a feared country, may be we need to unshackle ourselves and get back to the business of killing those that wish to kill us.

But what if a passing mad scientist with al qaeda tendencies takes the various body parts, reassembles them and brings him back to life?
We need something more permanent than the death penalty to address situations such as this.

lol.. then we should kill the mad scientist and kill frankenmohammed

Heres my thoughts on these radicals...

I believe they are men that have fallen into the trap of thinking it's our fault that there lifes are crap. And this is why they want to kill us all.

Its not my fault dude... I didn't make you insane, I didn't make you ugly, I didn't put all that hate inside you.

STOP blaming and start farming.. feed your people... Its not our fault your people are hungry... Man we work to pay our taxes so you can be fed by the giros you recieve... you should be thankfull...

kill him, then kill the ones that follow him...

You don't get it, do you? Killing him makes it more likely that more people will follow him and there's no guarantee that they won't kill be able to kill people before "we" kill them. Expose him for what he is and people might be persuaded not to follow him.

England was once a feared country, may be we need to unshackle ourselves and get back to the business of killing those that wish to kill us.

Why did we and our allies invade Iraq? Because they had weapons of mass destruction that could be used within 45 minutes, so we were told. They didn't and invading Iraq (which has involved lots of killing) hasn't done us a lot of good, has it?

You don't get it, do you? Killing him makes it more likely that more people will follow him and there's no guarantee that they won't kill be able to kill people before "we" kill them. Expose him for what he is and people might be persuaded not to follow him.



Why did we and our allies invade Iraq? Because they had weapons of mass destruction that could be used within 45 minutes, so we were told. They didn't and invading Iraq (which has involved lots of killing) hasn't done us a lot of good, has it?

I was totally against the Iraq war... Im actually a bit of a pascifist, I signed the anti war papers and I went on the march.

This doesnt mean I want to be walked all over by the people our goverment has offered to protect from harsher regimes.

They come here or there parents did to have a better life than what their former countries could give them... Yet they throw it back in our faces and treat us with contempt and utter disrespect...

I dont care if killing them makes them martys.. they are treacherous scum. That will smile at you and shake your hand whilst they are praying for your demise and downfall....

Thats why they should leave and never come back...

Bring back the death penalty

Bring back the death penalty

Apparently that's to be Justin Lee Collins next TV show after his "Bring Back The A Team" and "Bring Back Grange Hill" challenges.

Apparently that's to be Justin Lee Collins next TV show after his "Bring Back The A Team" and "Bring Back Grange Hill" challenges.

Never heard of him... He sounds a bit mixed up....

Id pay to be able to swing on his legs.. lol What a waste of money keeping this sucker alive... cant we change the law and go old school on this guy.

1000 lashes with the birch
then hung drawn and quartered

that would keep him qiuiet for a while

Solving violence with more violence doesn't seem right to me. :huh:

Like training others to slaughter you and your family?

Islam doesnt say that muslims have to kill none muslims! This person has twisted a peaceful religion for their own ends.

As long as he is able to train others and/or pass on his knowledge of guerilla tactics/warfare, he will be a danger to the people of this nation

Yes he should be punished for what he did. How many times do I have to say it? What I object to is locking someone up indefinitely until they change their beliefs, I think Stalin used to do that too.

I don't know what Islam says, but if you judge the religion by what it does and not by what it says it is not a peaceful religion.

Yes he should be punished for what he did. How many times do I have to say it? What I object to is locking someone up indefinitely until they change their beliefs, I think Stalin used to do that too.

I don't know what Islam says, but if you judge the religion by what it does and not by what it says it is not a peaceful religion.

So let him go then and he can finish off the job he started. :hihi:

Again who has he killed? since when has training in the forest classed as terrorism? its ridiculous.he hasnt actually done anything has he.

With the greatest respect for your viewpoint chloe01, you don't actually have to have killed someone to be locked up for life.

Would you want a recidivist paedophile, who has never killed a child, to be allowed to roam the streets freely after say a 7.1/2 year sentence?

Or would you prefer that such a repeat offender be locked up on an indeterminate sentence until such time as he was too old and incapable of re-offending?

It's an easy question for me to answer. And the same goes for a convicted terrorist in my view. In my opinion, the law should protect society from both terrorists (and paedophiles), until such time as they are deemed reformed or incapable of commiting similar crimes again.

The law already allows indeterminate incarceration of the mentally ill who are deemed incapable of giving a plea in court when charged with a serious offence. Is that any more ridiculous than locking away someone who has been proved guilty of commiting a terrorist offence?

I for one welcome the change in the law which now means our streets, our towns and cities, our shops, our airports, trains and underground are now going to be that little bit safer for all of us now that one terrorist has been put away behind bars.

If he still has the same murderous intent at the end of his 7.1/2 years, then I don't want him releasing from prison to carry on where he left off, i.e., training gullible young men to commit acts of murder and terrorism against the populace.

He can cheerfully keep his avowed murderous intentions for as long as he wants as far as I am concerned, so long as we keep him from acting on his intentions - by making sure he is locked up. It's his choice. I commend the judge in this case for making an indeterminate sentence.