Laughing Stock

I heard someone make a very fair point on TV last night - in discussing the release of Mr Abu Qatada from Long Lartin jail.

Which went something like this:

How is it possible for Mr Abu Qatada not to be charged with a hate crime over his extremist views - which have been expressed in public time and again?

Yet someone like John Terry - the Chelsea football captain - is arrested and charged with  racially abusing another player.

Now if true these words which were clearly offensive - but they were certainly not inciting others to violence and hatred - and to run on to the field and kill the QPR player. 

In Terry's case the player on the receiving end - Anton Ferdinand - did not complain - a member of the public did and the whole business has ended up in court.

So it does seem a good question to ask of the long arm of the law. 

Why does the UK put up with this ridiculous pantomime involving a suspected terrorist - who came to this country many years using false documents - and who has been sheltered here ever since at great public expense?

I can't see that Mr Abu Qatada should have many - if any - rights in the UK given that he arrived in this country illegally.

Yet the crazy state of the law is that he is allowed to claim asylum - as soon as he is found out.

Which seems to mean - unless I have read things wrongly - that Mr Abu Qatada's  rights become more important than the rights of everyone else in the country.  

Human rights are an essential feature of any civilised society.

But the application of human rights law in  many cases is fast turning the issue - and the whole country - into a laughing stock.

If people of goodwill and common sense don't act soon - there is bound to be a terrible public  backlash.