Abu Qatada deported

Which great lady was that Bags?

I couldn't understand how he was able to claim benefits when many disabled people were being told they were fit for work. Will his family be following him or do we have to support them still?

aka, I don't know. I could guess (have guessed), but I don't know, so my guess could be wrong.

Any 'ordinary' person who came to this country on forged documents would have been deported years ago. The only people who have profited from this are the lawyers who have doubtless been fleecing the tax payers.
Well done Theresa May, and whosoever the quote is attributable to ('cuse grammar) it is very true (by and large and in general).

I don't feel any sense of triumph about this, just quiet relief.

I am with you there whenim64 I was always concerned about the 'person' who accompanied him, never sure whether
male or female, and if it was his wife, is she also to be deported ?

Pleased he's gone...took far too long in my opinion but I guess we can say we did it entirely by the book.

Apparently the neighbours of his remaining family are refusing to pay
their council tax. His family are on benefits.
According to the DM.

When they moved into their present 4 bedroom house in a quiet, leafy suburb not far from where I live, he or his wife complained that the house was not clean. Have they never heard of elbow grease?

I am sorry his family did not go also to support him! We are still giving them homes but their neighbours are refusing to pay their council tax until they are moved.

I just said that Brenda

Well, almost!

It's taken 1.7 million pounds and 8 years to deport this man. That's disgusting.

It is quite outrageous !

I bet that's an underestimate as well.

Is this the only Country in the world where it takes so long to deport anyone or is it just our legal system,other Countries don't seem to have this problem if you where an unwanted in USA or Australia you would be on the first plane back out of there I'm sure.

This case was much more complicated than a straightforward deportation. The underpinning issue was about the use of evidence gained through torture. I hold no brief at all for this man but am pleased that I live in a society which values the rule of law. Look at Egypty, Syria, Iraq. It's right now that he's gone but it was after Jordan made substantial promises. We shouldn't pick and choose who we treat lawfully on the basis of whether we approve of their views that's what the Met is for

Yes, justice has to be seen to be done, even when it frustrates everyone. There's times we have ridden roughshod over other countres' citizens' rights, but at least we did the right thing this time and won't have torture on our conscience I hope

Well said, bluebell. There had to be assurances from Jordan that he would not be tortured and that evidence used aginst him would not include any that was obtained by torture from other people. Once the required assurances were in place, I understand that he was willing to go.

We already have torture on our consciences - those of us who care - given British complicity in waterboarding, stress techniques and other methods of torture in Guantanamo Bay.

Yes, absent that's what informed the compelling need not to be complicit in torture on this occasion. I think this country has enough on its plate without attracting more reasons to have a grievance against us.

when There are probably enough reasons for grievance to fuel extreme and violent actions of revenge against the UK until the end of the century and beyond. They predate the invasion of Iraq, extraordinary rendition and Guantanamo Bay but these certainly poured oil on the flames. (Sorry if that seems like pun.) Of course, Tony Blair had no interest in history but that is still no excuse for not learning from past mistakes. The present pugilistic government still thinks the country should be "punching above its weight" and until Britain acknowledges its true position in the world, dangerous and silly political mistakes will continue to be made.

If only we could act like the size of the small group of islands that we are, instead of being the 'Big I Am'!

Blair (and others) may have ignored some history, but all our prime ministers remember that, for all our size, our history is one of a very powerful nation. Whether that was a good thing or bad, it is true and we have not got completely away from it yet. (Nor, I suspect, do our governments want us to). That doesn't justify torture or other dubious practices, but it does explain why successive British governments still think we are part of the the great nations of the world. And anyway, in some ways, we are.

That is the most patriotic 'speech' I've ever made or am ever likely to make.

Bags Blair not only ignored some aspects of history but also distorted others. You might be interested to know that, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, he reckoned Britain went to war in 1939 to save the Jews.