Anti-Muslim Twitter and Facebook Posts Land Brits In Jail

Instead of muzzling and jailing the radical Muslims spewing hate and oftentimes inciting violence, the Brits are now arresting people who are criticizing the haters.  What happened to soldier Lee Rigby is outrageous, especially considering the circumstances. Yes, we have the right to be angry and comment on his brutal murder, but the people in England aren't allowed to do that.

Apparently three men were arrested after posting to Twitter and Facebook what were deemed to be racist and/or anti-Muslim comments regarding the Woolwich murder.

One man has been charged with "malicious communications" on Facebook, the Daily Mail reports.

Two others have been arrested under the Public Order Act on suspicion of inciting racial or religious hatred. The police are now arresting people based on mere speech in social media, a detective said in a statement to the press:

'The men were arrested under the Public Order Act on suspicion of inciting racial or religious hatred. Our inquiries into these comments continue.

'These comments were directed against a section of our community. Comments such as these are completely unacceptable and only cause more harm to our community in Bristol.

'People should stop and think about what they say on social media before making statements as the consequences could be serious.'

Of course, it was British Muslims who demanded the arrests, but where is their outrage and condemnation for what happened to Rigby?

 And what about arrests of Muslims who call for the death of infidels?

Those in the above photo are the kind of people who turn into animals like the butchers who killed Rigby. Why aren't they being detained.  Instead people who are angered by the senseless act of violence perpetrated in the name of Islam are the ones being targeted. Two of the men arrested were taken in the middle of the night:

"We began inquiries into the comments and at around 3.20am two men, aged 23 and 22, were detained at two addresses in Bristol.

"The men were arrested under the Public Order Act on suspicion of inciting racial or religious hatred. Our inquiries into these comments continue."

Muslims need to be equally outraged by the evil that some of their fellow Muslims do, and the British government needs to start becoming more pro-active and arresting those that are truly inciting and perpetrating hate and violence, not the ones reacting to it.

Home Secretary Theresa May has threatened to ban on-line extremist Islamists and radical groups, but  that will probably never happen.

Source: Yahoo

Hate Preacher Abu Qatada To Leave UK Voluntarily?

Bye-bye Abu Qatada aka Mohammed Othman. The Brits had worried they might be stuck with the Algerian hate preacher for life, since his "rights" superseded the safety of the British people. The courts were loathe to send him over to Jordan (where he is a wanted man) because he might not receive a fair trial, and the poor terror suspect was suicidal. But it looks like the radical Muslim will be going there after all. Voluntarily. Pending some kind of deal between Jordan and the UK- assuring all parties involved that he will get that fair trial.

Britain last month announced it had signed a new treaty with Jordan aimed at addressing those concerns.

"If and when the Jordanian parliament ratifies that treaty, Mr Othman will voluntarily return to Jordan," Edward Fitzgerald, a lawyer representing him, told a special immigration tribunal on Friday.

That would be a relief to home secretary Theresa May, the British interior minister, who has faced media pressure over repeated failures to deport Abu Qatada.

"The home secretary's focus remains on seeing Abu Qatada returned to Jordan at the earliest opportunity," security minister James Brokenshire said in a statement issued by the Home Office shortly after the news from court emerged.

"We continue to pursue this case before the courts and to work with the Jordanian government to achieve this."

After eight long years of trying to boot him out of the country, they might finally be rid of him.

Brits Stuck With Abu Qatada For Life? His Rights Come First

 Everyone agrees that hate preacher/terrorist Abu Qatada is a "very dangerous" individual. He also happens to be a parasite sucking the British government dry while he lives in comfort- with his brood- courtesy of the British taxpayer.  Yet deporting him back to Jordan is proving to be a fruitless endeavour. Why? Because his human rights trump the rest of the British citizenry. At least that's how some judges feel about Qatada's case.

The judges said that while Qatada’s deportation was ‘long overdue’, his risk to the public was not ‘a relevant consideration’ under human rights laws.
[snip]
The Appeal Court yesterday upheld an earlier verdict that sending the hate preacher to face a terror trial in Jordan would not be fair.

Not fair, because they're afraid Qatada might be tortured in Jordan.

Brits have been trying for ten years to boot him out of the country, and now they might be stuck with him forever, unless Home Secretary Theresa May can work a miracle.

Home Secretary Theresa May will now lodge a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court. If that fails, it would raise the prospect of Qatada – variously described as a ‘truly dangerous individual’ and Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe – never being deported. He could apply to be freed within days.

But some are blaming May for this epic failure.

Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said Mrs May’s strategy of pursuing the case through the British courts rather than in Europe had backfired disastrously, adding: ‘This is an extremely serious and disappointing judgment.’

Read more on the whole disastrous situation on the UK DailyMail.

It's not the first time the British courts have sided with terrorists, placing the English people at risk.  An Algerian terror suspect, living in the country illegally for years, was also allowed to stay in England because he was suicidal.

What the Brits are doing is suicidal.

Romanian Who Bilked £2.9 million Gets To Stay In UK To Protect Human Rights

33-year-old Romanian gypsy Lavinia Olmazu, who spent 2 plus years in jail for bilking the British system out of at least £2.9 million, was supposed to have been deported after her release. But Olmazu will get to stay in England with her 12-year-old son after using Article 8 of the Human Rights Act to make her case. Yes, she claimed her human rights would be violated if she was sent back to Romania, and the judges concurred.

Article 8 guarantees the 'right to family life', so mum decided that since her son had spent the bulk of his life in England, and spoke little Romanian (or so she claims) they deserved to stay. All this in spite of the fact that the son was born in Romania, his biological father lives in Romania, and mum's partner-in-crime, Alin Enachi, is also Romanian.

Apparently, Olmazu

.. was employed by two London boroughs and homeless charity the Big Issue to help integrate Romanian gipsies into British society.
[snip]
She was jailed after she abused her position of trust with the authorities and Roma community to orchestrate an elaborate fraud that cost taxpayers millions – and gained her and her partner tens of thousands of pounds.

They charged £80 each to provide hundreds of immigrants from Romania with false National Insurance numbers so they could claim thousands of pounds in benefits they were not entitled to.

Armed with an NI number, their clients claimed handouts including child benefit, child tax credit, working tax credit, as well as use the NHS and other welfare services.

Under rules introduced when Romania joined the EU in 2007, Romanian immigrants cannot get a National Insurance number – which is the key to getting benefits – unless they can prove they have paid employment lined up.

Operating from their suburban home in Woodford Green, Essex, they provided 368 false NI numbers. Of these, 172 were successfully used to claim benefits resulting in fraud totalling £2.9million.

But at the time it was reported the scam could have cost taxpayers up to £10 million if all of the fraudulent documents had been used, police revealed.

Not only was she not deported, she now has a job with another charity, Media Diversity Institute, which is partially sponsored by the British government.  I wonder how long it will take her to start pilfering from that organization.

However, not everyone was thrilled with the decision to allow her to stay. The Home Office tried its best to kick her out, but was thwarted by a judge who felt the boy had the right to finish his schooling here.

The case is among the first to be considered by senior immigration judges after an attempt by Theresa May to make it more difficult for immigration criminals to stay.

In June Mrs May declared war on judges who refused to deport foreign criminals because of their human rights, saying the courts should stop allowing overseas prisoners, law-breakers and illegal immigrants to stay in Britain on the grounds that they have a right to a family life.

She promised a vote in Parliament to ram home to judges ‘what the public believe’ and persuade them ‘to take into account what Parliament has said’.

Failure by the judiciary to listen will result in new laws to curb the exploitation of the human rights legislation by foreign criminals, Mrs May said.
MPs of all parties voted unanimously in support of the stricter guidelines.

Since when do criminals have rights?  They lose their rights when they commit crimes. The Brit nanny state cares  more for the rights of criminals and freeloaders than the hard working, over taxed, British worker.