Brits can deport Abu Qatada

In a rational system, this decision would have come immediately, since Abu Qatada had entered Britain under false pretenses, lied to get asylum, and then started issuing fatwas approving the murders of non-believers.  Instead, a British court actually allowed Qatada out on bail and rescinded his deportation order, requiring the government to try a second time to kick Qatada out of the country.  Human rights activists decried the decision today to deport Qatada to Jordan, where he faces charges of terrorism:

In a victory for the Home Office, law lords today decided that Qatada – who is wanted in Jordan on terror charges – could be deported from the UK.

The Government had appealed against a court decision preventing his deportation on the grounds he may face unfair treatment in Jordan.

The 48-year-old, once dubbed Osama bin Laden’s right-hand-man-in Europe, has claimed evidence against him was extracted by torture. …

Human rights groups condemned the decision, which also favoured the Home Office in its efforts to deport two Algerians.

Amnesty International urged ministers not to take the judgment as a “green light” to deport more people to regimes where they risked unfair trial and torture.

Presumably, the two Alergian cases relate to this story in July, when the British released two al-Qaeda terrorists on bail.  “U” also entered Britain under false pretenses, an action that until recently had given governments all the reason it needed to deport undesirables.  US intelligence had tracked “U” even before the 9/11 attacks, as he had connections to the millenium bomb plot that the US accidentally uncovered in December 1999.  We wanted him deported here, but could not build a case against “U”, and so the Brits wanted him sent back to Algeria — but the courts blocked the deportation of a known terrorist, allowing him to live among them instead.

Nations have no responsibility to house terrorists, especially those that commit fraud to enter the country or get granted asylum.  They especially have no responsibility to house people who issue death orders to their followers, regardless of how they’ll get treated when returned to their home country or to a nation that wants to try him for other crimes.  People who emigrate to a country have a responsibility to follow the law if they want to stay there.  If they don’t, then they have little to complain about when given the boot.

Thankfully, the Law Lords applied a little common sense to these cases.  The previous ruling, that their nation had to abide terrorists who lied to get into the country and who continued their terrorist pursuits while residing there, was a prescription for suicide.

Blowback