Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Multicultualism: Where Is It When We Need It ?

Don't be shocked, but the judicary have finally found a form of cultural endeavour where Britain stands head and shoulders above the wogs. And what is it ? The law, of course.

It gets better. It turns out that they have a problem with the court system in Jordan and so they have no option but to grant asylum to a terrorist.


Since the courts seem to be going through a round of Groundhog Day, let me point out that yet again asylum is being granted not to someone who also happens to be a terrorist, but to someone precisely *because* he's a terrorist. It's only because he faces the prospect of being called to account for his crimes that he can claim to be persecuted. If he was a law-abiding pharmacist from Amman, he'd have to go through normal immigration procedures - only murderous sociopaths qualify for the left's express lane. And even with all that, the logic on show is truly a wonder to behold:
Ministers had been confident he would be booted out after securing the Memorandum of Understanding with Jordan in August 2005. It gave assurances he would not be tortured or ill-treated.

But, in a ruling which displays the true reach of human rights law, the Court of Appeal said that - while Qatada might not be harmed - witnesses who may be called to give evidence against him in any future trial held by the Jordanian authorities may have been tortured.
Get that ? They admit the whole 'suspects being tortured' dog won't hunt, but potential witnesses at a future trial could hypothetically be tortured at some future date (possibly by Elvis).

Well, you can't say it couldn't happen, but I'm thinking that as a rule, judical findings shouldn't include more hypothetical leaps of faith than a Diane conspiracy theory. Still, it does reveal an interesting mindset. After all, Jordan is part of that international community the left is so anxious to grovel too. Yet liberals give Jordan the 'Minority Report' treatment when it comes to discussing ill-treatment that hasn't, strictly speaking, happened yet. In other words, when Jordan is ranting at the UN, it's the voice of moderate Islam, but you still can't trust these people to run an honest court (unlike us).

Just to check the scorecard again, that whole 'bigamy' thing is not only an archaic Eurocentric concept, but we'll even waive a few other laws just to save you from the perfectly predictable consequences of your actions. On the other hand, the fact a sovereign nation chooses to run its court system differently to our own is proof positive that the whole nation is clearly run by sadistic sand monkeys just waiting to torture all and sundry. A-huh!

No comments: