Abu hamza attacked
 

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

"tasty Chracters" heh

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Hardly surprising, really. You don't tend to get great pillars of society in very many jails nowadays :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

not ever since the greeks left :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Are we surprised that this has happened given all the anti publicity this person has attracted.

Will we be surprised if it now leads to yet more legal shananagans, aid and all sorts for claims for compensation, failure to protect, breach of human rights and all that.

Answers on a postcard to Belmarsh Jail or perhaps Tony Blair.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

he carries his own!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Well we all saw that one comming!!!!! It was only a matter of time

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

People get attacked in prisons every day. Why so much publicity over this one attack? And what if the attacker claims he was provoked by one of Hamza's famous "rants"?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Prisons sound awful

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I do not think I could spend much time in there, but then again it is the right place for him, as is a person who is really filled with hate. I bet everybody in the prision clapped when they found that out though!!!!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

He didnt, wonder why :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Too busy making sure the soap stayed on the hook ;)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

In my opinion it should have happened sooner. People like him need to be kicked out out of this country, if I was in charge of this country I would have put a 'hit' on this guy a long time ago. He is a true menace to society and deserves all the beatings he gets.

Obviously my opinion is based on what I have seen and read in the newspapers so you never know, he could be a really nice man :erm:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Didn't Saddam have similar ideas for his enemies?? :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

good enough for him i reckon , mores the pity he is still in this country :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Saddam may have been a naughty boy :) but at least he didn't take any sh**t from anyone and knew how to deal with these kind of ruffians.

I believe that our government should create some sort of covert black ops team which work under the radar and give them the authority to make guys like Abu Hamza disappear or at least have a fatal accident of some sort ;) and I reckon I should lead this new team seeing as I can really speak the lingo :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Heck, couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

As someone said - why is this news?

"They don't care about getting caught and one of them wanted to show Hamza exactly what they think of him, he added."

Guess he must count himself lucky this wasn't a suicide attack...

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

LOL, that would be rather ironic.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Just the kind of thing they're working towards with the current anti-terrorism legislation.

Sure - you can lead the team, I'll pick the targets...

I can really see democracy benefit from this :confused:

We don't need any 'black ops' (hmmm, doesn't sound right, anyway) just to exercise the laws that already exist. In the case of Hamza they took way too long to do it. Now they've got him locked up they seem to be having trouble deciding what to do next.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

No doubt our friend Abu will be released on appeal, with a nice new identity, 24hr gaurd, a media blackout on any stories regarding him, and an income for life..........

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

He's a British citizen, so you can't.

He's an unpleasant mouth on a stick who deserves a day in court to answer what seem to be fairly obvious charges given his record. He's not the demon he's made out to be in the Sun.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I would imagine that his metal hook would have been removed while in prison & he would have had to have a plastic one or something.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

As I recall, he married an English citizen to gain citizenship; but he was already married, so the marriage was actually null and void. Seems like fair grounds to revoke the citizenship?

Sadly, I can see him now getting legal aid to sue anyone and everyone, claiming compensation, and if he wins, getting to keep all the money whilst still claiming lots of benefits. Oh what a lovely system we have in this country.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I think he's more than that personally-I've actually watched this guy giving sermons in the street, & inciting people.

Having watched him in action, I disagree, & anyone involved with people burning the Union Jack flag should be immediately deported for that alone IMO.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You were there in person?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Yes, curiosity got the better of me.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

If thats the case than he deserves all he gets. Why are we wasting are tax money on a cell even for him?

I think he should be sentto the US and let them deal with him

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

wow..........cool!
Was he preaching in English or Arabic?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Both, mainly Arabic but what was in English was spoken in English deliberately to provoke :afire:

Stuff like "the day is coming" followed by Arabic sentances, then "we will all be hallowed" in English, followed by more Arabic.

I've watched the guy in action & believe me it's a scary site-he even looked at me & pointed at one stage. :Yikes:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

With his hook or finger? :rofl:

Joking apart I bet it was scary :shocked:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

thats it m8, you're a marked man! :D
On a serious note, these Arab extremist types have the edge on us. I have done a fairly extensive trawl of the web looking at their sites and (strangely enough) they are mostly in arabic. They understand english, we don't understand arabic.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You can't even hide, as he can point around a corner at you... ;)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

It actually was very scary, I kept looking over my shoulder etc on the way home, but being the man that trained Jack Bauer I was ready for anything! :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Why did you stare at him or something??? A friend of mine who lives in London went to see one of his speaches and she has even commented on out he picks out white man and tries to harass them, she was then followed back to her friends house and they waited outside for a good few minutes and then they left, she had to call the police as she was to scared to go home, infact she ended comming up here for a couple of days and spending time with us, that is how freaked she was infact she now lives in Dover! So there you go!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Neil - what are you more frightened of, a loudmouth, well known to the authorities, ranting on the street watched by bored coppers or a nice, quiet professional like Mohammed Atta, having nice, quiet meetings in his Harburg flat while attending the local university? The biggest threat is the one you don't see, the one who takes care not to draw attention to himself.

What rubbish - it's a flag, not a human being. Get over it. Remind me to set fire to one and you can try and deport me for it. Even the USA specifically protects flag burning as a fairly obvious example of freedom of expression, which is one of the things the flag actually stands for.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Very good point. However, Neil was probably frightened of the big minders...........a far more immediate threat :D

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

However he tends not to have the rabid followers all around him who'll attack you on sight for appearing to be an infidel or not respecting their leader.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

It's not "rubbish", it's my opinion, & please don't say that my opinions are "rubbish".

Correct. :)

That's charming, is that what everyone who doesn't agree with you should do "Get over it" ?

I can't "try" because there's no law in place to support me in deporting you, & the point I made about deportation was a personal opinion (as I made clear in my post)

Oh...that's ok then, so you're suggesting that just because the USA feels it's ok (which I'm not so sure it does BTW), then I should just think that too?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Because a piece of cloth is clearly so much more important than the right to free expression. :rolleyes: Remind me come November 5th to construct a bonfire entirely out of Union Jacks.

I think it is a bit rich to complain about people espousing extreme ideas when you argue that deportation is a suitable punishment for burning a bit of cloth.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

It's not about "importance", it's about respect for the country in which you are residing, & respect for the country that is supporting your way of life here.

I don;t feel that anyone that comes to this country should be allowed to behave like that.

Ok.

Fair enough, our views differ. :)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Sorry lads its not a bit of 'cloth' it represents are country Great Britain.
Have some respect!!!!!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Currently the flag has no protection in the USA but there are people hard at work to change that: http://www.cfa-inc.org/

Sure - it's only a flag - only a sheet of material. But it is a clear symbol of a nation's sovereignty. So never mind deporting someone for burning a flag - by that act they have made it clear what they think of that country, so they should depart voluntarily. I'd propose allowing them to do so free-of-charge to make it simpler and quicker!

But we'd have to keep secret from the destination country why these people were travelling there - after all, would we want people like that coming here?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Well said, have a greenie. :clap:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

And from me too.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Or should we take it in a more literally offensive way that its them showing what they really want to do to the entire coutries ocupants ?

IMO it demonstartes racism at a height way above anyhting they have endured from us in recent years.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You can be jailed for scraping a bit of metal remember.....or rather, defacing the Queen's image on a coin. I don't see the two 'offences' being all that different.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

very well said. :tu:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Quite right, defacing the image of the 'Queen' should be made legal :)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Or burning bank notes. It's known as 'defacing the coin of the realm' - http://www.pomian.demon.co.uk/weights.htm also see http://www.gold.org/value/reserve_as...1870feb10.html point 7.

So our coinage is protected by law, but the flag isn't.

But anyone thinking that flag is 'just a piece of cloth' might have a look here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/775016.stm to see just how much ire can be created over 'just a flag' - and not even national ones!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I don`t see how that invalidates my position that it is just a piece of cloth. To me it just strengthens my opinion that people get too worked up over a bit of cloth.

To those who argue that the important thing is what the flag represents, ie. the UK, that suggests to me that there there isn`t anything more worthwhile that can be considered to be representative of this country.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I'd be a bit more afraid of the fanatics who follow him, and whom he may well incite to commit rather unpleasant acts, be it on a person or a country.

As for the flag, I can think of a few laws that he might be considered to be breaking. I doubt we'll se them being enforced though. But as you say, it's just a piece of cloth. So here's an idea... why don't you go and stand in front of the worshippers and burn a few pictures of Allah, then we'll see what all the fuss is about?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Oops, there *ARE* no pictures of Allah, nor indeed of Mohammed because such things are proscribed by Islam...!!!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I think the point here is that Hamza is happy to live in this country and take all of the support that it gives him. In the meantime he rants on about destroying it, and then goes on to burn it's national flag! If he really loathes it so much, why does he stay? And before you say "it's a free country", that's not the ideal that HE is pursuing.
__________________

OK, the chap they worship with the beard. No, not Jeremy Beadle! And certainly not Rolf!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bloke :clap:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

By that token the Bible or Koran are 'just books' and nothing to get worked up over either.

No-one is arguing that only the flag represents the UK, nor that it's the only worthwhile representation.
We are arguing that it is a sufficiently worthwhile representation of the UK to warrant more respect than it gets.

And this is not only true of the Union flag - just ask any people who are proud of their heritage, and they'll tell you.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

As an aetheist I would apply that argument to all religions. To me they are "just books", some of the most popular fiction in the world today.

Ok, then justify why a piece of cloth deserves respect? Surely it should be the factors that it represents that deserve respect?
__________________

In fact, I guess that if you were to burn a picture of Allah it would be looked upon positively as you are destroying a forbidden image.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Or is it that the cloth represents those factors which should be respected and therefore in turn it too should be respected?


However printing a passage from the koran on something which is designed to be thrown away is offensive (as McDonalds found out when they inlcuded the Saudi Flag on their paper bags during a previous olympics)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

So, as I have been arguing, the flag itself does not have anything intrinsic about it to be respected, so therefore I don`t see why I should respect it.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Exactly. To you they are. But you wanted to know why so many people other than you got in a lather about these things.
I'm sure there are things you believe in you wouldn't tolerate others making light of. And if not, then more pity you.

Sometimes the symbol of respect is equally important as the respect itself.

Do you not shake someone's hand when you meet them? Why do you do that?

It's only a symbol that you are not holding your sword - i.e. you're not armed, and hence your approach is peaceful. But it can also mean much more: http://www.canoe.ca/LifewiseWorkOffice00/handshake.html

So by showing enough respect to the flag not to burn it, means you at least recognise the values it represents.
__________________

Which reminds me...

Mummy: What's that you're drawing George

George: God

Mummy: But no-one knows what God looks like!

George: They will when I'm finished.

;)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

So just because you don't respect it, it's OK to burn it? What about the millions of Britons who DO respect it, who might find the burning offensive? And what about the many that fought for the flag, and died? Sorry you don't respect the flag, but I do.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Just need to know are you English? :confused:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Technically yes, but that is only an accident of my birth location. In the modern world I consider national boundaries to be petty and divisive. I would rather be considered as European than English.
__________________

No, they fought for the values the flag symbolises. Again, I consider that to be more important that a bit of cloth.

Frankly, why should I care that some people respect the flag if those people aren`t going to respect the fact that burning a flag is a valid form of freedom of expression?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

If it is only a bit of cloth, why bother burning it then?
Unless your expression is specifically designed to upset people who respect said bit of cloth...

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

So, would it be OK to stand outside the Finsbury Park mosque and burn a copy of the Koran? I think the CRE and the powers that be would come down on the "offender" like a ton of bricks. "Incitement of Racial Hatred" springs to mind... along with "Behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace"...

In my mind, burning a flag is exactly that "Incitiment of racial hatred". Or am I missing something here?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Or if it is necessary to protest against what a flag represents or has come to represent, and yes, it will be directed against those who respect the flag, as if it has come to a situation where flag burning is mandated then those, by definition, are your opponents.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

So it's not just a bit of cloth then?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

....and in the case of those flag burning arabs outside parliment it represents freedom to upset the inhabitants of the country that has given them refuge. To protest against freedoms greater than they have at home. :rolleyes:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Amen!

The shortcomings of his argument clearly spotted.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

To be honest, I think any westener standing outside Finsbury park burning a copy of the Koran would be in grave danger. I would bet the chances of an individual walking away alive would be something not worth risking.

These people are fanatics, and would kill over someone burning a copy of a book of fairy tales!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Like always, another brilliant post :tu:

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

How is burning a copy of the Koran like burning a flag?


Wouldn't burning a copy of the Koran be more like burning a Bible or other holy book, rather than simply a flag?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Depends how you view it.
Either the flag is just a bit of cloth and a religious book is just a load of paper bound together, or they are special for individual reasons

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

This line of argument reminded me of the images that surrounded what I think was the first major clash of cultures involving Muslims in recent times - namely when we had to witness the burning of books, flags and effigys - I refer to the storm caused by 'Satanic Verses'.

Now in how far indeed the book was an affront to Muslims I don't know, but I can't think of anything anyone could write or say about the Bible that would justify a call for their murder.

In case anyone is unsure what I'm referring to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2542873.stm

I recall at the time being highly incensed by the rethoric of the Muslims and very much angered by their unfettered displays of hatred. It really seemed as if all reason had left them, because their (re)actions were quite alien to British society at the time - and in many ways they still are.

We might have seen it a few more times since then, but I don't think we've lost that feeling of disgust at such apparently mindless violence.

I think if someone had reasoned the issue at the time we might all have reacted a little more sympathetically. As it was, it was just about impossible not to come down on the side of 'free speech'.

There is a message in that to all extremists - we're more likely to listen and hear you if you don't shout so much...
__________________

It's about what is going to get someone's goat.

Since the person on the other side is arguing that flags have no meaning, and there is an assumption that they probably hold a pro-islamic viewpoint, then clearly suggesting the burning of a copy of the Koran is deemed similarly offensive as was the notion of the burning of the flag.

I mean, how upset would you get over someone burning a copy of the Bible? When there is a copy in just about every hotel room (even in Islamic countries?) in the world, and you can buy a copy in every book shop in every town, there's no need to get seriously upset, is there?
I can rationalise that the burning of a single copy in no way affects the message (acceptable packet loss rate ;)) and since a Christian doesn't worship the Bible, but rather God, then no real harm done.
That's not to say we wouldn't consider it an insult, but I don't think many of us (even ardent bible bashers) would actually kill because of it.

But we feel quite sure that's not how the other side feels. So we use what we think will tug at those same strings in them.

It's 'funny' really - we're talking about respecting a national flag and end up talking about how we might insult a specific religious group. Way off at different tangents.

I'd be interested to know if a Muslim really has no feelings towards their national flag. Because that would suggest that they aren't interested in any national identity either. But since this is clearly not the case (if the 'insurgent' voices in Iraq are to be believed) then this disrespect for a flag is not a question of faith, or probably even culture, but rather more likely a lack of both.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

If it gets at those a protest is directed against then it is more than a piece of cloth only in the minds of the receiving end, if you are burning it at as a form of protest it is merely a tool. You don`t have to personally share respect for what a symbol stands for in order to work on the minds of others.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

It is interesting that your argument has moved from incredulity over someone's belief in respect for their national flag to it being a weapon in your hands.

At first it looks like an innocent personal/cultural difference - just a matter of perspective. But is is quite clear that you knew all along just how inflammatory (pun intended) the flag burning issue was and hence your entire line of argument was only intended to cause offence.

You are either a sad troll or else they're currently debating in Parliament how to deal with you.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Yes, because I disagree with you I am a sad troll. :rolleyes: Perhaps you should join a debating club.

I think your last post amply demonstrates just how narrow minded you are. "Deal with people like you." Well, you've certainly nailed your true colours to the post, anyone whose opinion differs to yours must be a terrorist :rolleyes:

Now why don`t you step back from this thread a bit and read it again. Why don`t you pay close attention to the fact that this is an argument as to how to use a flag effectively in protest, and which started out with the point that banning the burning of flags as a means of protest is not acceptable. Now please explain how a knowledge of how to use psychology and a disagreement over a point of symbolism makes someone either a troll or a suitable candidate for anti-terrorism legislation. I`ll be waiting, I could do with a laugh.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

dr wadd.............you really take the biscuit :(

You started off denying that we should get worked up by arabs burning our flag (because the flag doesn't mean anything) and then moved your argument to stating that they do that because it gets us worked up (because they know it means something to us).
You want it both ways.........

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

There is nothing contradictory there. If people didn`t get wound up by it they wouldn`t do it. I argue that we shouldn`t get wound up by it, and if we didn`t I doubt they would continue. It is perfectly valid for me to state that we shouldn`t get wound up over it while recognising why people do get wound up by it.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You mean we're NOT debating here? My understanding of the definition of that word says we are. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=debate
In any case I'm not the only one you are in disagreement with, so the fact that you're trying to argue (blindly) with all comers is looking rather troll-like.

I never said "people like you" - I said "with you" - so I wasn't generalising, I was specifically picking you out as a possible terrorist suspect.
And since you seem keen to dispel the idea that you might be a troll, you're just adding fuel to the fire. (lol. we're back to burning!)

I don't need to 'step back'. I've been following it quite closely. You may have been trying to espouse the efficacy of using a flag to insult a nation, the rest of us were definitely defending the flag.
Free speech doesn't give anyone the right to say whatever they want, or to express themselves in whatever manner they please. Anyone who thinks that clearly doesn't understand the concept at all.

Now you're trying to make it sound really intellectual - psychology is it? No - nothing of the sort. You're defending incitement as a valid form of free speech.
Since that's the kind of thinking that put Abu Hamza where he is, I do indeed think that makes you a candidate to join him.

There you go - you didn't have to wait long, and if you want to laugh, go right ahead. It's still a free country!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

First, I suggest you start to consider carefully what accusations you throw around in a public forum. You are sailing dangerously close to the wind there. But once again, you clearly demonstrate that you consider someone with a differing opinion to you to be a potential terrorist. I suggest you volunteer to be the post-child for FUD.

When you stop throwing around wild allegations you may have a point, until then you are simply a hypocrit.

Ok, so if this is incitement, it does make me wonder what sort of person you are. If something as non-threatening as burning a flag is enough for incitement, I have to ask, do you have any degree of self-control? You see, for incitement to work it relies on those being incited to lose control. If it works on you as incitement, does that suggest you are rational?

Really, so the authorities have been lying about all the accusations against him? It's just that I swear I could recall a bigger list of charges than simply flag burning.

Yes, it is, which is ironic considering that if you got your way and the burning of the flag was banned the country would actually have had a freedom removed. Contradictory perhaps?

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

First of all you don't like me generalising. Now you don't like me picking on you. Make up your mind.
And while we're here, I'm just exercising freedom of speech - if you feel accused by that then that's your problem.

The only thing I'm demonstrating is that your argument has fallen apart.

I have made no wild allegations, and even if I had, that would not make me a hypocrite. http://www.freesearch.co.uk/dictionary/hypocrite

You are the kind of person that would burn a flag to make a point. You would like to make that point in a way that maximally upset someone.
You would do that because you would like to cause that someone to 'lose control' because then you could try to claim the moral high ground.
I am the kind of person who, quite rationally, points these facts out and then it is you that makes the accusations.

What pipe are you smoking? Did anything I say shorten that list? No.

No contradiction at all. Just goes to show that you completely fail to understand the concept of freedom of speech. It's not an absolute freedom - there is not such thing.

Do come back if you think you can demonstrate that you do understand what it really means.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You what??! Your first words on the subject were:
Several pages of backpedaling produces:
.......where you state that it is more than just a piece of cloth (to us).........changing your mind is ok.....just don't deny that you are doing it.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I have not changed my mind in any way. I have:-

1. Pointed out that I do not feel it is worth while getting wound up over a flag being burnt, I do not believe that it means anything.

2. I acknowledge that there are some people that have some sort of attachment to the flag. That does not contradict point 1. I cannot understand that attachment.

3. Since there are people of the sort outlined by point 2, it is logical that burning a flag can be an effective means of protest. As I do not consider the flag special it means nothing to me personally other than it being an effective tool of protest. But if people have an attachment that I do not agree with, and I wish to make a protest, then it is only sensible to strike for the weak spot.

So, I do acknowledge that it is more than a piece of cloth to some, but I neither share nor agree with that viewpoint. However, if a weakness is there you may as well go for it when you make a protest. There is nothing contradictory in that, merely strategic thinking.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Today, 16:55 #61
skunk4u

Just need to know are you English?


Today, 18:48 #67
Ramrod


....and in the case of those flag burning arabs outside parliment it represents freedom to upset the inhabitants of the country that has given them refuge. To protest against freedoms greater than they have at home.

Today, 21:42 #75
ScaredWebWarrior

You are either a sad troll or else they're currently debating in Parliament how to deal with you.


------------------------
Apologies, long-time reader but very rare poster here. Jumping into the middle of a rather loud debate, but I just wanted to back up Dr Wadd in some respects here.

The tone of this debate, along with several others in this forum, is extremely unpleasant. I've snipped out a few comments above to particularly comment on:

The first one "are you English", has no relevance whatsoever. Firstly I am English and it does not concern me one iota whether someone burns the English flag, the Union Jack or a Red Rose (I'm from Lancashire). I note that the poster implicitly defines themself as English rather than British.

The second comment "those flag burning arabs".."To protest against freedoms greater than they have at home"..(see original reply for full context) again includes several implicit opinions and makes me ask several questions. Which "arabs"? Where is their "home"? Why are they protesting? I don't know the poster but that post is full of meaningless rhetoric.

The third comment " You are either a sad troll or else they're currently debating in Parliament how to deal with you." is also distasteful. I cannot imagine how someone can jump from a flag-burning discussion to accusing someone of being a terrorist and would love to see a real justification of that statement.


Finally, I think the original news story was regarding Abu Hamza being attacked in prison. From all that I have read he comes across as an unpleasant and particularly distasteful individual. That does not justify any individual actions, especially as he is now in the hands of the judicial system. Given the hype that surrounds him, I'm surprised that he was left in a situation where he could be attacked.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Indeed. Only 2 posts so far.
Long-time reader you say? Who joined the forum maybe no more than maybe 10 days ago. A lurker if ever I saw one.

Looking at the comments you chose, I am not convinced that you have been following this debate much at all.

For one, there's plenty of people in the UK who will use the term 'English' to mean 'British' - quite a large section of the population doesn't really bother to distinguish. Maybe they're wrong, but the question is valid enough. Considering this forum is open to the entire Internet anyone could be from any country on Earth, just about.

The second comment simply shows that you are not following the debate, or you would understand the context in which the comments were made. If you did understand the context, the answer to your questions would be obvious.

So you want me to justify myself? OK - if you know what a 'troll' is in common parlance around the Internet, then you will understand why I accused the poster of being such. Or is that not the bit you found distasteful? So offering the poster the alternative he found it necessary to challenge me on it, just as you have. (Odd that...) Instead he could have simply accepted the fact that he is a troll and continued his fun or perhaps think that maybe his rhetoric was possibly being mistaken for something altogether more radical.
No, he chose the 3rd alternative of trying to make out he was involved in an intelligent, reasonable, rational, intellectual debate.
And then promptly spoiled the illusion by talking twaddle.

Your final paraghraph kind of sums it up. You are attempting to moderate the discussion.
Reminding us what this thread was all about - let's get back to what we were trying to talk about, instead of pondering on the motives of "Dr Wadd" - interesting you chose to capitalise his handle like that, because in the forum he's just "dr wadd". I wonder what made you do that...

Lastly you are chastising us for leaving poor Abu Hamza vulnerable to this attack, having already clearly laid the blame at the door of the judicial system.

Go back to reading long-time.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I can understand your reasoning, but I have to ask what the goal in your protest is? Is it to make your voice heard and possibly achieve your aims, or is it to p$ss off the 'enemy' as much as possible (or perhaps to just rally more supporters who are willing to resort to extreme measures (in the opinion of the general public) to achieve a more important goal?).

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

OK, I have a few questions that I would like to put to an open forum. I am interested in all answers, with reasoning if you wish to add it:

1) Do you agree to Hamza being detained?
2) Do you think Hamza should be deported?
3) Do you think he should be allowed to publicly burn the flag of ANY country, unchallenged?
4) Do you know what he is protesting about?

or the record, my thoughts are as follows:

1) Yes. He incites racial hatred and openly supports acts of violence against others.
2) Yes. He clearly loathes Britain and all that it stands for.
3) No. It is offensive to many, and is a form of provocation. It also symbolises and supports his loathing of those countries whose flag he burns, and his desire to see harm come to those countries and their people.
4) "The West", America, and everything non-Muslim. That is my understanding, but I may be wrong. Feel free t correct me.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

1) Yes. His actions were unlawful.
2) Whatever is appropriate, legally. Personally, I'd rather he was locked up here and unable to continue his campaign of hate.
3) No-one (not just Hamza) should be allowed to burn any national flag. For all the reasons already discussed at length here.
4) I have no idea if he's even protesting about anything. All I know is that he is preaching hatred. He tries to convince others to commit illegal acts.

On the last point, it always amazes me that these extremist groups are always 'led' by someone who is ready to convince others to kill themselves for their cause. Yet when these leaders get a chance to face the enemy they run and hide...

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Yes, because him being bailed would mean he would commit further crimes (inciting racial hatred, etc).

Yes. His citizenship was illegal, even if he is found innocent.

So long as it doesn't cause a public order offence. (i.e. cause a riot). If it was done in front of me, i'd just tut and walk off. I know others would react differently.

He is following his own party line. Its the same old rubbish. Anti-west, anti-civilisation, anti-tolerance, etc.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Again, I think you've clearly demonstrated where you are coming from. Someone comes in to post their opinion and you immediately resort to personal attacks. Highly indicative of someone who doesn`t have a valid argument. You've even siezed on someone`s use of captilisation as an attack. You can complain about other posters all you like, but now I see just how petty you are I can see it's not worth debating with you further.
__________________

Getting your voice heard is one thing, but sometimes protest needs to push those emotive buttons so that those on the receiving end actually sit up and pay attention. I'd like to point out that burning a flag doesn`t necessarily imply extreme measures are to follow.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

I am so sorry Dr Wadd, but I have to agree with the rest on this flag burning issue. Look what happened in Iraq, and there is still civil unrest there. I only joined the forum last week and I have done over 100 posts and yes I am passionate about a lot of things. If you want the truth, I just wish the US would take this guy off our hands, as I am pretty narked about a guy who has hate for this country and it is quite clear that this guy has. And we have to pay for him???? And his lifestyle which has come accustomed to I do not think so. He deserved a good kicking nd I would not be supprised if somebody in that prision had put a contract to kill him, while he is in there, he is lower than the lowest person on this planet.He rants on like Hitler and look at Hitler he was a coward who hid behind his men, like this guy does. And yes I am offened bu the flag burning and I am not even English, Im Dutch, Italian!

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

'Arabs' means people of middle eastern origin.....'home' would be the middle eastern country they originally hail from.....simple enough really :)

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

That's perfectly fine, and you don`t need to apologise for a difference of opinion. Ramrod and I rarely agree on anything but we generally keep it civil. However, I feel that ScaredWebWarrior is totally out of line here, and to immediately jump upon someone and personally attack them because they agreed with me I consider to be unacceptable, more so than him attack me personally.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

You may get them to sit up and pay attention, but in my opinion insulting people is not the best way to get them to listen.

Re: Abu hamza attacked
 

Thank you Dr Wadd, But I still do not agree with the flag burning comment. I know everybody is entitiled to speach, I should know!!!!!!