Terrorists Treated Like Royality

MUSLIM TERRORISTS TREATED LIKE ROYALTY

NO JAIL FOR JIHADIS

by Michael Travis

If you’re a terrorist, go to England and get arrested. The British government will provide you with living costs, “subsistence” funds, and, best of all, an annual subsidy.

This news was released from the Home Office by Parliament this week.

Since April 2007, 13 Islamic terror suspects have collected £611,470 – – approximately $1,040,000 while under house arrest for accomodations, taxes, utlity bills, prepaid telephone cards, phone bills, and food.

In addition to having their expenses paid while they are free to walk around Piccadilly Circus, nine receive public welfare and all receive additional sums in benefits.

This means that the average terrorist in British custody makes over $100,000 a year tax free.

The figure may be higher.

Separate figures released under the Freedom of Information Act show that the total cost to the Home Office of the control orders regime for the 44 terror suspects since April 2006 is £9.4 million.

“Nice life if you can get it,” as Gershwin wrote, “and you can get it if you try” – – simply by attempting to blow up a food stand or a subway stop.

Moreover, since 2007, £180,000 has been paid to private security companies contracted to carry out “electronic monitoring” of the suspects.

The figures were uncovered by the Conservatives, who want to suspend “control orders” (which grants the suspects freedom} and to place them on trial.

Presently, the Islamists who are subject to control orders, cannot be legally identified. They are Muslims who are alleged by the security services to be terrorists who pose a direct threat to national security.

Control orders date back to 2005, when the Law Lords rules that ministers could not legally hold terror suspects without trial in Belmarsh prison in London.

The control order regime has been frequently criticised, and Baroness Neville-Jones, the Conservative shadow homeland security secretary said the costs associated with the orders were another reason to abolish them.

Ms. Neville-Jones said: “Control orders deny due process to the defendant, do not provide a reliable remedy to the security problem posed by terrorist suspects, and on top of all that cost hundreds of thousands of pounds.

“A Conservative government would review the morally objectionable and costly control order regime with a view, consistent with the security situation, to replacing it by the trial of suspects through the normal court system.’

Patrick Mercer, the chairman of the Commons subcommittee on counter-terrorism, criticised the sums paid to the controlees. “It wouldn’t surprise me to learn we had been renting DVDs for them as well,” he said.

Calling for a fundamental change in the treatment of terrorist suspects, he added: “The control order regime is not only impractical, it is also very expensive. We need measures to get these people into court – intercept evidence, plea bargaining, questioning after charge. That would allow us to divest ourselves of these detainees and the huge cost of detaining them.”

As well as criticism about the civil liberties implications of control orders, the regime has faced charges of being ineffective at controlling suspects.

Since the orders were created, 44 suspects have been made subjects of control orders.

Despite being under regular surveillance by the security forces, at least seven suspects under control orders have absconded. Some are thought to have fled the country.

Control orders can put subjects under curfew for up to 13 hours a day and face restrictions on their use of telephones and the internet. Their movements and social contacts may also be restricted.

The fact that the Home Office is paying for telephones and phone cards for some controlees may raise concerns about their ability to communicate with others.

Some people who have been subject to orders are said to be extremist preachers who do not directly participate in terrorism but encourage others to do so.

One man previously put under a control order is Abu Qatada, a Muslim cleric whose sermons said to have inspired Mohammed Atta, one of the ringleaders of the September 11 hijackers.

Earlier this year, Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, warned terror suspects under control orders are able to stay in contact with each other and could become active again.

Related Reading:

• UN General Assembly seeks to Protect Transvestite Terrorists
• Chicago Muslim Charged In Mumbai Massacre
• Italy Says, No More Muslim Food?
• Haiti – Help or Occupation; You decide…
• England, what has happened…
• England revisited…
• The Point of No Return Is Now

Tweet This Post