Immigration and Asylum Madness Continues as Lib/Lab/Con Coalition Talks Splutter On
Muslim terrorist suspects — and their wives — continue to brazenly parasite off the British taxpayer while the Lib/Lab/Con artists concentrate on trying to gain power to perpetuate their policies for the destruction of Britain.
In the latest shambolic display of Britain’s smashed border and security policies, a Muslim terrorist suspect from Algeria has been granted the right to stay in Britain under the “Human Rights Act” (HRA) travesty.
The suspect, who is so protected that he cannot even be named and is only identified as “T,” entered Britain in 1997 on a false passport. He brought his wife to Britain in 2001 using false documents.
Since then, he has used taxpayers’ money to fight all deportation attempts and has now been granted leave to remain in Britain because he has now had children in this country.
The HRA was created by the Labour regime to make Britain’s legislation fall into line with European Union human rights laws.
This law is supported by the Lib Dems and although initially opposed by the Conservatives, they too have admitted that the law cannot be changed while Britain remains a member of the EU.
Remaining in the EU is of course a fundamental part of Conservative Party policy.
According to the latest ruling, immigration judges have ruled that attempts to remove “T” have taken so long that it would now be unfair on his four children to deport him.
The 39-year-old man has links with al-Qaeda suspect Abu Doha and attended the same training camp as the British shoe bombers Richard Reid and Saajid Badat.
According to reports, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) has ruled that deporting the suspect “would be unfair on his children.”
Astonishingly, it is said that the SIAC also “warned that further legal battles against his deportation could drag out for another two years, by which time his children 'will each have become even more settled in England.”
* Meanwhile, a ruling by the European Court of Justice last month forbid the British government from withholding benefits to the wives of terrorist suspects in this country.
According to reports, the decision will in all likelihood force the Government to change anti-terrorism rules.
The case was brought by three women whose husbands appear on a list of people said to have links with al Qaida, the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. This list, which was drawn up by a UN sanctions committee, contains names of people who have had their funds and other assets frozen, in a bid to cut off terrorist funding.
The EU enforces the measure via rules stating that no funds “shall be made available, directly or indirectly, to, or for the benefit of people named on the list, unless authorised to cover basic expenses.”
The wives of the suspects went to court to challenge the Treasury's decision to impose tough restrictions on access to social security payments worth several hundred pounds a week, including income support, child benefit and housing assistance.
Under the Treasury rules, such benefits must be paid into a bank account, and the spouse can draw only up to £10 in cash for each member of her household. All other payments from the account must be made by debit card.
The spouses, all living in the UK with their husbands and children, must also submit a monthly account to the Treasury detailing all spending, with receipts for any goods bought and copies of bank statements allowing Treasury officials to check that the purchases do not exceed “basic expenses.”
The EU court has ruled that “'The freezing of funds of persons with suspected links to bin Laden, al Qaida or the Taliban does not apply to certain social security benefits paid to their spouses.
“The regulation ordering funds to be frozen applies only to assets that can be used to support terrorist activities.”
In other words, thanks to the Lib/Lab/Con EU membership policy, British taxpayers are now obliged to financially support the families of Islamist terrorists as well.