Attacked for just doing his job.

[anotheoldgit]

http://tinyurl.com/3hlfqqa

Four Islamic savages cowardly attack an innocent teacher, for daring to teach Muslim girls and because they did not approve of a non-Muslim teacher giving lessons on religion to a niece of one of the attackers.

If the offended uncle had solely attacked the teacher, that would have been bad enough, but to foster the help of three others was a total cowedly act.

The sentence for this crime committed by suspected terrorists was,

Hussain and Hussein were given an indeterminate sentence but told they would serve a minimum of five years.

Alam was told he would remain in a Young Offenders’ Institute for at least five years, before being released on a five-year licence.

Rashid was told he would be eligible for release after four years, when he too would be subjected to a five year licence.

A fifth man, Badruzzuha Uddin, 24, a mechanic who admitted helping the thugs by hiding blood-stained clothing, was jailed for two years.

Can one imagine if the it had been four white Christians who had attacked a Muslim teacher? It would have been described as "a cowedly religious, racist attack, along with attempted murder."

Not just "grievous bodily harm with intent", as in their case.

[andy-hughes]

In spite of your attempts to perceive a difference in approach to these men because they are Muslims, and appear in your view to have been more lieniently labeled, I would argue that the description would have been the same, no matter who had committed the offence.

'Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent' is a legal term, defined, and applied in this situation based on the circumstances.

The religion of the perpetrators is of no relavence what ever.

You appear to be trying to put forward the view that Muslims receive preferential treatment in law as against that which would hypotheitcally be meted out to Christian offenders in the same situation.

I suggest that this is untrue, and is slanted with a view to underlining your oft-held suspicion of Muslim people in this country

[Ankou]

actually no. four white men beat and murdered a muslim man in huddersfield about 4 years back. they got 17 years.

[anotheoldgit]

http://tinyurl.com/3p3ajce

Yet another case of lenient sentences metered out to some other Muslim killers.

It is an old case I know but to Gavin Hopley's parents it will be etched on their minds forever, of how lenient their son's killers sentences were..

[The-HouseHusband]

Ankou the four whit men committed murder which normally carries a life sentance so they got off lightly!!

AOG- they have been sentenced in accordance with the laws of the United Kingdom, although it is glorified by "The Daily Mail(white extremists) the teacher is back at work and showing in the best way possible that he is made of better stuff than any of his attackers whatever race/colour/gender they may be.

Andy - it would appear that AOG is doing his usual trying to stir up patriotism without looking at all the facts. Totally agree with what you say.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - do you ever stop to consider that the law operates outside racial and religious boundaries and that people are tried and convicted or not, based on the evidence presented in court, which does not include the ethnicity and / or religion of the suspect(s)?

Or are those just the cases that attract your attention - as has been considered many times previously on this site?

[Ankou]

"based on the evidence presented in court, which does not include the ethnicity and / or religion of the suspect(s)? "

it does if it was racially motivated, like my example of the poor muslim guy beaten to death by four white christians (as aog puts it).

[Gromit]

Shocking case. They deserve the sentences, and I do not believe they have been treated leniently. Why would they?

I must pick up on this

// following suspicions of a terrorist plot, the security services had planted a bug in their car that recorded them //

Sounds suspiciously illegal. Unless they can do anything under the new Terror Laws.

[ludwig]

I believe that if an assault is racially motivated it carries heavier penalties that a 'normal' assault - (I'm not sure why it's nicer to attack someone at random rather than for a specific reason, but that's another question).

So, if one assault was treated as racially motivated, and the other not, that would be relevant, and aog would be making a fair point.

[dave50]

Good point ludwig, why are racially motivated attacks treated more severely? An attack is an attack whatever the motive.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

I beg to differ, the law normally takes a very serious view of cases that contain an element of religion (incitement to religious hatred) maximum sentence 7 years.

It also takes a serious view of racial hatred, both of these could be woven into this case, plus the threat to kill, ie 'This is the dog we want to hit, or strike, or kill'.

I am sorry Andy but I thought your last paragraph to be totally unnecessary, unless of course you are reverting to previous times, when you did not allow me to voice an opinion, without the need for you to take the chance to somehow belittle me?

[andy-hughes]

If you perceived my last pararaph as an attempt to belittle you, then please accept my apologies, that was not my intention.

However, I believe the point i raised in my last paragraph is a valid one, and it is still offered, with no attempt to offer any personal slight at all.

I do not think that there has ever been a time when I ever 'disallowed' your right to express an opinion without an attempt to belittle you.

I do recall a time when we crossed swords a little too violently, and some unpleasantnesses were exchanged, and I stress, they were exchanged - but that is certainly behind us now, and I have no desire to return to those regrettable circumstances.

My opinions and points are offered, as always, in the spirit of debate and exchange - I do not intend any personal insult at all, and again, my apologies if i have inadvertently caused you any personal distrsss.

[R1Geezer]

where's Mladic when you need him?

[anotheoldgit]

Not particularly personal distress Andy, only disappointment in you.

I cannot see how you can apologise for that paragraph and then say it was not your intention to belittle me, and then once again repeat the insinuation.

/// However, I believe the point i raised in my last paragraph is a valid one, and it is still offered, with no attempt to offer any personal slight at all. ///

Just read that offending paragraph again,

/// Or are those just the cases that attract your attention - as has been considered many times previously on this site? ///

It was just unnecessary, and did not add anything to your argument, except to get over a belittling insinuation against me.

May I also add that these are not the only cases that attract my attention as well you know it.

[Ankou]

oh give over. zzzz. get back to the question and stop playing the vicitim.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - I have apologised if I inadvertenly caused you offence, which I would not wish to do.

If you feel 'disappointed' with me, then so be it - I can live with that.

If you still feel I have belittled you, then there is nothing more to say on the issue from my point of view.

In conclusion, this may not be the only issue which draws your attention, but it is fair to say that issues regarding imigrants in general, and Muslims in particular, certainly draw your attention more than anyone else on AB, as I am sure you would agree.

[Zeuhl]

Andy

Shame on you.

There is absolutely no need to belittle AOG.
.

[andy-hughes]

LOL!