*can* be extradited to a foreign barbarian country that executes people, just for the "crime" of having written a website that allowed people to find copyrighted content. (Note: he didn't supply any such content himself...) And on the other hand we've got this man from Jordan who can't be sent *back* to Jordan, because despite being judged a clear and present security threat to OUR country, despite being a well-known Islamist extremist and endorser of terrorist acts, apparently there's a risk that in HIS country the justice system isn't all it might be. and The extradition system in this country is SERIOUSLY screwed up. Richard O'Dwyer should get a slap on the wrist and maybe a nominal fine for messing about, IF he's broken any English laws and is found guilty in an English court. If not, it's nobody else's business. Abu Qatada I've read elsewhere that the UK Government would not be penalised by the European Court of Human Rights if he were just sent to Jordan. There would just be a lot of tut-tutting and a lot of commotion amongst the "self-appointed self-righteous". My view is, if the government are sure of their position, then they should send him back to Jordan and state their reasoning within the media. It's not as if Jordan is deemed a "terrorist state". Abu Qatada The fine would probably be a lot less than the savings to be had in keeping Abu Qatada here. In terms of moral authority I suspect that