Be a terrorist, it pays...

Dolph said:
It's disguting for anyone on benefits to be getting that much, that's a much better income and house than many hard working people can afford.
Click to expand...

Yes I work my ******* off for what is peanuts compared to him, no chance me affording a £800,000 house anytime soon, its beggars beliefs wonders why I work, when it seems you can easily claim :confused: :(
 
That's how it works, it's a mutual agreement - he's the state's pet. They get to shout "terrorism terrorism terrorism" and he gets a free home and welfare payments.

Meanwhile the rest of us get screwed over as usual.
 
Last edited:
"He is also banned from using any communications equipment apart from a landline telephone, which is almost certainly bugged by the security services."

"He cannot use a computer and he is banned from having any contact, directly or indirectly, with a list of terrorists including Bin Laden."

Well that's some stupid planning. :p

And also - What major terrorist is going to answer the phone and say "Bin Laden speaking, may I ask who is calling?"
 
terrorism etc aside, the benefit system is bonkers, while i feel there should be some help to make sure poor children dont suffer, it shouldn't gain profit.

after 2 kids, if you cantafford em they goto the kebab shop.
 
bigredshark said:
No! Read what it says. He is not allowed to have direct or indirect contact with a list of terrorists including Bin Laden, so if he did he'd be back in jail. There is no reference to the other person being a terrorist, and all he's doing is walking down the street with someone who's using a mobile phone. Which isn't, surprisingly, against the law.
Click to expand...

admitedly i just re-read it and i did read the "once described as osama bin ladens right hand man in europe" bit wrong, which led me to believe the other guy was a terrorist
 
Tute said:
Is there any chance the Daily Mail bashers are going to construct a proper and reasonable argument?
Click to expand...

My argument would be that the average jumped up reader is going to miss the fact that these are figures for his entire family, mostly claimed by his wife, and not by this psychotic terrorist. He doesn't get £50k a year for sitting on his arse:



The Times said:
He gets about £1,000 a month in welfare benefits.
Click to expand...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/minette_marrin/article3735984.ece

The Telegraph said:
– where he will receive around £1,000 per month in state benefits –
Click to expand...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2149819/Abu-Qatada-release-will-be-appealed.html


And here we can see that it is not him that is getting the rest of the money to make it up to £50K, but his wife, for stuff that any average council house denizen can expect like child allowance, housing benefit etc...

The Sunday Mirror said:
Hate preacher Abu Qatada has won £150 a week in benefits because a bad back makes him unfit for work. ... The Sunday Mirror can also reveal that while he has been behind bars on terror convictions his wife has been claiming £45,000 a year in child benefit, income support, housing benefit and council tax credit
Click to expand...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sunday-mirr...tada-wins-150-a-week-benefits-98487-20617373/

The Mail on Sunday said:
The fanatical cleric, said to be Osama Bin Laden’s ambassador in Europe, will get £150 a week of taxpayer’s cash after being released from jail last week. ... His wife has been claiming £45,000 a year in child benefit, income support, housing benefit and council tax credit for the past four years.
Click to expand...
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/...8-000-incapacity-benefits-year--bad-back.html
 
Last edited:
This is quite old news, maybe a month so I forget all the details. He's not being sent back "where he came from" because to do so would mean his certain death correct? So instead we are keeping him here, however, we are fairly certain he is guilty and right now, he's not "allowed" to have contact with other suspected/known terrorists but frankly theres nothing at all to stop him dissappearing with someone and going on to commit more acts. Terrorists aren't logical, thats the problem, it seems ridiculous to pass up essentially a fairly easy life with quite a lot of freedom and his kids being supported but blowing yourself up isn't logical.

I don't want money being given to this guy, there really would be almost no one in this country who would want their tax money going to him and while very few really do actually want him to die, most wouldn't cry over his death if he was sent back to face charges where he really was most likely guilty.

Its just a joke, but the bigger joke is, how on earth was he allowed into the country in the first place?

When we have criminals that flee, if they get to a country that will send them back we still go after them. But we won't do the same, purely because that country supports the death penalty. We would however extradite people would were guilty of a crime in the USA and managed to get over here.

While I don't have a particular personal gripe with this guy, there really does have to be a line with who we help and why. I think paying for this guy to live is ridiculous and if he didn't want to face death penalty's he shouldn't be a damn terrorist.


Its also worth pointing out that £150 a week is more than I believe he should get, and I don't believe we should support his family either. He's also claiming money for having a bad back but was shown pictured carrying a whole bunch of bags back from the shop supposedly a decent walk away, meaning he can walk, can carry stuff, isn't completely housebound and didn't look in any pain at all. So why can't he do some office work, or any other job. He's not only getting money the majority of the country doesn't think he should have any right to at all, nor should a terrorist be allowed to preach hate and bring his family here, but he's literally scamming the government for more money claiming not to be able to work when he seems perfectly able to. its a joke.
 
who would employ him though if he could work, im not sure any employer would want to have a known terrorist/ or someone affiliaed with terrorism, working for them,
 
MattandJet said:
who would employ him though if he could work, im not sure any employer would want to have a known terrorist/ or someone affiliaed with terrorism, working for them,
Click to expand...

I dunno I reckon Macdonald's would :D

Make him wear a hair net over his beard :p
 
Usual Daily Mail quality journalism. "has claimed incapacity benefit". When? 1994?

I like the way he's banned from contacting Osama bin Laden. They should positively encourage it if they've got him bugged!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom