US terrorist lovers stall treaty

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Yet again the terrorist loving element in the US Senate stall the ratification of the UK-US extradition treaty, while UK has honoured the terms of the treaty for at least three years the Senate is now bogged down in talks with Irish-American lobby groups. Apparently many of these lobby groups are more than a little worried about the scope of the treaty and feel that raising money for terrorists could be reason enough for many of them to end up in Belmarsh via Lear Jet exec class travel. We in the UK want a special relationship that does not resemble that between Ms Lewinsky and your former Mr President: unequal, disreputable, with the junior partner always on their knees.

[Happy]

I guess the British should have helped out a bit back in 1847.

[LaoSexMachine]

I bet Hilary is behind it.

[Renal]

At the end of the day, you can't have a bilateral treaty that's observed by only one side.

As to the legality of it, I'm quite concerned that the requirement for evidence is nil which sounds fundamentally unsound. Now before I'm branded a peacenik, liberal hippy or whatever the vogue term is - I would have no problem with a law that applies fairly to the citizens of both countries and maintains the right of the accused to defend themselves.

[ttunavy]

Yet again the terrorist loving element in the US Senate stall the ratification of the UK-US extradition treaty, while UK has honoured the terms of the treaty for at least three years the Senate is now bogged down in talks with Irish-American lobby groups. Apparently many of these lobby groups are more than a little worried about the scope of the treaty and feel that raising money for terrorists could be reason enough for many of them to end up in Belmarsh via Lear Jet exec class travel. We in the UK want a special relationship that does not resemble that between Ms Lewinsky and your former Mr President: unequal, disreputable, with the junior partner always on their knees.

more details please.