The UK can't kick out Qatada

AA grumpy · Post by **AA grumpy** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:08 pm

hello lord grumpy here again and iv,e been scouring the bowels of the media world to find another bit of p.c pottiness.

and here we are with two offerings tonight so sit down and drink your cocoa and relax with grumps.

one sugar or two ?

HATE preacher Abu Qatada could soon be freed — after winning a legal battle

against deportation.

The fanatic — Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe — is wanted by Jordan for terrorist bomb plots.

But the Appeal Court yesterday blocked his extradition for fear his trial may use evidence obtained under torture.

In a separate ruling, the same judges forced Britain to free 12 Libyan terror suspects linked to al-Qaeda.

They warned they could face ill-treatment, jail without trial or death if sent back home.

The rulings are a big blow to the Government’s campaign to kick out terror suspects.

It has introduced a policy of seeking “memoranda of understanding with foreign countries to deport terror suspects.

The so-called MOUs are designed to give reassurance that countries with poor human rights records will not torture or ill-treat anyone returned to them.

Libya and Jordan have both signed up — but the court ruling undermines these agreements.

Jordanian Qatada, 45, was held in 2001, seven years after arriving in Britain on a false passport as an asylum seeker — but he was freed.

He had £170,000 cash on him. Months later, Qatada was arrested in an armed raid in South East London.

Tapes of his sermons were found in a Hamburg flat used by some of those in the 9/11 plot.

The judges said the decision to deport him mis-applied the law over evidence obtained by torture.

But Home Office Minister Tony McNulty vowed to appeal the ruling, keeping Qatada behind bars.

In the other judgment, two unnamed Libyan suspects won their appeal against deportation, leading the Home Office to drop proceedings against another ten.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said: “The Government should establish a dedicated UK border police to prevent foreign terror suspects from entering the country in the first place.

AAG

thank god theres some one with sense like tony mc nulty in keeping this terrorist loony behind bars .

hopefully if they can drag the appeal out he could remain locked up for a few more years.

what planet are these appeal court judges on ?

setting this terrorist free is the worst kind of thing they can do.

abu qatada is a severe threat to british security but they wont see that untill this scumbag either blows something or himself up and maims or kills innocent people then the powers that be will wring their hands and say well all this could have been avoided.

the judges say it is a breach of his human rights do they think of the human rights

of all the innocent people when they plant a bomb on a bus train plane or tube ?

not a chance just jhad .

the evidence against qatada was overwhelming with sermons found in the flat of 9/11 BOMBERS

we could always deport him to the states as a co conspiritor of the 9/11 plot

and let the americans execute him for us .

AAG

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:41 pm

Yes, a spectacular legal own goal I am afraid, though I sincerely doubt this individual will be released any time soon. Though I respect the independence of British judges to make decisions like this, sometimes you do have to wonder how they weigh up the balance of arguments and rights to come to such self-defeating conclusions, but the law is the law, and you have to work within it, if there are glaring problems in the law, then is should be changed, thats how the system works.

I also think that Jester's point is a valid one in general, in that trying to bargain or treat with people whose aims (based on some hallucenogenic religious "vision") include the takeover of your society, the destruction of you civilization, and the totalitarian-religious rule of the planet through threat of extreme violence is, shall we say, naive in the extreme.

If you believe that bargaining with Al Queda is going to work I would put it to you that your bargaining strategy is based on the misapprehension that the people you think you are bargaining with share your hand-wringing abhorence of violence, unshakable belief that compromise is always the best policy (no matter who you are dealing with), and a failure to understand that the fact that they quite clearly state that they "intend to destroy you and everything you stand for in the name of Allah" is not a counter bargaining position to your own, it isn't, they mean it. They have no interest in bargaining with anyone, they are assured of their own righteousness, bargaining and talk of their version of "peace" is used a distraction to demoralize, divide, and confuse their enemies.

In the same way that although Hitler quite clearly stated in Mein Kampf exactly what he intended to do, those who had to deal with him politically in Germany and Europe in the 1930s (until War became inevitable) resolutely decided to ignore that uncomfortable fact, and believed instead that he didn't really mean it, as the consequences of it being true were so unpleasant, and also because (as was noted by Cesear 2,000 years ago) men believe what is most pleasing for them to believe. Hitler of course soon recognized their essential cravenness and weakness and exploited it to the full.

In earlier times, people such as this subversive hate-mongering scumbag who has lived in London for years off British largesse (taxpayers money of course) while calling for the murder of British citizens and the Islamicization of British society, and inspiring his minions to do so would have been hanged or shot out of hand with little comment and few tears, but you are more civilized now of course.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:32 pm

Jester;833546 wrote: I think the mindset there is that you are supposed to negotiate with them, treat them kindly giving them special treatment and ask them politely not to commit anymore terror acts. If I understand what Ive been told here from Britians finest correctly, all we have to do to get them to stop is just leave them alone, forgive them and they will suddenly just be nice, apparently. It sounds confusing to me, but what do I know, I am just a warmongering american.

Hardly a valid representation of my position so I'll assume it's one of these comic posts Spot has so much difficulty with.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:58 pm

Jester;839324 wrote: I thought it fit you rather well, nearly a direct quote... :wah:

Hardly, negotiation does not imply "treat them kindly giving them special treatment and ask them politely not to commit anymore terror acts." - it means talking to them and seeking points of agreement whilst demanding as much movement from them as you give - we won't invade your country if you don't bomb ours would be a good starting point.

The bit I do object to is :-

"all we have to do to get them to stop is just leave them alone, forgive them and they will suddenly just be nice"

I do not believe that I have ever hinted at that - it's total misrepresentation. What I have said is that by invading their country you have multiplied the problem to many times its original size and that if the invasion of Iraq had not happened we would not have half the problems we do now but you are totally inverting that position.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:12 pm

I note the following as relevant to the matter:On the question of why the Palestinian-born Jordanian had never been prosecuted in the UK, Lib Dem peer Lord Macdonald - director of public prosecutions from 2003 to 2008 - told BBC News he had never been shown any evidence to support a criminal prosecution.

BBC News - Abu Qatada release: Cameron "fed up"

The red-top tabloids have far too much power in this country. I'd happily see that counterbalanced by a genuine gesture of respect toward Abu Qatada as an apology for the way he's been vilified for the sake of a few more groats in the pockets of headline-screaming news barons. Perhaps Abu Qatada could be elected an MP at the next bye-election, that'd do it.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:34 pm

It can be solved quite quickly.... Kick him out... what's the EU going to do ? Put Britain In prison ? At worst we'll get fined... a small price to pay.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:42 pm

oscar;1410352 wrote: It can be solved quite quickly.... Kick him out... what's the EU going to do ? Put Britain In prison ? At worst we'll get fined... a small price to pay.

I can't imagine why you'd want to, other than blind ignorant unreasoning hatred.

Potentially Abu Qatada is an asset to the United Kingdom if he were only engaged in discussion instead of vilified.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:01 pm

Týr;1410353 wrote: I can't imagine why you'd want to, other than blind ignorant unreasoning hatred.

Potentially Abu Qatada is an asset to the United Kingdom if he were only engaged in discussion instead of vilified. If you can only resort to Insults then refrain from quoting me.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:18 pm

oscar;1410354 wrote: If you can only resort to Insults then refrain from quoting me.

I left out unprincipled.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:02 pm

TÃ½r;1410355 wrote: I left out unprincipled. Tell you what, I'll engage your folly.

So you think he should be open to discussion? And you think MI5 and police haven't tried to do that while he In custody ? Derrrrrr

Why do you think he chooses the UK In which to reside... One reason, we don't use torture to extract Information.

The reason some countries do use torture on suspected or known terrorists Is because Al-Qaeda Is notoriously subjected to a code of silence among their agents.... In a nutshell, they don't talk.... what on earth makes you think they do? What on earth makes you think he's suddenly going to tell the British everything he knows? If you think that then you have an unbelievable Ignorance of how Al-Qaeda operates.

It Is the mere fact that he won't help the UK by talking that he should be kicked out. We are spending £5,000 a week on security for him when pensioners can't afford heating.

Your Ignorance of the entire matter Is amazing.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:21 pm

I note the following as relevant to the matter:On the question of why the Palestinian-born Jordanian had never been prosecuted in the UK, Lib Dem peer Lord Macdonald - director of public prosecutions from 2003 to 2008 - told BBC News he had never been shown any evidence to support a criminal prosecution.

BBC News - Abu Qatada release: Cameron "fed up"

And he's spent about ten years in a UK maximum security prison without trial?

It's shameful. Hating him is shameful. Calling for extra-judicial procedures in exchange for a fine is shameful.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:22 pm

Bryn Mawr;839310 wrote: Hardly a valid representation of my position so I'll assume it's one of these comic posts Spot has so much difficulty with.
Who is this person "Spot"?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:26 pm

oscar;1410352 wrote: It can be solved quite quickly.... Kick him out... what's the EU going to do ? Put Britain In prison ? At worst we'll get fined... a small price to pay.

The EU can direct the UK's internal politics? You sure this EU isn't going too far? An economic alliance is a smart thing, but this? Just asking (because I don't know).

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:28 pm

Týr;1410360 wrote: I note the following as relevant to the matter:On the question of why the Palestinian-born Jordanian had never been prosecuted in the UK, Lib Dem peer Lord Macdonald - director of public prosecutions from 2003 to 2008 - told BBC News he had never been shown any evidence to support a criminal prosecution.

BBC News - Abu Qatada release: Cameron "fed up"

And he's spent about ten years in a UK maximum security prison without trial?

It's shameful. Hating him is shameful. Calling for extra-judicial procedures in exchange for a fine is shameful. Who says anyone has to hate him ?

Our Government has stated he Is a threat to National security.... that's nothing to do with hating someone... It's a responsible Government protecting It's citizens.

It matters not weather he's had a trial here and that means nothing... he's wanted by Jordan to stand trial, of course he hasn't had a trial here, he wasn't wanted on terrorism charges here, what made you think he was ??We should hand him over to Jordan to stand trial. He has no right to protection by the British for crimes he may have committed In other countries.

Putting It down to hating the man Is Infantile and a pretty lame excuse.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:29 pm

AnneBoleyn;1410362 wrote: The EU can direct the UK's internal politics? You sure this EU isn't going too far? An economic alliance is a smart thing, but this? Just asking (because I don't know).

Actually It was a British Judge In a British court who decided he should stay, not the EU

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:33 pm

oscar;1410364 wrote: Actually It was a British Judge In a British court who decided he should stay, not the EU
Then why did you say "what's the EU going to do? Put Britain in prison"?

?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:38 pm

AnneBoleyn;1410366 wrote: Then why did you say "what's the EU going to do? Put Britain in prison"?

?

Because they can fine us for breaking the law and In this case If the Government Ignored the order for him to stay and put him on a plane, then the Government would be breaking the law,

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:55 pm

oscar;1410367 wrote: Because they can fine us for breaking the law and In this case If the Government Ignored the order for him to stay and put him on a plane, then the Government would be breaking the law,
Sorry to ask another question oscar. Thanks for the information. Soooooooooo, if the British Gov't ignores a British Court Order then you can be fined by the EU?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:02 pm

AnneBoleyn;1410368 wrote: Sorry to ask another question oscar. Thanks for the information. Soooooooooo, if the British Gov't ignores a British Court Order then you can be fined by the EU?

Yes because we are part of the EU and the EU rules against any EU country extraditing anyone to stand trial In a country that has or does use torture. The EU ruled that because Jordan has used torture to gain Information to put Abu Qatada on trial, It Is unethical. This Is why the British Judge ruled he must stay In Britain because Jordan can not gauruntee a re-trial where Info gained under torture could be used.

To put him straight on a plane would mean the government breaking the law and EU regulations to not send anyone to stand trial In a country that has used torture.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:06 pm

Incidently, Jordan has changed it's constitution forbidding the use of torture and evidence gained by torture being admissable should he ever get to stand trial there.

Apparently Jordans word is just not good enough for the EU.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:07 pm

Thank you again. Very informative. It appears that the EU has more influence over member nations than the USofA does over it's individual states. Radical.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:12 pm

oscar;1410363 wrote: Putting It down to hating the man Is Infantile and a pretty lame excuse.
You see no venom in the phrase "Kick him out", evidently.

I expect you're just used to it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:25 pm

Týr;1410373 wrote: You see no venom in the phrase "Kick him out", evidently.

I expect you're just used to it.

Rather than just bait a particular poster, could you not bring your reasons for holding such bait making comments ?

That would educate the rest of us too.......rather than vex.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:28 pm

Týr;1410373 wrote: You see no venom in the phrase "Kick him out", evidently.

I expect you're just used to it.

He has no Inherent right to be In this country. He Is not here legally

It is important to remember two things here. The first is that Abu Qatada has not been charged in this country, presumably because prosecutors have not got a strong enough case against him. The second, nevertheless, is that he had no business here in the first place. He is a foreigner who got into the UK on a forged passport. Ministers in successive governments are therefore entitled to try to deport him, partly because he has serious charges to answer in Jordan and partly because foreign jihadists whose activities may threaten the state have no inherent right to remain here in all circumstances, come what may.

Abu Qatada: spiral of failure | Editorial | Comment is free | The Guardian

Don't ever assume you know me or what I'm used to or I may be tempted to assume you are Ignorant In the extreme.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:30 pm

Don't let the lad bait you oscar. I think you have a valid point of view.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:42 pm

AnneBoleyn;1410376 wrote: Don't let the lad bait you oscar. I think you have a valid point of view. I couldn't give a toss what he thinks... I know he's just baiting and actually has offered no valid debate to the thread....

Abu Qutada has been here for 9 years on a forged passport... he has no right to be here at all nor does he have any right to British protection.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:50 pm

Bruv;1410374 wrote: Rather than just bait a particular poster, could you not bring your reasons for holding such bait making comments ?Hang on a bit. I raised this thread from history to add a new reported fact and make a comment on it today and oscar had never been near the thread. She was in here within minutes like a cyclist on steroids slagging at what I'd posted, and you're telling me I'm baiting her? Would you care to explain how you get this particular stick backward?

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:52 pm

oscar;1410375 wrote: Don't ever assume you know me or what I'm used to or I may be tempted to assume you are Ignorant In the extreme.
Assume whatever you like, madam. Your assumptions, along with yourself, are a subject of justified contempt.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:53 pm

Bruv;1410371 wrote: Incidently, Jordan has changed it's constitution forbidding the use of torture and evidence gained by torture being admissable should he ever get to stand trial there.

Apparently Jordans word is just not good enough for the EU. What they are saying Is that If there has to be a re-trial because either side has to appeal the Initial verdict, Jordan may change the constitution back to permitting the use of Info gained under torture to secure a conviction.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:54 pm

Týr;1410378 wrote: Hang on a bit. I raised this thread from history to make a comment in it today and oscar had never been near it. She was in here within minutes like a cyclist on steroids slagging at what I'd posted, and you're telling me I'm baiting her? Would you care to explain how you get this particular stick backward? I entered the thread because today's newspapers are full of the latest development and ruling.

The exact reason you re-opened the thread... because of todays developments.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:27 pm

oscar;1410382 wrote: I entered the thread because today's newspapers are full of the latest development and ruling.

The exact reason you re-opened the thread... because of todays developments.It strikes me the only reason you posted in this thread instead of carrying on in Bryn's where you were discussing it previously is that your post here is the complete opposite of what you wrote four weeks ago in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... ost1408311

I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:45 pm

Týr;1410385 wrote: It strikes me the only reason you posted in this thread instead of carrying on in Bryn's where you were discussing it previously is that your post here is the complete opposite of what you wrote four weeks ago in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... ost1408311

I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account. barge In ??? For Gods sake you are being ridiculous.

First of all... when I posted In this thread, I was on the verge of posting a new thread myself because of the recent developments. I held off because I thought Andy may be posting one later tonight.

This thread Is not yours. It Is Andy's... I did not quote you when I ' barged In ' I wrote a seperate post which was In fact a follow on from the OP that Andy wrote which by the way was at a time when I was not posting here.

Today on line, there were 4 or 5 members, two of them, you and me. There were also no new threads... It is perfectly reasonable that i would post in a thread by someone else, on a day when there has been developments In the case and the newspapers are full of It.

You however, have trolled me from post to post In threads over the past few days such as Lon's ' Is this true' thread where you constantly quoted me.of which I have Ignored and you quoted me In this thread and continued baiting and baiting even after I directly asked you to refrain from quoting me.

Now you seriously want anyone here to believe I am bullying you ??? Other members here can see your baiting. You have been told by the site owner to stop the personal Insults yet you continue.

Your only beef here Is that I had an oppossing view to yours In a thread about my country which Is current news.

If you really do believe It is me bullying you then do as you have been asked. Stop quoting me and stop personal Insults .... In fact, put me on Ignore,because you look ridiculous.

I am not bickering with you any further or taking your ridiculous bait.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:57 pm

Anyway back to topic.

I'm very pleased to hear the Home Secretary Is to appeal the ruling in tonights news.

Abu Qatada: home secretary faces long battle to overturn deportation ruling | World news | The Guardian

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:02 pm

Good god, just don't send him this way!

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:26 am

Týr;1410378 wrote: Hang on a bit. I raised this thread from history to add a new reported fact and make a comment on it today and oscar had never been near the thread. She was in here within minutes like a cyclist on steroids slagging at what I'd posted, and you're telling me I'm baiting her? Would you care to explain how you get this particular stick backward?

Týr;1410379 wrote: Assume whatever you like, madam. Your assumptions, along with yourself, are a subject of justified contempt.

Still no input about the Topic in question.

Hoisted on your own petard, given enough rope, couldn't make it up, you wouldn't let it lie......................all phrases that spring to mind.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:56 am

flopstock;1410398 wrote: Good god, just don't send him this way! Don't worry, he's not wanted In the USA although I'm sure they'd love to get their hands on him.

For 9 years our finest MI5 Intelligence , police and our finest anti-terrorist officers have been trying to get him talk. If he did talk and was assisting the UK In anti-terrorism, then Yes, I'd accept keeping him here but he's keep up a wall of silence for 9 years and he's not going to start talking now.

If my Prime Minister and Home Secretary state that he Is a major threat to National Security, then rightly, I want him out of my country as most Uk people do. I'm damn sure my PM and HS know a hell of a lot more as to why he Is a danger to the UK than they'll ever let on to the media but It does warrant spending £5 million a year to monitor his activities while our children go short of books In our schools.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:18 pm

So, here In the UK, homes are being repossessed, schools don't have enough books, our prisons are over-crowded, we have pensioners who can't pay their heating bills, young couples waiting 6 years for a council house and benefits have been cut, but hey !!! Abu Qatada who Is here Illegally after getting Into the UK on a false passport gets a new free house and lives the rest of his days on state benefit paid for by the tax payer.

Hate preacher Abu Qatada will get a new home at the taxpayers' expense | Mail Online

Hatred ??? No, It's called principles.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:29 pm

I hope he is actively looking for work. I wouldn't want to see his benefits cut

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:50 pm

Týr to oscar:

"I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account."

Cyber-bullying. Good grief. I'm tempted to say 'grow a pair' but that might be rude, so instead I'll ask "Man? Or mouse?"

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:04 pm

AnneBoleyn;1410512 wrote: Týr to oscar:

"I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account."

Cyber-bullying. Good grief. I'm tempted to say 'grow a pair' but that might be rude, so instead I'll ask "Man? Or mouse?" When Andy originally posted the thread on this subject, I was not here to post.

When Tyr resurrected Andy's thread, It was due to developments in the case that was breaking news and all over our newspapers.

I did not quote Tyr. I wrote a seperate post In relation to Andy's OP. Tyr has mistaken my seperate post as a direct attack on his post. Just because someone's post happens to be the one after yours, It does not go without saying that they are responding to you.

I am the one member here that consistently posts on all of Andy's threads,

I have tried to repeatedly get this thread back on track because I know Andy and I know he'll be furious that his thread has been used to just personally attack someone.

Back to topic please.

Post by **Peter Lake** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:01 am

AnneBoleyn;1410512 wrote: Týr to oscar:

"I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account."

Cyber-bullying. Good grief. I'm tempted to say 'grow a pair' but that might be rude, so instead I'll ask "Man? Or mouse?" It's a tired old formula Anne weather it's Tyr or Spot. Troll Oscar around threads quoting her at every turn, bait her and insult her in the hope she'll have enough finally and over-step the mark. Then her post gets reported with the call to have her banned. That is bullying and in the process trash another posters thread. Different user name, same old practice.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:16 am

AnneBoleyn;1410512 wrote: Týr to oscar:

"I reckon your barging in to counter what I wrote today is no different to the cyber-bullying I had from you on my previous account."

Cyber-bullying. Good grief. I'm tempted to say 'grow a pair' but that might be rude, so instead I'll ask "Man? Or mouse?"

Grow a pair? Hell grow a vagina, they seem to be able to take quite a pounding without ill effect.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:57 pm

YZGI;1410584 wrote: Grow a pair? Hell grow a vagina, they seem to be able to take quite a pounding without ill effect.
:yh_rotflBet you wish you could!:yh_rotfl

Post by **Peter Lake** » Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:18 am

Wise words.

Attached files

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:48 pm

Nope won't let me load

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:14 pm

oscar;1410664 wrote: Nope won't let me load

Is someone stopping you from putting the magazine in your gun ?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:18 pm

Snowfire;1410667 wrote: Is someone stopping you from putting the magazine in your gun ? No... a friend of mine has just posted a video on what's happening outside Qatader's house tonight that he's just filmed on his phone an hour ago.... I can't load It... shame, It's an eye opener.