Instead of being called the Attorney General would it be more accurate to describe Lord Hermer as the terrorist’s lawyer?
I pose the question as it has been disclosed over the last 48 hours that before his appointment as Attorney General he represented a terrorist whom was just days away from carrying out a bombing attack in Manchester.
How can it be right that a man who has made his money out of people who want to kill us, can act in our best interests as our legal guardian in government?
As a prominent KC he surely would have been so busy he could pick and choose who he acted for.
Senior Labour figures are turning against Attorney General Lord Hermer GETTYThe latest scandal to be laid at the door of Lord Hermer concerns a charmer called Abid Naseer, the ringleader of an Al-Qaeda cell based in the North.
Among his crimes Nasser planned to detonate a car bomb outside Manchester’s Arndale Centre and then kill hundreds of Easter shoppers by placing suicide bombers at the exits.
Naseer, a Pakistani student, attempted to get bail and hired Hermer. This is what he said: "The case against him is palpably weak and inherently flawed. It amounts to nothing."
Hermer’s view was seriously wrong. In a later judgment, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission said Naseer was "an Al-Qaeda operative who posed and still poses a serious threat to the national security of the UK."
Lord Hermer
PATo be fair, Hermer only appeared in one hearing on behalf of Naseer. But two years later the United States sought his extradition as part of a wider Al-Qaeda conspiracy involving, plans for an attack on the New York subway, an attack in Norway and the one in Manchester.
He is currently serving 40 years in a maximum security prison. Hermer should reflect on that.
LATEST OPINION MEMBERSHIP:
Robert Jenrick called for an investigation into Starmer’s ‘murky’ Attorney General after Lord Hermer refuses to declare new legal earnings
Getty
The reason Hermer has a job in government because he’s Starmer’s long-time human rights pal. It was a shocking appointment and Starmer would have known it.
A Labour source has said that everyone is entitled to legal representation and Hermer has represented people whose views he wholeheartedly and vehemently disagrees with.
That may be the case, and I’m not suggesting Hermer’s views align with those he once represented. But I still don’t want somebody who would act for terrorists in my government. I suspect you don’t either.
Kick him out. Now.
