Are the Brits Wishy-Washy on Terrorism?

The author of the attached article starts off by saying that the British are being wishy-washy in the war on terror. First they're tough on Muslim extremists, then they go all soft and fuzzy.

But the facts, even as laid out in his own article, don't support that thesis. First, the British tried some Muslim extremists and decided to kick them out of the country. Then the European Court of Human Rights accepts and appeal from the Muslims. So, the first thing to say is that the British don't control the European Court of Human Rights, which isn't even in Britain, and it isn't a sign of British weakness that the defendants appealed their sentence to a higher court. After all, is the State of Texas any less bloodthirsty because of its death row prisoners pursue appeals through the Federal courts?

The second thing to say is that there is process and there is outcome. One of the problems with the Bush/Cheney attitude toward terrorism was that they didn't trust any process they could not control. Since you can't have a fair trial and guarantee the outcome, the past administration decided to do without trials. That isn't a sign of strength; it's a sign of unreasoning fear of legal process.

The author of this article seems to have confused British compliance with sort of due process that has made Britain worth fighting for, with some sort of weak-kneed pandering to the extremists.