UK bans critics of Islam from entering

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

[Leftbehind]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

[Lord Halifax]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

As long as you are in the EU you shouldn't ban EU citizens from entering due to their political beliefs. You can do that after Brexit but until then an Austrian citizen should have the same rights as a British, "fascist" or not.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I wonder whether the leftists in this thread would be as delighted with shutting down free speech if Trump would do it to some of the left-wing media in the U.S. that are more radical than any of the people banned from the UK.

That's not even close to,what happened here. The equivalent would be the US denying some tankie idiot or Maduro supporter entry. Is have no problem with that.

[Famous Mortimer]

You import millions of Muslim people and suddenly, without any legislation needing to be passed, criticism of Islam becomes illegal. It works exactly like the "Islamaphobes" and "bigots" said it would. I doubt this will be the last way UK society is irrevocably altered by immigration. Go ahead a celebrate blasphemy laws. You just show where the left's true priorities lie.

[Famous Mortimer]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

Telling how you don't apply that same logic to Islamic extremists.

[Lord Halifax]

I wonder whether the leftists in this thread would be as delighted with shutting down free speech if Trump would do it to some of the left-wing media in the U.S. that are more radical than any of the people banned from the UK.

That's not even close to,what happened here. The equivalent would be the US denying some tankie idiot or Maduro supporter entry. Is have no problem with that.

Why not? Its a form of censorship.

[Leftbehind]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

Telling how you don't apply that same logic to Islamic extremists.

The country has banned plenty of Islamic extremists from entering, and I support that, so I dunno what you're on about.

[Leftbehind]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

As long as you are in the EU you shouldn't ban EU citizens from entering due to their political beliefs. You can do that after Brexit but until then an Austrian citizen should have the same rights as a British, "fascist" or not.

Well OK - if to abide by EU laws whilst we're still a member, but not if we don't have to.

[parochial boy]

tbh I disagree with this (as with the ban on Farakhan and non-violent Islamists as well). I think the Home Office has too much power in general. I'm also not sure why it really matters that they are foreign agitators; are they so much worse than homegrown fascists?

Homegrown fascists are our problem; we don't need to multiply that problem.

Telling how you don't apply that same logic to Islamic extremists.

The country has banned plenty of Islamic extremists from entering, and I support that, so I dunno what you're on about.

Hmm, yes, I don't necessarily support the ban - but it's funny how none of the free speech "advocates" on here are that worried about Omar Bakri or Osama Bin Laden's son being banned from the UK. Dieudonné too for that matter.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

[Helsinkian]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

This is the leaflet that Southern and Pettibone were distributing in Luton. Do you think it's "inciting racial hatred"?

[Zinneke]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

This is the leaflet that Southern and Pettibone were distributing in Luton. Do you think it's "inciting racial hatred"?

If these guys are so innocent, and are being considered a threat for political reasons rather than for public order reasons, why are prominent critics of Islam such as Douglas Murray and Maajid Nawaz given massive mediatic platforms, and they are banned?

[Statilius the Epicurean]

No, I don't. Well I think it's ill-advised and rather counter-productive for the cause of gay equality to tell people of another religion what their own god says. But Southern wasn't banned from entering the country solely on the basis of that leaflet and it's kind of disingenuous to pretend so I think.

[Famous Mortimer]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

This is the leaflet that Southern and Pettibone were distributing in Luton. Do you think it's "inciting racial hatred"?

If these guys are so innocent, and are being considered a threat for political reasons rather than for public order reasons, why are prominent critics of Islam such as Douglas Murray and Maajid Nawaz given massive mediatic platforms, and they are banned?

Remember this comment when you try to justify Murray and Nawaz being in jail 2 years from now.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

This is the leaflet that Southern and Pettibone were distributing in Luton. Do you think it's "inciting racial hatred"?

If "Allah" was replaced with "Jesus" that poster would be celebrated instead of condemned.

[Leftbehind]

If "Allah" was replaced with "Jesus" that poster would be celebrated instead of condemned.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/atheist-given-asbo-for-leaflets-mocking-jesus-1952985.html

Not that I agree with such a law.

[dead0man]

Do you have any cites for people in trouble for JUST mocking Jesus, because 2 of that guy's 3 posters he got in trouble for were making fun of Muslims.

[Zinneke]

Inciting racial hatred is a crime. Why let people into the country to commit crimes?

This is the leaflet that Southern and Pettibone were distributing in Luton. Do you think it's "inciting racial hatred"?

If these guys are so innocent, and are being considered a threat for political reasons rather than for public order reasons, why are prominent critics of Islam such as Douglas Murray and Maajid Nawaz given massive mediatic platforms, and they are banned?

Remember this comment when you try to justify Murray and Nawaz being in jail 2 years from now.

I really doubt those two will end up in jail for criticising Islam tho...

[Leftbehind]

Do you have any cites for people in trouble for JUST mocking Jesus, because 2 of that guy's 3 posters he got in trouble for were making fun of Muslims.

No - it's rarely used, because it isn't about mocking Jesus/religion - but targeting religious people specifically with intent to offend through mockery. Also there were 4 posters: two Christian and 2 Islam.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Do you have any cites for people in trouble for JUST mocking Jesus, because 2 of that guy's 3 posters he got in trouble for were making fun of Muslims.

No - it's rarely used, because it isn't about mocking Jesus/religion - but targeting religious people specifically with intent to offend through mockery. Also there were 4 posters: two Christian and 2 Islam.

So are certain Family Guy episodes banned in the UK?

[Leftbehind]

Do you have any cites for people in trouble for JUST mocking Jesus, because 2 of that guy's 3 posters he got in trouble for were making fun of Muslims.

No - it's rarely used, because it isn't about mocking Jesus/religion - but targeting religious people specifically with intent to offend through mockery. Also there were 4 posters: two Christian and 2 Islam.

So are certain Family Guy episodes banned in the UK?

A programme that is broadcast to millions indiscriminately isn't targeted at religious people. Don't misunderstand: satire can be broadcast mocking certain religions. If they don't like it they can switch channel. The law is written with harassment in mind - ie these people can't even go to places of worship/their own homes without escaping the mockery. 

[Izzyeviel]

Southern was part of the far-right mob that last year spent time in the Mediterranean trying to block rescue boats from reaching sinking boats. She is a vile wannabe fascist and she is not welcome here.

[Helsinkian]

Southern was part of the far-right mob that last year spent time in the Mediterranean trying to block rescue boats from reaching sinking boats. She is a vile wannabe fascist and she is not welcome here.

Those weren't rescue boats; they were sea taxis. Had the NGOs operating those vessels been purely about saving lives and nothing else then they would have returned the people on those boats to the nearest shore, Libya, instead of ferrying them to Italy. And the very presence of those vessels led to asylum seekers departing Libya on ill-suited boats because they believed that they would be picked up in any case. Deaths on the Mediterranean dropped immediately when Libya and Italy started to take a harsher stance on the whole thing.

[parochial boy]

Southern was part of the far-right mob that last year spent time in the Mediterranean trying to block rescue boats from reaching sinking boats. She is a vile wannabe fascist and she is not welcome here.

Those weren't rescue boats; they were sea taxis. Had the NGOs operating those vessels been purely about saving lives and nothing else then they would have returned the people on those boats to the nearest shore, Libya, instead of ferrying them to Italy. And the very presence of those vessels led to asylum seekers departing Libya on ill-suited boats because they believed that they would be picked up in any case. Deaths on the Mediterranean dropped immediately when Libya and Italy started to take a harsher stance on the whole thing.

errm, say what you want about the Med crisis, but taking the migrants back to Libya would absolutely not constitute "saving their lives"