UK 'least wanted' list published

World news discussion forum
Post Reply
User avatar
JimboPSM
udonmap.com
Posts: 3581
Joined: July 4, 2005, 3:23 pm
Location: Isle of Man / Bangkok / Udon Thani

UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by JimboPSM » May 5, 2009, 2:31 pm

This is one of those areas that I have mixed views on. Although it is contrary to freedom of speech letting them in means we would have to pay the police to protect these folk so that they could spew their hatred in complete safety.

I don't like condoning censorship, but these days there seem to be far too many people who, without question, are willing to accept and believe in views which stir up (as stated in the article) hatred, terrorist violence or serious criminal activity - I really don't see why the taxpayers should have to pay to protect them, after all they are not our citizens.
The names of some of the people barred from entering the UK for fostering extremism or hatred have been published for the first time.

Out of 22 who were excluded in the five months to March, 16 have been named by the Home Office.

They include Islamic extremists, white supremacists and a US radio host.

Since 2005, the home secretary has been able to exclude people if they express views which stir up hatred, terrorist violence or serious criminal activity.

The Home Office said it was "not considered to be in the public interest" to reveal the names of the remaining six.

The Muslim Council of Britain says the government should not act against people - whatever their views - unless they have broken the law.

Neo-Nazi

In October, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced the tightening of the rules determining who could come to the UK.

She said a "presumption in favour of exclusion" was being introduced which meant that in future it would be up to the individual concerned to prove they would not "stir up tension" in the UK.

On the list of those banned between October and March are Hamas MP Yunis Al-Astal and Jewish extremist Mike Guzovsky.

Also excluded are two leaders of a violent Russian skinhead gang, ex-Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Stephen 'Don' Black and neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe.

Fred Waldron Phelps Snr, a 79-year-old American Baptist pastor, and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper are barred for their anti-gay comments.

Both have picketed the funerals of Aids victims and celebrated the deaths of US soldiers as "punishment" for US tolerance of homosexuality.

Talk show host Michael Savage - real name Michael Weiner - is also excluded. His views on immigration, Islam, rape and autism have caused great offence in America.

Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, told BBC Radio 5 Live that people should be free to enter the country, regardless of their views.

"If they step over the line and break the law, it's at that moment the law should be enacted, not beforehand.

"If people are keeping their odious views to themselves, that's their business. We should not be in the business of policing people's minds."

He added that internet broadcasts meant that speeches could be screened from abroad into UK meetings anyway.

In recent years, individuals from a range of backgrounds have been prevented from entering the UK.

They have included animal rights activists, rap singers such as Snoop Dogg and even a lifestyle "guru" - Martha Stewart.

She was kept out after being jailed in the US for lying to investigators about a share sale.
Full story on BBC News - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8033060.stm



User avatar
Galee
udonmap.com
Posts: 3424
Joined: July 12, 2005, 5:16 pm
Location: Was Eastbourne, East Sussex. Now Udon.

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by Galee » May 5, 2009, 4:28 pm

What!!! No Udon Map members on that list.! Amazing!!!! :D

User avatar
JimboPSM
udonmap.com
Posts: 3581
Joined: July 4, 2005, 3:23 pm
Location: Isle of Man / Bangkok / Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by JimboPSM » May 5, 2009, 4:49 pm

Galee wrote:What!!! No Udon Map members on that list.! Amazing!!!! :D
From the BBC article:
Out of 22 who were excluded in the five months to March, 16 have been named by the Home Office
Don't jump to conclusions - If you do the math there are six who have not been named; confidentially the least wanted UM members are :censored:

User avatar
Prenders88
udonmap.com
Posts: 3482
Joined: July 7, 2005, 12:51 am
Location: Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by Prenders88 » May 5, 2009, 6:10 pm

Gordon Brown should be on that list for stealing from my pension fund.

User avatar
BobHelm
udonmap.com
Posts: 18408
Joined: September 7, 2005, 11:58 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by BobHelm » May 5, 2009, 8:05 pm

Prenders88 wrote:Gordon Brown should be on that list for stealing from my pension fund.
ha,ha anyone that understands the history of GB & pension funds would agree 100% with that Prenders.
It is difficult to explain to non UK persons just how much (without the world "economic crisis") People who attempted to save for their retirement throughout their working lives have been "screwed over" by the UK government who are then happy to screw them over again every month that they actually manage to live to claim their pension....

User avatar
LoongLee
udonmap.com
Posts: 843
Joined: February 15, 2009, 8:54 pm
Location: Virginia- Sic Semper Tyrannis

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by LoongLee » May 5, 2009, 8:24 pm

I would hope the list includes Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since he meets the requirements stated. Will be interesting to see if the UK has the cojones to put him on the list. I would expect the list would be much, much longer considering the hate and violence spewed by extremist Islamic clerics around.

And why the "nice PC speak? Call it a banned from entry list.

User avatar
BobHelm
udonmap.com
Posts: 18408
Joined: September 7, 2005, 11:58 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by BobHelm » May 5, 2009, 9:04 pm

Agree 100% with your summary Jimbo. Why should the UK have to pay & protect these people if they come to the UK. If a visitor to a country is not beneficial to the finances of a country then he/she should be refused entry.
This is a financial & not a "philosophical" discussion.
I often despair at my home country that it cannot differentiate between the two. I see no reason why ANYONE who is not a passport holder should be entitled to 1 GBP of the taxes I pay. If he/she is suspected by the authorities to incur ANY costs then they should be enforced to pay the estimated costs before they enter the country.

LL I disagree totally about what you say about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - given my conditions above - I believe that the truth can only be seen by examining words & not ignoring what anyone has to say...

User avatar
LoongLee
udonmap.com
Posts: 843
Joined: February 15, 2009, 8:54 pm
Location: Virginia- Sic Semper Tyrannis

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by LoongLee » May 5, 2009, 10:43 pm

BobH,,,,, I fail to see anywhere in the original post above where it states that it is a financial discussion and not a philosophical one. I stated my views based on the criteria stated,,,

"Since 2005, the home secretary has been able to exclude people if they express views which stir up hatred, terrorist violence or serious criminal activity."

Given the criteria stated by your Home Secretary,,,, Ahmadinejad definitely qualifies.

To connect free speech and the ability to pay is morally corrupt.

User avatar
BobHelm
udonmap.com
Posts: 18408
Joined: September 7, 2005, 11:58 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by BobHelm » May 6, 2009, 10:03 am

No where am I connecting free speech with the ability to pay. It is you who is suggesting that free speech should be curtailed for anyone who has views other than your own.
I cleared stated that this is a financial issue & not a political one - which, as with most things, the current UK government has got completely wrong.
If anyone in the UK makes a speech or writes anything that violates its' laws then they can be prosecuted by the police & courts. That takes care of the politics side. If they say things that are not illegal that is their free right.
If someone wishes to enter the country who requires special security services then they should pay for those services before they enter the country. This in no way effects the legal position above while they are in the country. If they are unwilling to pay for their own security then they should be refused entry.

User avatar
LoongLee
udonmap.com
Posts: 843
Joined: February 15, 2009, 8:54 pm
Location: Virginia- Sic Semper Tyrannis

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by LoongLee » May 6, 2009, 7:31 pm

BobH,,,, I said nothing about "curtailing free speech for anyone who has views other than my own"

I said the criteria listed by YOUR Home Secretary would seem to exclude a world leader, the President of Iran. And I did say I hoped the list would include him but that was based on Britains List, not the US.

Your statement "No where am I connecting free speech with the ability to pay." and then write "If they are unwilling to pay for their own security then they should be refused entry."

This in fact does say that if you can't pay you can't speak,, If one has sufficient funds to pay for security then you can spout all the rubbish you want.

I repeat,,,To connect free speech and the ability to pay is morally corrupt.

User avatar
LoongLee
udonmap.com
Posts: 843
Joined: February 15, 2009, 8:54 pm
Location: Virginia- Sic Semper Tyrannis

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by LoongLee » May 6, 2009, 7:47 pm

BobH,,,, to further clarify my position,,,, I was interested in seeing if the UK would deny entry based on their criteria to everyone no matter what their rank or position.... Have I confused the issue more?

I don't believe anyone should be denied a right to speak, and definitely not based on their ability to pay.

Cheers, LL

User avatar
BobHelm
udonmap.com
Posts: 18408
Joined: September 7, 2005, 11:58 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by BobHelm » May 6, 2009, 8:00 pm

This in fact does say that if you can't pay you can't speak
No it does not. It says that if you require special security in the UK you should pay for it.
It says nothing about what you say when you are there - which is strictly controlled by law.
It does not say that if you pay you can say - it says you can't even get off the plane if you are going to cost UK tax payers money.
If you cannot understand this simple concept then I can see why you struggle with understanding some of the more complex issues that the President of Iran might say..... :D :D

User avatar
LoongLee
udonmap.com
Posts: 843
Joined: February 15, 2009, 8:54 pm
Location: Virginia- Sic Semper Tyrannis

Re: UK 'least wanted' list published

Post by LoongLee » May 6, 2009, 9:15 pm

Well BobH,,,,, we definitely have a difference about what our respective words mean. I am satisfied I have explained myself and now leave it to the forum readers to interpret our views. Thank you for the discourse, even with the slap....."If you cannot understand this simple concept then I can see why you struggle with understanding some of the more complex issues that the President of Iran might say....."

Post Reply

Return to “World News”