Originally posted by no1marauderIt is not very clear to me as well. He is an Islamic fundamentalist and I think argues for an Islamic superstate. But there are far right white supremacists (the British National Party and Combat 18) who the state sees no particular reason to supress despite the fact that they are responsible for a string of racist murders.
It's unclear to me; was he supposed to have DONE something or just said things that aren't "politically correct" in Great Britain?
If his kids were born here and have Britsh Nationality then they are entitled to state benefits. Also if they are kids then they ought to be looked after whatever the parent is.
Oh come off it!
The man is just another hate-mongering git, set on killing as many civilians as possible.
It's more than right the man should be deported and never allowed on English soil again.
People like him lead to suffering. Suffering leads to anger and anger leads to hatred...
Oh wait. You're not talking about Blair?
WELL I BLOODY WELL AM!
Originally posted by shavixmirViolence leads to Violence
Oh come off it!
The man is just another hate-mongering git, set on killing as many civilians as possible.
It's more than right the man should be deported and never allowed on English soil again.
People like him lead to suffering. Suffering leads to anger and anger leads to hatred...
Oh wait. You're not talking about Blair?
WELL I BLOODY WELL AM!
(this message brought to you by STANG).
Originally posted by no1marauderAnd where does inciting terrorism and attempting to recruit suicide bombers come into that?, as well as associating with terrorists.
If he financially supports terrorist groups then he can be arrested; if all he does is say that Osama or hamas or hezbollah or the CIA is A-OK, then he should be left alone.
Originally posted by jimslyp69I have no evidence of that. All I was saying was that No1 commented that we could arrest him for financing terrorists or leave him alone if all he had done wrong was believe that osame etc... was "A-OK". But what about the middle ground. We haven't been given any information about him financing terrorists, but what would happen, hypothetically, if it was found that he was inciting terrorism, trying to recruit young musulims. This all happening while he was in the country of course. Would we be able to arrest him for that, or would we just have to let him get on with it?
Where's the proof of that Fred? All I've read is that he made a few insensitive comments about his own beliefs.
Originally posted by Freddie2004I'm not sure about that one. The laws of this country are way over my head.
I have no evidence of that. All I was saying was that No1 commented that we could arrest him for financing terrorists or leave him alone if all he had done wrong was believe that osame etc... was "A-OK". But what about the middle ground. We haven't been given any information about him financing terrorists, but what would happen, hypothetically, if it ...[text shortened]... ourse. Would we be able to arrest him for that, or would we just have to let him get on with it?
Originally posted by no1marauderFree speech is not absolute. For example, incitement to riot and other crimes is illegal. You can't round up a bunch of guys, convince them to commit a crime and then say all you did was speak.
It's unclear to me; was he supposed to have DONE something or just said things that aren't "politically correct" in Great Britain?
I don't know quite what this particular guy has done, but many of these preachers exhort their followers to break the law in various ways.
Members of the BNP have been prosecuted for less (although not racist murders as someone suggested - I have never even heard that as an accusation), such as just saying that the moslems do not integrate in this country and are a danger. If you can be prosecuted for that (which is debatable. From your posts I would think you shouldn't be), then instructing people to civil disobediance and violence is surely criminal too.