Acts of hate: full list of 'deportation' actsBy Times Online
The Home Office today published a list of "unacceptable behaviours" which will lead to the deportation or exclusion of any foreign national who commits them from the UK.
According to the Home Secretary the list is indicative rather than exhaustive and covers any non-UK citizen whether in the UK or abroad.
Terrorist violence
Cannot foment, justify, glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs
Terrorist acts
Cannot seek to provoke others to terrorist acts
Criminal acts
Cannot foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts
Inter-community violence
Cannot foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.
Method
Individuals who do the above by any means or medium are caught by the legislation, including:
- writing, producing, publishing or distributing material;
- public speaking including preaching
- running a website
- using a position of responsibility such as teacher, community or youth leader
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
So, for example, I'm gussing Pat Robertson won't be visiting the UK any time soon!
So... out of curiosity, what was your reason for posting this, Dusty? Do you have some comments?
And old Pat really got slammed (and rightly so) in the national media yesterday. I bet he wishes he could have attracted this much attention during his unsucessful presidental campaign...
I thought it was interesting that Britain would take the steps to declare something like that. I know we have hate speech laws, but do you think the US Gov would ever create something like this?
Well, I suppose there are two answers to that question. Do I think that the US government, especially in the age of the Patriot Act, could conceivably enact such criteria? Absolutely. Do I think they should? Well, no. In the name of fighting terror, we have demonstrated an alarming willingness to give up certain freedoms, and as Americans I think we ought to be far more concerned about this issue. Adam, Dusty, Abe and hundreds of thousands of others are out there fighting for this country in various places--will it be worth it if we allow ourselves to become less free in the name of security?
There are, of course, legitimate restrictions on behavior in a society--for example, people who incite riots or yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater are endangering their fellow citizens, and there are (rightly) laws protecting against such things.
But the clause of the British document Dusty posted that seems especially threatening is the bit about "justifying" acts of terror. What does that mean exactly? There are many academics in lots of different fields, including English, who have written about the current world situation, pointing out that the West, and America, cannot declare itself innocent in this conflict of ideologies. America (and other coutries, of course) have pursued self-centered, destructive policies all over the world, especially when oil is involved, and at least some of the terrorist backlash can be attributed to our own arrogance abroad. Some academics who have published on these topics have been branded "anti-American" or "terrorist sympathizers." What would they now call such people in Britain? Would their work be censored because it doesn't square with the party line?
Ahh, the age old question--how far can you restrict speech and still say you support the freedom of speech? How many freedoms can you take away and still celebrate the land of the free and the home of the brave?
I think the current administration might answer that last question with a paraphrase of Pirates of the Carribean, "At least one more!"
Post a Comment