Britain to deport anyone who "justifies acts of violence"

Netchicken, Blair's publicly stated proposal is not what you are describing.

According to his publicly stated policy all people who 'justify violence' are to be deported.. . . and this includes himself.

What I am saying here is that the PM should say what he really means, and what he really means is that only some justifications of violence will result in deportation.

He has an obligation to say what he means. . . . . . public policy is not the place for guesswork, double meanings and 'reading between the lines'.

This is an interesting article on the subject.

Why 'War on Terror' Was Re-Branded
Mission not accomplished, but changed. The 'war frame' helped Bush consolidate power, never fit reality of terrorism.
By George Lakoff
Published: August 3, 2005

The "War on Terror" is no more. It has been replaced by the "global struggle against violent extremism." The phrase "War on Terror" was chosen with care. "War" is a crucial term. It evokes a war frame, and with it, the idea that the nation is under military attack -- an attack that can only be defended militarily, by use of armies, planes, bombs, and so on. The war frame includes special war powers for the president, who becomes commander in chief. It evokes unquestioned patriotism, and the idea that lack of support for the war effort is treasonous. It forces Congress to give unlimited powers to the President, lest detractors be called unpatriotic. And the war frame includes an end to the war -- winning the war, mission accomplished!

www.thetyee.ca...

Originally posted by AgentSmith
It's pretty pathetic when in the lack of viable arguments you have to make such a big deal out of a relatively minor wording error.

It is not a minor wording error. . . . . . the enormous difference here between what has been said and what is actually meant is equal to a complete abandonment of logical protocol. . . . . a very dangerous thing to do when drafting laws.

The point is everyone knows what he's on about and it's all good for a change!

In your enthusiasm to support what you believe to be 'right' you are abandoning the connection between what is said and what is meant. . . . . .this leads to action based solely on emotion which is one of the marks of the witch hunt.

I like this law, unfortunately, it means damn near every human being is subject to deportation.

This is classic double-speak, just as the War on Terror is a war utilizing terroristic tactics.

Violence is a means to an end, nothing more. If people would start valueing death as much as they value life, we wouldn't care so much about violence. The fact is, death is the most pleasurable experience of your life. So why is everyone afraid of it? Why is everyone running madly on the treadmill, wasting energy and going nowhere?

Has anyone, anywhere, ever escaped death? No.

This policy is funny though, good find RRS. Blair should read more philosophy before opening his twisted little mouth.

One can reasonably dutify anything - Fukiyama (paraphrased)

Roy, I respect you and your message of peace here. I am glad we have people like you at ATS and think we need more. This place is slowly gaining racists and bigots in larger numbers. Everyone knows this.

With that said, I agree with what blair is doing here. You cannot have people who are not citizens of your country calling for violence towards the people of that country. That is the single most despicable thing a person can do and makes a mockery of your tolerance and goodwill. The fact that these people stand under the protection of the very military they wish to slaughter. These people must go. That is not racist or bigotted, that is having self-respect and dignity which the British people have in abundance. Forget Blair, this is about the British people who have tolerated this blatant and open hate towards them for a long time, and tolerated it.

Lets just hope that the BNP are on that deprtation list. Where would they go? Thats the big issue here, if these foreigners are targetted for their hateful and violent rhetoric, then the same must apply to native Britons who do the same, including British born muslims. If this is the case, then prisons will be busy and more dangerous place to be.

Tony Blair again shows why hes a failure making that statement. Since New Labour have been in power this Country has filled up with immigrants legal and mainly illegal that don't want to integrate into British society. Now hes wanting to deport them, thats ok but the do gooders the Human Rights lawyers stop any way of getting rid of the undesirable people who come here, his wife is one of those lawyers. Its another show by Blair that will not happen, its time to rename him the man who said alot but achieved nothing.

You guys are blowing this out of proporation and whining and crying about them being deported, you'll see blair is doing your country a great service by removing these radicals. You have hate laws right? so why not have laws that say if you support Islamic terrorism, you can leave?

Thatswhats needed!

MORE Laws
MORE Control
MORE Authority
MORE Fear
MORE Accusations
MORE Security

MORE< MORE

Cargo,

The main point which I am making is being missed.

The point is this: Tony Blair is letting you think that he is going to deport terrorists and supporters of terrorism. This is not, however, what the new law he is proposing actually says... . . . . it says that anyone who "justifies violence" is to be deported. When I point this out people say "Oh, but we all know what he really means". That's all very well, and perhaps we do know what he 'means', but granting him the right to pass this sweeping new law which will immediately be interpreted according to unwritten rules is asking for trouble. Sure we might know what Blair 'means' today, but you are granting him the power to change the interpretation tomorrow and immediately take action.. . . . . the proposed new power is so wide that it allows much much more than just deporting known terrorists and their supporters.

Another problem with the new power is that it only allows action against those who were not born in the UK. . . . . . where is Blair going to send people who were born and bred in the UK (including himself!) ? Of course you can assume that the only people who need to be deported are those who were born outside the UK, but that's putting the cart before the horse. . . . . the law is supposed to be dealing with violence, not racial origin or visa status.

It is a thinly disguised 'racial cleansing' tactic and stinks of fascism.

Roy Robinson Stewart, are you having any issues with France doing the same thing or is your issue just with Blair and the UK standing up and taking action against those who advocate violence and justification for it?

Hey, maybe they can bust the Honorable Galloway or the Mayor of London?







seekerof

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Seekerof]

The point has been made that, had these laws been around in the mid 80's, the majority of this current British Governemt would be locked up now as they vehemently supported the ANC, an acknowledged 'terrorist' group.

How are these laws going to cover British nationals? How do you deport someone from their home state? Am I to be criminalised for supporting the Palestinian cause in future, or for showing sympathy towards the Chechen people.

Just deport all the minorities while you're at it.

Originally posted by KhieuSamphan
How are these laws going to cover British nationals? How do you deport someone from their home state? Am I to be criminalised for supporting the Palestinian cause in future, or for showing sympathy towards the Chechen people.

My understanding from what I have read so far on this, is that those who are British born or nationals will simply be jailed if found in violation.




seekerof

I think the wording could have been more specific and I also would like to see where the line is drawn, after all many people say that the war in Iraq has caused radicalisation of some British Muslims who may now be more sympathetic to the actions of the terrorists. Now could that statement be construed as supporting or justifying acts of violence or is that just a controversial opinion.

Overall though I applaud the idea of getting tough on those who spout overt hatred and seek to damage or undermine my country and I rather hope it extends to those who are violent and anti social in the general population too. I'm just hoping Blair can walk the walk as well as he talks the talk.

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS



Article 9: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.




www.unhchr.ch...

Originally posted by Seekerof
My understanding from what I have read so far on this, is that those who are British born or nationals will simply be jailed if found in violation.

What else could they do I suppose. Some observers have said, however, that locking up 'terrorists' together could provide a situation whereby 'extremist' ideology can be nurtured and spread.

Also, can anybody tell me how these deportation/imprisonment methods propose to attack the root of the problems we are experiencing?

Originally posted by thepresidentsbrain

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS



Article 9: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.




www.unhchr.ch...

Blah, screw the human rights!

Originally posted by ubermunche


Overall though I applaud the idea of getting tough on those who spout overt hatred and seek to damage or undermine my country and I rather hope it extends to those who are violent and anti social in the general population too. I'm just hoping Blair can walk the walk as well as he talks the talk.

Unfortunately few people have noticed that Blair himself is guilty of "justifying violence" . . . . . . this is indisputable, and the only argument I have heard so far against him being convicted by his own law is along the lines of "The violence which he is justifying is in fact justified" (e.g. shoot to kill policy and Iraq war) This of course is a circular argument and involves classic Orwellian Doublethink.

Blair justifies violence therefore he should be jailed by his own law!!!

Lock the man up immediately!

Just like to respond to 2 points as a uK resident

"The bombings have bought a burst of reality into British society."

what like the war with the IRA didnt you mean? (funded mainly by the USA i hasten to add one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter )

I can see this becoming a UK Partriot Act

It'll never happen. Once the dust has settled from 7/7 Blair will never get his patriot act through parliament. Common Sense usually prevails and if by some major lapse in judgement it happens it will be revoked by the European Court of Human Rights once contested

One thing you need to remember about Blair is he always ends up with egg on his face no matter what he tries to do!



[edit on 6-8-2005 by dj howls]

Still none of the Blair apologists on this thread have managed to explain away the doublethink in the new proposal, which clearly convicts Blair as a "Justifier of killing". . . . . instead in classic Doublethink fashion they ignore the glaringly obvious logical conclusion that Blair should be locked up or deported, and just change the subject.

Blair and his supporters are illogical!!!!

You have all been sprung!

You are making doublespeak detectors red line!