al-Muhajiroun/Islam4UK proscribed under Terror laws

It's been announced that the government has banned the extreme Islamist organisation known as Islam4UK using the anti-terror legislation. Its most well known leading figure is Anjam Choudary, a british born muslim who is a qualified solicitor.

They're the group who disrupted the Royal Anglian Regiment parade in Luton last year by waving banners accusing the soldiers of killing babies, murder and such things. They also mooted the idea of a march through Wooton Bassett, the town where - for the last two years or so - many residents and visitors line the streets to pay respect to the dead when our fallen warriors are repatriated from nearby RAF Lyneham.

Few would argue that Choudary is a pretty unsavoury character, but he argues that his organisation is ideological / political, not terrorist. His stated aim is for Britain to become a muslim state. He says he will continue campaigning as an individual citizen (and no doubt his associates will do the same).

The government is totally wrong, and this ban will achieve precicely bugger all. 22 years ago, the Thatcher government tried to suppress publicity for certain organisations by banning all broadcasting of speeches by leading IRA figures and 10 other organisations in Ulster both nationalist & loyalist. As a result, we had the ludicrous situation of news bulletins showing a caption along the lines of "words of Gerry Adams" while an actor sounding exactly like him read a transcript of Adam's words verbatim. So much for denying publicity. It was a tactic that failed then, but our government are a bit thick ... haven't learned from history yet again.

This is yet another abuse of anti terror laws to deny individuals freedom of speech and action. We already have laws against incitement etc which are perfectly adequate.

Yes, Islam 4UK is an offensive, extreme organisation .... but then again so is the BNP, but there's no case for banning them either. I'm totally against banning organisations / activities simply on the basis that some sections of society are offended. All it leads to is more power to the state, and less for the individual citizen. Not sure I'm right - then consider this ......

........ imagine the Anti-Nazi League as one (extreme) end 6 inch of an 8 foot plank, with the BNP as the other (extreme) end. Ban them both by chopping off 6 inches at each end. OK, the plank is only 7 feet long now, but it's still got 2 (extreme) ends. When either is deemed unacceptable another ban shortens the plank yet again. Fast forward another 15-20 years and you can end up with a 6 inch length of wood with the government telling us what to think, and secret police making sure we do exactly that ....... after all - if they had their way, people could be locked up for three whole months purely on the word of a policeman without trial, or even being charged.

That bloody frightens me a damn sight more than anything some nut-case Imam will ever do to me.

Exactly the type of over-reaction that terrorist desire in response to their activities . . . cannot our governments see this?

Your lot have a similar attitude then tac ?

It does seem like a surefire way to create more terrorists.

What's crazy about it is that this group is said to be no more than 20 loonies.

Great publicity.

JKLever wrote:What's crazy about it is that this group is said to be no more than 20 loonies.

Great publicity.

AKA the Buckaroo Effect

Funny line on one of the comment sections at the BBC

'On the news yesterday Islam4UK members were shown holding up a placard proclaiming 'Freedom can go to hell' - I assume therefore that they welcome this curtailment of their unwanted freedom.'

Growler wrote:Your lot have a similar attitude then tac ?

Not so much under the wise and thoughtful leadership of Honest John (Howard), but I imgine things are going to the dogs in a hurry these days . . .


*waiting*

tac wrote:

Growler wrote:Your lot have a similar attitude then tac ?

Not so much under the wise and thoughtful leadership of Honest John (Howard), but I imgine things are going to the dogs in a hurry these days . . .


*waiting*

Actually I am confused. Your govt says that it is wary of China and wants to get closer to India.

And yet the govt of Rudd goes out of its way to insult India. But supposedly these are the more liberal guys. And Howard was a right-wing loony.

If 'getting close to India' means that India must behave like colonial "coolies" and our folk can be treated like Abos have been down the decades,then dream on cobber !

You can't call people "abos" you despicable racist turd

G.Wood wrote:You can't call people "abos" you despicable racist turd

lol.

this coming from the most racist of all english speaking countries. What I can't digest is moral high-ground coming from some racist australian.

So "you lot do it worse" is a legitimate defence?

Geez you're a sook

Woody isn't racist ...he's one of your nice ozzies

G.Wood wrote:So "you lot do it worse" is a legitimate defence?

Geez you're a sook

You surely were around when the duo of Fat and Smelly were using all the racist epithets & stereotypes they could manage to get their hands on in their flame fest with me.

You saw the language being used, and you didn't have a problem with that. not a whimper from your side was heard then.

sorry, you then have no right to squeak now.