Tony Blair to ban foreigners who encourage terrorism (tradition, blood)

[michel]

London bombs (www.timesonline.co.uk)



August 05, 2005

Tony Blair revealing plans to ban foreigners who encourage terrorism (Sky News)


Blair announces summary deportation for extremists
By Philippe Naughton, Times Online




Tony Blair announced a major extension of Home Office powers today that will allow the summary deportation of foreigners accused of inciting extremism.


At his regular Downing Street press conference, the Prime Minister also said that Parliament could be recalled in September - a month early - to start pushing through new anti-terrorist legislation after a month of intensive consultation to draft new laws and find cross-party consensus for them.
Mr Blair said the measures were a direct response to the changed changed security climate after the July 7 and 21 bombing attacks on London. They included drawing up a list of extremist websites, bookshops and organisations, involvement with which could be a trigger for deportation. Similar lists could be used to deny asylum to those arriving.
The move will end the UK's traditionally liberal approach to the hosting of foreign radicals, an approach which has given rise over the past two decades to the phenomenon dubbed "Londonistan".
"Anyone who has participated in terrorism or has anything to do with it anywhere will automatically be refused asylum in our country," Mr Blair said. "Let no one be in any doubt that the rules of the games are changing."
Most of the new measures will be administrative, allowing the Home Secretary to decide who should be deported. They will be backed up by agreements with some ten Middle Eastern and North African countries designed to ensure that deportees are not tortured or mistreated.
But the Prime Minister said that legislation would be drafted to back up the new measures, including, for instance, a possible rewriting of the Human Rights Act.
That Act enshrines in UK law the European Convention on Human Rights, but Mr Blair said that it might need to be redrafted to change its interpretation of the European rules to allow "non-suspensive appeals" against deportation under which appeals are only heard after deportation.
The new measures could lead to the deportation in the next few months of dozens of foreign Muslims, including some of the country's best known Islamic clerics. Mr Blair would not be drawn on how many deportations he expected, except to say "more than a handful".
He read out a list of 12 specific measures and proposals, including banning Hizb'ut Tahrir, a radical Islamic organisation whose call for a global Islamic caliphate has attracted thousands of young British Muslims. The successor organisation to the disbanded Al Muhajiroun, run by the radical cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed, has also been placed on the proscribed list.
Mr Blair said there would be widespread consultation with Britain's large Muslim community to ensure that their views are taken into account. Muslim leaders would however be expected to co-operate in identifying those foreigners who preach Islamic extremism.
"This is not in any way aimed at the decent law-abiding Muslim community of Britain," Mr Blair said. "We know that this fringe of extremism does not truly represent Islam."
He added: "Coming to Britain is not a right - and even when people have come here, staying here carries with it a duty. That duty is to share and sustain the values that support British life."
Mr Blair's announcent was welcomed by the Conservatives. David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, said: "It is vital that the Home Secretary is able to use his powers to deport or exclude non-UK citizens who threaten our national security – we have been calling for him to use these for some time. There is no reason why they cannot be applied as soon as possible."

It seems a shame that it has taken so long for what is a such an obvious piece of Legistlation to be brought into being............. But better late than never.

There was a comment about the possible need to change legistlation with regards to human rights as well - but that will take time - and will not be easily accepted.

The police reaction:-
Police chief hails anti-terror move Britain's top policeman has claimed new powers to deport extremists will help stop the "fomenting of terrorism" across the UK. Prime Minister Tony Blair has outlined proposals for legislation to exclude from the country those who promote violent acts of terror. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair said he believes the public will support the tough new measures.

Just one thought - let this not be misused.

[Ardent Listener]

It's to late, but hopefully, not to little.

[Fluffy]

Tony will have difficulty banning Hizb'ut Tahrir and The Saviour Sect without creating massive opposition since both organisations disguise their violent attitudes very well and strongly oppose terrorism.

Personally I don't see how banning two organisations who only promote violence via a bloodless coup after gaining military support, will in any way aid the war on terror.

[greatcalgarian]

No wonder the IRA gave up arm struggle. They must have forseen Tony coming up with this fantastic strategy of exporting anyone spreading terrorism

[Fluffy]

No wonder the IRA gave up arm struggle. They must have forseen Tony coming up with this fantastic strategy of exporting anyone spreading terrorism

The arms struggle was already illegal. This has nothing to do with violence but supporting ideas that are commonly held amongst violent organisations. If I were to say that the IRA's ideas were great but I disagreed completely with their violent methods, I could get chucked out of the country, just like Omar Bakri Mohammed.

[Sunstone]

On the one hand, I think what Blair is proposing could be called commonsense. Why allow anyone who advocates terrorism to live among us? But, on the other hand, I can see the possibility that the government will abuse it powers. Of course, I'm naturally suspicious of governments abusing their powers.

[greatcalgarian]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

The arms struggle was already illegal. This has nothing to do with violence but supporting ideas that are commonly held amongst violent organisations. If I were to say that the IRA's ideas were great but I disagreed completely with their violent methods, I could get chucked out of the country, just like Omar Bakri Mohammed.

Okay, so we can support the Arabs to want to get rid of US and UK in Iraq, but we just say that we do not support the way they resort to terrorism. So if all the Iraqis followed Ghandi method, and just stand infront of the tanks to ask the US and UK to leave their homeland is okay. Any other means, especially bringing the reality of war to the host country of UK and US by 'terrorist' mean is wrong. Okay, I got it.

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

If I were to say that the IRA's ideas were great but I disagreed completely with their violent methods, I could get chucked out of the country, just like Omar Bakri Mohammed.

You're not a UK national?

My biggest fear is that these proposed powers will be misused. In public support of what can be labelled terrorism Americans could be deported for celebrating their independance or I might find myself in prison for hailing the Zapatistas opposition to the NAFTA.

[Fluffy]

You're not a UK national?

I didn't realise that it only applied to foreigners. So we have the beginnings of a 2 class state then where the freedom of speech of the people living here is better protected than the freedom of speech of those who visit.