Blair's troubling stance on deportation.

by Eternal Hope
Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 10:15:56 AM EST

British PM Tony Blair's stance on deportation is becoming more troubling. He unveiled measures which would deport groups he deems as being too radical for the UK. While he is careful to point out that this is a blow to extremism rather than Islam, and he actively engages Muslim leaders he deems as "moderate," he is now deporting groups which repudiate Bin Laden's calls for violence.

Here is his definiton of groups which would be deported:

Clerics who preach hate and Web sites or book shops that sponsor violence would be targeted, Blair told a news conference. Foreign nationals could be deported under the new measures.

<snip>

By the year's end, Blair also wants to pass legislation that would outlaw "indirect incitement" of terrorism -- targeting extremist Islamic clerics who glorify acts of terrorism and seduce impressionable Muslim youth.

The proposed law would ban receiving training in terrorist techniques in Britain or abroad. A new offense of "acts preparatory to terrorism" would outlaw planning an attack and activities such as acquiring bomb-making instructions on the Internet.

All of which sounds good on the surface, especially if you believe in law and order. But, as Blair's actions have shown, these definitions are subjective and dependent on his whims.


For instance, he also announced the banning of two Islamic groups in conjunction with his proposals. One group supported the 9/11 bombings, and any reasonable person would accept that they would fall under that category. But another group, Hizb-al-Tahir, in fact opposes the use of violence and repudiates the evil actions of Bin Laden.

Hizb-al-Tahir is a group which calls for the unification of all the Middle Eastern states under a Caliphaite, similar to when the Muslims first took over the Middle East. This is similar to Bin Laden's aims. But in fact, Hizb-al-Tahir rejects the use of violence and has no ties whatsoever with Bin Laden. From a press release, reacting to an arrest of Al-Qaeda operatives:

Recently it has been consistently reported by the local press, that the provincial government of Sindh has detained Dr. Akmal Waheed and Dr. Arshad Waheed for one month under section 11-EEE of the anti- Terrorism Act due to their affiliation with al-Qaida, Jundullah and Hizb-ut-Tahrir. We would like to make it clear that the Waheed brothers have no affiliation with Hizb-ut-Tahrir nor have they had any affiliation in the past. We also condemn the government's efforts to bracket Hizb-ut-Tahrir as a militant group. It is widely known Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a political party based on Islam and it follows the method of Muhammad (saw) in working to establish the Islamic State.

We regard the use of terror or militancy in the establishment of the Khilafah as a contravention of the shari'ah. Rather we work to change the public opinion of the masses and convince the people of power and influence in society.

Unless the UK government can document their ties to Al-Qaeda and thus prove them liars, Blair clearly crossed even his own line when banning this group.

We all oppose the creation of a theocratic religious state of any kind, regardless of the religion. The problem with the formation of such a government is that the next question becomes, "which faction?" This leads to violence, such as the anti-Catholic Gordon riots during the Revolutionary War. These riots were in response to the government's legalization of Catholicism.

But groups such as Hizb-al-Tahir should be free to operate, just like we in America support the right of religious theocratic groups such as Focus on the Family to operate, even when we disagree 100% with that group's objectives.

Banning groups like that may make the law-and-order types feel better about exacting a little payback for the 7/7 bombings. But that does not solve the real problem that Western leaders still exhibit the 19th-century colonialist mentality that somehow we Western nations are superior to everyone else and therefore, the rest of the world should be dominated. The much harder, and right way to solve the problem of Muslim extremism is to look in the mirror and see what we can do to treat Muslims as equals rather than patronizing them.

Blair rightly spoke out against xenophobia in the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks. But actions like the ones he took recently will only reinforce the kind of xenophobia that he himself spoke out against at Prime Minister's Questions on 7/13.  

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
by Eternal Hope on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 10:16:19 AM EST
.
Very fortunate for all Brits, the UK is EU member and bound by the Convention on Human Rights.

Britain's ability to deport foreign nationals has been hampered by human rights legislation. As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, Britain is not allowed to deport people to a country where they may face torture or death.

On the other hand, the UK as well as the Netherlands, have been harboring suspected terrorists for decades.

  • Right-wing UK radio station broadcasts hate attacks on Muslim MP in Denmark.

    What about the other side of the coin?

  • EU and UK support of Israeli occupation of Gaza and West Bank
  • Illegal act of war - Iraq invasion and Fallujah war crimes.
    Equal under law, any (foreign) national in support of Blair's policy will be deported?

    ~~~
     

  • UK Faces Terror Risk Because of US Alliance ¶ Chatham House Report
    ~~~  
  • by Oui on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 10:56:18 AM EST
    He is already drafting legislation to back his rules if such deportations are challenged in court. As of right now, he has not stated how far he would draw the line or how his plan squares with the Convention.

    Iraq War news and comment.
    by Eternal Hope on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 11:31:40 AM EST
    [ Parent ]
    I think they're banned in Germany.(Tried to download a Verfassungsschutz document which a google of Hizb al Tahrir + Verbot turned up but the huge pdf doc crashed Adobe) France expels radical imams. In general much of Europe has laws against hate speech, you don't need to actually advocate violence to be engaged in criminal speech. So the only real issue here is whether or not the people in question are likely to be tortured when they get sent home. But that is a practical problem of the implementation of the law, not something which would make the law illegal per se.  
    by MarekNYC on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 06:14:01 PM EST
    [ Parent ]
     in 2003as a 'Islamist organization with a clear anti-Jewish ideology' (islamistische Vereinigung mit deutlich anti-jüdischem Gedankengut). According to the same source it calls for fighting the 'Jewish infidels'
    http://www.stura.uni-leipzig.de/~farao/gruppen/hizbtahrir.htm

    In general equating ultra radical organizations like this one with mainstream US fundy Christian ones like Focus on the Family seems deeply misguided to me. The American mainstream fundies bear a lot more resemblance to moderate Islamists like Qardawi or Sistani than they do to the friendly totalitarians of Hizb al Tahrir.  By that I mean that they believe in democracy but one where the 'true' religion plays a major role, particularly in legal norms regarding personal life and morality. Something rather different from the outright rejection of Democracy as an inherently evil ideology because it gives sovreignty to the people rather than to god, or rather his representatives on earth.

    by MarekNYC on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 06:30:23 PM EST
    [ Parent ]
    FOTF plays a lot more lip service to democracy even as their proposals would end it or weaken it. Hizb-al-Tahrir, on the other hand, makes no secret of its detestation of Democracy and its misguided desire to replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist state.

    Iraq War news and comment.
    by Eternal Hope on Sat Aug 6th, 2005 at 02:02:51 AM EST
    [ Parent ]
    .
    RAF terrorist Knut Folkerts <video> killed Utrecht policeman Arie Kranenburg in cold blood in 1977, a second policeman was severely wounded.  Folkerts was sentenced in The Netherlands to 20 years imprisonment, later extradited and handed to German authorities because of his involvement in RAF terror and the murders of Judge Siegfried Buback, bank director Jürgen Ponto and president employers-union Hanns-Martin Schleyer. Folkerts was released from prison in 1995 - German Justice has forgotten about the 20 years Dutch prison sentence. Since his release, Folkerts has traveled across the open borders in the European Union with impunity. He has been sighted in Utrecht, where Justice would like to apprehend him and put him away for many years.

    Joke Kranenburg is understandably angry that RAF terrorist Folkerts is walking free, her husband shot to death at the time his son was 22 months old and Joke was pregnant of a second child. Dutch Justice did not follow through on the conviction in Germany, nor were they informed when Folkerts was released in 1995.

    NRC Handelsblad -- Rote Armee Fraktion
    The RAF was a left-wing terror group, also known as the Baader-Meinhof Group. The movement started in the student protest groups of the sixties, resistence to capitalism and opposition to ex-Nazis in high positions in German society.

    Knut Folkerts belonged to the second generation of the RAF. In the fall of 1977, he was responsible for a new wave of terror violence in Germany. The three persons in high position were murdered in execution style atacks.

    The Dutch authorities had expected the RAF terrorist would receive a life sentence for his deeds and stay imprisoned. Reality is often seen to be played by its own rules, justice not well served.

    ~~~

    by Oui on Fri Aug 5th, 2005 at 01:53:08 PM EST


    Display:
    Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]