Question Authority
8/24/2005
A dear friend of mine is moving to the UK (and I will miss her dearly). I, news junkie, read today about Government reaction to the recent bombings, and I stumbled upon this article pertaining to the deportation of 'hate preachers.'
I have a little concern with the wording in U.K. Home Secretary Charles Clarke's new criteria to deport 'extremists' 'considered to be encouraging terrorism.'
I don't support terrorism, or war, or guns, or violence. However, let it be said that this decision puts their enforcement agencies on a slippery slope. Hopefully the terminology of this decision will be debated, discussed and fleshed out with greater clarity so that free-thinking non-citizens can be more cooperative and responsive to this policy. Let it not be another Patriot Act.
My problem is with this:
.... " The list of ``unacceptable behaviors'' includes expressing views that justify, glorify or foment terrorist violence...."
Who decides? What level of anti-war or anti-foreign-policy views fit these criteria? If one is against involvement in the 'War on Terror,' does that make one a candidate for deportation? After all, one only has to do is 'foment' (agitate) terrorist violence to be included in this database. A good attorney could frame this in such a way that the most loving critic of foreign policy gets the boot. Yes, this seems irrational and extreme, but it's done all the time here in the US. Just look at Guantanamo and the ambiguous wordplay that allows it to continue thriving right under our very noses.
I'm not saying their Government shouldn't act in a way that discourages hatemongers to move and 'agitate' freely. I actually PRAISE Canada for banning Jack Chic religious tracts for their hate speech, and I often wonder why the US lets KKK members crash all the civil rights events with their hateful agitations. But they ought to be more specific as to where free speech and 'unacceptable behavior' meet. If I were a non-citizen resident, or about to be, I would be a little bit concerned.
People should never forget the value and importance of questioning authority, for it is the people that give that power to their respective authorities. ALWAYS QUESTION.
And Speaking of Authority...
Who gave Pat Robertson the right to call for assassinating world leaders? What a crazy, stupid asshole.
It's sick, pathetic power-leg-humpers like Robertson that make me shudder in disgust at the way this country - this world - has been taken over by right-wing extremists. Please, world, know that we're not all this fucking stupid.
posted by Edward Svengali @ Wednesday, August 24, 2005,
