Dear All
It seems that a Muslim preacher banned by the home secretary from entering the UK for his "unacceptable behaviour" is to challenge the ruling in the courts.
Zakir Naik has said that 'every Muslim should be a terrorist' and wants a judicial review in the High Court.
So, is okay to say that 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'?
It seems that a Muslim preacher banned by the home secretary from entering the UK for his "unacceptable behaviour" is to challenge the ruling in the courts.
Zakir Naik has said that 'every Muslim should be a terrorist' and wants a judicial review in the High Court.
So, is okay to say that 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'?
Does that fall within the province of banning someone for glorify terrorism, promote violence or encourage other serious crime?
I would say yes and the ban should stand and if needed be extra legislation brought on to the statute books to enforce such a ban.
Naik is based in Mumbai, India where he works for the Peace TV channel so calling for ‘every Muslim to be a terrorist’ must strike people as odd.
Theresa May has said that visiting the UK is "a privilege, not a right".
She is quite correct, we welcome people from different countries even if they don’t share our views, we only ask for acceptable behaviour and they don’t do anything that is a threat to national security, public order or the safety of citizens.
Freedom of speech is very important but carries with it responsibility on the part of the individual. Enticing people to be terrorists goes beyond what any reasonable person could argue falls within that remit.
After the ban, The Islamic Research Foundation tried to turn this in a race issue by making the following statements:
"It is deeply regrettable the British Government has bowed to pressure from sectarian and Islamophobic pressure groups by preventing the entry of Dr Zakir Naik, who has been visiting and delivering talks in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
“Dr Zakir Naik is undoubtedly an opponent of terrorism and as such has often spoken out against all acts of violence and violent extremism”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
"He has emphatically and unequivocally condemned the killing of civilians and is one of the world's regular noted orators on this topic”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
Perhaps fellows at The Islamic Research Foundation don’t quite keep themselves up to speed on all of Zakir Naik’s words of wisdom.
At a conference in Melbourne, senior writer and columnist Sushi Das commented:
I would say yes and the ban should stand and if needed be extra legislation brought on to the statute books to enforce such a ban.
Naik is based in Mumbai, India where he works for the Peace TV channel so calling for ‘every Muslim to be a terrorist’ must strike people as odd.
Theresa May has said that visiting the UK is "a privilege, not a right".
She is quite correct, we welcome people from different countries even if they don’t share our views, we only ask for acceptable behaviour and they don’t do anything that is a threat to national security, public order or the safety of citizens.
Freedom of speech is very important but carries with it responsibility on the part of the individual. Enticing people to be terrorists goes beyond what any reasonable person could argue falls within that remit.
After the ban, The Islamic Research Foundation tried to turn this in a race issue by making the following statements:
"It is deeply regrettable the British Government has bowed to pressure from sectarian and Islamophobic pressure groups by preventing the entry of Dr Zakir Naik, who has been visiting and delivering talks in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
“Dr Zakir Naik is undoubtedly an opponent of terrorism and as such has often spoken out against all acts of violence and violent extremism”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
"He has emphatically and unequivocally condemned the killing of civilians and is one of the world's regular noted orators on this topic”.
Zakir Naik, 'every Muslim should be a terrorist'.
Perhaps fellows at The Islamic Research Foundation don’t quite keep themselves up to speed on all of Zakir Naik’s words of wisdom.
At a conference in Melbourne, senior writer and columnist Sushi Das commented:
"Naik extolled the moral and spiritual superiority of Islam and lampooned other faiths and the West in general", further criticising that Naik's words "fostered a spirit of separateness and reinforced prejudice".
And of course there is Website footage had shown the preacher making the claim that every Muslim should embrace terrorism.
Zakir Naik is legally entitled to his day in court and given the above comments made by him; I would think that a judicial review would find that the ban is proportionate and appropriate.
Telling people to be terrorists within their own country is out with what freedom of speech is generally recognised as being about.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Zakir Naik is legally entitled to his day in court and given the above comments made by him; I would think that a judicial review would find that the ban is proportionate and appropriate.
Telling people to be terrorists within their own country is out with what freedom of speech is generally recognised as being about.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
2 comments:
"Zakir Naik is legally entitled to his day in court and given the above comments made by him; I would think that a judicial review would find that the ban is proportionate and appropriate."
I disagree George. Why should a foreigner, never mind one who holds beliefs antithetical to western liberal democracy, be entitled to "his day" in a British court? Surely no nation should be beholden to explain and defend their decisions to some individual from a foreign land in a British court.
Dear Scunnert
It is important that the UK upholds the rights of people to have a fair hearing.
We cannot and must not tamper with that or allow political interference in this important principle.
People are entitled to fairness otherwise we slip further towards a fascist state.
We are upholding our principles not his by giving him a judicial review.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Post a Comment