Britain - The Official Thread

[Johnnypenso]

No problem.

Its a large piece of legislation, but please be area I have already cited other reasons why all three (as she was not alone) could well have been denied entry.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

Section 26.1b could well be argued to apply.

The context you will however be missing, is that the far-right in Europe (and the UK) have been attempting to hi-jack LGBT causes as an excuse to carry out anti-Muslim and anti-immigration marches and campaigns. As I said earlier, they would have a slightly better argument if they didn't focus on one group!

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/2017/06/06/lennon-hijacks-gays-sharia-protest/

If you know the exact part of the legislation that applies please point to it and how it relates to distributing a flyer that, in modern society, shouldn't be offensive to anyone who is a rational person, let alone illegal. The second link, I don't see Lauren Southern's name in there anywhere.

 

[Scaff]

If you know the exact part of the legislation that applies please point to it and how it relates to distributing a flyer that, in modern society, shouldn't be offensive to anyone who is a rational person, let alone illegal.

I already have, and it wasn't just a flyer, as I have already posted in this very thread (which I quoted you in).

The second link, I don't see Lauren Southern's name in there anywhere.

That's the organiser of the event she was attempting to attend, which once again I have already posted in regard to (which I quoted you in).

 

[TexRex]

 

[ECGadget]

Can you provide a link to this legal principle of how race/racism is identified in the U.K.? Also, what is racist or even offensive about that flyer? I would like to get @ECGadget's point of view as to whether he or a "true" muslim should be offended by that flyer.

As @Scaff said, there was more to this story than what the article states. But directly answering your question, I am unsure as to how to feel about that leaflet taken as an entity on its own. On one hand, it can be taken as offensive because there is a possibility for a different meaning. But on the other hand, it is merely trying to say that Allah is the God of everybody, regardless of who you are, what your sexual orientation is, or how you view the world.
Personally, if I was knowledgable enough and a community leader I would have
1) Asked to meet with such a person and understand what they meant by the poster, and have a lovely dialogue
2) Diffuse the situation by explaining to Muslims that the poster in a literal sense is correct in the fact that Allah is the God of all.

But again, as Scaff said, there was more to that story than reported in that article.

 

[novcze]

She committed crimes last time she was here - real actual crimes.

Was she prosecuted, is she convicted? No? ... what crime then.

Fighting for a foreign army isn't always a criminal act here (though it can be) and I suspect the law where you are works the same way. Why do you say the UK have no problem with them returning when your own link says they're nearly all imprisoned upon their return? Did you read your own link?

Most are imprisoned in 33 countries to which they returned, while specific report from the UK says "it can be difficult to obtain the necessary criminal proof to jail returnees, and that imprisonment merely postpones their release into society while risking the further radicalisation of other inmates."

... but I agree with you that "no problem" isn't best description of the situation, it's more like "we can't do much about it" (btw. I'm not suggesting anything I only made observation)

Might I respectfully suggest that you didn't understand Monty Python? Could you draw our attention to a specific reason for them being 'banned too nowadays'?

You can suggest what you want. I do see a parallel between handing out Allah is gay poster and Life of Brian which some described as "a vicious attack on Judaism and the Bible, and a cruel mockery of Christian religious feelings as well."

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2013/aug/30/monty-python-life-of-brian-blasphemy-1979

Personally, if I was knowledgable enough and a community leader I would have
1) Asked to meet with such a person and understand what they meant by the poster, and have a lovely dialogue
2) Diffuse the situation by explaining to Muslims that the poster in a literal sense is correct in the fact that Allah is the God of all.

That's good rational approach, I can't speak for Southern but from what I gathered from the video I posted earlier, her mindset was like: if Jesus is gay statement doesn't rise any eyebrows, nobody is rioting in the streets then reaction should be same for the Allah is gay statement, there's nothing to it and certainly nothing that should warrant detention under terrorism legislation next time you legally visit the UK.

 

[Scaff]

Was she prosecuted, is she convicted? No? ... what crime then.

You don't need to have been convicted of a crime to be denied entry.

You can suggest what you want. I do see a parallel between handing out Allah is gay poster and Life of Brian which some described as "a vicious attack on Judaism and the Bible, and a cruel mockery of Christian religious feelings as well."

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2013/aug/30/monty-python-life-of-brian-blasphemy-1979

If you don't see the difference then I think you are either unaware of/or ignoring the larger context behind the former.

That's good rational approach, I can't speak for Southern but from what I gathered from the video I posted earlier, her mindset was like: if Jesus is gay statement doesn't rise any eyebrows, nobody is rioting in the streets then reaction should be same for the Allah is gay statement, there's nothing to it and certainly nothing that should warrant detention under terrorism legislation next time you legally visit the UK.

It wasn't just a leaflet and you are ignoring the context, her travel companions, the people she was travelling to the UK to meet and the relation they have to a proscribed group that had been investigated for and standing trial for plotting to kill a sitting member of the UK government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...our-mp-bought-machete-far-right-a8023056.html

However I've posted enough of this in the thread so far that I suspect this will simply be ignored again for the 'its just a leaflet' nonsense.

As for the comparison to Christianity, do you have footage of her trying this in the Southern US states? I can answer that for you, it will be a no, because this has nothing at all to do with protecting LGBT rights from being the target of religion as a whole, and simply a window dressing to target one religion. The claim they are fall apart very quickly the second abuse by other faiths towards the LGBT community is looked at and the lack of action from this lot towards that!

If you honestly think this is about LGBT rights, then I have a bridge for sale..........

 

[Famine]

Ah, I remember when Cat Stevens was banned from entering the USA for two years because he had suspected ties to terrorist activities - although it turned out that was Youssef Islam, and not Stevens' post-conversion name Yusuf Islam. He'd never been convicted of anything.

And when Nigella Lawson was banned from entering the USA for no clearly stated reason that I'm aware of, but allegedly because she'd taken cocaine at home in the UK some years previously, which came out in court during her divorce from Charles Saatchi. She'd never been convicted of anything.

And when that kid from Luton was banned from entering the USA for life because he once sent a profane email to Barack Obama. He'd never been convicted of anything.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Ah, I remember when Cat Stevens was banned from entering the USA for two years because he had suspected ties to terrorist activities - although it turned out that was Youssef Islam, and not Stevens' post-conversion name Yusuf Islam. He'd never been convicted of anything.

And when Nigella Lawson was banned from entering the USA for no clearly stated reason that I'm aware of, but allegedly because she'd taken cocaine at home in the UK some years previously, which came out in court during her divorce from Charles Saatchi. She'd never been convicted of anything.

And when that kid from Luton was banned from entering the USA for life because he once sent a profane email to Barack Obama. He'd never been convicted of anything.

Let's not stoop to the level of US border control

 

[novcze]

You don't need to have been convicted of a crime to be denied entry.

I agree, @TenEightyOne was talking about real crimes so I wanted to know what crimes.

It wasn't just a leaflet and you are ignoring the context, her travel companions, the people she was travelling to the UK to meet and the relation they have to a proscribed group that had been investigated for and standing trial for plotting to kill sitting members of the UK government.

I tend to judge people as individuals and I will not pretend that I know real reasons behind her ban. I've read what you wrote and you can be right, I don't have enough information to argue about it.

If you honestly think this is about LGBT rights, then I have a bridge for sale..........

I never said anything about LGBT rights, I think it is about exposing possible double standard, if 'jesus is gay' is ok and 'allah is gay' is racism in the UK then what?

 

[TenEightyOne]

I never said anything about LGBT rights, I think it is about exposing possible double standard, if 'jesus is gay' is ok and 'allah is gay' is racism in the UK then what?

Bananas are okay too and yet they can still form the basis of hate crime or racist behaviour. How very odd, the whole world doesn't operate purely at face value.

 

[Scaff]

I agree, @TenEightyOne was talking about real crimes so I wanted to know what crimes.

Real crimes can exist without a conviction.

I tend to judge people as individuals and I will not pretend that I know real reasons behind her ban. I've read what you wrote and you can be right, I don't have enough information to argue about it.

Individuals chose the company they keep and the people they visit, both of which can't be ignored in this case.

I never said anything about LGBT rights, I think it is about exposing possible double standard, if 'jesus is gay' is ok and 'allah is gay' is racism in the UK then what?

If being the operative word, and in this case it has nothing at all to do with 'exposing a double standard'.

The far right in the UK have, for example long used pedophilia as a reason to target the Muslim community, yet oddly ignoring it in any other religion and (in what is actually a real double standard) within its own ranks.

 

[Dotini]

Like it were some polite game of croquet, Russia has issued its retaliation mirroring UK sanctions of the Skripal incident, expelling 23 diplomats. The first nerve agent attack in Europe since WWII, felling members of your own civilian and police merits only the most microscopic and trivial response conceivable. We might wonder why the response is so tepid, so mild, so weak. Reason #1, the UK has too much to lose in economic terms of its corrupt relations with Russians.

“UK governments have shied away from hitting the moneyed Kremlin-linked interests that, by an extraordinary coincidence, enrich a well-connected stratum of UK-based bankers, accountants, solicitors, and estate agents,” Chatham House’s Nixey told me.

In order for May to get serious about seizing Russian assets, she would have to confront those beneficiaries of London’s lax attitude toward laundering. She would also have to endure the cost of spooking foreign investors and cutting off a serious source of revenue for London — property taxes.

“Do you turn a blind eye to mafia money because it makes your city richer?” Carpenter asks, summing up May’s dilemma.

Another reason to think May might shy away from getting tough on dirty money: The economy is already in a fragile state. The UK is struggling with weak economic growth and hurriedly preparing to exit the European Union in 2019, a move that could upend a lot of the UK’s trade and investment relationships with Europe.

The last thing the UK wants right now is more instability. In other words, London might be in too precarious of a position to really bring the heat against Russia by cracking down on dirty money.

Russia also has the ability to retaliate against the British economy. Trade between the UK and Russia is worth about $14 billion a year. The UK exports cars, machinery, and chemical products to Russia, and Moscow could either put punitive tariffs on these products or ban them altogether. The British oil giant BP has a roughly 20 percent stake in Russia’s state-owned oil company Rosneft, and Russia could potentially expropriate BP’s stake in the company.
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/3/16/17123918/russia-nerve-agent-attack-uk-sanctions-spy-skripal

Reason #2, doubt over the nature of the attack. It seems very odd that Russia would choose to perform an attack with a weapon so uniquely associated with itself, then entirely botch the attack, failing to kill the traitor and taking numerous collateral civilians as victim. IMO, If Russia did indeed author this attack, it was intended as a giant "**** You!" right in your face, and a dare to do anything at all about it. Or else it was a false flag.

 

[numbnuts70]

Like it were some polite game of croquet, Russia has issued its retaliation mirroring UK sanctions of the Skripal incident, expelling 23 diplomats. The first nerve agent attack in Europe since WWII, felling members of your own civilian and police merits only the most microscopic and trivial response conceivable. We might wonder why the response is so tepid, so mild, so weak. Reason #1, the UK has too much to lose in economic terms of its corrupt relations with Russians.



Reason #2, doubt over the nature of the attack. It seems very odd that Russia would choose to perform an attack with a weapon so uniquely associated with itself, then entirely botch the attack, failing to kill the traitor and taking numerous collateral civilians as victim. IMO, If Russia did indeed author this attack, it was intended as a giant "**** You!" right in your face, and a dare to do anything at all about it. Or else it was a false flag.

Imo, it's the latter.

Galloway is a good listen and a brlliant orator and can also be found on RT (Sputnik).

 

[Rage Racer]

It could be, although my list only contained Russian citizens and Russians connected to Boris Berezovsky and Mikhail Khodorkovsky who have died suddenly. I don't believe Kaczynski is either of those things.

I have to agree that people like Berezovsky and Khodorkovsky have some... bad aura around them. That may cause heart attacks, suicides, or at times even lead overdose.

Rumors say that Khodorkovsky had been involved in a number of hired killings in Russia in the '90s, but currently he's only charged with one. Ironically, he graduated from the same university as me, so he knows something about chemistry, too...

I also recall that Theresa May stated that the incident was either due to Russian involvement or due to Russia losing control of its nerve agents. As Russia developed the Novichok agents at sites now in Uzbekistan, which the USA is helping to decommission and decontaminate, the possibility exists that Russia has lost control of the agent.

I'd put it in this way: Russia in the present state (the Russian Federation) never had complete control of it. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, this site was inherited by Uzbekistan, and it was up to the Uzbeks to control. In 1994, their security agency intercepted 5 tonnes of a "double-purpose chemical substance" that somebody tried to transport to "a country of the Middle East". The investigation found out that earlier, in 1993, a load of 815 kg of methylphosphonyl dichloride (a precursor for sarin, soman and, presumably, some of the compounds of "Foliant" program, including Novichok) was secretly exported to the same place.
(source: https://iz.ru/719460/konstantin-bogdanov/smertelno-opasnyi-novichok - in Russian)
Not even to mention that the Americans were there too, dealing with those chemicals.

So, blaming Russia on the chemical attack on Britain simply because the substance was "of a type developed by Russia" is as wrong as saying that Moscow was behind the terrorist attacks on Paris in 2015 because the terrorists used Kalashnikov rifles - a weapon used and produced (legally and illegally) in MANY places around the world - but developed by Russia.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So, blaming Russia on the chemical attack on Britain simply because the substance was "of a type developed by Russia" is as wrong as saying that Moscow was behind the terrorist attacks on Paris in 2015 because the terrorists used Kalashnikov rifles - a weapon used and produced (legally and illegally) in MANY places around the world - but developed by Russia.

Quite. But then the nerve agent (and Porton Down will know the difference between the signatures of various attempts to mix the final agent) isn't the only clue. In terms of motive and opportunity and modus operandi there are a lot of pointers.

 

[ExigeEvan]

So, blaming Russia on the chemical attack on Britain simply because the substance was "of a type developed by Russia" is as wrong as saying that Moscow was behind the terrorist attacks on Paris in 2015 because the terrorists used Kalashnikov rifles - a weapon used and produced (legally and illegally) in MANY places around the world - but developed by Russia.

Except it's not. Because comparing nerve agents that are supposed to be surrounded by huge security with one of the most widely used rifles in the world is completely ludicrous.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Except it's not. Because comparing nerve agents that are supposed to be surrounded by huge security with one of the most widely used rifles in the world is completely ludicrous.

Further to that it seems that much is being made on Russian news of the fact that the ingredients required for this novichok were published in a book, this means anybody could make it... or could they?

In that case: cream, eggs, soft flour, vanilla pods, water, syrup, butter, sugar, salt. Everybody can now make a perfect Baked Alaska for dessert.

 

[x3ra]

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/world/us-and-uzbeks-agree-on-chemical-arms-plant-cleanup.html

May 5th 1999.

The United States and Uzbekistan have quietly negotiated and are expected to sign a bilateral agreement today to provide American aid in dismantling and decontaminating one of the former Soviet Union's largest chemical weapons testing facilities, according to Defense Department and Uzbek officials.

So what's fake? the New York Times or Theresa May?

 

[ExigeEvan]

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/world/us-and-uzbeks-agree-on-chemical-arms-plant-cleanup.html

May 5th 1999.



So what's fake? the New York Times or Theresa May?

What's your point? America helps clean up test site therefore they must have access to the materials?

 

[Dotini]

The disgraced author of that article, Judith Miller, was determined to have written a number of inaccurate stories. She spent 85 days in jail, and was forced to resign from her job at the Times.

 

[Lizard]

Porton Down is a fishy place. They are officially a place dedicated to research and development of areas around public health.. Unofficially a lot of traffic goes between them and the military base next door.

Source, my dad works there. Although not in the labs so I have no idea on specific research projects.

 

[Dotini]

Porton Down, located near to Salisbury, near the scene of the nerve agent crime, is a secretive military chemical and biological weapons lab since WWI, linked to conspiracy theories as is its US equivalent, Plum Island. They will tell you what they want you to believe, and there is no way on Earth to get in there and find out for yourself. It's simply a blunt instrument, a military organ of the UK government.

 

[Lizard]

Porton Down, located near to Salisbury, near the scene of the nerve agent crime, is a secretive military chemical and biological weapons lab since WWI, linked to conspiracy theories as is its US equivalent, Plum Island. They will tell you what they want you to believe, and there is no way on Earth to get in there and find out for yourself. It's simply a blunt instrument, a military organ of the UK government.

You are right.. However it operates under Health Protection Agency to try and hide a lot of stuff.

One story my dad told me was that they were doing anthrax testing there. He has no access to the labs though as he is just a guy who negotiates supply deals.

 

[PeterJB]

Most of the labs and bunkers around Salisbury are being used to grow pot.

 

[TenEightyOne]

They are officially a place dedicated to research and development of areas around public health.

And officially a military weapons research centre, obvs.

 

[Scaff]

Porton Down, located near to Salisbury, near the scene of the nerve agent crime, is a secretive military chemical and biological weapons lab since WWI, linked to conspiracy theories as is its US equivalent, Plum Island. They will tell you what they want you to believe, and there is no way on Earth to get in there and find out for yourself. It's simply a blunt instrument, a military organ of the UK government.

I've driven past it many times and know a few people who have work there. Most of its underground, and given what they work on you would want to get in there.

 

[Famine]

They will tell you what they want you to believe, and there is no way on Earth to get in there and find out for yourself.

I mean, I went for a job interview there - at DERA, as it was then - in 2000, so... no.

I can't tell you anything about it because, just as with my last job where I worked on a site officially owned by Qinetiq (which I also can't tell you anything about, although it was a cool place. Our office used to be a mmffmfmfmmff [redacted]), I had to sign the Official Secrets Act to get in.

Also went for an interview in 1999 at Huntingdon Life Sciences. That was a lightly paranoia-inducing experience.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I mean, I went for a job interview there - at DERA, as it was then - in 2000, so... no.

I worked on a project subcontracted by Thales that got me into there (and similar) a few times. To say that the background check is thorough would be an understatement. There were even questions about attending an NUS conference in Blackpool in the early 90s, an event that was something of a blur at the time and more so many years later.

The thing that strikes you about these places is that whether they're building (*redacted*) or photocopier trays it's all the same desks, chairs and drab office accoutrements. I wanted to see at least one all-glass control room with a hologram of Judi Dench barking orders but it wasn't to be.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Bloody hell, you're all DSTL affiliated?

This explains so much about my customer community...

 

[Dotini]

I don't much about Craig Murray, but here is what he says:

I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve agent as being of Russian manufacture, and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation “of a type developed by Russia” after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation. The Russians were allegedly researching, in the “Novichok” programme a generation of nerve agents which could be produced from commercially available precursors such as insecticides and fertilisers. This substance is a “novichok” in that sense. It is of that type. Just as I am typing on a laptop of a type developed by the United States, though this one was made in China.

To anybody with a Whitehall background this has been obvious for several days. The government has never said the nerve agent was made in Russia, or that it can only be made in Russia. The exact formulation “of a type developed by Russia” was used by Theresa May in parliament, used by the UK at the UN Security Council, used by Boris Johnson on the BBC yesterday and, most tellingly of all, “of a type developed by Russia” is the precise phraseused in the joint communique issued by the UK, USA, France and Germany yesterday:

This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War.

When the same extremely careful phrasing is never deviated from, you know it is the result of a very delicate Whitehall compromise. My FCO source, like me, remembers the extreme pressure put on FCO staff and other civil servants to sign off the dirty dossier on Iraqi WMD, some of which pressure I recount in my memoir Murder in Samarkand. She volunteered the comparison to what is happening now, particularly at Porton Down, with no prompting from me.

Separately I have written to the media office at OPCW to ask them to confirm that there has never been any physical evidence of the existence of Russian Novichoks, and the programme of inspection and destruction of Russian chemical weapons was completed last year.

Did you know these interesting facts?

OPCW inspectors have had full access to all known Russian chemical weapons facilities for over a decade – including those identified by the “Novichok” alleged whistleblower Mirzayanov – and last year OPCW inspectors completed the destruction of the last of 40,000 tonnes of Russian chemical weapons

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/