• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Barred from entry to the UK

And the "zzz" emoticon was the epitome of a mature argument?

dudalb said:
Boy, are you in a bad mood tonight.
You seem to get upset if ANYBODY dares disagree with you on anything.
Hopefully you will grow out of it.
Click to expand...
Actually, I wasn't disagreeing with you on that at all

I find the silly language on either side to be silly. Both the "The UK government is despotic, cowardly, and evil!" and the... well, the reverse, just for a different reason.

That I shorten my words to silliness does not mean disagreement. To be fair, I can see why you would have drawn that conclusion.
 
Last edited:
Lonewulf said:
And the "zzzz" emoticon was the epitome of a mature argument?
Click to expand...


I am just tired of the Same Old S--- from Jihad Jane all the time.
Or are you defending her rants?
You really seem to be suffering from "Angry Young Man" disease quite badly, the same way Skeptic seems to suffering from "disgurntled Oldster" disease.
 
dudalb said:
I am just tired of the Same Old S--- from Jihad Jane all the time.
Or are you defending her rants?
Click to expand...
Read my edited post, please.

And I'm tired of the Same Old S--- from Skeptic, all the time. What makes you better than me?

You really seem to be suffering from "Angry Young Man" disease quite badly, the same way Skeptic seems to suffering from "disgurntled Oldster" disease.
Click to expand...

Well... that's nothing new on my part, at least, you gotta admit.
 
I was listening to Rusty Humphries (wingnut radio moron) on the way in to work tonight and he was ranting about how the U.K. was crazy for putting him on the list and then showing us "real" hateful and dangerous speech by playing clips of Muslims (ostensibly in Britain) calling for worldwide jihad or something. It was as if they were singling out Savage but weren't keeping the really dangers (read Muslims) out of the country...

kallsop said:
How many hateful Islamic preachers are on the list? The UK is a lost cause, death by multiculturalism.
Click to expand...

Oooops. Good job there Rusty...
 
Having read the quotes from Savage, I can see why he is on the list. It probably wouldn't be enough to be seen as encouraging hatred of a group, but his words are pretty clear incitement to violence which is a crime in this country. Imagine if the same words were said by an islamic preacher - they would be on that list faster than [something really, really fast].
 
Ach, stuff 'em.

England's Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith
Click to expand...

England has a Home Secretary? You learn something new every day.
 
Last edited:
Well, I did PM him, but no response. Ah well.

To be fair, Dudalb is right about disagreement. But it's not because I disagree with Skeptic. I disagree with plenty of people that I'm able to debate civilly with. Skeptic doesn't want to disagree civilly, though. In every single debate, every single one, he has to put anyone that disagrees under some label ("progressive", "humanist", whatever), and then create a strawman caricature of what they believe, past actions, future actions, and then he suggests that they "hate everyone" (for instance, on Israel-Palestine arguments, anyone that ever defends Palestine is made out to be a Jew-hater that only defends Arabs). And even then, he does this before anyone even started to disagree.

But his tactic here was just using vitriolic language against the UK that's obviously just apocalyptic speech. I might as well go into a huge rant at how England is becoming the new 1984, soon they'll be "liquifying" people that disagree with them, blah blah blah.
 
Last edited:
Holler Hoojer said:
We might take a page from Edward Everett Hale and put all those folks on a rusty old tub anchored 30 miles off Somalia for all eternity.
Click to expand...
(From a description of Ecoterrorists on a taken over ship) and without toilet facilities - if they approach to dump in the ocean, a sniper fires - they have to live with their products.
 
Lonewulf said:
Well, I did PM him, but no response. Ah well.

To be fair, Dudalb is right about disagreement. But it's not because I disagree with Skeptic. I disagree with plenty of people that I'm able to debate civilly with. Skeptic doesn't want to disagree civilly, though. In every single debate, every single one, he has to put anyone that disagrees under some label (progressive, humanist, whatever), and then create a strawman caricature of what they believe, past actions, future actions, and then he suggests that they "hate everyone" (for instance, on Israel-Palestine arguments, anyone that ever defends Palestine is made out to be a Jew-hater that only defends Arabs). And even then, he does this before anyone even started to disagree.

But his tactic here was just using vitriolic language against the UK that's obviously just apocalyptic speech. I might as well go into a huge rant at how England is becoming the new 1984, soon they'll be "liquifying" people that disagree with them, blah blah blah.
Click to expand...
Probably just paid too much attention to V. Missed the point that it was fiction.
 
Oh yeah, and by the way: If I was in a country with a large Muslim population, I would not want to invite someone into the country that essentially says, "We should wipe out all Muslims".

Oh, yeah. And if I was in Israel, I wouldn't invite someone that said, "We should wipe out all Jews".

Anyone who thinks that this is "just" a case of "thought control" obviously hasn't put much thought into the delicate issues at hand.
 
Last edited:
Lonewulf said:
Oh yeah, and by the way: If I was in a country with a large Muslim population, I would not want to invite someone into the country that essentially says, "We should wipe out all Muslims".

Oh, yeah. And if I was in Israel, I wouldn't invite someone that said, "We should wipe out all Jews".

Anyone who thinks that this is "just" a case of "thought control" obviously hasn't put much thought into the delicate issues at hand.
Click to expand...
I have a suspicion that your first example would probably be the reverse - they just would not be letting them out - unchanged.:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp
 
Darat said:
If they were Brits living in this country I think there would be more concern but these are foreigners wanting to come into the country so have no rights here.
Click to expand...

Darat, either you worded this a bit more harshly than intended or I may be in strong disagreement with you. I know in the US, civil rights are not exclusive to just US citizens, but to anybody subject to US authority. I assumed it was the same in the UK.

I agree that countries have to right to bar entry to 'undesirable' foreign nationals (If I am not mistaken the diplomatic term is personna non grata) but to extend that to the statement that they 'have no rights here' seems a bit excessive.
 
I think Darat meant they have no rights to be here, not that they have no human rights when on our soil.
 
Yeah, if we want to look into silly standards for limiting immigration or even visiting the country, I'm not sure the U.S. should throw rocks in its glass house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom