quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Lest we forget, Tommy Robinson was refused entry for one reason. He has been to prison for violent offences.

On a personal level I would be fine if he had been refused entry for being a racist shit. Just as I would be fine if a Muslim firebrand was refused entry for the same reason.

One EDL member explaining his reasoning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32qQGLVHiHk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
One EDL member explaining his reasoning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32qQGLVHiHk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

I dunno... after seeing Alex Jones... I just don't know... that guy has 262M views and isn't billed as a comedian, which is almost as scary as that whole notion of his that he needs his fifty guns for when he thinks he's being hounded by undercover agents out to get him.

ETA: The above was for fucktoyprincess.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
One EDL member explaining his reasoning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32qQGLVHiHk

Superb!

Did I catch that right - he wants to fight against Muslamics with ray guns, Muslamic infidels, and Iraqi Law?

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Is this what the average EDL member is like?

quote:

So the specific thing the court decided was the narrow issue of whether the First Amendment gave the appellees the right to force the Attorney General to admit someone into the country and the court stated that the Attorney General is not required to allow someone to enter the country when the Attorney General has a legitimate reason (in this case the violation of the visa requirements during the second visit).

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

So the specific thing the court decided was the narrow issue of whether the First Amendment gave the appellees the right to force the Attorney General to admit someone into the country and the court stated that the Attorney General is not required to allow someone to enter the country when the Attorney General has a legitimate reason (in this case the violation of the visa requirements during the second visit).

Kudos to you, FT Princess, for a thorough explanation of Kleindienst v Mandel. It is much appreciated that you took the time to go through it and explain it.

I am not surprised the Court refused to extend the Attorney General's authority. The Court often gives very narrow rulings.

So neither Mandel's Belgian Marxist nor Tommy Robinson were denied entry for any substantial reason, and the AG has authority to find some secondary excuse for denying entry. It is a slippery slope that reminds me of AG Palmer's Red Scare tactics of illegal search, midnight raids, and deportations in fear of anarchists, Bolsheviks and the politicalization of Labor in the USA after 1917. I would have been happier if the Court applied an "imminent danger" standard to the AG's power to deny entry, similar to the "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" proviso of the First Amendment Free Speech.

The United States Government has a history of prosecuting conspiracies rather than hard preparations for terrorists actions. Have a look at the case of Jose Padilla as an example. A citizen can be prosecuted for just talking with someone about something that might ought to be done at some vague time in the future. We live in hysterical times again.

I take note of Meatcleaver's discussion of the anti-globalization grievances felt by the working classes here and in Western Europe. I think the Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party reactions have been either ineffective or distracted. And as Aswad rightly points out, we should fear the rise of neo-fascism.

Nevertheless, I hold with the free marketplace of ideas. It is ironic that the Belgian Marxist's message was delivered by telephone. Gotta laugh at Government censors battling the technology of communications, as the Chinese are currently engaged. I think we should hear everyone in the flesh and, again a tip of the hat to Aswad, we should sort them out ourselves. Why in person? There is a big difference reading Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech than hearing him deliver it, wouldn't you agree?

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Robinson has been arrested and convicted of crimes in the U.K. that have nothing to do with free speech.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period?

quote:

Otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period? I mean everyone in the world can literally say that. Anyone's exposition on anything is speech. They don't have to be political; they don't have to be the leader of an organization, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

So it was not his message that prevented his entry. Robinson has been arrested and convicted of crimes in the U.K. that have nothing to do with free speech. Again, I don't see why we are required to allow a former convict to enter the country (again, what is arbitrary or slippery slope about that?).

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period? I mean everyone in the world can literally say that. Anyone's exposition on anything is speech. They don't have to be political; they don't have to be the leader of an organization, etc.

That is not at all what I said. Fuck no! I never suggested that foreign visitors had First Amendment free speech rights in America. Where did you read that? My concern was addressed to Kleindienst and the powers of the AG to censor who we wish to hear from abroad.

You are correct that Tommy Robinson is not an exemplar in this issue. He is only a football hooligan trying to be a pol. The incident in question took place in 2012 after Robinson entered the US on a fake passport, was screened by our ever alert Customs Service and allowed to go free. He stayed one night and was arrested when he returned to the UK on his real passport. Bizarre.

Tommy Robinson, whoever he is, is not the issue here because he was not denied a visa by our AG in 2012, when he was arrested.

The slippery slope is that Kleindienst (1972) unless it has since been modified gives the AG arbitrary authority based on some technicality to prevent us from hearing a foreign political figure we wish to invite. All of this while at the same time any world leader can speak at the UN in downtown New York and be broadcast over our television channels despite any objection by the AG. However, opponents of that world leader may be denied a visa if invited to speak here. So, on the one hand the AG has a petty power of censorship while on the other he has absolutely no power to censor. Think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on American televison. In Kleindienst a Belgian Marxist was denied entry. As if America could not survive his speaking here.

Please address the issue I raised. I apologise if I did not make myself clear in the earlier message.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period?

I'll have to remember that argument if ever I want to go on holiday in the USA and stay longer than my visa allows. 'Hey, I'm no longer on holiday - I'm here to spread my political message!' Then, all I'd need to do is schedule a certain minimum number of meetings at which I present lectures about anything political (including how Muslims shouldn't have freedom of speech, for instance - I have the freedom to say that too, right?).

(Pfft. Just get it enacted into US law that the USA has the right not to admit nasty little wankers - if only so that someone like Robinson could one day get a letter from the US Embassy here saying something like, 'Dear Mr Robinson, regrettably your application for a visa has been declined. This is because you are a nasty little wanker.' Fun!)

quote:

You are misinterpreting what I wrote. When I say "otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period?" meaning their right to entry in order to give their POV is protected by our (meaning belonging to you and me) First Amendment rights to hear their POV. Nowhere in any of my posts do I suggest that non-citizens have First Amendment rights themselves.

quote:

I've been searching for an example of someone denied entry on purely speech grounds, but can't come up with anything. If you uncover anything, please let me know as I would be very interested. Thanks!

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

You are misinterpreting what I wrote. When I say "otherwise can't every person trying to enter the U.S. simply say they are entitled to enter in order to give us their POV on the world, and they are protected by our First Amendment rights to enter....period?" meaning their right to entry in order to give their POV is protected by our (meaning belonging to you and me) First Amendment rights to hear their POV. Nowhere in any of my posts do I suggest that non-citizens have First Amendment rights themselves.

Ah yes, I did misunderstand your use of the word our. You are quite correct. Mea culpa.

quote:

I've been searching for an example of someone denied entry on purely speech grounds, but can't come up with anything. If you uncover anything, please let me know as I would be very interested. Thanks!

Oddly enough, Wiki cites Kleindienst giving the AG the power to deny a visa for speech purposes, but I can see (in reading Kleinienst) that you are right and they are wrong. I haven't found any others.

You win the blue ribbon for research and interpretation

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow
KKK is a racist organization. Militant Islam is not a race.

Neither is Judaism, but the KKK is nearly as notorious for jewbashing as it is for its problem with uppity blacks.

No, Judaism is not a race.  A religion, a culture, a tribe, a nation.  But not a race.  There are some Jewish ethnic groups: the Mizrahi (from the Middle East and North Africa), the Sephardi (Spanish) and the Ashkenazi, (German, Polish, Russian and other Eastern European), the Beta Yisrael of Ethiopia, and the Cochin of India.  That idea that Judaism is a race was put forth by Adolph Hitler.  The KKK are twits. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

I dunno... after seeing Alex Jones... I just don't know... that guy has 262M views and isn't billed as a comedian, which is almost as scary as that whole notion of his that he needs his fifty guns for when he thinks he's being hounded by undercover agents out to get him.

ETA: The above was for fucktoyprincess.

IWYW,
— Aswad.