Should Koran-protest pastor be banned from the UK?
Campaigners are calling for a controversial US pastor to be banned from entering the UK to share his views on Islam with activists. Should the visit be prevented?
Terry Jones attracted condemnation when he threatened to burn copies of the Koran on this year's 9/11 anniversary.
The English Defence League has invited the pastor to speak at a rally in Luton in February next year. Anti-extremist group Hope Not Hate is urging the home secretary to stop the visit.
Should Mr Jones be allowed to speak freely, or should he be banned from visiting the UK? What would his visit achieve?
Thank you for your comments. This debate is now closed.


Page 1 of 17
Comment number 1.
At 09:40 12th Dec 2010, steve butler wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 09:46 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 09:59 12th Dec 2010, knownought wrote:Yes he should be allowed to visit, why not? Why do we ban only 'Right Wing Nutters' and let the 'Loony Left Brigade' run riot? Do we, or do we not live in a democracy? Obviously the answer is no!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 10:01 12th Dec 2010, Craig H wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 10:03 12th Dec 2010, Ivan Idea wrote:It should not even require discussion or thought. There is NO place in our multi-cultural socis.ety for religious or political biggot
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 10:05 12th Dec 2010, Gillian wrote:More religious bigotry from the States. Why should we entertain these people who believe in a sky daddy yet wind up those who believe in a different sky daddy. It doesn't make much sense to me.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 10:06 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:Should Koran-protest pastor be banned from the UK?
No, all sides have a right to be heard, how can people make up there own minds if government doesn't allow the whole picture.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 10:08 12th Dec 2010, tony d wrote:No there should be no ban. The Home secretary should be targeting the islamofascist organisations in this country, and be putting more pressure on the ones who claim to be moderate to be more forceful in their condemnation of the militants.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 10:08 12th Dec 2010, Aneeta Trikk wrote:So having blown this man's importance out of all proportion in early September, the media now wish to shove his travel commitments down our throats?
Are you sure this is what HYS should be for BBC?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 10:10 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:Only openness will create a better society, talking of openness what are the intrepid BBC journalists doing by way of investigating if US diplomats have collected any DNA at the UN yet?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 10:12 12th Dec 2010, Foxhead wrote:If his repugnant views are not accepted in his own country of 'Greed, guns and God', why should we entertain him here?
This is not a free speech issue.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 10:14 12th Dec 2010, BeesAreTrendy wrote:The pastor has the idea that the Muslims want to take over the world; I can't imagine why he would come to that conclusion.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 10:14 12th Dec 2010, Peter Hoath wrote:Freedom of speech isn't just freedom to say what the majority thinks is correct.
Trying to ban Mr Jones will only give him the oxygen of publicity and a level of credibility he doesn't deserve.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 10:15 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:Is this the BBC trying to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment? Why not get back to the bigger story which is the USA trying to silence Wikileaks and throttle freedom of speech!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)
Comment number 15.
At 10:16 12th Dec 2010, Blogger wrote:UK never banned Islamic extremists like Pakistani general Musharraf who openly admitted to acts of terrorism in India. Even UK minister and PM has openly criticized that. So why ban now?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 15)
Comment number 16.
At 10:17 12th Dec 2010, newsfella wrote:Of course he should be allowed to visit. Last I looked we still lived in a democracy with a right of free speech. We seem to bend over backwards to ensure Islamic radicals get their chance to criticise everything about OUR society, so why shouldn't it work the other way? Oh of course, that wouldn't be very PC would it...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 16)
Comment number 17.
At 10:20 12th Dec 2010, stanblogger wrote:In a country, where there is supposed to be freedom of speech no one should be prevented from expressing their opinions, however much those opinions upset other people.
It would be further evidence that the UK is degenerating into a state where freedom is no longer valued, if the pastor were banned.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 17)
Comment number 18.
At 10:25 12th Dec 2010, Duckerama wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 18)
Comment number 19.
At 10:25 12th Dec 2010, barryp wrote:I dislike the comments this man has made in the past, as I dislike ALL pronouncements by Religious spokemen (the description I would use would becensored by the moderators). This mans doctine seems to be at best unworthy of a Christian and at worse unlawful.
I will of course fight for his right to freedom of speech, that freedom must know few bounds, and his utterances must be judged in context and occasion. Banning a speaker simply because you dislike what he says is not the answer.
For those with a Religious belief, leave it to your God to deal with. (Gods are normally big enough to deal with criticism, or they cannot count as Gods.)
AS for the rest of us, his words are simple garbage.
His visit must be allowed , if only to show that freedom of speech still exists in the UK.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 19)
Comment number 20.
At 10:26 12th Dec 2010, Alasdair Campbell wrote:So long as Muslim preachers continue to voice their messages of hate against us without sanction, then this pastor should be allowed into the UK to attend his meeting. This is one of the major flaws of 'multicultural' Britain - unconditional toleration and acceptance of all aspects of other faiths and their customs at the expense of our own religion and traditions. It creates resentment and does nothing to serve the cause of harmony in our society.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 20)
Comment number 21.
At 10:30 12th Dec 2010, David Windsor wrote:I don't know enough about this guys "message" to say.
But I think that people should recognise that the UK is a secular and christian state; and that we do not owe it to Muslims or any other faith to do anything other than understanding their desire to worship. I think we should end positive discrimination in favour of other faiths, not finance education in other faiths, stop considering ourselves multicultural, and if people want to live or visit here, kind of expect them to understand that they will see examples of both secular and christian doctrine and celebration against which they have zero right to criticise, comment upon, or mutter that they are being discriminated against.
Which doesn't mean that we should entertain people who preach against any other religion in an unhinged or deliberately inflammatory fashion. Speaking lucidly about the problems associated with multiculturalism is fine. Ranting like an idiot is not.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 21)
Comment number 22.
At 10:30 12th Dec 2010, Wu Shu wrote:Well done BBC for feeding the Muslim-haters yet again.
Would we allow someone who said the same things about Jews into the country? No, I don't think so either.
Does the BBC have an agenda about constantly whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment?
The comments in this HYS are going to be so predictable. Just wait until SystemF wakes up and sees this HYS. LOL.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 22)
Comment number 23.
At 10:31 12th Dec 2010, Tim wrote:What ever happened to freedom of speech.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 23)
Comment number 24.
At 10:32 12th Dec 2010, W Fletcher wrote:Don't see what the problem is - the spineless UK "government" allows moslem psychopaths to run amok shrieking about killing anyone who doesn't believe their fairy story. So the presence of another nutter who shrieks about hell 'n' damnation etc etc for not believing his fairy story... should make little difference!
If I as normal person who dismisses BOTH fairy stories as tripe, were to stand on a street corner bawling my head off about killing members of either sect, I'd be arrested in 2.373 nano seconds - but as long as it's all done within the guise of a load of religious twaddle - then that's OK matey....!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 24)
Comment number 25.
At 10:33 12th Dec 2010, Have your say Rejected wrote:If his words would constitute a crime in the UK, then don't let him in. there seems to be some uninformed people who think Christian Extremists are the ones who get banned, a quick search will show that about half the names listed on the 'name and shame' banned list are Islamic.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 25)
Comment number 26.
At 10:35 12th Dec 2010, U14717780 wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 26)
Comment number 27.
At 10:36 12th Dec 2010, Bob Ezergailis wrote:We have to begin to distinguish "hate" from difference of opinion, and even more so from differences as to values and ways of life. If we oppose another system of values and way of life, it does not necessarily imply that we must hate it, but it does mean that we must not only understand it, but we must oppose it. If it continues to assert itself against our opposition then hate against that aggression is appropriate, even if we hope that the matter does not go that far as to necessitate that severity of response.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 27)
Comment number 28.
At 10:40 12th Dec 2010, qwerty wrote:OK, here's an idea which I hope would satisfy both sides of the debate. We let him in, let him do his talk to a very small bunch of extremists, but the media and government agree to completely ignore the event giving him no publicity at all (it's the publicity he so craves). Freedom of speech guarenteed and the rest of us will just carry on as if it never happened. How about it BBC?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 28)
Comment number 29.
At 10:41 12th Dec 2010, Systematic wrote:Certainly we have Al'Qaeda members in our prisons not being sent to Pakistan as it would violate their human rights. We have a proven indian islamic hate preacher attempting to gain entry to the UK, and is currently winning. Why shouldn't we allow a guy who preaches hate against islam in? Would it upset the poor dears as everything else seems to do?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 29)
Comment number 30.
At 10:42 12th Dec 2010, PaganView wrote:Wu Shu said.....'Well done BBC for feeding the Muslim-haters yet again.
Would we allow someone who said the same things about Jews into the country? No, I don't think so either.
Does the BBC have an agenda about constantly whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment?'
Wu Shu, your argument is flawed, what about the muslims who hate the rest of us? You don't say anything negative about them, so it's obvious where your sentiments lie.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 30)
Comment number 31.
At 10:43 12th Dec 2010, panchopablo wrote:We have Muslim extremists on are streets burning poopies and insulting are troops all the while having police protection to do so.
Banning this man how ever extremist,would show discrimination.
14. At 10:15am on 12 Dec 2010, moreram wrote:
"Is this the BBC trying to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment? Why not get back to the bigger story which is the USA trying to silence Wikileaks and throttle freedom of speech!."
Seeing though it has two Israeli bashing HYS at once,i think its only fair we balance out the subjects.
Afterall,we leave in equal society,dont we?.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 31)
Comment number 32.
At 10:43 12th Dec 2010, kaybraes wrote:Why should someone be banned because his views don't coincide with the views of the Liberal surrender monkeys who force their views on the public ? If he believes as many people do that Islam is a threat to freedom and liberty and wishes to publicise this fact then he has a right to do so.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 32)
Comment number 33.
At 10:48 12th Dec 2010, Funitikus wrote:In the absence of religion or it's newly disguised wording "way of life", earth would have been a much happier planet.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 33)
Comment number 34.
At 10:48 12th Dec 2010, grumpovian wrote:Absolutely NOT!!! We allow every other religious maniac into the country, who wishes to preach against Christianity, and extol the virtues of islam. So, why not this one!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 34)
Comment number 35.
At 10:49 12th Dec 2010, load_of_bull wrote:23. At 10:31am on 12 Dec 2010, Tim wrote:
What ever happened to freedom of speech.
---------------------------
I think you will find the west has "Selective Freedom of Speech" controlled by the egotistical muppets who head states and media.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 35)
Comment number 36.
At 10:49 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 36)
Comment number 37.
At 10:51 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 37)
Comment number 38.
At 10:52 12th Dec 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 38)
Comment number 39.
At 10:54 12th Dec 2010, U14720016 wrote:Wu Shu wrote:
Well done BBC for feeding the Muslim-haters yet again.
Would we allow someone who said the same things about Jews into the country? No, I don't think so either.
Does the BBC have an agenda about constantly whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment?
------------------------
Is this the same BBC which has two simultaneous HYS's open dedicated to deriding Israel?
And perhaps you'd like to look into how many extremist preachers have entered this country, especially during Labour's reign. Remember Ken Livingstone hugging a man who wanted to throw homosexuals off of cliffs?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 39)
Comment number 40.
At 10:55 12th Dec 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 40)
Comment number 41.
At 10:55 12th Dec 2010, Lucy Lastic wrote:We either have freedom of speech or we don't.
Let him in but totally ignore him. He wants to be a player but if we keep the cameras away and the press(Highly Doubtful) then he will be forgotten before his plane takes off on his return to the U.S.
If it upsets the Islamic section of society, so what, they must appreciate we live in a democracy and not under Sharia Law.
If the E.D.L. attend then the police can practice kettling.
Freedom of Speech is paramount by all persuasions of society it's how we help resolve our issues.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 41)
Comment number 42.
At 10:56 12th Dec 2010, steve butler wrote:PaganView wrote:
Wu Shu said.....'Well done BBC for feeding the Muslim-haters yet again.
Would we allow someone who said the same things about Jews into the country? No, I don't think so either.
Does the BBC have an agenda about constantly whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment?'
Wu Shu, your argument is flawed, what about the muslims who hate the rest of us? You don't say anything negative about them, so it's obvious where your sentiments lie.
If you scan through his/her posts, it is indeed abundantly clear what his/her views are - silence anyone who has the nerve to speak out against the political movement known as "islam", but allow any views in support of it or its poitical motives. Most of it is quite funny to read actually.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 42)
Comment number 43.
At 10:56 12th Dec 2010, Funitikus wrote:There goes the rhetoric of "Freedom of Speech", the most hypocritic legislation ever passed.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 43)
Comment number 44.
At 11:00 12th Dec 2010, Dawny Hills wrote:No,he shouldn't be barred from entering the country but niether should he be provided with any protection. If these religeous fanatics have such faith in their twisted beliefs then that is all the protection that they are entitled to, or need. I doubt if any God with an ounce of self-respect is in a hurry to populate His/Her,Heaven/Paradise with dipsticks like this so he'll be as safe as houses.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 44)
Comment number 45.
At 11:02 12th Dec 2010, RICH588 wrote:No my beleif is we should not entertain any extremists If we have to he should be made to share a cell with one of those clerics that preach hatred we should lock them all up
and treat them eith the contempt they deserve
Complain about this comment (Comment number 45)
Comment number 46.
At 11:04 12th Dec 2010, panchopablo wrote:22. At 10:30am on 12 Dec 2010, Wu Shu wrote:
"Would we allow someone who said the same things about Jews into the country? No, I don't think so either."
We have many in this country and let in many who says such against Jews,didnt Ken Livingston make a man a guest of honour who promoted suicide attacks against Israeli civilians?.
Oh,i suggest you go to the two Israeli bashing HYS going on now and look at some of the comments about Jews ruling America,the EU and the world.
Is Islam the only religion free from criticism?.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 46)
Comment number 47.
At 11:04 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 47)
Comment number 48.
At 11:04 12th Dec 2010, Tez wrote:"Should Koran-protest pastor be banned from the UK?" - hys:
No - because:
He has his views on something and HOPEFULLY, we believe in free speech - even though a MINORITY may not agree.
IN MY PERSONAL OPINION:
He is FAR from the most dangerous & divisive visitor we have allowed to these shores.
He merely disagrees with the views of a BOOK.
We wouldn't ban him if he threatened to burn a Bible.
We should NOT allow a MINORITY to deny the MAJORITY.
NO Religious book should have preference over another.
Perhaps if the Koran did NOT espouse SUCH violent and dismissive actions against other Religions - there would be no NEED for people like Terry Jones to make his point.
In this age of 'terrorism', the contents of the Koran do not exactly preach universal Peace. It's time that it's 'followers' admitted this AND openly refuted some of it's contents - for the sake of Universal Peace between ALL Religions - unless they have a different view...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 48)
Comment number 49.
At 11:05 12th Dec 2010, Nigel Hiller-Garvey wrote:Well we are a democracy, so we have to let him enter and speak. Doesn't mean we have to listen, as most thinking people won't listen. The small minority that do listen to extremists (of any persuasion) do have the right to do so, provided they don't breach the law. We have suitable laws in this country to deal with the pastor if he actually attempts to incite violence etc. So let the man speak, and let us laugh at him :-)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 49)
Comment number 50.
At 11:10 12th Dec 2010, paul wrote:Much as I don't care for this rabid individual I still think he should be allowed to visit this country, by all means if he breaks the law when here have him arrested.
The so called English Defence league have not been declared an illegal organisation so until he breaks the law I believe he should be free to travel.
Otherwise you may as well arrest every male as a potential rapist/mugger etc.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 50)
Comment number 51.
At 11:10 12th Dec 2010, Mrs Vee wrote:No, I don't think he should be allowed in.
We have quite enough muppets of our own without allowing in this bloke from the foreign contingency of muppetry.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 51)
Comment number 52.
At 11:11 12th Dec 2010, jim wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 52)
Comment number 53.
At 11:12 12th Dec 2010, Lewis Fitzroy wrote:Why should he be banned? He did not burn any holy book, it was just a verbal protest!!! against a small group of brainwasher terrorist,, or crazy fools? who kill innocent woman and children, and they give very many good Moslems a very bad name!!!!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 53)
Comment number 54.
At 11:14 12th Dec 2010, Wicked Witch of the South West wrote:No he shouldn't be banned, just ignored. If only the media, desperate for 'news', would not give this 'man' the attention he so clearly craves there would be little or no problem. Instead it's going to be blown up out of all proportions......much like the poppy burning incident where the BBC reporting was more focussed on the EDL supporters who got arrested for quite rightly reacting to the muslim protesters provocation. I wonder who is going to get the bigger sentence if/ when that comes to court???
For clarity I have nothing against anyone of any religion, I just detest those who use religion as a facade to give their hate a 'respectable' front, regardless of which religion they're using.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 54)
Comment number 55.
At 11:15 12th Dec 2010, smilingparrotfan wrote:We have freedom of speech, don't we? And I'm pretty sure if this Mr. Jones should enter our jolly kingdom then his God will protect him from any marauding hordes.
Personally, I'd like all " extremists" to go away and fight their battles elsewhere. Who would believe that in the 21st century we still need to fight, bomb, spit and kill each other. One day we will grow up. Until then it seems we have little idea how to proclaim " peace on earth".
Complain about this comment (Comment number 55)
Comment number 56.
At 11:18 12th Dec 2010, MaxMax wrote:Yes. This man preaches hatred and so should be banned. It should make no difference what your religion is: anyone who preaches hatred, regardless of the religion of the preacher of hate, that individual should be banned from the UK.
If he was preaching peace, tolerance and love for our fellow men - like Jesus Christ did, then there should be no objection.
Individuals who preach hate, regardless of whether they are Christian, Muslim or another religion, are only going to create problems and will be putting fuel on a fire that should not be lit.
The UK can do without the disease of hatred and any individuals preaching such hatred. So ban ALL preachers of hate regardless of their religion.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 56)
Comment number 57.
At 11:18 12th Dec 2010, Armagideon Time wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 57)
Comment number 58.
At 11:20 12th Dec 2010, carlos wrote:as mentioned by a previous poster, muslims are allowed to take to the streets and show total disregard to grieving families who have lost loved ones past and present. burning poppies seems fine, it must be ok if your allowed to do it with full police protection. but make a cartoon of their "god" and thats it ,your dead. the young man who urinated on the war memorial got nationwide condemnation so why cant muslims who do far worse receive the same treatment ? this pastor is just voicing opinions that we in this country are not allowed to, well not in public.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 58)
Comment number 59.
At 11:22 12th Dec 2010, milvusvestal wrote:Here we go again - religious factions at each others' throats because one expresses violent hatred for the other.
Religion doesn't solve anything. All it does is sow seeds of unrest around the globe.
Don't ban him from entering the UK, as that will merely strengthen the position of Islamists. Better to ban religion altogether.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 59)
Comment number 60.
At 11:22 12th Dec 2010, Andrew Lye wrote:The US would not hesitate to exclude a UK person if they had done and said exactly the same as Pastor Terry Jones.
I am sure this invite was made public knowing full well that he would be banned and the EDL will have had the free publicity.
I am sure Pastor Jones could say what he wants via video conferencing.
His views are un-Christian and whilst I dont want the extremist Moslems in the UK that preach hatred and death to UK troops in Afghanistan, the introduction of Sharia Law and for the UK to become a Islamic state, I dont want someonehere who's sole aim is to incite hatred.
Let the US keep their own rubbish as we have enough of our own.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 60)
Comment number 61.
At 11:28 12th Dec 2010, Stereotype wrote:No he should not be banned from entering the UK.
Has he broken any laws in this country or his own? No.
Why do we allow a small, vocal minority to dictate what we can and cannot do or say here? Why do the groups like Unite Against Fascism always appear to be the most fanatical & dogmatic about opposing freedom & unity in the name of 'anti-racism'?
To the BBC: Stop trying to bend over backwards for people who despise the liberal views that you try to defend so dearly.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 61)
Comment number 62.
At 11:29 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:31. At 10:43am on 12 Dec 2010, panchopablo wrote:
We have Muslim extremists on are streets burning poopies and insulting are troops all the while having police protection to do so.
Banning this man how ever extremist,would show discrimination.
14. At 10:15am on 12 Dec 2010, moreram wrote:
"Is this the BBC trying to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment? Why not get back to the bigger story which is the USA trying to silence Wikileaks and throttle freedom of speech!."
Seeing though it has two Israeli bashing HYS at once,i think its only fair we balance out the subjects.
After all, we live in an equal society, don't we?.
_____________________________________________________
Get it right Sancho-Pancho! I'm anti Zionist and anti illegal building of settlements in contravention of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 446. I support Israels right to exist but not to continuously expand while blaming the refusal to negotiate on the Palestinians' reluctance to renounce violence while being inhumanely "kettled" in the West Bank.
However, let's not get sidetracked, getting back to topic, why is the BBC giving exposure to extremists? Why give the oxygen of media attention to fanatics of any persuasion? Let them shout and scream about one god or another till they go blue in the face. DON'T ENTER INTO IT! I'm sure the BBC decided on this HYS topic for a Sunday morning to whip up anti Muslim sentiment to deflect attention from the real big news happening in the world at the moment - Wikileaks and the arrest of Julian Assange. Why not discuss the calls by the right-wing in the US for Mr Assange's assassination by the CIA?
Okey BBC, if you are struggeling to find real news I will give you an example of it:https://themoderatevoice.com/94806/the-war-against-wikileaks-julian-assange-and-the-first-amendment/
A lot more relevant than a mad mullah of any persuasion don't you think?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 62)
Comment number 63.
At 11:30 12th Dec 2010, Aziz Merchant wrote:There are already a galore of problems and impasse facing this world in the 21st century - the most exploding power keg being misconstrued religion. Freedom does not mean liberty to openly streak in the public. It carries the tag of responibilities. All world religions brag about their steadfast and the shortest route to eternity. In the disgorging melee of venom and hatred the sacrosanct precept of humanity gets buried. UK or for that matter any other country should not invite such devilish brutes of all religious denominations to spread rancour and mayhem among the members of the community through their lop-sided, fiery yet bereft of logic hate speeches and sloganeering.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 63)
Comment number 64.
At 11:32 12th Dec 2010, Quo Vadis wrote:Yes, he should be barred from entering the UK. There is freedom of speech, and there are people who abuse that freedom. This 'pastor' is one such person, and he should be told in no uncertain terms that he is not welcome here. If he were allowed in, he would inflame passions, and stir up racial and religious divisions, so on this basis also he should not be allowed entry into the UK.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 64)
Comment number 65.
At 11:32 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 65)
Comment number 66.
At 11:32 12th Dec 2010, Potty Harry wrote:He burns books.
In response we are threatened with acts of violence in the name of somebodies imaginary best friend. Sweden suffered just this fate this weekend.
I know who I would ban.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 66)
Comment number 67.
At 11:32 12th Dec 2010, aphoristic wrote:Well well auntie Beeb... there seems to be a strange lack of any HYS topics relating to Wikileaks and the political prisoner Julian Assange.. I bet a lot of people would like an opportunity to vent some spleen on this subject... Government pressure eh?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 67)
Comment number 68.
At 11:33 12th Dec 2010, pedwards2 wrote:neither extremist Mullahs nor extremist Pastors nor extremist Rabbis should be tolerated in the UK. It is agianst the law to incite hatred and violence, or to indulge in acts which threaten public law and order. If there is a place for radicalism in religion, the religion needs to clean house, or itself not be tolerated
Complain about this comment (Comment number 68)
Comment number 69.
At 11:33 12th Dec 2010, Ex Tory Voter wrote:Whilst I think he's an idiot, he has a right to free speech. I also reserve the right to burn Bibles in front of him.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 69)
Comment number 70.
At 11:35 12th Dec 2010, Stokkevn wrote:I thought Christianity was all about love, compassion and all people are equal, at least that is the sentiment from the C of E bible. Maybe this guy who was "sent by God" to preach has a later version or maybe one he has written himself. He is not a Christian in my book, but he must be allowed into the UK to spout his rubbish and even maybe get a few followers, who hopefully who follow him back to the usa.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 70)
Comment number 71.
At 11:38 12th Dec 2010, John Prescott wrote:3. At 09:59am on 12 Dec 2010, knownought wrote:
Yes he should be allowed to visit, why not? Why do we ban only 'Right Wing Nutters' and let the 'Loony Left Brigade' run riot? Do we, or do we not live in a democracy? Obviously the answer is no!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the rabid response this topic is likely to draw from right wing nutters I think you are about to discover that there is no shortage of them.
In much the same way another carefully selected topic would have the effect of drawing a mass of left wing nutters to it's subject matter.
This I think proves that the UK does in fact have a pretty fair balance of nutters and also proves the old and well known law that opposites attract.
Being a BBC moderator must be quite an entertaining job at times. Light the blue touch paper and stand well back. :-)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 71)
Comment number 72.
At 11:38 12th Dec 2010, Peter Bassey wrote:The man responded to appeals and refrained from burning the koran. He has shown himself a far more reasonable human than those on the other side of the divide who chop off heads and exterminate their christian captives no matter the beggings and pleadings.And, good grief, all he threatened to do was incinerate a book, not wipe out a human life.
If he's turned back from entering the UK when death-spitting mullahs are a dozen for a pfennig, then it will confirm Britain in my eyes as the place I've always suspected it to be.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 72)
Comment number 73.
At 11:40 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 73)
Comment number 74.
At 11:42 12th Dec 2010, ziggyboy wrote:Is ther nothing more worthwhile in the news that deserves a bit of debate?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 74)
Comment number 75.
At 11:44 12th Dec 2010, Edwin Schrodinger wrote:Left wing students are allowed to daub obsecenties over the memorials to those who fought and died for Britain's freedom. But a vicar who is rude about Muslims should not be allowed into the country? Did those war heroes die in vain?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 75)
Comment number 76.
At 11:44 12th Dec 2010, Fly_n_finn wrote:1. At 09:40am on 12 Dec 2010, steve butler wrote:
If muslims are allowed to preach hatred, why shouldn't this guy? If we are going to bend over backwards for one sect, we should do it for all of them. Far better to just ban the lot.
_______________________________________________________________________
Agree entirely! Alternatively we could NOT bend over for ANY sect and kick them all out in the process of banning this guy? But then think about the terr's that would creep out of the woodwork if this guy was given a platform? Gives MI5 more intel'!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 76)
Comment number 77.
At 11:44 12th Dec 2010, Aneeta Trikk wrote:#62 moreram
I agree the premature closure of the Wikileaks item and the introduction of this scurrilous item (plus the equally banal items on Coronation Street and John Lennon) demonstrates an unhealthiness in the BBC's agenda.
Perhaps the BBC need to allow the public to determine what subjects should be aired on HYS as it once did a long time ago.
It is not the role of the media, especially the license payer funded BBC, to tell us what is important and an item about a two bit preacher, in terms of relevance to current affairs, is frankly pathetic.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 77)
Comment number 78.
At 11:45 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 78)
Comment number 79.
At 11:45 12th Dec 2010, yellowsandydog wrote:"28. At 10:40am on 12 Dec 2010, qwerty wrote:
OK, here's an idea which I hope would satisfy both sides of the debate. We let him in, let him do his talk to a very small bunch of extremists, but the media and government agree to completely ignore the event giving him no publicity at all (it's the publicity he so craves). Freedom of speech guarenteed and the rest of us will just carry on as if it never happened. How about it BBC? "
I agree, the media has built up this man's importance out of all proportion to what he actually does. Can he please be given the obscurity he deserves?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 79)
Comment number 80.
At 11:46 12th Dec 2010, corncobuk wrote:If we allow certain immams to not only preach hatred but pay for them to be here then we should allow this guy to come and give opinion. The day we stop him is the day we stop being a democracy. As far as i`m concerned they should all be chucked on an island and left to sort it out themselves. We have far more pressing problems than to listen to people arguing over who`s god is the right one. Playground mentality if you ask me.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 80)
Comment number 81.
At 11:48 12th Dec 2010, Lionwillow70 wrote:It never ceases to amaze me how much anger and hate is generated over something that, although it has different names, is exactly the same: religion. I think that it is simply the abdication of your own responsibilities to some "higher power" . I wish I could accept brainwashing on this scale.....
Complain about this comment (Comment number 81)
Comment number 82.
At 11:49 12th Dec 2010, U14368420 wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 82)
Comment number 83.
At 11:49 12th Dec 2010, Maureen Gobener wrote:Yes, let him in. I would like to hear what he has to say. It's been part of our way of life to have people standing on soap boxes in Hyde Park spouting about all sorts of subjects. Freedom of speech is good and, in any case, if we don't like what he has to say we don't have to take any notice. Whether he's preaching hate or love, let's make up our own minds. Just one man against the others.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 83)
Comment number 84.
At 11:50 12th Dec 2010, Duke wrote:Silly people burning things.
Grow up?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 84)
Comment number 85.
At 11:50 12th Dec 2010, Bill Daley wrote:People, be reasonable! The man comes from Florida, which along with Texas is the heart of redneck territory. if, in his home state, the best he can do is 50 adherents, just how effective is his hate campaign? It seems the only interest in his crusade comes from sensational media outlets, and BBC has joined the circus. Let him into Britain, and then make fun of him and his message. Take him seriously and you descend to his base level.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 85)
Comment number 86.
At 11:50 12th Dec 2010, load_of_bull wrote:40. At 10:55am on 12 Dec 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:
23. At 10:31am on 12 Dec 2010, Tim wrote:
What ever happened to freedom of speech.
=======================================
Its under lock & key in London zoo, as any dangerous animal is.
---------------------------------
Sharing a cage with Julian Assange!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 86)
Comment number 87.
At 11:50 12th Dec 2010, TC wrote:He should be allowed in. We have free speech in this country. However the press should report his visit in context and with balance.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 87)
Comment number 88.
At 11:51 12th Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:All this user's posts have been removed.Why?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 88)
Comment number 89.
At 11:52 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:73. At 11:40am on 12 Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:
69. At 11:33am on 12 Dec 2010, Richard wrote:
Whilst I think he's an idiot, he has a right to free speech. I also reserve the right to burn Bibles in front of him.
____________________
Free in the knowledge no one's going to kill you for that!
_________________________________________
So what's your point moog, kill them first?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 89)
Comment number 90.
At 11:52 12th Dec 2010, Detroit56 wrote:How did we allow ourselves to begin a journey toward a religious war?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 90)
Comment number 91.
At 11:53 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:74. At 11:42am on 12 Dec 2010, ziggyboy wrote:
Is ther nothing more worthwhile in the news that deserves a bit of debate?
______________________________________________________
Exactly! Though moog seems to have found his mojo.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 91)
Comment number 92.
At 11:55 12th Dec 2010, moreram wrote:77. At 11:44am on 12 Dec 2010, Aneeta Trikk wrote:
#62 moreram
I agree the premature closure of the Wikileaks item and the introduction of this scurrilous item (plus the equally banal items on Coronation Street and John Lennon) demonstrates an unhealthiness in the BBC's agenda.
Perhaps the BBC need to allow the public to determine what subjects should be aired on HYS as it once did a long time ago.
It is not the role of the media, especially the license payer funded BBC, to tell us what is important and an item about a two bit preacher, in terms of relevance to current affairs, is frankly pathetic.
_________________________________________________________
Thanks Aneeta!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 92)
Comment number 93.
At 11:55 12th Dec 2010, HSWET wrote:Yes, he should be allowed in! The issue is not one of free speech; it is simple fairness. We seem to allow antagonistic elements to roam the country calling for death on their targets and threatening violence to anyone who opposes them. On that basis, why shouldn't a man, who didn't actually do the deed he is being criticised for, be permitted a platform in this country?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 93)
Comment number 94.
At 11:57 12th Dec 2010, chiptheduck wrote:Whatever happened to free speech?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 94)
Comment number 95.
At 11:59 12th Dec 2010, chiptheduck wrote:74. At 11:42am on 12 Dec 2010, ziggyboy wrote:
Is ther nothing more worthwhile in the news that deserves a bit of debate?
-------------------
You bet. But the BBC is frightened of anything contentious. People might start realising that we are getting pretty fed up with the way things are going in the UK.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 95)
Comment number 96.
At 12:00 12th Dec 2010, corncobuk wrote:88. At 11:51am on 12 Dec 2010, the-moog wrote:
80. At 11:46am on 12 Dec 2010, corncobuk wrote:
If we allow certain immams to not only preach hatred but pay for them to be here then we should allow this guy to come and give opinion. The day we stop him is the day we stop being a democracy. As far as i`m concerned they should all be chucked on an island and left to sort it out themselves. We have far more pressing problems than to listen to people arguing over who`s god is the right one. Playground mentality if you ask me.
_________________________
Judging from your other posts, 'playground mentality', sounds like a mindset you're very familiar with!
----------------------------------------
Familiar with, indeed. A practitioner, no. I rely on posts such as yours for such examples.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 96)
Comment number 97.
At 12:01 12th Dec 2010, Graphis wrote:Personally, I think it's a bit pointless him coming here: if he really wants to have an effect, why doesn't he try preaching in Saudi Arabia?
More importantly, can we discuss the US governments dirty tricks campaign against Julian Assange?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 97)
Comment number 98.
At 12:01 12th Dec 2010, Frank wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 98)
Comment number 99.
At 12:02 12th Dec 2010, Rob wrote:Why impose a ban? I thought we only punished those convicted of crimes.
Banning him from the UK because you don't like what you think he might say?
Does the UK government not have a sense of morality anymore?
1. Free Speech
2. Innocent until proven guilty [i.e. one must be convicted before a punishment is imposed]
Complain about this comment (Comment number 99)
Comment number 100.
At 12:05 12th Dec 2010, Bradford wrote:Many people in Britain are disturbed by the growth of the muslim community in Britain and its benign treatment by the authorities inspite of bombings, provocation and sympathy for jihadist anti western causes. We are effectively denied a voice.
We have to listen and see radical muslims parade on British streets so
Why shouldn't Terry Jones be allowed to speak since he represents in part many of the views of British people. He should be heard.
If he is banned and if this post is banned it just proves that freedom of speech is a one sided affair.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 100)
Page 1 of 17