News

Suck on this, Jacqui Smith!

HOME Secretary Jacqui Smith – mistress of manipulation when it comes to public finances, but utterly useless as a defender of free speech – has just been further shamed by the Italians.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith

Just days after Smith had Geert Wilders slung out of the UK, the Dutch politician was invited to Rome, where he was granted the Oriana Fallaci Free Speech Award.

The award was handed to the Dutch politician during a conference on Islam and Free speech hosted by the Associazione una via per Oriana.

The Freedom Party leader addressed an invited audience and showed his film Fitna. Wilders entered Italy without any trouble on Friday morning.

The writer and journalist Fallaci, who died in 2006, was known, among other things, for her criticism of Islam. She considered Islamism to be a form of fascism. As is the case with Geert Wilders, Fallaci’s Islamic opponents and their leftist enablers actively sought to have her prosecuted for her criticism of Islam.

Smith’s second major blunder of the week was to ban Pastor Fred Phelps and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper from entering the country to picket a performance of the Laramie Project.

The excuse given for barring the Westboro Baptist Church clowns was:

The government has made it clear it opposes extremism in all its forms. We will continue to stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country. The exclusions policy is targeted at all those who seek to stir up tension and provoke others to violence regardless of their origins and beliefs.

Commented Mediawatchwatch:

How the hell are we supposed to make fun of them if they aren’t allowed into the country? The government exposes extremism in all its forms – except for extreme stupidity, apparently.

The WBC often threaten to travel abroad with their protests, but never deliver. All the government have succeeded in doing -  yet again – is to give idiots a lot of free publicity and feed the persecution complexes which they believe vindicates them.

And Brendan O’Neil, in the on-line magazine, Spiked, observed:

The banning of Wilders from Britain was motivated by the axis of prejudices that always underpins censorship. First by the idea that the public is incapable of dealing with difficult or dodgy ideas, and instead hears only ‘fire!’ or ‘panic!’ or ‘kill, kill, kill!’ when it encounters inflammatory material. Second by the idea that there is some abstract greater good – ‘social fabric’, ‘public security’ or ‘community harmony’ – that must be guarded from the pollution of dangerous ideas. And third by the notion that it is the job of the authorities to decide what is appropriate and inappropriate material for public consumption and to airbrush from Britain any thinking judged too pernicious or poisonous.

New Labour now polices the borders not only to keep out the ‘wrong’ people but also the ‘wrong’ ideas. The Wilders affair has set a very dangerous precedent. A Miliband-designed Thought Forcefield has been erected around the country. Britain is a little more unfree following last week’s Wilders exclusion.



10 responses to “Suck on this, Jacqui Smith!”

  1. newspaniard says:

    Roll on the elections, let’s get this bunch of amateurs away from where they can do so much damage.

  2. Stonyground says:

    Did anyone See Jaqui Smith’s pathetic response to the guy who suggested that taking certain drugs was less dangerous than riding a horse? The best that she could come up with was to say that his comments were unhelpful. Surely the statement needs to be challenged as to whether it is true or not. If the statement is untrue then let it be refuted, if it is true then we need to incorporate it into our thinking on drug use and try to move on from there. Jaqui Smith’s response seems to be to stick her head in the sand and ignore reality if reality fails to match up to her worldview.

  3. Barry Duke says:

    Yeah, Stoneyground, I did, and it just confirmed that New Labour’s irrationality goes way beyond issues of freedom of speech and thought. Its drugs “strategy”, like that of the US – where a trillion dollars has been spent over 20 years on its War on Drugs – is completely INSANE! Anyone with half a brain realised decades ago that the only way to deal effectively with drugs is to decriminalise their use, regulate their supply and tax each product as we do alcohol and tobacco.

    In a little light-hearted discussion in the pub earlier this week, talk got round to what one ought to do with any spare cash one might have, given that the banks are paying so little or no interest on savings. I suggested that the next best thing to hoarding it under the mattress was to invest it in cocaine.

    “Oh no”, said a mate. “Have you seen how the price of coke has dropped since the banking crisis hit the UK? – it’s down to a pound a line or less!”

    Being a little naive, I couldn’t quite see the connection. “It’s simple. When the City was on a high, it really was on a HIGH! The City of London was consuming enough cocaine to keep small South American republics afloat for decades. When the balloon finally burst, there was bound to be a glut of coke. So, as an investment opportunity, cocaine is pure pants,” explained my friend.

    Forgive my ramblings. Right now I am on drugs – anti-bronchitis drugs. I’m going back to bed.

  4. FrodoSaves says:

    I’ve had enough of this bovine masquerading as a woman. Who’s running the country while she’s out to pasture? This won’t do at all.

  5. Broga says:

    Is this the Jacqui whose banker crook husband has been sentenced to four years in the slammer in Italy? Or is that some other Cabinet Minister? I just can’t keep up with all these sleaze hounds. Now Gordo is off to see Papa in Rome for the third time – seems the Papa wants more Aid to the needy countries. Not, of course, the kind of Aid that buys contraceptives or provides abortions for women who have been raped. Brown was well chuffed to get 40 minutes with Papa – most of the discussion on Aid. The BBC is so reverential about these reports.

    I wonder if Cameron offers any slight hope. I heard he was an enthusiast for David Hume’s philosophical writing. I don’t suppose he could be veering to the dreaded atheist side of the divide? Or maybe his PR man meant to say that he liked the work of Rab C. Nesbit, the Scottish philosopher, in an attempt to capture the Scottish vote.

    Bronchitis Barry? Nasty. Best wishes.

  6. valdemar says:

    I doubt whether Cameron is anything other than Blair Lite. His refusal to simply come out and admit that he used (and probaby enjoyed) illegal drugs at Eton or Oxbridge or wherever bodes ill for commonsense in politics. It’s a bit like the baby Leo MMR fiasco.

  7. I’ve always found it ironic that in the UK, if you speak out against Islamic Terrorism, you are somehow a “racist”. But if Muslims scream, “death to the UK, death to the Jews”, they are simply exercising their “right to free speech”. The double standard is pathetic.

  8. Broga says:

    Valdemar. I concur. Anyone with £30 million tucked away, public school product and links to that bunch of destructive, drunken prats he joined at university is unlikely to offer much hope.

  9. Broga says:

    Comrade Tovya. I thought the Pope was a bit slow in condemn his holocaust bishops who denied the holocaust. Although, fair play, they did say “only 200,000” Jews were fed into the ovens. I see that Argentina has given one of these repellent bishops 10 days to get out of the country. Gordo and co. keep their heads well down as down Rowan Williams. Although Williams has little to fear as whatever he says is so opaque, convoluted and mesandering that either no one knows what he means or if they do and object he can always “clarify.”

    What was it that character in Alice in Wonderland said, “That is entirely meaningless.”

    “Excellent,” said the other. “That saves us all the trouble of trying to understand it.”

    Very free rendering from reading it to my children a long time ago.

  10. Broga says:

    After hearing some details of the torture – denied by the USA – in Guatanamo (hung of by the thumbs for a day or so) Gordon Brown says that the security of we Brits must come before any revelations. Ah yes. Quite so. Obama took the step of sending in someone to have a look. Suppose this man says Britain has been complicit in the torture, as is claimed, by the victim just released – what then?

    I guess Blair, Brown and co would prefer to say, “Yes, well we will ensure that this never happens again and we have learned important lessons.”

    Censorship, suspension of habeas corpus, denial of free speech are all just fine as long as you are a politician, preferably in the Christian believers stripe, and not on the receiving end yourself. I think these subject to the water boarding treatment, hung up by their thumbs and other forms of barbaric treatment might want a lot more.