Posted on 01/20/2016 2:47:59 PM PST by SeekAndFind
LONDON -- Donald Trump doesn't have many fans in Britain's Parliament.
But a debate among lawmakers on calls to ban Trump from the country revealed little appetite to close Britain's doors to the provocative Republican US presidential contender.
During a three-hour debate Monday, legislators from Britain's main parties stood to call Trump an attention-seeker, a demagogue and a fool. Many, though, argued that he should not be stifled or banned.
"While I think this man is crazy, while I think this man has no valid points to make, I will not be the one to silence his voice," said Conservative lawmaker Tom Tugendhat.
Parliament took up the topic after half a million people signed a petition calling for Trump to be excluded over his call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States in the wake of extremist violence. Trump has also claimed that some areas of Britain are so radicalized that police fear for their lives.
Under British law, any petition supported by 100,000 people -- who must each provide and confirm an email address -- is considered for parliamentary debate. Monday's debate was intended to air the subject rather than take a vote.
Labour Party legislator Paul Flynn, who opened the session, said Trump had already received "far too much attention."
"The great danger by attacking this one man is that we can fix on him a halo of victimhood" and boost his popularity among supporters, Flynn said.
Parliament took up the topic after half a million people signed a petition calling for Trump to be excluded over his call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States in the wake of extremist violence. Trump has also claimed that some areas of Britain are so radicalized that police fear for their lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Under British law, any petition supported by 100,000 people -- who must each provide and confirm an email address -- is considered for parliamentary debate. Monday's debate was intended to air the subject rather than take a vote.
Why in the hell haven’t we banned piers morgan yet?
I prefer Captain Morgan myself.
Britain is lost to Muslim immigration. And yet they want to ban the guy who wants to stop that. Goodbye England, have fun in your rape zone.
I guess the Brits didnt want to risk a massive American boycott. UK is dead anyway, they let themselves be overrun by the islamos. No putting that genie back in the bottle.
Uh, Tom. Did your read what David Cameroon recently said in the press advocating that Muslim immigrants to the UK be forced to assimilate and adopt Western values? Are you going to ban him too, because I think the smarter members of your party are coming around to Trump's position even though they may not admit it openly.
Imagine if parliament had banned Trump and then he became President? It would b a major embarrassment for those idiots when they would be forced to rescind the ban. If they had enacted the ban and refused to remove it there are so many levers of power Trump could use to humiliate that gaggle of bombastic idiots.
To any British readers who might see this post I have to tell you that BOTH of our countries are currently ruled by an idiocracy.
I am waiting to cut loose a great big,”EFF YOU”, when Trump becomes President elect. Battle of New Orleans 2.0!! And you can keep your damn Churchill Bust.
RE: ... said Conservative lawmaker Tom Tugendhat.
They sure throw around the word “conservative” quite loosely in the UK don’t they?
RE: It would b a major embarrassment for those idiots when they would be forced to rescind the ban.
But they did not ban him at all.... are they expecting something to happen? A portent of things to come?
Trump wants to prevent the US becoming the Muslim hell hole Britain has become.
Go Trump !
By that I’m not throwing my vote to him but in this argument I’m 100% behind him.
If Trump wanted to he and his Mega Rich friends could BDS the UK selling at least $10 billion in asset, and taking over controlling interest in many UK owned stocks on the wall street market. Icahn is an expert on this.
Yeah, they didn’t ban Trump because if he wins they will be asking him for money down the road and it’s stupid to piss off a loan shark.
WWII was ended about 70 years ago, time to shut down all the USA bases still open in England
Germany could handle everything that England does now.
Greece, and Poland could be forward bases, and Israel or Egypt could be our middle eastern emergency bases. In fact I think Israel has lots of American weapons already stored for that purpose as our best ally in the region.
you know you have irritated me when I break out html formatting on my phone.
And yet Anjem Choudry, the bile-spewing hateful Muslim preacher still lives in the UK, on the Dole with his multiple wives.
Why don’t we just shut our bases in Germany too, let them pay their way, they have been just as big dicks as those in England pushing this crap. We have some real allies in Europe that our money would be much better going to.
Key words:
Britain, Parliament, London, British law and CNN.
Of which our normal reaction should be:
Who cares, doesn’t matter, absolutely meaningless, just
the rants from the property of a crown (serfs). They are
no one to be criticizing America, they are someones property
and not sovereign individual citizens. They are 2nd class
subjects.
The German bases are strategic, The air bases are well positioned, but your right there are way to many that use being there as a vacation.
Virtually all staff could be replaced by Germans and paid for by Germany.
Also, I woult Tell England that Micheal Savage better be taken off the banned list or the first day Trump is in office the UK will get a big headache.
$$$$$$$$
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.