British government cancels plan for Trump to address Parliament

New York Post ^ | February 10, 2017 | Yaron Steinbuch

[detective]

The British government has pulled the plug on a planned address by President Trump to the joint Houses of Parliament during a state visit, according to a report.

Commons Speaker John Bercow this week said Trump should not be allowed to address Parliament because of his immigration ban, as well as the UK’s “opposition to racism and to sexism.”

Trump’s controversial visit is expected to take place in late summer or early autumn — with officials trying to avoid a formal snub by making sure he is not in London when Parliament is sitting, the Guardian reported.

[frog in a pot]

…the UK’s “opposition to racism and to sexism.”

Recommend watching the Netflick 2016 documentary, “The Jihadis Next Door” to see how well that “opposition to racism” is working out for Britain.

Its open borders with European countries is problematic, at the least.

[mewzilla]

And American tourists planning a visit should also reconsider.

[Scooter100]

Frankly, the Brits need their own version of PizzaGate. Clean out 1/3 of Parl. and then get back to us and reschedule Trump’s speech.

[Nifster]

The House Speaker has no authority to do this. He is seeking his fifteen minutes. We will see what Mrs May decides

[SteveH]

Trump should just go over and visit Farage (and the Queen if she is game), and then go back to the US.

Snub them all.

[Alberta's Child]

I don’t have a problem with this. I’ve never been a fan of having foreign leaders formally address Congress.

[Mr Radical]

As a Brit, I would like to apologise for the behaviour of our politicans.
Unfortunately, as Britain is probably lost, notwithstanding the BRexit vote, President Trump can probably find better things to do with his time than speak in Parliament anyway.

[MUDDOG]

No problem, old boy!

We remember some of you chaps also supported us in our war of independence.

[little jeremiah]

Placemark.

[Winniesboy]

Its open borders with European countries is problematic, at the least.

The United Kingdom does NOT have open borders with the rest of Europe. It's never been part of the Schengen open-border area, in which not all EU countries participate. Consequently when the UK refused to join in the EU's Merkel-inspired plan to distribute Syrian refugees on a quota basis throughout Europe, the EU could do nothing to enforce it. Consequently also the notorious (now closed) 'jungle' camp at Calais, where migrants who had made it across the rest of Europe became stuck at the UK border.

The only immigrants which Britain was obliged to accept under its EU membership were people who were already citizens of other EU countries, exercising their right to live and work in any other EU country. Third-world immigration to the UK was affected little, if at all, by EU membership. It's been the responsibility of successive British governments, not of the EU.

[frog in a pot]

My point:
Its open borders with European countries is problematic, at the least.

Your response:
The only immigrants which Britain was obliged to accept under its EU membership were people who were already citizens of other EU countries, exercising their right to live and work in any other EU country.

Thank you.

[detective]

“As a Brit, I would like to apologise for the behaviour of our politicans.
Unfortunately, as Britain is probably lost, notwithstanding the BRexit vote, President Trump can probably find better things to do with his time than speak in Parliament anyway.”

Thanks for the thought, but there is no need for you to apologize.

I suspect most of the British people agree with you.

[Winniesboy]

As it happens, I’ve just seen the latest figures for EU citizens currently resident in the UK. There are just over 3 million, with largest numbers from Poland (916,000) followed by Ireland, Romania, Portugal, Italy and Lithuania. None of these sources (with the possible exception of Romania) seem likely to generate the kind of multicultural problems I took it you were implying.