Many of the people in this list promote hatred and violence towards different sections of society. This is just as much an affront to free speech and a persons individual freedom, as it may intimidate a person from participating in an activity that they should be able to do freely in a democratic society. Britain has so far been too willing to tolerate such extremism. According to the telegraph we have “made it easy for non-violent extremists. It has meant that supporting Islamism, condemning parliamentary democracy, advocating the destruction of Israel and calling for jihad against British troops in Afghanistan or elsewhere has been tolerated because it is not directly violent.”^[1] We must not continue to appease the promotion of hatred just because those promoting it are from an ethnic minority and therefore can fall back onto arguing that we are discriminating against them if we prevent such promotion of hatred. The Muslim community in particular has not been willing to confront the extremism in its midst so the state must. Banning those who promote such views from entering the UK is a good first step.

1. ^ Ed Husain, We must stop appeasing Islamist extremism, 14th March 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4991879/We-must-stop-appeasing-Islamist-extremism.html

Two of the people included on this list are Fred Phelps and Shirley Phelps-Roper who are the leaders of the Westboro Baptist Church, which promotes hatred against homosexuality and in the past has picketed US soldiers funerals claiming that their deaths were punishment for United States tolerance of homosexuality, and has also targeted funerals of aids victims. This is the sort of hatred and intolerance that the list is trying to prevent spreading into the United Kingdom.

This debate would not exist if these were members of Al-Qaeda or a similar group. In reality, they are the next best thing and the only reason they aren't locked up is that they themselves haven't physically hurt anyone. What we do know is that (especially in the case of Pastor Phelps) these people have created an atmosphere which itself incites violence and physical harm to people. This is not to mention the mental trauma that, sometimes very vulnerable people, are put through. The question, therefore, is "Do we really want these people in Britain?", and I would challenge anybody to say yes. There is no way that they could be counted as beneficial members of society, and we have enough people already in the country without letting in the detritus cast from other nations. I would not like to have my tax money spent on punishing or extraditing these people in the future.

As young Muslims within the UK are already being radicalised we need to do whatever we can to slow this process down. Banning radical preachers reduces the number of recruiting sergeants for radicalism in Britain hopefully reducing the speed at which radicalism spreads. People with firsthand knowledge of radicalisation say that preachers do play a key role in preparing the susceptible for acts of violence so they have to be kept out of Britain if possible.^[1]

1. ^ A ban that only helps extremists on both sides, 13th Feb 2009, http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-a-ban-that-only-helps-the-extremists-ndash-on-both-sides-1608169.html