Home About Archive of Articles Meetings Links Join the Forum Archive of Free Life Book Shop

The Court of Appeal Judgement against Farrakhan Old Hickory The black power leader, the Reverend Louis Farrakhan, has been banned from the UK since 1986.  On 30 April 2002 the government won its appeal against the ruling that the controversial American political leader should be allowed to enter Britain.  The Appeal Court overturned a High Court decision made in 2001 to quash a 16-year ban on the Nation of Islam leader.  It was feared that the 68-year-old could threaten public order if he were allowed to enter Britain.  However, this is not the end of this affair, for the lawyers acting for Farrakhan said they would appeal to the House of Lords.  Farrakhan has been banned by successive Home Secretaries since1986 when the Tories banned him on the grounds he had repeatedly expressed racist and anti-Semitic views.  He has especially upset the Jews in his attacks, as have other black power leaders like Jessie Jackson who have kept to Christianity.  This is one aspect of the laws against racism that has backfired on the Jews.  Maybe the black power leaders think the Jews are too rich to be spared their attacks.  Many British Jews were upset that the High Court repealed the ban last year. Every Home Secretary since 1986 has been set against Farrakhan entering the UK.  Blunkett is no exception.  Three Court of Appeal judges headed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Phillips, backed him up in that judgement.  The judges thought that the ban “did not involve a disproportionate interference with freedom of expression.”  This is not quite true, nor even can it be so, and the judges haply should have admitted as much.  Maybe they really do feel that motivation matters greatly to the nature of a ban.  But the plain fact is that motivation is rarely, if ever, germane to the truth.  Blunkett welcomed the result by saying: “I am very relieved that the view taken by successive Home Secretaries has been vindicated and the Home Secretary’s right to exclude someone from the country whose presence is not conducive to good public order has been upheld.”  In their ruling, the appeal judges said that since Mr Justice Turner’s 2001 decision about Farrakhan being safe “the events of September 11 had intervened”.  They said it was a personal decision of the Home Secretary which was within his “wide margin of discretion”, and that he was in a far better position to reach an informed conclusion than was any court.  Blunkett seemed pleased with the result. But there were some that were not so pleased.  Dr Hilary Muhammed, Farrakhan’s representative in the UK, said the Appeal Court had acknowledged the minister posed no threat.  Similarly, Sabiq Khan, solicitor for the Nation of Islam said, “He is preaching a message of self-discipline, self-reliance, atonement and responsibility.  He’s trying to address the issues and problems we have in the UK, black on black crime and problems in the black community.  It’s outrageous and astonishing that the British Government is trying to exclude this man.”  Farrakhan’s lawyers had argued the ban scotched the European Convention of Human Rights, which is also, nowadays, enshrined in British law.  Farrakhan has visited Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Israel and Libya.  But the appeal case overturned Justice Michael Turner’s ruling that there was no evidence of racial, religious or ethnic tensions between the Muslim and Jewish communities in Britain. But others welcomed the decision.  Lord Janner, chairman of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said: “I am delighted that the law has acted justly, realising the damage that Farrakhan could have done to Britain, particularly now at a time of political unrest in the Middle East, Europe and here.  With our local elections this week, the BNP do not need encouragement from the likes of Farrakhan.”   Farrakhan’s brand of Islam differs from the orthodox religion, which its founders did not really master – as Malcolm X discovered when he left the organisation and went to meet Muslims in Africa.  The Black Muslims of USA regards Elijah Mohammed, who died 27 years ago, as the last prophet, not the seventh century Mohammed, who founded Islam in Mecca.  But that is not quite how Islam worldwide sees it.  It has been Farrakhan’s aim to bring the Nation of Islam closer to the pristine creed, which itself is not short of members in the USA where there is the Muslim American Society.  This enables Farrakhan to learn without having to break away from the upstart creed.  Farrakhan’s followers defend him as a respectable role model to young black men.  The members are always dressed very smartly and behave in a way far more dignified than that of the black power movement in the 1960s.  They preach the virtues of self-respect, the family and Islam. Farrakhan is certainly a demagogue and has repeatedly attacked Jews with the result that in the USA and the UK they now hate him.  They say that he is racist and anti-Semitic and that seems to be true enough.  He has mellowed of late but in the past he has called white people “devils” and called the Jews “bloodsuckers”.  He has said that Judaism was a “gutter religion” and that Adolf Hitler was a “wickedly great man”, maybe in the rap sense of wicked.  But this has not been known to end in violence so far.  And, now he has decided to foster good will, he may never repeat his firebrand days.  But this is something the authorities never did want to risk.     © Libertarian Alliance  2002

web la-articles   Top 50 books of all time : by Old Hickory:-   "I have limited the selection to the books I have read. I keep to the norm of not recommending to others books I have yet to read. Clearly, books I have not read by now suggests a judgement of some sort." Read Online Diary Index Farrakhan has been banned by successive Home Secretaries since1986 when the Tories banned him on the grounds he had repeatedly expressed racist and anti-Semitic views. He has especially upset the Jews in his attacks, as have other black power leaders like Jessie Jackson who have kept to Christianity. This is one aspect of the laws against racism that has backfired on the Jews. Maybe the black power leaders think the Jews are too rich to be spared their attacks. Many British Jews were upset that the High Court repealed the ban last year.                                                           Farrakhan is certainly a demagogue and has repeatedly attacked Jews with the result that in the USA and the UK they now hate him.  They say that he is racist and anti-Semitic and that seems to be true enough.  He has mellowed of late but in the past he has called white people “devils” and called the Jews “bloodsuckers”.  He has said that Judaism was a “gutter religion” and that Adolf Hitler was a “wickedly great man”, maybe in the rap sense of wicked.