Category: UK

Can The UK Ban Donald Trump Under Hate Speech Laws?

Joshua David Craddock Stoneham / / Europe, North America, UK

132739021_abdd1918c9_z

Since the Paris Attacks, Islamophobia and anti-Muslim rhetoric has been prevalent among many political and journalistic figures. An example from the press is the anti-Islam Sun newspaper headline claiming that “1 in 5 British Muslims support Jihadists”. Politically, The right-wing French party National Front is set to make political gains in local elections in the country. But no other political figure has been more of a talking point than Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who,this week, called for the “complete shutdown of Muslim immigration into America”.

This statement has been condemned by politicians and the public across the board with even senior Republican figures condemning Trump for this statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnn-N9_EDDo

One SNP MP, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (who is Scotland’s first female muslim MP) has called on Home Secretary Teresa May to ban Trump from Britain under laws prohibiting hate preaching.

Citing examples where extremist hate preachers have been banned from the UK in the past, the MP implored the Home Secretary to consider doing the same thing for Mr Trump.

But could the presidential candidate be banned under hate speech laws?

The law:

Whether Trump could be banned or not would come under the Public Order Act 1986 which defines hate speech as:

“A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

An amendement to the act, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 added:

A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.”

However another section of the law does state that freedom of expression is protected.

So technically the UK could decide to ban Donald Trump from the UK if they believed that he was in breach of the Racial and Religious Act 2006.

Whether he is is contentious, although of course his comments are undoubtedly Islamaphobic. However the treatment of hate preachers from Islam and other religions could make a case for a serious case to keep Trump on his side of the Atlantic.

Photots by Thomas Hawk Video from Wotchit News, Greg Hengler

How Likely Is Britain To Bomb Syria?

Joshua David Craddock Stoneham / / Europe, Middle-East, UK

8534228557_44d92f8091_z

On the day of the Syrian air strike vote, the question on everyones lips is how likely is it that we are going to be bombing Syria tomorrow?

In the past, Cameron said that he would not hold another vote to take military action in Syria until he was “sure” that the vote would successfully pass through parliament.

Screen Shot 2015-12-02 at 18.01.50
ISIS’ Presence in Syria

This is mostly due to his humiliating defeat in 2013 when he was defeated in the commons when putting through a bill which would allow Britain to bomb Syria, targeting pro-Assad forces.

Cameron now thinks that he will have enough support for action in Syria. This was made more likely by Jeremy Corbyn’s decision to give his MPs a free vote on the issue, meaning that many Labour MPs may support air strikes in Syria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2F6oSwFx28

Parties that have come out against air strikes and will likely vote against are the SNP, Plaid Cmryu, The Green Party and UKIP.

Labour’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn has advised his MPs to vote against air strikes, but many may defy this advice and vote in favour of the strikes.

Also some Conservative rebels have come out against the decision. The Conservative party line is to vote in favour of air strikes. The Liberal Democrats have also indicated they would vote in favour of air strikes.

So how seats are needed to swing it either way?

  • 640 MPs will be voting
  • The government need half, plus one, of them to secure a majority
  • At least 50 of the 231 Labour MPs are thought to vote in favour
  • This would ensure a government victory

Screen Shot 2015-12-02 at 17.56.13

So really, it comes down to those Labour MPs. Being the second largest party in parliament, if they along with the SNP, Green Party, UKIP and rebel Tory MPs vote against the strikes, the authorisation won’t go through. Whether Corbyn can convince enough of his MPs to take his stance on the issue will be the defining factor.

Photos by:Iain A Wanless, Guardian and BBC News.

All About The Volkwagen Scandal

Natasha Taylor / / Europe, North America, UK

11876301203_975bc8a653_k

Volkswagen recently hit global headlines as it was uncovered that they had been cheating in emission tests by making its cars appear far less polluting than they are.

The Guardian reported that the US Environmental Protection Agency discovered that 482,000 VW diesel cars on American roads were emitting up to 40 times more toxic fumes than permitted – and VW has since admitted the cheat affects 11m cars worldwide.

Volkswagen’s “defeat device” wasn’t a physical device, but instead a programme in the engine software that effectively sensed when the car was being tested and as a result activated equipment that reduced emissions. However, this was not the case in regular driving as the software turned off and increased emissions far above legal limits – up to 40 times of what is legal in the US.

It has also meant that far more harmful NOx emissions, including nitrogen dioxide, have been pumped into the air than was thought – on one analysis, between 250,000 to 1m extra tonnes every year. The hidden damage from these VW vehicles could equate to all of the UK’s NOx emissions from all power stations, vehicles, industry and agriculture, says the Guardian.

It is not yet known exactly which systems Volkswagen modified, but experts are said to be focusing on parts of the exhaust system that are designed to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide, a pollutant that can cause emphysema, bronchitis and other respiratory diseases.

The Environmental Protection Agency said in September that it would order Volkswagen to recall seven of its American car models with affected engines, which amount to total of about 500,000 vehicles.

Volkswagen will be getting in touch with anyone who has a car that has been affected as they now face $18bn (£12bn) in penalties under the US Clean Air Act, which allows fines of up to $37,500 per car.

In addition, the European Parliament has now also voted to set up a committee to investigate the scandal in more depth.

Why David Cameron Cautious About Action In Syria

Joshua David Craddock Stoneham / / Middle-East, UK

4592977889_79dd9e8a0a_z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the aftermath of the Paris Attacks, President Hollande declared that it was an “act of war”. However David Cameron is cautious about getting the House Of Commons to vote on whether act against ISIS in the form of air strikes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JkV0h8P_h0

Whereas France have stepped up their attacks on the terrorist group along with the U.S, Britain still remains a minor player in the attacks.

Despite having a long history with wars in the Middle East alongside the U.S, the two nations have been more divided with this issue.

The key reason David Cameron isn’t trying to get air strikes approved by the commons yet is because of the previous failed attempts.

Two years ago, Cameron tried to get approval through the commons to launch air strikes aimed at destabilising the power of the leader of Syria, Bashar-al-Assad. Due to a public outcry and reminders of poor military intervention in the past, the air strikes proposals were defeated.

However the UK has been launching airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq for the last two years, which was approved by parliament.

As Russia’s involvement in Syria has been linked to the downing of a Russian plane in Egypt, and French airstrikes have been linked to the attack in Paris, it may still be sometime until Britain gets involved in Syria rather than just Iraq.

Syria is more controversial and dangerous to bomb, as there are a lot of different groups fighting in the region, and mistakes could lead to even more success for ISIS as bitter civilians turn to terrorism.

This was something seen in Yemen a few years ago, when US airstrikes increased the Al-Qaeda presence in Yemen due to poorly targeted air strikes.

Cameron said he would not proposed legislation until he was sure he wold have a majority of MPs who support him. But with one defeat already, it may be a while until Cameron risks another one.

Photos by Eva Blue videos by AP, CNN and The Young Turks

Will Processed Meat Cause You To Get Cancer?

Natasha Taylor / / Europe, North America, UK

The World Health Organisation (WHO) have recently claimed that processed meats such as bacon, sausages and ham can cause you cancer.

The report claimed that consuming more than 50g of processed meat a day – which equates to around 2 slices of bacon – increased the change of people developing colorectal cancer by 18%.

This is in fact a real finding but what should we make of it?

The main thing is to remember that although this is a real finding, it’s a narrow finding that hasn’t just come to the surface. In fact links between certain types of meat and some forms of cancer – notably bowel cancer – isn’t ‘new’ news. The evidence surrounding this study has been building for decades, and is supported by a lot of careful research.

First of all, it’s important to understand the definition of what the study is saying.

Cancer Research have highlighted the difference between the meats highlighted in the study, and their definitions are as follows:

‘Red’ meat is (as you might expect), any meat that’s a dark red colour before it’s cooked –  this obviously means meats like  beef and lamb, but also includes pork.

‘Processed’ meat is meat that’s not sold fresh, but instead has been cured, salted, smoked, or otherwise preserved in some way (so things like bacon, sausages, hot dogs, ham, salami, and pepperoni). But this doesn’t include fresh burgers or mince.

The WHO’s study didn’t claim that if you eat any sort of meat then you can cause yourself to get all or any kinds of cancer. And it also didn’t claim that processed meat is just as, or even more dangerous than smoking, or anything else linked to cancer. The conclusions from the study were a lot narrower in that they have to do with cancer (mainly colon and rectal cancers) and meat.

According to Cancer Research,  in 2011 scientists estimated that around 3 in every hundred cancers in the UK were due to eating too much red and processed meat (that’s around 8,800 cases every year). This compares against 64,500 cases every year caused by smoking (or 19 per cent of all cancers).

They’ve also said that none of this means that a single meat-based meal is ‘bad for you’. What it does mean, however, is that eating large amounts of red and processed meat, over a long period of time, is probably not the best approach if you’re aiming to live a long and healthy life. Meat is fine in moderation. Cancer Research have said that it certainly is a very good source of some nutrients which you need – including protein, iron and zinc.  It’s just about being sensible, and not eating too much, too often.

So fear not, you’re free to eat a bacon sandwich every once in a while without worrying about the long-term state of your health.

 

Photo by: Kjetil Ree