UK revokes visa of law student who addressed pro-Palestine protest

[NotSoBigCrocodile]

With all the recent threads about the protests, I wonder what everyone thinks about the U.K. Government revoking the visa of 19 year old law student Dana Abuqamar. She said that:

“Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, but it seems to not apply to ethnic minorities, particularly Muslims and Palestinians like myself.”

She is challenging the decision and has accused the U.K. of hypocrisy. These are her comments, which she said have been taken out of context:

https://x.com/australianwoma1/status/1791064513321795956

I always see written on Mumsnet that “freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence.”

Do you think the Government’s decision is the correct one?

Yeah, I'm sure the judge is some sucker, not a highly educated member of society that knows the law better than most

You sound awfully invested in what you have inferred, an inference that the court has found to be entirely unsupported. We don’t convict people on the basis of what might be inferred but on what they actually say. You understand what freedom of speech is?

Judges aren't infallible. Mistakes made can be costly if others feel 'resistance' as seen on October 7th is ok or feel pride at 'resistance ' a d follow that path.

Freedom of speech (or rather freedom of expression in the UK) is not without limitations.
It is illegal to show support for a proscribed organisation in this country, and this is what Hamas is.
But sure, go ahead and pretend that someone expressing pride and joy at “Palestinian resistance” a day after October 7th is definitely not referring to the Hamas attack.

I’m not the one pretending! The appeal court ruled that what she said was perfectly legal and not supporting terrorism, Hamas or any of their actions.

You seem hell bent on pretending she was saying something illegal, in my opinion due to misreporting by the Daily Fail and other news outlets who falsely claimed she had.

It’s a type of propaganda that you have accepted. As a Jewish person, I am all too familiar with how racism towards a religious minority affects the way stories are published in outlets like the Daily Fail.

I would be interested to hear her views about the existence of the state of Israel and the possibility of a two state solution.
She's a law student, she should know about the careful meaning of words.

It was an appeal tribunal which requires three senior, specialist judges to sit on the hearing and make the ruling.

My understanding is....supreme court is the highest authority, the appeal court has decided she's a bit of a foolish child ( in her own words 'a 19 year old law student) and are probably wary of giving her too much importance and creating a figurehead.
She'll finish her course and toddle off home presumably.

Each article in the HRA and therefore the ECHR, has a derogation, ( eg public good or national security). If she was important it would be used I hope, nevertheless she may be considered one to watch. UK society is famously complacent and the government would like to keep it that way as it makes us easier to manage.

Yes. Afaik, the Home Office doesn’t intend to take it to the U.K. Supreme Court.

Above the U.K. Supreme Court would be the ECHR as the case falls under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights- freedom of expression.

It would be millions of pounds of taxpayer money for the Home Office to risk an appeal to this. She is a Canadian Jordanian law student who will head back home soon enough to countries that are both allies of the U.K.

Thanks. Foolish child. Hopefully, they are correct.

Personally I think she's dangerous because she's a foolish child.
What was the average age of Islamists who have carried out attacks in Europe and America? The average age of UK citizens who went to Isis as fighters & brides? What was the average age of the over enthusiastic jihadis on 7/10?
We live in interesting times.