Italy has deported Imam Zulfiqar Khan for promoting antisemitism, radical ideologies, and supporting Hamas. His expulsion highlights Italy's commitment to countering hate speech and extremism on the anniversary of the October 7th massacre.
Bad people (right-wing neo-fascist Meloni) doing bad things (deportation) to bad people (right-wing homophobe cleric) Khan, for bad reasons (being pro-Palestinian).
Khan’s social media activity, between November 2023 and April 2024, was said to have included videos in which he accused Americans, Germans, French, English, and Italians of supporting impure Zionists. He also invoked Allah to destroy the oppressors, particularly Western states that support Israel. […] He expressed admiration for Hamas, claiming they had demonstrated Israel’s inability to confront men and could only target children, women, and civilians. He also voiced his belief that Hamas was not a terrorist organisation but was defending its territory.
Encouraging and supporting terrorism is illegal in Europe and they had every right to expel him. You can’t be living as a guest in a Western country and at the same time demand their destruction. He’s not pro-Palestinian, he’s just your run of the mill Islamist demagogue.
Encouraging and supporting terrorism is illegal in Europe
Their support for Israel proves otherwise. It’s just a label they use to favor one side.
You can’t be living as a guest in a Western country and at the same time demand their destruction
Yes, you can. That’s what free speech means. Advocating that Westernism is bad and calling for its downfall is not the same as inciting direct violence. There is no requirement to be pro-West, to live here. This, “love it or leave it” Western Chauvinism is not something to be advocating on Beehaw.
He’s not pro-Palestinian, he’s just your run of the mill Islamist demagogue.
He is both, but he’s always been a right-wing Islamic demagogue. It’s only because he’s advocating for Palestinians that he’s now being expelled.
No, there are precise legal definitions. Here’s the one that applies to the EU. This definition also includes the following: “[D]istributing, whether online or offline, a message with the intention of inciting a terrorist offence, for example by glorifying terrorist acts”, which 100% matches Khan’s actions.
That’s what free speech means.
Europe doesn’t have the first amendment and pretty much every European country limits free speech specifically to prevent those who want to destroy the democratic order from doing so, like this Islamofascist. And yes, demanding the destruction of one or several countries is without a doubt a call for violence. What else would it be? What do you think “destroy” means and why are you making excuses for this guy? Why are you trying to bend this into the more abstract “calling for its downfall”? It seems to me - and correct me if I’m wrong - like you are trying to somehow marry some old extreme-left anti-Western ideals with Islamofascim, which is absurd mental gymnastics. Actual ideological similarities beyond hatred of the West in general and Israel in particular are nonexistent. You are just continuing the old Eastern Bloc zero-sum geopolitical “power play” of supporting terrorist groups that were primarily targeting the West - which ended up costing Russia dearly in the '90s and early 2000s. Not that they nor any Western intellectual still slavishly following this old directive have learned from this mistake.
He is both
You cannot be an advocate for the Palestinian people and at the same time support a group that oppresses Palestinians and has brought endless suffering over them even before this war that they started. That’s mutually exclusive. When Hamas had free reign over the Gaza strip from 2006 to October of last year, they murdered and tortured with impunity while siphoning wealth away into the coffers of their billionaire rulers. Did you know that Israel is granting asylum to LGBTQ+ Palestinians from both the Gaza strip and the West Bank due to how heavily they are being persecuted? Here’s a fantastic article on this topic that I would highly recommend you read:
Hamas’ goals are indistinguishable from the likes of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. They are all Islamofascist movements that wish to create a global Islamic caliphate, which involves the murder of every Jew and other “unbeliever” as well as the complete disenfranchisement of women. It’s a foolish mistake to think that it’s a resistance organization. You criticized this preacher for his Islamist views, but you failed to realize that they are indistinguishable from the ideology of Hamas, from what Hamas is actually fighting for.
with the intention of inciting a terrorist offence
which 100% matches Khan’s actions.
Bullshit. He did not attempt to actually incite people to commit terrorist actions, from anything I’ve read. You’re trying to play games with words, where “destruction” is (right now, you’ve decided) a direct incitement to violence, but “downfall” is just a vague ideological opposition. The word choice is not what matters, it’s the intent that does, and they did not show any evidence that he’s attempted to incite people to violent acts.
I don’t have to like the guy to oppose obvious bad-faith claims by the right-wing white supremacists running the Italian government.
like you are trying to somehow marry some old extreme-left anti-Western ideals with Islamofascim, which is absurd mental gymnastics
I didn’t do that, you did. I didn’t mention e.g. socialist calls for revolution or the like anywhere. But since you brought it up, it is important to point out that the logic used against him absolutely could be used against the Left in Italy. The whole point of the “First they came for…” poem is about not pushing back on fascism when it isn’t targeting you, or maybe even targeting people you don’t like.
And in case you want to claim this is fear-mongering, this is actually happening in the UK already, with climate protesters being charged as “terrorists” under a program (“Prevent”) that was originally meant to protect against especially Islamic extremism. [1][2]
You cannot be an advocate for the Palestinian people and at the same time support a group that oppresses Palestinians and has brought endless suffering over them even before this war that they started.
Now you’re just falling back on the “Hamas bad so Israel good better for Palestinians” shtick. Hamas is bad, but they’re certainly helping Palestinians more than Israel is. And their leaders being wealthy? You can largely thank Netanyahu for that, because he’s one of the biggest offenders siphoning them money to undermine the PA from making inroads back into Gaza. Also, using wealth disparity as some kind of gotcha against them as leaders is a hell of a line to use if you live in a Western country, since that’s true for their political leaders too.
Did you know that Israel is granting asylum to LGBTQ+ Palestinians from both the Gaza strip and the West Bank due to how heavily they are being persecuted?
That’s wonderful. It does not excuse their genocide, though. (See, I can actually hold a nuanced view that goes beyond “x good or x bad”.)
Hamas’ goals are indistinguishable from the likes of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.
Once again, you are clearly incapable of understanding that not supporting Israel (or their right-wing supporters abroad) does not mean someone supports Hamas or their political views. But them being bad, and even the majority of Palestinians having what I believe to be harmful religious views, does not mean I’m okay with mistreating or killing them. Same way I don’t for religious Jews or Christians, who also have harmful views.
Bad people (right-wing neo-fascist Meloni) doing bad things (deportation) to bad people (right-wing homophobe cleric) Khan, for bad reasons (being pro-Palestinian).
For the right reasons:
Encouraging and supporting terrorism is illegal in Europe and they had every right to expel him. You can’t be living as a guest in a Western country and at the same time demand their destruction. He’s not pro-Palestinian, he’s just your run of the mill Islamist demagogue.
Here come the usual suspects…
Their support for Israel proves otherwise. It’s just a label they use to favor one side.
Yes, you can. That’s what free speech means. Advocating that Westernism is bad and calling for its downfall is not the same as inciting direct violence. There is no requirement to be pro-West, to live here. This, “love it or leave it” Western Chauvinism is not something to be advocating on Beehaw.
He is both, but he’s always been a right-wing Islamic demagogue. It’s only because he’s advocating for Palestinians that he’s now being expelled.
Come on. “No u” is all you’ve got?
No, there are precise legal definitions. Here’s the one that applies to the EU. This definition also includes the following: “[D]istributing, whether online or offline, a message with the intention of inciting a terrorist offence, for example by glorifying terrorist acts”, which 100% matches Khan’s actions.
Europe doesn’t have the first amendment and pretty much every European country limits free speech specifically to prevent those who want to destroy the democratic order from doing so, like this Islamofascist. And yes, demanding the destruction of one or several countries is without a doubt a call for violence. What else would it be? What do you think “destroy” means and why are you making excuses for this guy? Why are you trying to bend this into the more abstract “calling for its downfall”? It seems to me - and correct me if I’m wrong - like you are trying to somehow marry some old extreme-left anti-Western ideals with Islamofascim, which is absurd mental gymnastics. Actual ideological similarities beyond hatred of the West in general and Israel in particular are nonexistent. You are just continuing the old Eastern Bloc zero-sum geopolitical “power play” of supporting terrorist groups that were primarily targeting the West - which ended up costing Russia dearly in the '90s and early 2000s. Not that they nor any Western intellectual still slavishly following this old directive have learned from this mistake.
You cannot be an advocate for the Palestinian people and at the same time support a group that oppresses Palestinians and has brought endless suffering over them even before this war that they started. That’s mutually exclusive. When Hamas had free reign over the Gaza strip from 2006 to October of last year, they murdered and tortured with impunity while siphoning wealth away into the coffers of their billionaire rulers. Did you know that Israel is granting asylum to LGBTQ+ Palestinians from both the Gaza strip and the West Bank due to how heavily they are being persecuted? Here’s a fantastic article on this topic that I would highly recommend you read:
https://voiceofsalam.com/2023/10/03/documenting-the-lives-of-lgbtq-palestinians-in-israel-an-interview-with-playwriter-tomer-aldubi/
Hamas’ goals are indistinguishable from the likes of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. They are all Islamofascist movements that wish to create a global Islamic caliphate, which involves the murder of every Jew and other “unbeliever” as well as the complete disenfranchisement of women. It’s a foolish mistake to think that it’s a resistance organization. You criticized this preacher for his Islamist views, but you failed to realize that they are indistinguishable from the ideology of Hamas, from what Hamas is actually fighting for.
It’s not “no u”, it’s “Israel is also committing war crimes and terrorism”. But you’re just an ideologue as well, and see everything in terms of one being right and the other being wrong.
Bullshit. He did not attempt to actually incite people to commit terrorist actions, from anything I’ve read. You’re trying to play games with words, where “destruction” is (right now, you’ve decided) a direct incitement to violence, but “downfall” is just a vague ideological opposition. The word choice is not what matters, it’s the intent that does, and they did not show any evidence that he’s attempted to incite people to violent acts.
I don’t have to like the guy to oppose obvious bad-faith claims by the right-wing white supremacists running the Italian government.
I didn’t do that, you did. I didn’t mention e.g. socialist calls for revolution or the like anywhere. But since you brought it up, it is important to point out that the logic used against him absolutely could be used against the Left in Italy. The whole point of the “First they came for…” poem is about not pushing back on fascism when it isn’t targeting you, or maybe even targeting people you don’t like.
And in case you want to claim this is fear-mongering, this is actually happening in the UK already, with climate protesters being charged as “terrorists” under a program (“Prevent”) that was originally meant to protect against especially Islamic extremism. [1][2]
Now you’re just falling back on the “Hamas bad so Israel
goodbetter for Palestinians” shtick. Hamas is bad, but they’re certainly helping Palestinians more than Israel is. And their leaders being wealthy? You can largely thank Netanyahu for that, because he’s one of the biggest offenders siphoning them money to undermine the PA from making inroads back into Gaza. Also, using wealth disparity as some kind of gotcha against them as leaders is a hell of a line to use if you live in a Western country, since that’s true for their political leaders too.That’s wonderful. It does not excuse their genocide, though. (See, I can actually hold a nuanced view that goes beyond “x good or x bad”.)
Once again, you are clearly incapable of understanding that not supporting Israel (or their right-wing supporters abroad) does not mean someone supports Hamas or their political views. But them being bad, and even the majority of Palestinians having what I believe to be harmful religious views, does not mean I’m okay with mistreating or killing them. Same way I don’t for religious Jews or Christians, who also have harmful views.