Preston Wiginton seems a thoroughly nasty man but why ban him from the UK?


I'm completely sure I could listen to him all day long without agreeing with his views.

And even if some people do agree with him then what's the problem with that?


We should allow all people of all views into our country so everyone can hear them all and democracy can take its natural course.

Those who wish to hear Wigington spout racist and white supremacist nonsense are free to travel to the US and hear him. So the ban on entry into the UK is purely academic. nothing to worry about. If you cannot afford to travel there, please let Mister Wiggington know I am absolutely certain he will finance travel of any number of people to hear his views.

Ha Ha! He won't be visiting the "mein kampf-site" in rural derbyshire after all. I imagine griffin and his mates will bang on for ages about the labourite plot against them again. Tossers!

The government has no reason to ban this man from the UK. He is not a danger to the public.

Those who feel they might adopt BNP policies if they went to hear him speak are perfectly free not to go and hear him speak.

I'm surprised the usual 'anti-fascists' haven't protested at this illiberal and nannying government ban.

The ban also limits the diversity of opinions in the UK, and diversity of opinions and everything else is a good thing which we all celebrate and want more of, not less.

Unfortunately, he has committed a number of offences that would be arrestable.


Since 2005, Wiginton has continued to appear at white supremacist events across the United States — and abroad, too. November 4 2008, Wiginton spoke to a crowd of 5,000 Russian ultranationalists at a Moscow rally against non-white immigration including calls for Serbian-style ethnic cleansing. Wiginton responded, "I'm taking my hat off as a sign of respect for your strong identity in ethnicity, nation and race." The audience responded with Nazi salutes and chants of "White power!" in English. Ten days before the Moscow rally, Wiginton served as master of ceremonies at an appearance in Michigan, by British Holocaust denier Nick Griffin, the national chairman of the BNP. He attended a meeting of the only university campus organisation in the whole USA described as a racially motivated hate group.

Being kept out of the UK is probably saving him from arrest and imprisonment. Given his outspoken views on Stormfront:

Beating down a mud [person of color] when they try to poisen [sic] one of our own or when they try to seduce one of our [white] girls may not be God inspired, but rather a righteous act of collective preservation."
— Stormfront.org post, July 29, 2007

"Some of the leading skinheads in Russia are my best friends. They are also the founders of the skinhead movement in Russia. … Luckily Russia is the only nation that understands RAHOWA [Racial Holy War]. Because of this … immigrants think twice about coming to Russia."
— Stormfront.org post, July 21, 2007

"I am here to tell you of …[a] cancer called illegal immigration … an abnormal growth that is threatening the life of American culture and the life of American people through the poisoning and infecting of our infrastructure … because of unsustainable cost … our streets and neighborhoods with crime … our health and environment with the spreading of diseases … our workforce by displacing jobs and … (our) values and ways of life."
— Excerpt from "Illegal Immigration Spells Cancer for the American Way of Life," undated essay posted to NoAztlan.org

After their Nazi mate was refused entry, perhaps now the BNP will be moved to argue that border controls are too strict?!

if they can ban him, then why do they still let these islamic clerics in to stir up hatred amongst the young muslims? Seems like one rule for them (appeasement?) and one rule for the other

Is absolutely immaterial. Nick Griffin described Islam as a "wicked faith" and won a court case to allow him to say that. Thus allowing any Muslim Cleric to describe Christianity as a "wicked faith" with impunity. Any cleric wishing to enter the country can simply point out that they are practicing their own faith and criticising another.

When trolling, it is usually best to come up with something better than the same tired claptrap that is trotted out by Griffinite drones. As for banned Muslim Clerics try these:


Abdullah Qadri Al Ahdal
Preacher considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs and fostering hatred which might lead to intercommunity violence.


Yunis Al Astal
Preacher considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs and to provoke others to terrorist acts.

Wadgy Abd El Hamied Mohamed Ghoneim
A prolific speaker and writer. Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs and to provoke others to commit terrorist acts.

Safwat Hijazi
Television preacher considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by glorifying terrorist violence.


Nasr Javed
Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs.


Abdul Ali Musa
Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fomenting and glorifying terrorist violence in furtherance of his particular beliefs and seeking to provoke others to terrorist acts.

Amir Siddique
Preacher considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fomenting terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs.


Face facts. You can go and see Preston Wigington preach racial hatred any time you want. The fare to the US is not that much. You could even get your return fare paid - like SImon Sheppard - if you play your cards right.

>> Is absolutely immaterial. Nick Griffin described Islam as a "wicked faith" and won a court case to allow him to say that. Thus allowing any Muslim Cleric to describe Christianity as a "wicked faith" with impunity. Any cleric wishing to enter the country can simply point out that they are practicing their own faith and criticising another.

So what you are saying is keep the Preston Wigingtons out, but let the Muslim hate preachers in?
I realise this is an attempt at appeasement, to try iron out tensions, but I would've thought most people would want to keep all hate mongers out fullstop. But, i guess you are entitled to your own opinions.

When Sarfraz Sarwar (leader of the basildon islamic center in essex) was ask what would the penalty be for under-age sex, he replied:
'You won't like it. But sharia says if they're caught doing it, you stone the woman.'

Lets kick out the white supremists, but also kick out the muslim extremists. They arent welcome here.

Except the BNP, nobody wants Fascist extremists in the country. Griffin fought and won a case on the basis that his extremism was acceptable. Thereby opening the floodgates for the entry of extremists into the country. When the "wrong kind of extremist" is excluded, then Fascists everywhere get upset.

Pick up your bat and ball and go home.

People have been migrating for 1000s of years. Everyone should have a right to enter the UK regardless of their viewpoints.

Apparently Wigington calls immigration a cancer.

You can agree or disagree with him but how can anyone have a problem with the man expressing his opinion?

Unless of course you have a problem with those you consider uneducated and unable to decide things for themselves hearing opinions they shouldn't be allowed to hear. And surely no anti-fascist could have such a low opinion of any of his fellow citizens.

Let all opinions be freely expressed and let everyone decide if they agree or disagree with them.

Pete says:
"Apparently Wigington calls immigration a cancer."

and

"Let all opinions be freely expressed and let everyone decide if they agree or disagree with them. "



Fairly obvious that Pete has access to Wigingtons opinions without the man entering the country. So what practical purpose would his presence in the UK serve? When you can find Wigingtons opinions you can decide if you agree or disagree and so freedom of speech is served. So why would the BNP invite him to the country?

>> Fairly obvious that Pete has access to Wigingtons opinions without the man entering the country. So what practical purpose would his presence in the UK serve? When you can find Wigingtons opinions you can decide if you agree or disagree and so freedom of speech is served. So why would the BNP invite him to the country?


"So what practical purpose would his presence in the UK serve?"
Business i'd imagine. Dumbass

Who put you in charge of immigration? Oh thats right - you arn't,
No one asked you and people don't need your permission to do anything.

Go home and collect bottle-tops