Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
January 6, 2016
I understand that it was likely mostly “British Moslems” (and women) that voted to ban Our Glorious Leader from entering the country.
Still, Britain: why do you have so many “British Moslems”?
Are they paying your pensions?
Donald Trump’s campaign fired back Tuesday against a scheduled debate in the British parliament to discuss whether the Republican contender should be banned from entering the United Kingdom.
British lawmakers will debate later this month whether Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States is a reason to prevent him from coming to Britain.
“Westminster would create a dangerous precedent and send a terrible message to the world that the United Kingdom opposes free speech,” George Sorial, executive vice president and counsel for the Trump Organization, told Fox News in a statement.
The Britcucks send the message every single day that they hate free speech.
They put Bonehill in prison for three years for posting Le Happy Merchant on Twitter.
This is a nation that wishes to abolish all forms of freedom in order to save the childlike emotions of Brown people and Jews.
Several British officials blasted Trump’s proposal follwing the Dec. 2 terror attack in San Bernardino, Calif., with Prime Minister David Cameron calling the idea “divisive, unhelpful and quite simply wrong” in a break from the convention that British officials keep their opinions about U.S. presidential candidates to themselves.
But why though, Dave?
Why would anyone want Moslems in their country?
Why is none of this ever explained?
Since Trump’s remarks, two petitions have been circulated regarding his potential travel to the U.K. The first, with more than 560,000 signatures, calls for Trump to be banned from entering Britain. A rival petition with nearly 40,000 signatures, calls on officials to refrain from imposing a ban.
The House of Commons Petitions Committee said Tuesday that both petitions would be debated Jan. 18. Chairwoman Helen Jones said the debate “will allow a range of views to be expressed,” and did not mean the committee supported a ban.
The debate will not result in a binding vote.
In response to the petitions, the British government said in a statement that while they don’t normally comment on individual exclusion decisions, Home Secretary Teresa May could ban someone if she “considers their presence in the UK to be non-conducive to the public good”.
“[We] will continue to speak out against comments which have the potential to divide our communities, regardless of who makes them,” the statement continues.
“We have to protect the emotions of child-raping terrorists!”
Not for long, cucks.
