Reader comments · Man who put up ‘gay free zone’ posters in London sentenced over al-Qaida material · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Man who put up ‘gay free zone’ posters in London sentenced over al-Qaida material

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Why am I thinking we are going to hear about this guy again…

    1. Gay & Happy 11 May 2012, 6:44pm

      Because he hasn’t been dealt with anywhere near harshly enough to deter him from carrying on with his hate (which I’m sure he fully intends to do, being bonkers, and not in a likeable way)?

      Still, this isn’t as derisory as the pathetic fine that he received for the posters. What a terrible message that sent out. Would almost have been better if that case had been dropped on a technicality…at least then it wouldn’t have made potential copycats confident that they only risked a small fine (and even then, only if caught by our less-than-impressive police “service”….)

      Anyway, can’t wait for him to get out next week….

      1. Sadly this level of religious fanaticism can/will never be tackled by the state. There is nothing they can do to this 19 year old boy that would prevent him from carrying out his continued hatred in the name of religion.
        When society accepts that basic truth, they will simply realise that there is no “discussion” or “compromise” with religious fanatics. It’s simply to deny them a platform for their hatred and let them wither and die in obscurity.

  2. Another holy one. Where would we be without the holy?

    1. Lynda Yilmaz 11 May 2012, 6:32pm

      Free and happy Ray. Free and happy

    2. ???? cow batmanz?

  3. Well he’ll certainly find that prison isn’t a “gay free zone”

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 May 2012, 6:40pm

      True, and he might turn out to be someone’s “bitch”. Teach him a lesson!

    2. de Villiers 12 May 2012, 8:46am

      It is never appropriate to advocate corrective rape.

  4. Irrespective of how vile this guy is, imprisoning somebody for 14 months for reading material that the government deems illegal is wrong and authoritarian on so many levels.

    You may as well ban books (I can think of far more compelling reasons to ban something like the Turner Diaries, even though I would never ban that either). The magazine may be evil, but the state has no right to imprison people should they decide read it,

    His previous offence was far worse and yet this only incurred a £100 fine.

    1. Censorship:
      Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship. It occurs in a variety of different contexts including speech, books, music, films and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of reasons including national security, to control obscenity, child pornography, and hate speech, to protect children, to promote or restrict political or religious views, to prevent slander and liable, and to protect intellectual property. It may or may not be legal. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and it is frequently necessary to balance conflicting rights in order to determine what can and cannot be censored.

      1. I’m not going to invoke ‘free speech’ or ‘censorship’ here since that’s pretty much an invitation to (usually fair) accusations of double standards.

        I just don’t believe banning people from reading objectionable material protects anybody and if I believed it did, I would never have made my last post.

        The point is with something like the Terrorism Act which is vague at best with what actually constitutes terrorism or terrorist material, what is to say one day it couldn’t be used against somebody with a worthy cause? That’s what makes this prosecution wrong.

        1. Lets hope he has’nt read this…

          ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’

    2. Spanner1960 12 May 2012, 9:39am

      I can see where you are coming from, but even in “The Land of the Free”, they still have restrictions. I remember many years ago seeing actual copies of “2600” which showed how to build phone hacking apparatus. (Useless now as it is all digital), but in its day it was pretty subversive and you could get nicked for just having a copy. There are also far worse items showing bomb-making etc. You simply can’t let material like that fall into the wrong hands.

      David Copeland, the guy that set off the Admiral Duncan bomb had various books as an example. Weak-minded individuals can be spurred on if this material was freely available, so it HAS to be restricted, and heavy penalties invoked on those that create or possess such antisocial stuff.

      1. Paddyswurds 12 May 2012, 11:33am

        Re phone hacking “equipment”… Unnecessary as all you needed to do was use the receiver cradle to bypass the payment mechanism… but as you say digital scotched all that nice stuff.

  5. Hope he gets bummed in the showers.

    1. Only if he enjoys it,

      1. Paddyswurds 11 May 2012, 8:16pm

        That is a very strong possibility. I had a look at his pic and with a good scrub and a shave I wouldn’t kick him outta bed for farting and I think by the look of him it wouldn’t be his first time swallowing the love juice…..

    2. Paddyswurds 11 May 2012, 8:18pm

      No matter how bad you think someone is you should never ever advocate Rape…….

    3. de Villiers 12 May 2012, 8:47am

      It is shocking to advocate the rape of people that you do not like.

  6. Sounds to me like they’re keeping him under close surveillance… the fact they knew what he was reading and got accounts from fellow inmates of his intentions gives the impression that there’s a file on him somewhere.
    In this instance that’s probably a good thing.

    1. I hope you’re right. This man’s a ticking bomb.

      1. Paddyswurds 12 May 2012, 11:38am

        …..No he isn’t. He is just suffering from the effects of the Abrahamic cult that he has been infected with since birth. I say rather than jailing someone for reading a magazine, reprogram them away from these evil cults that are the curse on the world because at the end of the day that is the elephant in the room.

  7. Next thing to do, seeing as he hates this country so much and will not accept our way of life is to send him off to his place of origin and we will see how he gets on over there. Stop namby pampying around and rid us of his idiocy.

    1. Spanner1960 12 May 2012, 9:43am

      Send him where? He was born here.

    2. kings cross 13 May 2012, 1:37pm

      His place of origin is Tower Hamlets

  8. The prisoner he was overheard to be talking to and who told him “to keep squeaky clean” so that their evil plans could continue was guilty of planning attacks on the Stock Exchange.

    Given Hasnaths history does this mean the LGBT communities in London are targets?

  9. Hasnath is a home grown extremist. He is second generation UK citizen.

    How do we deal with this?

    1. It could be a ‘phase’.
      He may grow out of it.

    2. By stop pandering to these Islamist extremists and making it clear to them that their hate-filled extremism has no place in the UK.

      Nedless to say that £100 fines for (anti-gay) hate crimes aren’t helpful to spread this message.

  10. in other words he got a £15 fine for the postering

  11. Proof anti-gay people like Christians and Muslims are terrorist.

    1. Spanner1960 12 May 2012, 9:44am

      Can be, not *are*

      1. Absolutely, Spanner

        Some are – not all.

    2. Paddyswurds 12 May 2012, 11:27am

      …..This is the same shyte that said all Nationalist Irish were terrorists….

  12. GingerlyColors 12 May 2012, 8:36am

    Let’s declare Britain a Sharia free zone.

    1. de Villiers 12 May 2012, 8:48am

      There could be a declaration of public secularity – although that would require the ending of the state religion.

      1. I’m up for that!

      2. seconded! France, despite being a staunchly catholic country is also a secular country. They recognised over 350 years ago the power that religion has, and removed it from the state.

        1. GingerlyColors 14 May 2012, 2:59am

          And Turkey, despite being a Muslim country is also secular and homosexuality is not criminalized, same with Azerbijan which will be hosting the Eurovision Song Contest in two weeks time.

    2. Hmmm too much of “V for Vendetta” in that thought. Religion is a personal thing and should remain as such. Banning it will simply force a fanaticism that will cause further problems.

  13. He should simply be deported to the country of his parents’ origin. He harbours death wishes for multiple groups of people in this country, and therefore has no place here. He should be somewhere where the ideology matches his own. And the ticket ought to be one way, of course.

    1. Michael

      So, my parents are both from Kenya. I was born in the UK. Should I be deported to Kenya if I commit a crime?

      My boss is based in Australia, but his family are from China – if he commits a crime where would you deport him to?

      If someone is born in this country then deportation is not possible. Nor would another country be likely to accept them.

      1. If you commit a crime against this country based on your belief that it would be better if you rendered it closer to ‘back home’ (your SPIRITUAL home), yes of course. Goodbye.

        1. I have never been to Kenya.

          I have only once left the UK – to go to Spain.

          Yet if I committed a crime, you would send me to a country I have not experienced – even though I am British, Michael N?

          Let me say I have no intention of committing any crime. I am very proud and patriotic to be British.

          In case it is relevant to you, Michael N, I am also white.

          Why should someone who is a British citizen be deported to a country they have never been to – merely because their parents are from a different country?

          I don’t disagree that Britain would be better off if Hasnath was not here. I however, see that if you somehow find a legal method to remove him and a country to accept him (unlikely) then you set a precedent that could be manipulated to then remove people such as me in the future if we committed crimes (and if the govt were not reputable it could be lesser crimes).

          Your argument does not make sense, Michael N.

    2. why can we not just exile these kinds of people to one of our barren islands?

      1. Guantanamo style?

  14. Jock S. Trap 12 May 2012, 12:12pm

    These people contribute nothing to soicety and should be forced or asked to leave to a country more suited to their deranged values.

    1. How would you do that, Jock S Trap?

      He is a UK citizen born in this country.

      How would you remove him – which country would accept him?

      Would the UK take a “terrorist” from a third country because his parents had been born in the UK?

      1. I ask a genuine question, because I can understand the temptation of removing this man from the UK – but recognise that he is a UK citizen and was born here – recognise that its unlikely any other country would take him – and ask a reasonable question as to how we deal with this – instead of providing an answer or engaging in debate about it people mark me down. Grown up debate works guys!

        How do you remove someone from your country who was born in that country and has citizenship of that country, which country do you remove them to, how are you sure that country/those countries would accept them?

        Not easy questions – but reasonable questions.

        1. I guess you make a valid point. You can’t just deport criminals born in the UK and dump them on someone else.
          In this case I would hope he’s kept under close surveillance, as he is evidently a wannabe dangerous radical.
          He’ll probably be the first point of enquiry for any suspect activity in Tower Hamlets, given the hate flyposting and al-Qaida fanzine subscription.

          1. Thanks Flapjack

            I dont like the answer that we can’t deport him – but we can’t.

            So close surveillance probably is the best we can come up with.

    2. Totally agree with you. Extremists like him are here for one purpose, to try and turn the UK into an islamic state. But as he was born here, we can’t.

  15. He is a parasite, hope he gets some sense kicked into him in prison. Retribate.

    1. He is a parasite.

      Wishing violence on him is lowering yourself to a similar level though.

      1. Revenge can be good. And revenge isn’t low, you should try it some time, it teaches your aggressor a lesson to not fuk with you again – the gay community haven’t done enough of it – which is why we keep getting fuked over, again and again – because we’re all happy and gay. A big problem with prison these days is that they are filled with muslims extremists who recruit and regroup whilst in there. So instead of getting his head kicked in, which I hope happens to him. He’ll be plotting other anti-gay ideas with his cohorts on how to kick your and my head in when he gets out.

  16. I’m seeing a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth over the light sentence he got, as though a police officer is the only defense gay people have against threats and violence. This is nonsense. Gays should harden up and learn to defend themselves. There’s a reason people are afraid to make fun of Islam, maybe we could take a few hints from the way Muslims react to attacks on their community. Respond aggressively to threats and you get respect.

    1. By the way, what’s stopping gay people from putting up leaflets pointing out that Islamic beliefs are nonsensical and and decrying Islamic homophobia in Muslim neighborhoods?

      1. Extreme reaction maybe?

        1. And you call yourself batman? Yeah right.

          1. You think I’m against leaflets posters and defending ourselves?

      2. The law?

    2. Completely agree… post on this topic so far.

      1. Well, if you can’t agree with yourself, who can you agree with?

  17. It’s rarely the terrorists from without that are the problem It’s usually the ones from within you really have to worry about.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.