British authorities said Monday they blocked Hasan Piker, a Turkish American online streamer, and another political commentator from entering the U.K. to speak at public events.
Piker, a liberal political commentator who is frequently critical of U.S. President Donald Trump, Israel and the war in Gaza, has 2.8 million followers on Twitch.
The Home Office said that the electronic travel authorization, or ETA, for Piker and Cenk Uygur, who hosts the “Young Turks” online political talk show and is reportedly Piker’s uncle, were canceled “on the grounds that their presence in the U.K. may not be conducive to the public good.”
“Decisions to refuse or cancel an ETA on these grounds are based solely on an assessment of the potential risk an individual may pose to U.K. society,” the Home Office said.
Piker and Uygur were due to speak at SXSW London, a culture, technology and creativity festival, this month. Uygur was also expected to give a speech at the Oxford Union, the prestigious student debating society.
“A sad state of affairs where obviously the interests of Israel take the highest priority,” Piker said on his YouTube channel.
Uygur said on X that he had been banned “for criticizing Israel. Are we free any more?”
Piker has faced criticism over some of his comments on the Hamas militant group, which is considered a terrorist organization in the U.K. and the U.S., among other countries.
Piker, a liberal political commentator
Yes the famously very liberal commentator …
Snicker, all this over a failed Nopixel role player who fooled everyone into thinking he is all that. Just nothing but a narcissistic bully.
“on the grounds that their presence in the U.K. may not be conducive to the public good.”
gutting the NHS, intrusive internet age-verification and spending taxpayer money on building weapons to kill civilians in Palestine, however, are all somehow very conducive to the public good
the UK government cares a lot about the public good
“The public good”
SHUT IT!
So weird how USA pays Israel’s bills but UK is the one putting it’s citizens in prison for speaking against it.
UK seems to be in an all out race to beat the US to full-on Orwellian dystopia. They’ve consistently been about 5-10 years ahead of the US when it comes to spying on citizens for decades now, but that gap does seem to be narrowing a bit.
Banning Israel’s political enemies from travel does put them squarely in the lead, but don’t count out the USians yet! Palantir’s Flock is spreading its wings, after all.
It really does feel weird as an American to see a foreign headline from a Western nation and think “yikes, things are bad over there”.
Eh… the USA is bigger and has more people to call this shit out, so the slide towards fascism can’t be as quick.
But the UK is, as a default, a lot more tolerant (or— I thought it was ), so the dynamics of all of this happening is… More complicated?
Seeing this all play out in real time is… Very weird and kind of fascinating
I feel like I’m learning a lot, but I also feel like I’m learning that I know nothing. More than anything, I’m feeling very confused.
UK falling into fascism isn’t likely, but authoritarianism, sure.
The UK doesn’t have a constitution, nor a constitutional right to freedom of speech. We’re a monarchy and have basically functioned under a family tradition for centuries of selecting the leader of the largest elected party as prime minister, and long may that continue. When government has tried to interfere in democracy, this family has clamped down on it. The constitution of the USA is nothing here.
A civilized country wouldn’t allow Israelis to enter.
There are plenty of Israelis who do not support what their government is doing. Should all Americans be banned from traveling based on their leader’s actions?
I wouldn’t be sad about it honestly.
The ETA system has been used to shut down commentators before, it was even used to deny entry for a Christian apologist. This censorship of anyone (unless they’re literally advocating violence) is disgusting
Israel is a cancer not a country.
Counterpoint: Countries are fully capable of being cancers. Case in point: Israel.
That is like calling cancer a distinct organism. It is not.
I’m OK with this, countries can regulate who comes into their country
Sure, but if the standard is consistent and based on legal precedent. All while the UK allows Israelis to enter the UK and spread actual hateful content that actually causes strife.
Let Palestine know.
When they win the war, set up international recognized borders and a government they can decide who comes in.
They did. Hundreds of years ago. Then colonizers and bullies came along and took it all away. People should be able to govern themselves. End of story. Anything else is justifying colonialism and authoritarianism.
It’s bullshit that countries should be able to deny entry to people arbitrarily, but your history is also a bit off. There never was a Palestinian nation state; there weren’t even nation states as we know them today hundreds of years ago (when Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire, and before that the Mamluk Sultanate).
You are the only one mentionning an independent state. Borders do not have to apply to only independent state either. The term can apply to non-administrative regions, geographic zones, and cultural areas The area that the british took from the ottoman empire was already called Palestine and the original plan was a single entity.
Correct. Anything else is basically saying culture X doesn’t have the exact same constructs or concepts as we do therefore they don’t exist. Tribal lands aren’t technically a nation or a state. Even if they are functionally the same. Pretty handy for the US and Canada. Just came in and took my families home and lands. Slaughtering them. No harm no foul. Should have known to have a nation/state right? State based colonialism is a hell of a drug.
Independent state or not, there certainly was no instance of a “Palestinian” people “govern[ing] themselves” (whatever that may mean - the majority of the world, including Israel/Palestine, has never had anything resembling a democratic government).
The Ottomans themselves were by definition a small dynastic elite that ruled over a multi-ethnic, multilingual empire. They didn’t give a shit about what “Palestinians” thought about the governance of this area except insofar as it suited their own perceived interests.
The Ottomans didn’t officially call this region “Palestine” in its own administrative divisions though that name existed as an unofficial designation for the rough area.
The Sykes-Picot borders were drawn from the rectums of some drunk European aristocrats who barely knew the region. On which sides of those borders people ended up is largely a historical accident.
The borders are already internationally recognized. It is gaza, the west bank and east jerusalem. While they would effictively control the boder if they win against the colonizer. Palestinian right to control their own lands and who enter it exists before it become an independent state.
Obviously good thing, right?
In a sense this will likely be more impactful as a galvanizing force than any speech the two could give at SXSW
