Piers Morgan: "Why I’m so embarrassed today for Britain"

'Tis kind've funny.

The same parliament that hasn’t banned a single UK citizen from returning after fighting for ISIS is seriously debating banning Trump from its shores

As I write this column, members of the UK Parliament are debating whether or not to ban Donald Trump from entering Britain.

They’ve allocated three hours of time to do this.

Time that could have been spent debating terrorism, famine, nuclear weapons, the Middle East refugee crisis or the Syrian War.

But no, instead British law-makers have concluded their own time is best served seriously considering a proposal to ban a man who may end up being the next President of the United States.


The reason they’re doing it is, of course, is because Trump recently called for a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the U.S. in the wake of an horrific mass shooting by two Islamic terrorists.

Like many, I didn’t agree with what Trump said and indeed, I wrote him an open letter at the time saying it was ‘dangerously wrong and bigoted’.

But to ban a foreign politician for expressing an opinion is utterly absurd. Particularly a foreign politician who stands an increasingly good chance of becoming leader of the world’s biggest superpower and Britain’s supposedly closest, most powerful ally.

Can you imagine a situation where President Trump, if he is elected, is actually banned? It would make Britain the laughing stock of the world, and confirm to Americans that we’re just as pathetically petty and small pond in our thinking as you’ve always suspected.

It would also cause serious, probably irreparable damage to Britain’s relationship with the United States.

The sheer hypocrisy in all this ‘Ban Trump’ nonsense is breathtaking.

Britain throws down the red carpet and blares out the royal bugles all the time for leaders of countries with heinous human rights records.

[link to www.dailymail.co.uk]