US self-defense guru vs British Home office

By Roy Denish

Theresa Mary May, the British home office secretary, may have the middle name of Jesus Christ’s mother, but she isn’t a typical saint type. She will stop you dead in your tracks if you fall into bad books with her.

Daughter of a reverend belonging to the Church of England, she was elected to the British Parliament in 1997 by her constituents of Maidenhead, a city just seven miles off Slough, predominantly made of immigrants from Eastern European countries, Asia and Africa.

In October 2011, she became a laughingstock when she argued at the conservative party conference that secretary of Justice Kenneth Clarke has resisted a deportation order of an illegal immigrant because the said immigrant owned a cat. Nevertheless, May is known as a “no nonsense” lady. She tried to strangle free speech by banning the word insult in the public order act. She was in the center of a controversy in January this year when she ordered the extradition of Richard O’Dwyer, a 24-year-old native of Sheffield, to New York for copyright infringement on his website TVshacke.net despite cries from the legal analysts that the website was not hosted on American servers.

Hard on the heels of Richard O’ Dwyer’s case, the home office secretary is embroiled in another rumpus over the exclusion of US self-defense expert Tim Larkin. Larkin was prevented from entering the United Kingdom last week when he was about to board a flight. A letter purportedly signed by the home office secretary stated, “the exclusion of a person from the United Kingdom is conducive to the public.”

Larkin committed the crime of criticizing the British self-defense laws in the aftermath of the London riots. The awe-struck Larkin later released a statement on his website www.targetfocustraining.com  stating that the refusal to disallow him was “simply misunderstanding” and hoping that the British will reconsider their decision.

Several legal analysts questioned the authenticity of the decision and whether the biased ruling was based on unsubstainated complaints made by Home Secretary May’s constituents.

In 2009, Larkin was involved in a tug-of-war with some of the city dwellers of Slough over his controversial seminar titled “maim or kill in self-defense.” His teachings sparked an outcry among the community leaders that prompted the former Mayor of the city, David MacIssac, to issue a statement to the media that Larkin was “not welcome” and that it’s not downtown Los Angeles.

MacIssac, a conservative politician, is a close confidante of the Home Secretary Theresa Mary May, and her constituency Maidenhead is located only seven miles apart from the city of Slough. During one of those seminars, Larkin sent out an invitation to the Home Secretary, but the invitation was declined for unknown reasons.

In the recent past, Larkin has stopped over in Slough at several occasions, holding seminars and workshops. But in October 2011, religious leaders and a group of politicians questioned how Larkin could ensure his methodology would not fall into hands of wrong-doers.

In the aftermath of Tim Larkin’s ban, a poll conducted by a British Newspaper, the Guardian, 76% of the readers disapproved the conduct of authorities as “unacceptable” to the question posed by the Newspaper whether it was right by the British authorities to exclude Tim Larkin.

A close friend of Tim Larkin, who wished to be anonmoyous, said there wasn’t an iota of evidence to suggest that Larkin’s teachings were vigilante, and to exclude him from the UK was a knee-jerk decision by the home office secretary.

Several British media outlets branded Larkin as a vigilante and labeled his methods as violent. In response to the accusations, Larkin told a British radio, “This is not being a vigilante. You are sitting in your house and you’re being attacked, or you’re attacked out in the street…There’s an awful lot of martial arts and self defense being taught there right now that gives no instruction on [how to hurt] the human body”

Larkin is a well-known self-defense expert in more than 40 countries.

Freedom of movement is part of the liberty of man, thus making it one of the most basic human rights. The article XIII of the Universal Declaration of HR stipulates, “Everyone has the right of freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and return to his country.” The article also says you should not suffer any discrimination because of your religion or your political opinion.

Larkin has planned to take his case with the Members of the British Parliamentarians in the coming weeks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.