Britain’s Daily Express reports:

Police will be ordered not to charge Muslim extremists in many hate crime cases — to stop them becoming more militant.

[...]

Examples of crimes to which a blind eye may be turned include incitement to religious hatred or viewing extremist material on the internet.

Last night critics warned that the move could mean Islamic radicals being give the freedom to encourage violence.

Some saw the move as a politically correct attempt to appease extremists who hate Britain.

It could even mean officers tolerating many activities of Muslim preachers of hate like the hook-handed cleric Abu Hamza.

Tory MP David Davies said: “This sounds like abject surrender. Everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law.

“It doesn’t matter whether someone is suspected of incitement to hatred or shoplifting — they should all face the same risk of prosecution.

“There should be no special favours or treatment for any section of the community.”

“Inciting religious hatred” and “viewing extremist material” are crimes? Sounds like the British are policing thought.

I think it’s dangerous for a society to punish thought and speech, no matter how despicable or unpopular.

But it is interesting that, while the British are ignoring the “crime” of “inciting religious hatred” among Muslims, they are enforcing a ban against American talk radio show host Michael Savage, who is not allowed to enter the country. Why? Because of his views and comments about radical Islam, which the British government says incite religious hatred.

So, if you live in Britain and follow a religious ideology whose adherents set off bombs around London, you can do all the hatred inciting you want. But if you caustically criticize the bombers and the people who inspired them, you might just find yourself banned for life.

“Thought crimes” are a bad idea. They’re even worse when they’re selectively applied.