Sod that.
Took long enough to train the one I have let alone the cost !!
UN Migration Pact - Criticising Migration = Hate Crime
- Thread starter Deluxe1
- Start date
Took long enough to train the one I have let alone the cost !!
Won't cost much, only be allowed to wear a black sheet and won't be able go out on yhiet Own.
They don't even understand what the other side is.
As a pretty middle of the road kind of guy, forgive me if I'm being paranoid but this sounds like *actual* fascism so I've signed.
Is this the angle being used to shut down debate on immigration and to proscribe political parties now? Sweet Jesus... We can't have a civilised debate about this and can't have the public being angry over it so let's send people we don't agree with to prison.
Sinister isn't the word.
Anyone saying "lulz" about this needs to ask themselves when it will be their personally niche views under scrutiny and that become the next target.
Is this the angle being used to shut down debate on immigration and to proscribe political parties now? Sweet Jesus... We can't have a civilised debate about this and can't have the public being angry over it so let's send people we don't agree with to prison.
Sinister isn't the word.
Anyone saying "lulz" about this needs to ask themselves when it will be their personally niche views under scrutiny and that become the next target.
Last edited:
So the signatories to this non-binding and unenforceable political statement agree that hate crimes against migrants and inciting violence against migrants should be illegal. Shocking stuff. Can freedom survive if you aren't allowed to incite a mob to lynch that awful foreigner who took your job?
You're right, it is more than that:
UN Objective 17 said:
I don't see anything in there about making legitimate criticism of migrants a hate crime. In fact, it specifically protects freedom of expression as well as open and free debate.
If you have only watched the YT video then it sounds terrifying, but if you read the document there isn't much in there to back up the claims in the video.
Sure, you can twist it to sound insidious (as Craracus has already shown) but then the same is true for practically anything. If you take it literally, it's not the fascist manifesto some people in here believe it to be.
After all, isn't that how we debate online now? A literal interpretation of every single syllable because the art of nuance and inference have been completely lost? Where anything suggestable gets twisted into an argument around semantics, or when someone calls someone else out on the obvious meaning of what they have written, they simply reply with "I didn't say that".
Those men are MEPs, specifically MEPs who are part of a group called Europe of Nations and Freedom, a group made up primarily of French and Dutch right-wing Nationalists. They held a press conference, speaking out against the UN Compact, so they aren't dictating anything, they are expressing their concerns (with a fair bit of spin) against it. I thought you'd quite like them.
Eliminate all forms of discrimination? They mean negative right, not banning quotas or positive discrimination since that is also a form of discrimination.
In point e) they put emphasis on women. While I agree with it, that is also discrimination.
It does appear to be an attempt to control discussion as it's too generalised and the interpretation of it could be defined in the ways people have shown concern.
In point e) they put emphasis on women. While I agree with it, that is also discrimination.
It does appear to be an attempt to control discussion as it's too generalised and the interpretation of it could be defined in the ways people have shown concern.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,096
Interesting you all ignored Irish Tom's post.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
Just grown by another one 
I see Spain is now embracing the right wing, something that after General Franco, would have been considered implausible. Is it any wonder with such nonsense from the more and more politically motivated UN and the number of economic migrants clambering ashore on their coast, that the EU are still incapable of quashing or even generating a cohesive policy against? I also see the UK claims lack of funding precludes naval patrol boats in the Channel, so they are returning a ship from the Med to "assist" the new wave of migrants now landing on OUR shores. Too much assisting, not enough desisting. EU countries with stronger right wing affiliations are growing exponentially, and still those blind to the causes reel back in horror
I see Spain is now embracing the right wing, something that after General Franco, would have been considered implausible. Is it any wonder with such nonsense from the more and more politically motivated UN and the number of economic migrants clambering ashore on their coast, that the EU are still incapable of quashing or even generating a cohesive policy against? I also see the UK claims lack of funding precludes naval patrol boats in the Channel, so they are returning a ship from the Med to "assist" the new wave of migrants now landing on OUR shores. Too much assisting, not enough desisting. EU countries with stronger right wing affiliations are growing exponentially, and still those blind to the causes reel back in horror If someone believes that criminalising violence or incitement to violence against migrants, which is what the UN statement actually calls for, is an intolerable infringement of their rights then they are a hideous bigot (or, with regards to incitement alone, perhaps one of those free speech absolutist oddballs).
Surely the people foaming at the mouth about the document that will destroy freedom of speech as we know it actually glanced at it before signing a petition and ranting about it online, and didn't rely purely on some berk's spin on it? If not, I'm happy to say that those people might be gullible and lazy rather than bigoted.
I heard about this a few days ago and that the UK is set to sign this.
I can already see the problem just by the quote of the document you made. There are conflicting lines that will means this is enforced selectively. Some people already can't tell the difference between something being racist and people having a discussion. Saying you don't want anymore immigration is not racist. But I suspect even on this forum some would disagree, and there is the problem.
The thread isn't 3 pages long yet and we already have someone conflating debates about mass immigration with actual violence
This is going to end well.
I can already see the problem just by the quote of the document you made. There are conflicting lines that will means this is enforced selectively. Some people already can't tell the difference between something being racist and people having a discussion. Saying you don't want anymore immigration is not racist. But I suspect even on this forum some would disagree, and there is the problem.
The thread isn't 3 pages long yet and we already have someone conflating debates about mass immigration with actual violence
This is going to end well.
