MEP "Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense"

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 01:43PM #1

Freedom of speech is under threat in Europe and yet those who voted for Brexit are called 'dumb'.

On December 10th there will be an international congress in Morocco. The participating countries are set to sign an agreement which while not binding is still meant to be the legal framework on which participating countries commit themselves to draft new legislation:

"…one basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech.

The agreement want to criminalise migration speech.

Criticism of migration will become a criminal offence, and media outlets…that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFTxZ7Xfbvo

The Italian Government have [URL="http://www.ansa.it/english/news/politics/2018/11/28/italy-not-signing-global-compact-salvini_fde75c34-ea73-4358-bd17-df80c94e5c2d.html]refused[/URL] to participate:

Italian deputy prime minister Matteo Salving said on Wednesday that Italy will not sign the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration next month.

He said: "Just like the Swiss, who carried forward the Global Compact up until yesterday and then said 'everyone stop', the Italian government will not sign anything and will not go to Marrakech.

"The floor of parliament must debate it. The Italian government will allow parliament to decide.”

Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte warned the migration document tackles issues citizens are divided on.

Mr Conte said: "The Global Migration Compact is a document that raises issues and questions that many citizens have strong feelings about.

"Therefore, we consider it right to put the debate in parliament and subject any final decision on the outcome of that debate, as Switzerland has done.

"So the government will not participate in Marrakech, reserving the option to adopt the document, or not, only when parliament has expressed its opinion.”

01-12-2018 01:47PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Freedom of speech is under threat in Europe and yet those who voted for Brexit are called 'dumb'.

https://twitter.com/KayaJones/status/1068401850016120832

This sets an alarming precedent. To paraphrase Hall, "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

TheValeyard · 01-12-2018 01:50PM

That cant be right. Make it illegal to criticise mass migration? What does the rest of the clip say?

Edit: The UN deal is not legally binding, but countries will be placed 'under pressure' to follow it.

Potential-Monke · 01-12-2018 01:53PM

Saw this last night. Man makes a point, especially with his theory on how immigration and poverty are better tackled. Plus, colourful illustration for those who like it:

languagenerd · 01-12-2018 01:54PM

I don't know who the speaker in the video is, but none of that is true. He's talking about the Global Compact on Migration, which is a UN initiative, not an EU one, and it doesn't contain any provisions for shutting down media outlets who criticize migration.

The relevant paragraph from the document in question is:

"Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and
advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media".

So outlets that constantly produce racist or discriminatory content may lose public funding, but they won't be shut down or criminalised.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 01:55PM

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

That cant be right. Make it illegal to criticise mass migration? What does the rest of the clip say?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFTxZ7Xfbvo

RasTa · 01-12-2018 01:55PM

You got to be a special type of stupid to believe that tweet.

Gatling · 01-12-2018 01:56PM

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Edit: The UN deal is not legally binding, but countries will be placed 'under pressure' to follow it.

Expect us to be first to totally agree with it and put it into law like good little EU citizens

01-12-2018 01:57PM

People in the comments say it's a non-binding UN initiative, and it's not about criticism, it's about misinformation or something.

I'm too lazy to check.

Stark · 01-12-2018 01:58PM

languagenerd wrote: »

I don't know who the speaker in the video is, but none of that is true. He's talking about the Global Compact on Migration, which is a UN initiative, not an EU one, and it doesn't contain any provisions for shutting down media outlets who criticize migration.

The relevant paragraph from the document in question is:

"Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and
advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media".

So outlets that constantly produce racist or discriminatory content may lose public funding, but they won't be shut down or criminalised.

Stop oppressing our freedom of speech with your facts!

Sonics2k · 01-12-2018 01:58PM

No matter how much I Google this, I really can't find anything authenticating it.

I can see a Politico article which refers to a UN policy which is no way legally binding:

https://www.politico.eu/article/migration-un-viktor-orban-sebastian-kurz-far-right-pressure-europe-retreats-from-pact/

Rather it's more a promise to defund a media outlet that promotes hate speech relating to migrations, so expanding on current hate speech regulations.

pleas advice · 01-12-2018 01:58PM

All those lads who left Ireland during the recession to go to places like Canada and Australia should have stayed home...

RasTa · 01-12-2018 01:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

People in the comments say it's a non-binding UN initiative, and it's not about criticism, it's about misinformation or something.

I'm too lazy to check.

Don't bother, some American pussycat doll said so on twitter so it must be true.

Gravelly · 01-12-2018 02:00PM

languagenerd wrote: »

I don't know who the speaker in the video is, but none of that is true. He's talking about the Global Compact on Migration, which is a UN initiative, not an EU one, and it doesn't contain any provisions for shutting down media outlets who criticize migration.

The relevant paragraph from the document in question is:

"Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and
advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media".

So outlets that constantly produce racist or discriminatory content may lose public funding, but they won't be shut down or criminalised.

“

"stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote....... other forms of discrimination towards migrants”

If that doesn’t worry you you are very foolish.

“Other forms of discrimination” can mean anything they want it to mean.

I know the left loves to shut down those they disagree with, but this open-ended kind of language can be used to shut down anyone, even you.

Sonics2k · 01-12-2018 02:00PM

hah, it's fake news Pete.

https://twitter.com/StevePeers/status/1068588896555024384

Try reading the full context properly.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 02:01PM

RasTa wrote: »

You got to be a special type of stupid to believe that tweet.

The tweet just quotes the comments made in the European Parliament.

Sonics2k · 01-12-2018 02:02PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The tweet just quotes the comments made in the European Parliament.

So you saw a Tweet that suited your agenda, clearly did no research on it and then ran in to post how the EU is out to censor you and Freedom of Speech is under attack.

This is literally how fake news spreads. Good job.

Gravelly · 01-12-2018 02:02PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

hah, it's fake news Pete.

https://twitter.com/StevePeers/status/1068588896555024384

Try reading the full context properly.

“Non binding UN initiative”

Until it is enshrined in law (or even becomes unwritten policy), then we’ll see how non binding it is.
Do you think they came up with this for something to do on a quiet afternoon?

Kivaro · 01-12-2018 02:04PM

Gatling wrote: »

Expect us to be first to totally agree with it and put it into law like good little EU citizens

With the extreme liberalism being pushed by our current government leaders (Leo, Zappone, Coveney), it wouldn't surprise me if they superseded this "initiative" by making it illegal for us to even think negatively about open border migration. The "thought" police finally coming to fruition.

Bubbaclaus · 01-12-2018 02:09PM

pleas advice wrote: »

All those lads who left Ireland during the recession to go to places like Canada and Australia should have stayed home...

Economic migrants, every single one of them. We don't mind those migrants though cos they are white and Irish.

SEPT 23 1989 · 01-12-2018 02:13PM

Kite flying exercise

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 02:13PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

So you saw a Tweet that suited your agenda, clearly did no research on it and then ran in to post how the EU is out to censor you and Freedom of Speech is under attack.

This is literally how fake news spreads. Good job.

How is it 'fake news' if I am directly quoting what the MEP said?

He's talking about the legal framework on which members of the EU are supposed to draft legislation on this issue:

One of the “guiding principles” of the document asks for a “whole-of-society approach” to promoting mass migration, including the role of the media.

Governments are asked to “promote independent, objective and quality reporting… and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants”.

It may be rejected, and I hope it is, but it is still being proposed and that in itself is something which should be criticized.

Graces7 · 01-12-2018 02:15PM

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Economic migrants, every single one of them. We don't mind those migrants though cos they are white and Irish.

You said it!

NSAman · 01-12-2018 02:16PM

We have all seen it, The EU signs a non-binding “want” which eventually becomes a want.

“Vote for Jobs” was the line they got Ireland to vote on twice. At that stage no European Army was ever going to happen.. now??

Personally, I do not trust the EU. Its founding principles of the EEC were noble and should have been enough, but the new shape of the EU is worrying at the least.

Anything that tries to criminalize free speech is not to be signed into a “Want”

01-12-2018 02:32PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Saw this last night. Man makes a point, especially with his theory on how immigration and poverty are better tackled. Plus, colourful illustration for those who like it:

this is interesting. I took the few minutes to watch this, he makes his point very well.

The rate of population in developing countries is increasing exponentially.

The west will never be able to make a difference of any significant bearing by hosting millions of people from the developing world. It would be of much greater benefit to these countries if the 1st world contributed via industry and education to developing countries.

The problem is though, that if the developing world were to enjoy the same level of quality of life as the 1st world, we would need approx 7 planet Earths to support this, in terms of resources.

Firstly, the issue of population explosion in the developing world needs to be tackled through education, and in certain countries, more rights for women.

The next issue is the impending food crisis. in 2016, 11% of the world's population went hungry (according to the UN). By 2050 the world's population will have increased to almost 10 billion. Demand for food will be over 50% higher than it is today.

I am straying way off topic here, and this probably belongs to a different thread.

PlaneSpeeking · 01-12-2018 02:35PM

Mass unchecked immigration is a bad idea.
Those crossing the Med are economic migrants not refugees..
Trump is a f**king moron but that Skittles analogy was spot on.
Genuine refugees are better helped by funding camps near their homes. With education and safety for children.

Just getting than in before I'm not allowed. We used to joke the left would only allow free speech as long as they agreed with it.

No joke now.

greencap · 01-12-2018 02:40PM

my straight banana bullsh1t detector is beeping.

two pages in and no more reliable source than 1 kind of anti-eu mep.

a reminder that even flat earth loons like the dup can get someone into a parliament.

doesn't mean what they spout is ever of any substance.

4068ac1elhodqr · 01-12-2018 02:42PM

'Declaring migration as a human right'?

Have always fancied living in one of the world's most dense/populated cities, Toyko looks swell on the TV box, I won't take up too much space.
Am a real fan of sushi, their ever so reserved ladies, karoke into the wee hours, and am handy enough at karate. Can't speak more than a few words though, but there's an App for that.

Anyway, can someone call dear Geoffrey the chauffeur, to get over to the nearset airport.
Will I just explain that the UN/EU are supportive of my notion, over at the ryanair desk for free tickets?

Do not criticise this idea above, it's not allowed.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 02:51PM

greencap wrote: »

a reminder that even flat earth loons like the dup can get someone into a parliament.

Flat Earth loons? It's an agreement finalized by UN member states scheduled to be adopted at a conference on December 10th in Morocco.

Here's more information:

The UN's Global Compact for Migration sets out non-binding guidelines for an integrated approach to international migration. DW looks at the agreement and at why some nations are vehemently against it.

The United Nations' Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration marks the first time the world body has ever agreed on a list of global measures to tackle the risks and challenges involved in migration for individual migrants, and at the same time to maximize benefits for the countries taking in immigrants.

The agreement comes as huge numbers of people across the world, often driven by conflict and poverty, are leaving their countries of origin to seek refuge elsewhere.

But not all countries agree with the compact's basic tenets and have been vocal in their opposition.

The text of the agreement was finalized by UN member states on July 13, 2018, and is scheduled to be adopted at a December intergovernmental conference in Marrakesh, Morocco.

The compact is based on the recognition that the entire world needs to cooperate if current and future massive migration flows are to be managed in a humane manner, while still taking account of the values of state sovereignty.

The compact comprises 23 objectives for the management of migration at local, national, regional and global levels.

They include:
minimizing "adverse drivers and structural factors" that force people to leave their home countries

ensuring that all migrants have adequate documentation and identity papers

making objective information available on all stages of migration

promoting an "evidence-based public discourse"

saving lives and coordinating international efforts for missing migrants

creating conditions to allow migrants to contribute to sustainable development in all countries

cooperation on a safe return and readmission of migrants to their home countries if necessary

The compact does not stipulate any mandatory number of migrants to be accepted by a country.

The guidelines also call for combating trafficking and the "integrated, secure and coordinated" management of borders.

Why do some countries object?
According to the UN, the agreement as a whole takes into account "legitimate concerns of states and communities" and the fact that the repercussions of migration for respective countries and regions may differ according to their demographic, economic, social and environmental situations.

However, these assurances, and the fact that the compact is not legally binding, have not been enough to convince several UN members, including the United States, Austria and Hungary, who say they will not sign the agreement.

Governments in these countries have voiced several objections, among other things saying the compact mixes up the rights of asylum-seekers with those of economic migrants.

The US under President Donald Trump also argues that multinational agreements in general, and this one in particular, go against the sovereign power of individual governments.

States may agree to join the agreement at a later date even if their political climate is currently opposed to it.

Refuting the objections
In a bid to counter false information spread on the internet about the compact, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU party has published a list of questions and answers to reassure "concerned citizens." They can also be seen as refuting the objections made by the countries that are refusing to sign.

Phoebas · 01-12-2018 02:56PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The tweet just quotes the comments made in the European Parliament.

By a right wing MEP in Greet Wilders' party and chair of an anti immigration, Eurosceptic party in the EP.

Pete, what youre doing here is just rabbiting an 'opinion' of someone in your own bubble and trying to sell it as if it was some kind of actual policy because the words were uttered by an MEP.

You need to try harder with your fake news.

Sonics2k · 01-12-2018 02:59PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

How is it 'fake news' if I am directly quoting what the MEP said?

He's talking about the legal framework on which members of the EU are supposed to draft legislation on this issue:

It may be rejected, and I hope it is, but it is still being proposed and that in itself is something which should be criticized.

Because the MEP took it woefully out of context, and again there is no change to Freedom of Speech.

It's a proposition for a non-binding agreement to update the policy on hate speech and the public funding of media outlets, namely those who lie about migration policies to put it simply.

If this were an actual legally binding law that prevented people from talking about legitimate concerns about mass immigration, I would 100% back you up because Freedom of Speech is probably the most vital thing in the western world, but it's not.

MEP "Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense"

Comments