MEP "Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense"

Il Fascista · 01-12-2018 03:07PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

.

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.

What does lying about migration have to do with hate speech?

languagenerd · 01-12-2018 03:08PM

Gravelly wrote: »

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.

I take your point about open-ended language and how it could be re-interpretted down the line. It's something of a hazard of international legal documents that need to cover all the nuances of all the languages it will be translated into. But nothing in this document allows for the criminalisation of criticizing migration. That sentence alone in a UN compact can't do that, and we don't have laws that would allow it to. "Discrimination" already has a legal interpretation in most countries, so it would be based on that.

Overall, I think this document is fairly balanced - it calls multiple times for objective and factual records of migration, better documentation and more evidence in the public discourse around migration, as well as a commitment to trying to reduce the reasons why people leave their home country. Surely that's something we all want and need, regardless of our views on migration (which don't always fit a neat for/against left/right divide)?

It's irresponsible and untrue to state that the EU is banning criticism of migration. It isn't. Incendiary soundbites to suit one agenda rarely serve the public good. We need to talk about migration but we need to do it with truth and full information.

NSAman · 01-12-2018 03:11PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

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.

I could be flippant and say that is most EU governments.

Lies and counter lies are dangerous in ALL situations. Having a non-binding “want” is showing the direction in which the EU want to go with this. It IS worrying based on the history of the EU.

I agree with you totally in that free speech should never be restrained. People should always be allowed to say whatever they think, but should always be able to take criticism on what their beliefs are. That is a two way street that allows both sides to grow and understand each other’s point of views. Pointing out BS is a fundamental in any debate and should not be stifled in any way. Stopping it by way of legislation means both sides become entrenched and causes more harm than good.

Zorya · 01-12-2018 03:12PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

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.

I saw this yesterday. Knew it was ascribed to a ''far right anti EU MEP''. This of course makes everything that travels out of his mouth a lie. Even if it is simply another point of view.

Updating policies on hate speech is a dangerous enough knife edge to walk. For example we now have removed blasphemy laws here, making Christianity in particular fair game (I am not a Christian, btw) but the ECHR has just supported punishment for blaspheming Islam. That's problematic.

One person's ''lie'' is another person's perspective. Do you just want to have politcially sanctioned and funded media available to you? I prefer to have the witterings of madmen and loons, along with the justifiable dissenters from majority truthspeak, available to me.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 03:13PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

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.

Good, I'm hope so. There have been many articles on this today though, I am far from alone in showing concerns.

If that MEP has misrepresented what the agreement could result in, fair enough, but with people being convicted of hate crimes for posting videos of their dog giving a Nazi salutes in recent times, crap like this wouldn't surprise me in the least.. we're not that far from things as it is.

Wibbs · 01-12-2018 03:16PM

Jesus if something like that ever gets passed into law I'm going straight to gaol.

greencap · 01-12-2018 03:20PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Good, I'm hope so. There have been many articles on this today though, I am far from alone in showing concerns.

If that MEP has misrepresented what the agreement could result in, fair enough, but with people being convicted of hate crimes for posting videos of their dog giving a Nazi salutes in recent times, crap like this wouldn't surprise me in the least.. we're not that far from things as it is.

but if this should all blow over, and turn out to be more of the semi-tinfoil 'europe will be a caliphate' style nonsense which has been doing the rounds for the last 5 years, the question is what is the negative consequence to the people spreading mis-information?

is there any? ... or do they just continue spreading panic and misinformation, and kind of forget about all the times they were spouting utter cobblers.

and then go back to eating cheetos?

oh yes, and the nazi pug thing took place under UK laws which have been on the books for decades. kind of hard to pin that one on the UN/EU/NWO/Rotschilds/Soros/

Sonics2k · 01-12-2018 03:27PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Good, I'm hope so. There have been many articles on this today though, I am far from alone in showing concerns.

If that MEP has misrepresented what the agreement could result in, fair enough, but with people being convicted of hate crimes for posting videos of their dog giving a Nazi salutes in recent times, crap like this wouldn't surprise me in the least.. we're not that far from things as it is.

He has absolutely misrepresented it. Listen to what he says compared to what the resolution actually states. Its non-binding, not an EU directive (as the Twitter you originally posted states) and doesn't criminalise anything. It states to defund or stop publicly funding a media group that does push a new addition to hate speech.

As for what happened to Count Dankula, that whole thing was an absolute fiasco and should never, ever have happened to him. He was clearly making a joke and hopefully it can be overturned.

Grayson · 01-12-2018 03:32PM

Zorya wrote: »

I saw this yesterday. Knew it was ascribed to a ''far right anti EU MEP''. This of course makes everything that travels out of his mouth a lie. Even if it is simply another point of view.

Updating policies on hate speech is a dangerous enough knife edge to walk. For example we now have removed blasphemy laws here, making Christianity in particular fair game (I am not a Christian, btw) but the ECHR has just supported punishment for blaspheming Islam. That's problematic.

One person's ''lie'' is another person's perspective. Do you just want to have politcially sanctioned and funded media available to you? I prefer to have the witterings of madmen and loons, along with the justifiable dissenters from majority truthspeak, available to me.

Hate speech is illegal here. That's for all religions. So if I say christians/muslims/jews are scum and we should go hurt them, it's wrong. The blasphemy law simply made it an offence to say anything that offended a religion. So I couldn't say that muslims/jews/christians believe in a sky fairy. (although no-one was ever charged for blasphemy).

You need to realise the difference between the two

Freedom of speech here isn't absolute and that's a good thing. Words have power and can be very harmful. That doesn't mean that we censor the truth, it just means that you can't say anything which will incite violence against a particular group. If you think that's a bad limitation then I think you have your priorities messed up.

What's messed up about this thread is that the OP posted an MEP lying. That guy should be censured by his party and the EU but he won't be. And if he was, despite the fact that he was lying, people here would say that his freedom to lie from a position of authority is what matters and it's just people who disagree with him shutting him down.

Zorya · 01-12-2018 03:33PM

greencap wrote: »

. kind of hard to pin that one on the UN/EU/NWO/Rotschilds/Soros/

That's what happens - any opinion that is not acceptably liberal and progressive is dismissed as the rantings of maniacs who think evil Georgy Soros is funding the NWO.

Thankfully that spin is getting tired now as more people take a reasoned look at what passes for policy.

southstar · 01-12-2018 03:34PM

Kivaro wrote: »

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.

illegal to think....wont effect you too much then ....and the wilful stupidity goes on.

Snake Plisken · 01-12-2018 03:35PM

The FG gimps better not sign this!

MarkHenderson · 01-12-2018 03:35PM

With each passing day I trust the EU less and less. It started out a good ideal but its becoming more and more evident we are headed down the wrong path with its vision.

MarkHenderson · 01-12-2018 03:36PM

Snake Plisken wrote: »

The FG gimps better not sign this!

FG and any other Irish government will do as the EU tell them.

yesto24 · 01-12-2018 03:39PM

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

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

That's maybe true.

But more likely because they got a visa for the country they went to so were there legally.

But you keep you racist fantasy alive.

And before you ask yes every "undocumented" Irish, also called illegal immigrant, in the USA should be kicked out.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 03:39PM

Phoebas wrote: »

You need to try harder with your fake news.

It's not 'fake news' what the hell are you on about. You sound like Trump there.

The Hungarian Foreign Minister has spoken out against the agreement also:

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, in announcing his country will vote “no” on the UN agreement in Marrakesh in December, told the media that the “goal of the UN Global Compact for Migration is to legalize illegal immigration, which is totally unacceptable and violates the sovereignty of member states, including that of Hungary.”

The foreign minister said the UN is “making the same mistake as the European Union, which wants to base its own migration policy on mandatory resettlement quotas.” The UN pact “is more dangerous, however, because it is a global initiative, meaning it will have a greater effect than [European] policy, and represents a risk to the whole world.”

Szijjarto said the Hungarian government’s main issue with the compact is “whether or not it is mandatory, and in view of the fact that the document contains the word ‘obligation’ on eighty occasions, the claim that it only includes recommendations is a false one.”

“A legally not binding document would not prescribe the establishment of national action plans, and accordingly it is ‘clearer than day’ that, just like the originally voluntary mandatory quota, the Global Compact for Migration will become a point of reference, mandatory, and the basis for international judicial decisions,” Szijjarto said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended the UN Migration Compact, saying there should be “no compromise” on global mass migration and condemned opposition as “nationalism in its purest form.”

Now it may turn out that those criticizing it are incorrect and Merkel is right but quit calling it fake news, there's nothing fake about the UN Global Compact for Migration nor the opinions being expressed about it. Incorrect, perhaps. Fake, no.

Odhinn · 01-12-2018 03:42PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's not 'fake news' what the hell are you on about. You sound like Trump there.

The Hungarian Foreign Minister has spoken out against the agreement also:

Now it may turn out that those criticizing it are incorrect and Merkel is right but quit calling it fake news, there's nothing fake about the UN Global Compact for Migration nor the opinions being expressed about it. Incorrect, perhaps. Fake, no.

Not the most reliable source, given that states current government.

Phoebas · 01-12-2018 03:49PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's not 'fake news' what the hell are you on about. You sound like Trump there.
.

This is clearly fake:

Freedom of speech is under threat in Europe

It's a non binding compact, from the UN, not the EU, that hasn't been adopted and even if it was is non binding and doesn't threaten free speech anyway.

Outlaw Pete · 01-12-2018 03:53PM

Okay, so you think that I and others are wrong about what the agreement could spell but even if you are right (and again, I hope you all are): wrong =/= fake.

Grayson · 01-12-2018 04:02PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's not 'fake news' what the hell are you on about. You sound like Trump there.

The Hungarian Foreign Minister has spoken out against the agreement also:

Now it may turn out that those criticizing it are incorrect and Merkel is right but quit calling it fake news, there's nothing fake about the UN Global Compact for Migration nor the opinions being expressed about it. Incorrect, perhaps. Fake, no.

I've been trying to find where that quote came from and all I can find is breitbart.

Skylinehead · 01-12-2018 04:27PM

Outlaw Pete with under-researched, sensationalist random tweets that have little to do with reality?

01-12-2018 04:33PM

Well, at least After Hours has yet another anti-EU heading standing out. Expect more of this fake news Europhobic shít from all the Brexit-pushers in the coming years as they try to undermine democracy in Ireland by dragging us down with them back into the supposedly "shared experience" of Irish subservience to Britain.

There really are some midget-brained Paddys who cannot see the very obvious bigger picture here when English nationalists are pretending to be on the side of Irish freedom.

weisses · 01-12-2018 04:37PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Okay, so you think that I and others are wrong about what the agreement could spell but even if you are right (and again, I hope you all are): wrong =/= fake.

If you can point out how criticism of migration will become a criminal offense in Europe you have a point

If not

Fake news, hyperbole, etc etc

seamus · 01-12-2018 04:43PM

The racists are out in force criticising the migration compact for no reason other than they're racists.

You can pretty sure that if you hear anything about this which seems insane or "PC gone mad" or otherwise makes you annoyed, then it's fake news.

suicide_circus · 01-12-2018 04:47PM

when is criticism of mass migration legitimate and not racist? is it possible to criticise immigration policy without being racist?

seamus · 01-12-2018 04:56PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

is it possible to criticise immigration policy without being racist?

Of course it is. Is it possible to be absolutely anti-migration and not racist? Maybe, but such a unicorn I've yet to see.

If someone invents fake immigration policies that don't exist and then criticises them, well if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's virtually always a racist.

The MEP in the OP is a far right anti EU Dutchman who has made claims that have been fabricated from nothing.

Like I say, the racists are out in force because to them "migration" is a bad word, so if the EU or UN do do anything which isn't completely negative about migration, they will start claiming that politicians are seeking to forcefully replace their own citizens with refugees and jail anyone who fights back.

dr.fuzzenstein · 01-12-2018 04:56PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

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

That's because they are. They're so dumb, they probably think the London Underground is a political movement.

Gravelly · 01-12-2018 04:58PM

seamus wrote: »

The racists are out in force criticising the migration compact for no reason other than they're racists.

What a truly ridiculous post. Beyond parody, and without even a kernel of an argument to debate. Well done.

dr.fuzzenstein · 01-12-2018 05:00PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Okay, so you think that I and others are wrong about what the agreement could spell but even if you are right (and again, I hope you all are): wrong =/= fake.

But deliberately misrepresenting and twisting facts = fake news.

suicide_circus · 01-12-2018 05:09PM

seamus wrote: »

Of course it is.

great, thanks.

MEP "Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense"

Comments