WTF is going on in France Svarty?

[pErvinalia]

hatred is but one facet of freedom; hate speech ought to be as free as any other kind... we're French forl, not Quakers obsessed with a "society of Friends'... only a fool thinks that he can be friend with all the people he meets.

If one supports hate speech laws, they do not support free speech.

Free speech doesn't mean you can say anything you like.

[Cunt]

Free speech doesn't mean you can say anything you like.

Do go on. We are all waiting for your clear and firm statement on your position.

[Svartalf]

what did I say about the French social security being underfinanced? The Principle is noble and excellent and generous... the current execution leaves much to be desired... we can't put aside enough resources to give decent lives to the poor, the disabled, the under, or simply un employed, educate those that can be made into more productive cogs of society... etc etc... we simply can't, or simply won't... the taxees protest that they are being cast into the pit of poverty so that some can be extracted therefrom and are justifiably malcontent... and those in need of help and not getting enough resort to more or less illegal expedients to survive as comfortably as they can, which means generally resorting to means deemd illegal but under the excuse of neceessity...

[pErvinalia]

Free speech doesn't mean you can say anything you like.

Do go on. We are all waiting for your clear and firm statement on your position.

Even you should be able to understand what I wrote.

[JimC]

There are fairly obvious examples. Giving a rabble-rousing public speech with utterances such as "Kill the Jews" or "Kill the blacks" would rightly attract criminal sanction.

Some on the left certainly try to take restrictions further than is warranted; they are a minority, and in reality draconian restrictions are not going to happen, no matter how the alarmists rabbit on...

[Cunt]

Free speech doesn't mean you can say anything you like.

Do go on. We are all waiting for your clear and firm statement on your position.

Even you should be able to understand what I wrote.

You were beginning to tell us all what free speech means.

You can just stick to a vague statement which says nothing, or you can continue your thought to completion.

[pErvinalia]

Why bother when you are involved? It will only lead to you disingenuously squirming out of addressing the point by asking 48 inane rhetorical questions.

[Cunt]

There are fairly obvious examples. Giving a rabble-rousing public speech with utterances such as "Kill the Jews" or "Kill the blacks" would rightly attract criminal sanction.

Some on the left certainly try to take restrictions further than is warranted; they are a minority, and in reality draconian restrictions are not going to happen, no matter how the alarmists rabbit on...

So if some church had a regular message about Jew-hate, would it attract criminal sanction?

Farrakhan: 'I'm Not an Anti-Semite. I'm Anti-Termite'

Criminal sanctions? Or different rules based on his skin-colour?

[Svartalf]

snf even so, such a speach should be made into an offence only if followed by action aimed at hurting the people targeted in the speech.

[Cunt]

in reality draconian restrictions are not going to happen, no matter how the alarmists rabbit on...

So in Canada, because of the human rights tribunals, you are not allowed to speak out on certain issues. Not 'alarmist' at all, but plain fact.

If you disagree, it's simple really. Start a business or news organization in Canada, and say those things. You WILL be ruined by the Human Rights Commission, with no legal recourse, no matter what the facts around your opinion are.

They are a bit sensitive about biology/sex/gender right now. Care to wager that a rational, scientifically based perspective will be safe for you to espouse?

[Rum]

There seems to be a basic misunderstanding in this thread about the EU’s approach to immigration. Within the EU itself all borders are open and people from one member country are free to travel and live if they want in any other.

The overall policy for immigration into the EU from outside member states boils down to welcoming those who the economy needs at any given time.

Why why... that's racist! If you want to avoid Auschwitz level of Nazism, you really need to admit anyone coming for a better life. Immigration from poor countries and unskilled labor passing illegally into your country is a net gain for your economies. That's what we paltry Merkins are told, anyway.

Jeez, it's like you have a border and rules for admission, and you expect people to follow those rules.... I didn't think any civilized country acted so horrendously.

The problem arises from the fact that the EU has so many borders and there are so many routes in from the Middle East and North Africa,. Most illegal migrants are economic ones seeking a better life. Who can blame them.

Nobody, and since you have it so good in Europe, there is no reason to deport them or deny them entry. Immigration only helps a nation grow more diverse and stronger.

It is true to say that hardly anyone believes open uncontrolled immigration into the EU is a good thing.

That's racist, isn't it? I mean, you're just excluding black and brown bodies, and stating that they have less of a right to live in a safe, healthy environment than you do. If families come, children and grandparents in tow, the only sensible thing is to admit them into the country, and let them reside (on the public dole if necessary) until their asylum or other visa claims are administered. And, since children are not to blame, anyone with children should be allowed to stay. By sending them back, you'd be condemning children to a life of squalor. That wouldn't be cricket.

What the fuck is the matter with you? Of course none of it is racist. You may be being rhetorical to make a point but controlling borders has nothing to do with racism, unless of course you make it that. I suspect that is what ypu would like.

[pErvinalia]

in reality draconian restrictions are not going to happen, no matter how the alarmists rabbit on...

So in Canada, because of the human rights tribunals, you are not allowed to speak out on certain issues. Not 'alarmist' at all, but plain fact.

You've been repeatedly asked to back up this bollocks, and never do.

I await the list of rhetorical questions.

[JimC]

I predict that he simply cannot give well-documented lists of criminal sanctions imposed in Canada for saying politically incorrect stuff...

[Cunt]

in reality draconian restrictions are not going to happen, no matter how the alarmists rabbit on...

So in Canada, because of the human rights tribunals, you are not allowed to speak out on certain issues. Not 'alarmist' at all, but plain fact.

You've been repeatedly asked to back up this bollocks, and never do.

I await the list of rhetorical questions.

https://aclj.org/human-rights/european- ... h-to-islam

The Regional Court convicted Ms. E.S. for “disparaging religious doctrines” and ordered her “to pay the costs of the proceedings and a day-fine of 4 euros (EUR) for a period of 120 days (amounting to 480 EUR in total), which would result in sixty days’ imprisonment in the event of default.” Although Ms. E.S. provided evidence from the Islamic texts which were consistent with her statements regarding Aisha’s age at the time of her marriage and consummation thereof, the court considered her statements to be “value judgments not intended to promote productive discussion” and not statements of fact.

It doesn't take long to find any.

Your notion that the Human Rights commision/tribunals have no teeth is either naive or stupid.

[Cunt]

I predict that he simply cannot give well-documented lists of criminal sanctions imposed in Canada for saying politically incorrect stuff...

It isn't about criminal sanctions, JimC. If you start a business (say, a news business) in Canada, and say the wrong thing about gender expression (even if from a valid scientific source) then you can be ruined financially by the Human Rights Commission.

Look at the way they bullied the Alberta preacher, then backed right the fuck down when a more resourceful individual republished exactly the same words. If you don't want to look, that's ok. You can sit with pErvinalia and insist that the human rights commission has no ability to enforce.