MrBlueSkyDo you want to look at how that panned out?. It was proven they weren’t all Nazi’s….in fact they were a generous, friendly and hospitable people with a great work ethic and very strong talent pools in science and the arts. They were the victims of a bunch of angry, bigoted, idiots emboldened and lead by a charismatic despot…himself of limited intelligence. Funny how similar themes resurface isnt it?.
Your twisting it Jonesy, where did I say all Germans were Nazi’s, not all Muslims are Jihadist’s, but it’s surprising just how people can get carried away…
Germany was in a terrible state.
The huge burden of reparations from World War One had damaged their economy, and it had gone into hyperinflation, wiping out people’s savings in a matter of days. The central government was weak. People were desperate for some relief, and Hitler and the NSDAP offered what seemed like easy answers. At that period it was all too easy to believe his lies that the Jews were responsible for Germany’s downfall in the First World War and all of its subsequent troubles — anti-Semitism was alive and well long before Hitler.
Also, the effect of losing the war had sapped German morale. Hitler offered people a way to be proud of Germany again. He told people they really were a master race that had simply been betrayed by the Jews and the Communists.
Finally, he didn’t start off by announcing the Holocaust, and in fact he never did announce it as such; it was a secret. He began by demanding that the Jews leave Germany, and then taking away their legal rights if they didn’t go — kicking them out of all government and academic positions, for example. But when the death camps opened, the German people were not aware of what was really happening, and they were under a strong compulsion not to ask. All they knew was that the Jews and others had been removed. By that time it was far too late to do anything.
MrBlueSkyBruce.
I didn’t name the video, I used it to show the sort of things Islam finds acceptable in the 21st Century, perhaps if it offends you, contact YouTube, as they’re pretty strict on hate crime’s
See here;
In Europe, outside the protections of the First Amendment, American tech giants Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and others reached an agreement with the Europe Union on Tuesday to crack down on online speech that some, including activist groups, identify as “hate speech.”
The Associated Press said the newly approved “code of conduct” will have the tech companies “quickly” remove “illegal hate speech directed against anyone over issues of race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.”
The companies agreed “to strengthen their partnerships with civil society organizations [that] often flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct,” the report said.
Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality, said in the report, “The Internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech.”
“Beyond national laws that criminalize hate speech, there is a need to ensure such activity by Internet users is expeditiously reviewed by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame,” the companies said in a joint statement.
Terror organizations such as ISIS have has used the Web and social media to spread their message, the report said.
The companies admitted it would be a “challenge” to balance freedom of expression and “hate speech.”
Reported Bloomberg: “A French Jewish youth group, UEJF, sued Twitter, Facebook and Google in Paris this month over how they monitor hate speech on the Web. In the course of about six weeks in April and May, members of French anti-discrimination groups flagged unambiguous hate speech that they said promoted racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism. More than 90 percent of the posts pointed out to Twitter and YouTube remained online within 15 days on average following requests for removal, according to the study by UEJF, SOS Racisme and SOS Homophobie.”
The AP, which noted Facebook has 1.6 million users, said the company was telling customers to use online reporting tools to monitor speech.
Meanwhile, Fortune said that as Facebook has focused on becoming a platform for video, publishers who don’t work in the medium are becoming less and less involved.
The report cited a study from NewsWhip that said there’s been a “noticeable decline” in engagement with Facebook.
The results follow by only days a scandal in which Facebook was accused of suppressing stories with a conservative viewpoint. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg held a meeting with conservative leaders over the issue.
The NewsWhip study said it looked at “likes,” comments and sharing of linked articles “from the top 10 publishers on Facebook over the past year.”
“Over the past nine months, NewsWhip says, the research shows a fairly sharp decline in engagement of all kinds: Likes, the most dominant form of interaction, dropped by about 55 percent between July of last year and April of 2016. And sharing activity also declined sharply: Shares fell by 57 percent and comments by almost 64 percent.”
The report said it “seems obvious that engagement for non-video content is declining. But why? It could be that Facebook is deliberately pushing that kind of article down in people’s feeds.”
WND reported two years ago that there were calls developing to censor speech online.
That was when the Southern Poverty Law Center called the World Congress of Families, which promotes the “natural family,” an “anti-LGBT hate group.”
And the same SPLC has blasted the Drudge Report for covering “black crime,” charging that the immensely popular Internet news aggregator “has been rife with what the online publisher calls ‘scary black people’ stories.”
That was when two Democrat lawmakers wanted to have Barack Obama’s Justice Department submit a report for action against any Internet sites, broadcast, cable television or radio shows determined to be advocating or encouraging “violent acts.”
That’s from the text of the bill from Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.
The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014 would have created ” an updated comprehensive report examining the role of the Internet and other telecommunications in encouraging hate crimes based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation and create recommendations to address such crimes,” stated a news release from Markey’s office.
SPLC was later linked to domestic terror when it was cited as a source of information for a man who attacked the Washington offices of Family Research Council and admitted he wanted to kill as many as possible.
The issue was that SPLC identified FRC as a “hate” group while it simply follows the biblical view of marriage and family.
Several years earlier, a Canadian administrative judge’s demand for a $5,000 penalty and a written apology from a man who criticized homosexuality in a letter to his local newspaper was overturned on appeal, because the law exempts “the free expression of opinion on any subject” and only applies to actions.
That’s been the legal standard in the United States as well, although there have been attempts to apply it to speech.
A spokesman for the Alliance Defending Freedom explained the U.S. First Amendment and the Canadian Charter of Rights were designed to protect unwanted speech.
“Speech everyone wants to hear doesn’t need protection. It’s the only reason the First Amendment was written, to protect unwanted or hurtful expressions,” the spokesman said at the time. “That’s what separates us from the totalitarian societies behind the old Iron Curtain.”
Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act early in his presidency, which cracks down on any acts that could be linked to criticism of homosexuality or even the “perception” of homosexuality.
As Congress debated it, there were assurances it would not be used to crack down on speech.
But days after Obama signed it, pastors and other Christian leaders gathered to read from the Bible at a rally organized with the help of Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Coalition.
“If this law is used to silence me or any of these preachers for speaking the truth, then we will be forced to conscientiously defy it,” declared Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America. “That is my calling as a Christian and my right as an American citizen.”
The bill signed by Obama was opposed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which called it a “menace” to civil liberties. The commission argued the law allows federal authorities to bring charges against individuals even if they’ve already been cleared in a state court.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/youtube-facebook-crack-down-on-hate-speech/#goYJjxMCIhcBfKcj.99
MrBlueSkyDo so at your family’s future peril…
(Video linked removed by Moderator)
MrBlueSkyBruce
“but people look at their behaviour and equate it with ‘normal’ Muslins. The vast majority of people of all religions are peaceable and eschew violence, yet there are always extremists.”
Very commendable, but the same was said about the Germans, that not all were Nazi’s, and look how that panned out.
MrBlueSkyJohn.
A total refusal to see there is a problem, between cultures, Muslim’s don’t seem to be able to peacefully coexist with themselves let alone people of other cultures and religions.
Islam once in the majority never seems to embrace ideals such as democracy and religious tolerance, but when in the minority seems to demand privileges to a fault.
Before 9/11, most people in the West knew little, and cared less, about Islam. It was just another exotic third world religion of no interest or importance. Since 9/11, the West has been learning all about Islam. And it’s getting a bit bored of it. It’s getting bored of Islamic anger and grievances. And people are especially getting annoyed at the idea that they have to watch what they say about Islam (while they can say what they like about any other religion).
The primitive, pre-modern Islam is locked into an endless exchange of abuse with shocking, tasteless, infidel Westerners. It is an exchange that Islam can only lose. If Islam wants to be free from blasphemy and mocking, it needs to disengage from the West entirely, not engage with it.
Islam has started to annoy the hell out of the West, and millions of westerners are starting to annoy Islam in return. And they will never stop. If you are Muslim, you better get used to escalating attacks on the Koran and the Prophet for decades to come…
Islam is the Western cultures Cancer, if left it will destroy our civilisation and put the world into a fearful dark age full of ignorance and terror.
MrBlueSkyMrBlueSkyOn a lighter note…
MrBlueSkyWatch…
MrBlueSkyThis is the major reason why we’re better out than in…
MrBlueSkyIn addition to the wish to separate ourselves from this failed and sclerotic enterprise, I think that we voted out because we were fed up with the disreputable antics of the bunch of shysters running the EU. Witness Herr Juncker for starters. Angela is, allegedly, plotting his removal as we write.
Hi John.
I think they want Juncker out because he doesn’t want to force any more austerity onto Greece and Italy,(Not sure if it’s Italy or Spain? ) which I would think is actually a good idea as to do so now just after the UK leaving might induce said countries to want the same, question of ******** if you do, ******** if you don’t!
MrBlueSkyHi Bruce…
Where are the figures that say “many people don’t understand politics, and went with the media” I’d like to see them if I may…
MrBlueSkyYes fine, but if there was talk of another referendum can you imagine what would happen when people who voted out, started EU marches like we saw the other week in London.
Hang on…
Oh, it appears it was only in London, a quick look came up with no other anti Brexit marches and the one in London was 50,000 strong from people all over the country, not many when apparently 16 million odd were apparently devastated…
Two Tribes eh:rolleyes:
MrBlueSkyCultural Enrichment.
Dundee City Centre: Leave or Remain? Independence for Scotland?
MrBlueSkyTop Gear staff ‘celebrated’ after Chris Evans announced he was stepping down from BBC show
“Chris’ decision to step down comes just hours after it was revealed Top Gear’s final show on Sunday night pulled in its lowest viewing figures since 2002.
It also comes as police confirmed he faced a probe over sex assault allegations relating to “incidents in Tower Hamlets in the 1990s.”
Chris has always denied any wrongdoing.”
MrBlueSkyIts stated EU policy that to trade with the EU, as part of the EEA, a country must be a signatory to the Schengen agreement.
Jonesy, you might be surprised to know that the UK has only recently referred to as being ‘in Europe’.
Up until 1985 in the west you had continental Europe, Scandinavia and Great Britain, however, with the UK slowly being drawn into the EU now everyone has had a memory lapse and loudly declare that Great Britain has always been part of Europe.
Perhaps we should now revert to the same again… :eagerness::highly_amused:
What about a spin with this…
I don’t think, and correct me if I’m wrong, that Canada has to agree to any ‘no free movement of citizens’ clause, although our UK financial services will get a bit sticky…
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (Ceta) between the EU and Canada is not yet in force, although it has been in the making for seven years.
It gives Canada preferential access to the EU single market without all the obligations that Norway and Switzerland face, eliminating most trade tariffs. However, some “sensitive” food items, including eggs and chicken, are not covered by it.
Canadian exporters will have to prove that their goods are entirely “made in Canada”, which imposes extra costs, to prevent imports entering the EU through a “back door”.
The services sector is only partially covered by Ceta.
Crucially, a Ceta-type deal would not give UK financial services the EU market access that they have now. It would be hard for London-based banks to get “passporting” rights for their services in the EU – rights that they value hugely now.
It would also mean that firms that export to the EU would have to comply with EU product standards and technical requirements without having any say in setting them.
Sign In
