Virtue-signalling western culture into the dustbin of history (but only after retreating into their walled compounds), the progressive asshats at Amnesty International bravely waved signs (and no doubt tweeted hashtags) inviting more armed, intolerant theocratic thugs into England. You will note that (as usual) the sign-wavers are all white and mostly female. The photo dates to April, just before the UK elections.
Now I realize that this is an old story, but we’ve had a few months to observe the “serious consequences” predicted if those elections did not turn out the way the Left wanted. So what has happened? Read on:
Amnesty International Warns of ‘Serious Consequences’ of Opposing Open Borders in General Election 21 Apr 2017
Amnesty International has issued a warning to would-be MPs standing in the upcoming general election not to speak out against uncontrolled migration.
Pointing to a rise in reported hate crimes after the Brexit vote, and the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, Amnesty issued a statement which “warn[s] all those standing as candidates in the forthcoming general election that their choice of language can have serious consequences”.
Kate Allen, Director of Amnesty International UK, said: “In the lead-up to the EU referendum, there was a worrying use of divisive language that demonised sections of the population.
“The toxic rhetoric being used by some politicians and media sent the harmful message that some people are more entitled to human rights than others.”
In recent years the “human rights”-focused NGO, whose United States sister group receives money from globalist billionaire George Soros, seems to have taken the position that any opposition to open borders in Western nations is a breach of migrants’ human rights.
Earlier this year, Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International, said politicians who campaigned on a platform of stopping mass migration were “peddl[ing] a dangerous idea that some people are less human than others” and “stripping away the humanity of entire groups of people”.
In February, the globalist organisation also fingered talk of Britain’s national sovereignty as having caused hate crime. Declaring the dawn of “a dark age for human rights in the UK” after the referendum, Amnesty’s website reads: “We saw political language around ‘taking our country back’ and propaganda to demonise refugees, coupled with proposals to treat European nationals like bargaining chips.
“This climate of hatred and mistrust sends a message that some people are entitled to human rights and some aren’t.”
In her statement on Thursday regarding the general election, Allen called for “all budding MPs” to “mind their language, and avoid using inflammatory language.
“This is an emotive time as the country prepares for Brexit, but that does not mean sections of society should be turned against one another in pursuit of political gain. Toxic rhetoric being used by politicians around the world risks taking us into a dark age of human rights,” the Amnesty UK director added.
Since last year’s referendum, Amnesty is one of a number of bodies to seize on reports of “record levels” of hate crime as evidence that Britain is in the grip of an epidemic of intolerance.
However, a key aim of the UK government’s strategy against hate crime is to raise the number of reports. Much of what is outlined in the “plan for tackling hate crime” is dedicated to furthering this goal, with the Home Office unveiling a whole host of measures which are being introduced “with a view, ultimately, to increase reporting”.
Hey, Amnesty International: How has that Welcome-Allahu-Akbar strategy worked out for your fellow citizens since the elections? Well, here’s the good news. Terror attacks, especially in metro London, have increased. Various sources, both in EU governments and at travel agencies, have suggested that tourists re-consider vacation plans that involve a visit to the UK, and France as well — the erstwhile home of “liberty, equality and brotherhood”, but now just the place that features barriers around the Eiffel Tower.
“Serious consequences”, all right: Terror attacks are cool just so long as nobody’s feelings get hurt. That’s a strategy eerily reminiscent of General George Casey’s fears about “diversity being a casualty” in the US military as America reacted to the murder of American soldiers by an Islamist at Fort Hood.
I wonder how loud the Sons of Muhammad laugh at the concept of “human rights” for infidels. But then cutting off leftists’ hands does put an end to that annoying habit of waving signs around.
But not to worry. Facts have no bearing on progressives, who are forever in search of that world of perpetual adolescence, where earnest good intentions never have serious real-world consequences.
— SafeSpace —