UJRefugees.net

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:16 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:14 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:13 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:01 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 9:32 pm There is no guardian person of the year award, you dupes just keep getting duped and no matter how many times you get duped you just return to the facebook echo chamber for more memes to dupe you. It takes literally seconds to shoot these things down if you are capable of thinking for yourself. Morons.

They asked readers to nominate their picks.

Guardian readers nominate their person of the year
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... f-the-year

You abject fucking moron, they asked their readers to nominate 'their person of the year' and they published letters from readers including one who nominated JK Rowling. THEY PUBLISHED THAT. Abject fucking morons on your facebook feed then told you they ran a person of the year award which they cancelled this year because of who one of THE LETTERS THEY CHOSE TO PUBLISH named. They don't do an award, they didn't cancel it because it never existed.

Ten to twenty seconds on google would have informed you of this, but you are incapable of questioning or looking, and frankly probably incapable of understanding after it has been clearly explained to you that you are a dupe who has been duped yet again. This is why this forum is now an echo chamber. Just what in the fuck is the point of trying to get through to you? You are too far gone even to grasp this one.

Except all I posted was that they asked their readers for their picks. I didnt say anything else.
As always, go fuck yourself.

So you agree and understand the award never existed, the post was by a moron who was duped then?

Or does reality just not exist for you at this point?

Sure, never said it did. I simply posted a link to the Guardian asking for their readers nominations. You then took it to retard level 10.

Animal wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:18 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 9:32 pm There is no guardian person of the year award, you dupes just keep getting duped and no matter how many times you get duped you just return to the facebook echo chamber for more memes to dupe you. It takes literally seconds to shoot these things down if you are capable of thinking for yourself. Morons.

speaking of dupes getting duped, tell me about that failed coup attempt again.

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:26 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:25 pm No it doesn't.

Yes it does. They also say you are a homo.

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:34 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:28 pm

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:26 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:25 pm No it doesn't.

Yes it does. They also say you are a homo.

I believe what they actually said was fuck you and the overstretched and mephitic pussy you slid out of. But do feel free to quote them.

Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated - sources

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 021-08-20/

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:19 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:16 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:14 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:13 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:01 pm

They asked readers to nominate their picks.

Guardian readers nominate their person of the year
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... f-the-year

You abject fucking moron, they asked their readers to nominate 'their person of the year' and they published letters from readers including one who nominated JK Rowling. THEY PUBLISHED THAT. Abject fucking morons on your facebook feed then told you they ran a person of the year award which they cancelled this year because of who one of THE LETTERS THEY CHOSE TO PUBLISH named. They don't do an award, they didn't cancel it because it never existed.

Ten to twenty seconds on google would have informed you of this, but you are incapable of questioning or looking, and frankly probably incapable of understanding after it has been clearly explained to you that you are a dupe who has been duped yet again. This is why this forum is now an echo chamber. Just what in the fuck is the point of trying to get through to you? You are too far gone even to grasp this one.

Except all I posted was that they asked their readers for their picks. I didnt say anything else.
As always, go fuck yourself.

So you agree and understand the award never existed, the post was by a moron who was duped then?

Or does reality just not exist for you at this point?

Sure, never said it did. I simply posted a link to the Guardian asking for their readers nominations. You then took it to retard level 10.

So you are saying you are too stupid to understand the point of the post? Which was to claim a non existent award had been removed because the awarder did not like who it had been awarded to?

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:26 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:25 pm No it doesn't.

Yes it does. They also say you are a homo.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:46 pm The ruling on what was not protected was actually pretty narrow -
"Employment Judge Tayler acknowledged that there is nothing to stop the claimant campaigning against the proposed revisions to the Gender Recognition Act or, expressing her opinion that there should be some spaces that are restricted to women assigned female at birth. However, she can do so without insisting on calling transwomen men. It is the fact that her belief necessarily involves violating the dignity of others which means it is not protected under the Equality Act 2010."

She was free to tweet about it, campaign about it etc, but if she insists on calling the transwoman in the next cubicle a dude, that's where she crosses the line by impinging on that persons rights, and her employer has the right to take action to protect the other employee. Or in this case, just not renew the contract with a troublesome employee. Cliff notes on the ruling.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 07, 2022 10:25 pm No it doesn't.

Biker wrote: ↑Sun Jul 31, 2022 3:20 pm

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 2:52 pm

Charliesheen wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 2:16 pm I wonder how Churchill would react to an angry social media post?

Churchill wasn't much better than Hitler. I hate that fucking genocidal monster.

QillerDaemon wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:49 pm

BigRedRetard wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 2:52 pm

Charliesheen wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 2:16 pm I wonder how Churchill would react to an angry social media post?

Churchill wasn't much better than Hitler. I hate that fucking genocidal monster.

Years ago, I read an article comparing the personal lives of the great leaders of both sides of WW2. Churchill comes down on the bottom of that list, Roosevelt not much higher, and Hitler came out on top. Vegetarian, non-smoker (hated the habit, possibly due to his being gassed in WW1), not a drinker, loved children and being around them, loved the attention of women without being a creep about it (though there is a story about him and a cousin...), rather bookish in his quiet time. Possibly was an overall alright guy to hang around when he wasn't being a total fascist anti-Semitic douche-bag dictator.

Biker wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 2:23 pm

Charliesheen wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:50 am https://www.zerohedge.com/political/maj ... hoplifters

Between 200,000 and 300,000 shoplifting offences go unpunished every year, while untold thousands more are never even reported.

Citing a lack of resources, police departments across the UK have stopped responding to or investigating some crimes, with their officers presumably being more interested in performing dance routines at gay pride parades.

Car theft in London has effectively been decriminalized, with just 277 out of 55,000 offences being solved by Scotland Yard, a 0.5% success rate.

Back in 2015, the head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council said that due to a lack of resources, officers would be unable to attend some burglaries. In 2018, it was revealed that two thirds of burglaries are not even investigated.

Despite many crimes going unsolved, there are still plenty of resources available to prosecute people for saying offensive things or making edgy social media posts.

Back in June, a man was jailed for 20 weeks for the ‘crime’ of posting offensive George Floyd memes in private WhatsApp and Facebook group chats.

In 2017, it was reported that British police had arrested 3,395 people for ‘offensive online comments’ in the space of a year.

Isn’t that speshul

UK: Police Force Encourages People to Report “Deadnaming” as a Hate Crime

Leicestershire Police are under fire for a Twitter post in which they appear to suggest that using an incorrect name for a trans-identified individual could be reported as a “hate crime.”

On October 8, Leicestershire Police’s Stay Safe Twitter account launched a social media campaign advertising Stamp It Out, an anti-hate resource website which provides information on the laws surrounding hate crimes in the area.

Stay Safe, a combined account for the force’s Crime Reduction Officers and Hate Crime Officer, was encouraging social media users to utilize Stamp It Out’s online reporting system in the event they experienced a hate crime.

The campaign’s Twitter posts, of which there were 7 in total, all include a black-and-white graphic with a photo of a person, and a quote in which they described an experience being targeted on the basis of their identity or appearance.

But one of the posts in particular has gone viral for appearing to suggest that calling a transgender person by a non-preferred name would be considered a reportable hate crime.

The graphic featured a photo of a man with long, blond hair, and a quote which read: “I get called by my previous male name on purpose, but that’s not who I am. it can be really hurtful, especially when it’s just seen as a joke.” The quote and photo were attributed to “Jane, 57” of Hinckley.

Despite purporting to depict a real member of the community, “Jane” is in fact a stock image model who has appeared in dozens of licensable photos across popular stock image websites.

The model was also featured in a “body positive” lingerie campaign in 2015 for Lane Bryant, an American women’s apparel and intimates specialty retailer focusing on plus-size clothing.

As of this article’s writing, Leicestershire Police’s post featuring “Jane” has wracked up over 3,000 overwhelmingly negative replies, compared to just 267 ‘likes,’ many of which were ironic.

Many users in the United Kingdom pointed out that Leicester has seen a massive surge in crime recently, and that the force’s campaign appears to demonstrate misplaced priorities.

“Leicester has just seen unprecedented unrest and violence, including rioting and looting, on its streets, and there have been numerous reports of sexual assault in the county this year. Fortunately, the police are on the case,” popular UK-based information service @ripx4nutmeg wrote sarcastically.

“You will not compel my speech. Do your real job. 3 women a week in the UK are murdered by men not to mention countless rapes and attacks. Where’s your publicity campaign for them and their children?” User @joolzdenby wrote, referencing femicide statistics which show one woman dies by domestic violence every three days in the United Kingdom.

Responding directly to Leicestershire Police, police watchdog We Are Fair Cop asked: “where is the hate crime here, please?”

Speaking to Reduxx, Dr. Kate Coleman of Keep Prisons Single Sex pointed out that what Leicestershire Police were suggesting was a criminal offense — “deadnaming” a transgender person — was in fact not a legal matter at all.

“A hate crime is a normal crime plus an aggregator. In this case, it would be hostility on the basis of transgender identity,” Dr. Coleman said. “But where is the crime in the example Leicestershire gives There is no crime. So this cannot be a hate crime.”

Coleman is the director of Keep Prisons Single Sex (KPSS), a campaign group focused on advocating for prisons to be segregated by sex, not self-declared gender identity. KPSS is vocal about the rights of women in the UK legal system, and has recently launched a crowdfunder to assist with their activism efforts.

Coleman slammed Leicestershire Police for their apparent lack of insight into the laws they were purporting to enforce, noting that it was a widespread issue in the United Kingdom. She speculated the cause may be that the police have become “institutionally captured” by gender ideology or its proponents.

“Police forces appear to be consistently unaware that in order for a hate crime to be reported, an actual crime must have been committed,” she said. “Hurting someone’s feelings, offending them, upsetting them or making them cry are not crimes. Yet the police are stating that they appear to be willing to act as if they are.”

Despite “misgendering” and “deadnaming” not being crimes in the United Kingdom, multiple women have been arrested or threatened with arrest on those grounds.

In 2019, a mother in Hertfordshire was arrested in front of her children and held for over 7 hours after being reported for “misgendering” a man who identified as a woman on Twitter. Kate Scottow’s conviction was ultimately overturned on appeal the next year, but was just one of many similar cases that would emerge.

Coleman expresses cautious optimism for the state of free speech rights in the United Kingdom, but stresses that many women are still concerned about being arrested and possibly charged for expressing factually accurate statements related to biology or gender ideology.

“I firmly believe that our determination to fight on will continue. Each day more people, men as well as women, realize the extent of this threat to freedom of speech. I am optimistic, but it would not surprise me if police forces double-down before things improve.”

The backlash against Leicestershire Police comes just weeks after a similar incident in Sussex.

The Sussex Police force came under fire after a series of posts cautioning Twitter users who were “misgendering” a serial pedophile named in one of their case updates. Taken by many to be a thinly-veiled threat of criminalization, some users asked if they could be charged if they continued to refer to the predator as a “man.” Sussex Police replied to those users with a link to their website outlining the nature of a hate crime, and encouraging people to ensure their “gender critical views” were “not targeted at an individual.”

Sussex Police ultimately retracted the tweets and apologized after widespread outrage.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:31 pm #Butthurtoverboeing.