BigSteve wrote:The words "Go back to where they came from" does not exist in his tweets.
You're not being honest here. The sentence that says they should "go back to where they came from" does not exist in his tweets, and I challenge you to either show where it does or admit to being dishonest in your approach to this debate.
They do exist in Trump's tweet quite evidently:
Trump wrote:So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly ...and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how ....it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!
I'm not sure why you deny obvious reality or what that says about your character but sure knock yourself out like a bot.
blackjack21 wrote:Trump's tweet was not racist. For the sake of demurrer, even if it was racist, that still would not imply any sort of legal consequences, because they United States cannot ratify or impose any treaty term that conflicts with the US constitution. The KKK and the Nazi party are racist organizations. You can be a member of either one in the United States, because the US first amendment is antecedent and superior to the UN's convention. The UN cannot violate the rights of the people of the United States secured by our Bill of Rights. The US cannot ratify a clause on "hate speech," because the first amendment precludes it in the United States. Freedom of thought implies the right to think racist thoughts. Freedom of speech implies the right to campaign for racist policies. You just don't get to infringe other people's rights unless you have done so by operation of law.
Trump's tweet is explicitly racist for all the reasons already provided. The rest are just assumptions and irrelevant straw-men you make. I am not aware of the legal ramifications of the UN convention and how it can be used in the US and internationally but its legal effect is irrelevant because no such claim or argument has been made. The fact remains that the US is party to this convention since Lyndon Johnson in 1965 and as such the US as a state recognises the validity of this definition of racism.
noemon wrote:Trump juxtaposes these women with the people of the United States and the nation as if they are separate alien entities.
blackjack21 wrote:Their rights have not been violated in any way.
Did SpecialOlympian violate your rights when you called his posts "racist" and demanded they be censored?
noemon wrote:There is a very clear attempt made here by people who are positively inclined towards racism intending to dilute the meaning of racism just so they can get away with saying racist things with impunity.
blackjack21 wrote:In the United States, you can say racist things with impunity. We have freedom of speech. You do not.
Congratulations on your racist achievement, this is not the US however and in here you cannot say racist things with impunity no matter how hard you try to dilute it.
EN EL ED EM ON
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...