So hold on, if you agree with the Labour MP's comments (which means you believe that male Syrian refugees are more likely to commit sex attacks due to cultural differences and must be given lessons on the correct treatment of women, judge for yourself whether you are a racist), why is what Nigel said any different? According to you, he said it to scare people. So during a national referendum on EU membership, people shouldn't hear about the potential risk of newly settled male refugees in Germany/Sweden gaining citizenship and thus the right to free movement and coming to the UK and committing sex attacks? Telling them something YOU believe to be true is scaremongering? Why is that? Like I say, you might disagree with his solution (which is most likely to not allow the refugees entry), but he wasn't criticised for not wanting to let them in, he was criticised for saying they would commit sex attacks, which is what Thangham Debbonaire implies will happen if male Syrian refugees aren't taught otherwise. If you believe in the premise of Thangham Debbonaire's comments, which is that male Syrian refugees are more likely to sexually harass women, then surely people have the right to know about it during a referendum? Why the hell shouldn't he raise it? Please let's get some consistency here.
What should I do?