Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
scribblet

War of the Worlds U.N. Migration Compact

Recommended Posts

Just now, TTM said:

Assumes they are familiar with the sketch. If I could assume that, I would have abbreviated it to "if she weighs the same as a duck..."

The sketch pokes fun at people using preconceived notions, falsly dressing up the facts, and and using faulty logic in coming to conclusions.  I thought it fit.

Free expression regarding immigration is protected, as it should be. Hate speech regarding immigrants is not, and should not be.  Nothing in this non-binding UN pact changes that

I have a hard time differentiating between free expression and hate speech.  I think it's okay to hate, and it's okay to express hate.  Some people hate Donald Trump, and they don't mind saying so. 

As far as immigrants go, I'm one, so I'm obviously in favour of immigration.  I just don't think there is anything wrong with frank discussion of eligibilty, responsibility, barbaric cultural practices, that sort of thing.  As long as one sticks to the truth, and no incitement to illegal behaviour is involved, those wishing to express themselves ought to free to do so with gay abandon.  The UN shouldn't have a say in it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

-Are you the poet?

-Yes...

-I used to admire your poetry.

-Thank-you.

-I shouldn't admire it now. I should find it absurdly personal. Don't you agree? Feelings, insights, affections...it's suddenly trivial now. You don't agree. You're wrong. The personal life is dead in Russia. History has killed it. I can see how you might hate me... 

"I hate everything you say, but not enough to kill you for it."  

Now those are the kind of immigrants I might welcome.  They're like me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I have a hard time differentiating between free expression and hate speech.  I think it's okay to hate, and it's okay to express hate.  Some people hate Donald Trump, and they don't mind saying so. 

As far as immigrants go, I'm one, so I'm obviously in favour of immigration.  I just don't think there is anything wrong with frank discussion of eligibilty, responsibility, barbaric cultural practices, that sort of thing.  As long as one sticks to the truth, and no incitement to illegal behaviour is involved, those wishing to express themselves ought to free to do so with gay abandon.  The UN shouldn't have a say in it.

It is a difficult subject. You seem to more or less agree with the UN.  I posted their guidance on hate speech close to the beginning of this thread 

Edited by TTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TTM said:

It is a difficult subject. You seem to more or less agree with the UN.  I posted their guidance on hate speech close to the beginning of this thread 

In that case, the UN agrees with me.  Makes a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

"I hate everything you say, but not enough to kill you for it."  

Now those are the kind of immigrants I might welcome.  They're like me!

(Yuri arrives at his home and is greeted by Tanya who introduces Yuri to the Bolsheviks)

-Yuri, this is Comrade Yelkin. Our local delegate. He lives here.

-How do you do? (offers hand...rejected) Welcome.

-It is not for you to welcome us, comrade....there was living space for 13 families in this whole house!

- Yes....yes...this is a...uhhh...better arrangement.....Comrade.  More just...

 

(I don't post this lightly...Yuri is us. ie: The West)

 

 

Edited by DogOnPorch
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TTM said:

Peasants: We have found a witch! (A witch! a witch!)
Burn her burn her!

 

Whatever that's supposed to mean ,but feel free to keep your head in the sand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scribblet said:

Whatever that's supposed to mean ,but feel free to keep your head in the sand 

Not a Monty Python fan then... :rolleyes:

The appropriate passage from the scene, in response to your comment of "if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck..." was (parphrasing) "if she weighs as much as a duck then she must be a witch!"

But no longer funny if you have to explain it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

(Yuri arrives at his home and is greeted by Tanya who introduces Yuri to the Bolsheviks)

-Yuri, this is Comrade Yelkin. Our local delegate. He lives here.

-How do you do? (offers hand...rejected) Welcome.

-It is not for you to welcome us, comrade....there was living space for 13 families in this whole house!

- Yes....yes...this is a...uhhh...better arrangement.....Comrade.  More just...

 Allegory, of course, about the European colonization of the New World... :o

A rather false analogy for the current situation since the whole power dynamic and motivations of the parties don't line up.  You might not like immigration, but the government encourages it as a matter of policy to "fill up that living space".  If we decided not, beyond the possible exception of non-refoulement, nothing but internal and international opinion would prevent us. We have full sovereignty over our borders, and nothing in this pact reduces it.

Edited by TTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TTM said:

 Allegory, of course, about the European colonization of the New World... :o

A rather false analogy for the current situation since the whole power dynamic and motivations of the parties don't line up.  You might not like immigration, but the government encourages it as a matter of policy to "fill up that living space".  If we decided not, beyond the possible exception of non-refoulement, nothing but internal and international opinion would prevent us. We have full sovereignty over our borders, and nothing in this pact reduces it.

 

Comrade Yelkin sure does go on...

Straw-man argument as I have never said one way or another if I'm 'against immigration'.

You even assume nobody but yourself has seen "The Holy Grail'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

1.  Straw-man argument as I have never said one way or another if I'm 'against immigration'.

2. You even assume nobody but yourself has seen "The Holy Grail'.

1. You notice how I said "might not". My argument did not depend one way or another on your beliefs on the topic.  Apparently your grasp of what a "straw man argument" is is about the same as your grasp of what fascism is.

2. lol. Yes, I'm the only Holy Grail fan on the planet. What were you saying about straw man?  My assumption was scribblet, who I was responding to, had probably not. And he basically admitted he had not in his last post, so... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 11:37 PM, TTM said:

So that people can discuss the actual text, and not third-hand descriptions, it is here

Regarding "criticism of migration becoming hate speach", and shutting down media, the actual text is this:

OBJECTIVE 17: Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration 

33. We commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law. We further commit to promote an open and evidence-based public discourse on migration and migrants in partnership with all parts of society, that generates a more realistic, humane and constructive perception in this regard. We also commit to protect freedom of expression in accordance with international law, recognizing that an open and free debate contributes to a comprehensive understanding 
of all aspects of migration. 

To realize this commitment, we will draw from the following actions: 

a) Enact, implement or maintain legislation that penalizes hate crimes and aggravated hate crimes targeting migrants, and train law enforcement and other public officials to identify, prevent and respond to such crimes and other acts of violence that target migrants, as well as to provide medical, legal and psychosocial assistance for victims 

b) Empower migrants and communities to denounce any acts of incitement to violence directed towards migrants by informing them of available mechanisms for redress, and ensure that those who actively participate in the commission of a hate crime targeting migrants are held accountable, in accordance with national legislation, while upholding international human rights law, in particular the right to freedom of expression 

c) Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media

d) Establish mechanisms to prevent, detect and respond to racial, ethnic and religious profiling of migrants by public authorities, as well as systematic instances of intolerance, xenophobia, racism and all other multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination in partnership with National Human Rights Institutions, including by tracking and publishing trends analyses, and ensuring access to effective complaint and redress mechanisms

e) Provide migrants, especially migrant women, with access to national and regional complaint and redress mechanisms with a view to promoting accountability and addressing governmental actions related to discriminatory acts and manifestations carried out against migrants and their families 

f) Promote awareness-raising campaigns targeted at communities of origin, transit and destination in order to inform public perceptions regarding the positive contributions of safe, orderly and regular migration, based on evidence and facts, and to end racism, xenophobia and stigmatization against all migrants 

g) Engage migrants, political, religious and community leaders, as well as educators and service providers to detect and prevent incidences of intolerance, racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination against migrants and diasporas and support activities in local communities to promote mutual respect, including in the context of electoral campaigns

So what you are saying is  that all of  scribblet sources are full of shit...or more to the point of false news......including those speakers from the ENF Press conference with Marcel de Graaff, Nicolas Bay, ENF Group Leaders, and Gerolf Annemanse. these guys are just tin foil hatters, who are spreading the word of some demi god  meant to discredit the UN and this compact....

It seems that there is more than a couple of members of the ENF that also agree, that this compact is not to be trusted....Now here we have for the lack of words professional politicians would I only assume that can at least read and understand all of the wording in the compact....and they have made it their mission to kill support for this UN compact, WHY ? I mean if it is as straight forward as you want us to believe WHY do these European politicians have a problem with it?  I mean I can understand us rednecks here in Canada not having the intelligence to understand all the double speak language used in most UN compacts or policies....But these euro guys they seem to understand completely....again my question is why ?

Just a couple of other questions ….If every world citizens is covered under the basic human rights pact , why would we need an entire compact on immigration rights....why would we need another compact on hate crimes, racism sounds redundant.....and yet here we are with the UN finding the need to include a special human right on all immigrants. They also include the words non binding....and yet we are about to place it under a basic human right compact …..the same human rights a lot of our laws are based on...to change them would make it binding would it not ? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

1. So what you are saying is  that all of  scribblet sources are full of shit

2.  It seems that there is more than a couple of members of the ENF that also agree, that this compact is not to be trusted

3. If every world citizens is covered under the basic human rights pact , why would we need an entire compact on immigration rights

4. the UN finding the need to include a special human right on all immigrants.

1. No I'm saying here are the actual words. Show me in the text the basis for these fears

2. ENF are anti-immigrant right wing nationalists.  Why would they support any migration pact? Also, see #4 below.

3. The pact addresses a whole host of issues relating to migrants and migration.  

4. This does not exist in the document. No special human right is added.  At best it says "apply basic human rights to immigrants." Problematic to those who would prefer to demonize them (and worse).

Edited by TTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Army Guy said:

So what you are saying is  that all of  scribblet sources are full of shit...or more to the point of false news......including those speakers from the ENF Press conference with Marcel de Graaff, Nicolas Bay, ENF Group Leaders, and Gerolf Annemanse. these guys are just tin foil hatters, who are spreading the word of some demi god  meant to discredit the UN and this compact....

It seems that ......

I suppose anyone who disagrees will believe that opposing views are 'sh.t' and of course 'far right'.     Too many countries/leaders agree that although it's a non binding document, it is not to be trusted - and rightly so as it is the U.N. after all.  

If nothing else and at the very least this Compact aims to normalize mass migration paving the way for millions of people to move to Canada and other 'rich' countries via  enforced socialism from the corrupt U.N.,  but more and more governments are seeing through it and don’t want it.  

Edited by scribblet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UWIGg0_RdI

23 hours ago, TTM said:

1. No I'm saying here are the actual words. Show me in the text the basis for these fears

2. ENF are anti-immigrant right wing nationalists.  Why would they support any migration pact? Also, see #4 below.

3. The pact addresses a whole host of issues relating to migrants and migration.  

4. This does not exist in the document. No special human right is added.  At best it says "apply basic human rights to immigrants." Problematic to those who would prefer to demonize them (and worse).

I am not an immigration lawyer or expert in the field, so I can not show you anything that sticks out that support these concerns. However your sources do not cover any new ground, what I mean is, that perhaps you can high light some of the areas in your source documents that Canada or for that matter most western countries are not already providing, such as basic human rights, or providing due diligence in care for cultural and race issues....I do not see anything that sticks out that would say "Hey we need to sign this because we treat immigrants like shit".... 

And I suppose now we have to call the Canadian Conservative party  a right wing nationalist party, as Scheer has just come out with his party line, "no way" he also says it will have effects on our sovereignty, and while non binding , he states they have a way to become binding, as they progress ....I'm not sure what being a right wing nations party has to do with all of this, controlling immigration is not just a far right idea....it happens in the left wing parties as well...Besides the majority of Canadians want more controls on immigration, and as a nation we are far more left than  anything else....If we want to talk about groups to be concerned about lets talk about the UN it self....another organization that most Canadians do not have any real trust in...

What is in the pact that we do not already adhere to ?.....

The compact is all about providing protections to immigrants, and what resources should be allotted , etc no where does it state what actions states have to eject immigrants that lie, cheat or falsify papers, who have criminal back grounds, or even took part in abusing human rights within their own countries.... 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meZrLDaip6o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UWIGg0_RdI

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SMFzd9uhXo

Edited by Army Guy
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points, we allready provide (and more) of what this document asks, so what else is it then except for agreeing to accept mass migration of generally less educated/skilled people.

Another problematic issue  (Objective 17) is that it commits countries to run propaganda campaigns to change public perceptions about migrants e.g.   “sensitize and educate media,”  along with punishing those who are seen as promoting intolerance towards migrants.    Note that Trudeau regime is allready systematically accusing anyone who so much as questions illegal migrants or issues surrounding so are already trying to silence anyone who disagrees with their mass immigration agenda.

The compact may not be actually legally binding but neither is all of the Paris climate deals, and yet they wield that like a gun to our heads, so this won't be any different.  

 

 

Edited by scribblet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important to the globalists to divide the West by identity politics so it is incapable of circling the wagons and preventing its destruction in favor of the Brave New World.

Not sure if resistance is futile or not...oh, Borg Collective.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The plan is sneaky and inevitable and also goes along with the Refugee Pact.  

Don’t they always start with “non-binding” but the  Liberal gov’t will  point to UN agreement to enact binding laws, just as they are doing now with a carbon tax that  started with non binding climate plan to enacting a now BINDING carbon tax that Trudeau says will do nothing. .  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scribblet said:

 The plan is sneaky and inevitable and also goes along with the Refugee Pact.  

Don’t they always start with “non-binding” but the  Liberal gov’t will  point to UN agreement to enact binding laws, just as they are doing now with a carbon tax that  started with non binding climate plan to enacting a now BINDING carbon tax that Trudeau says will do nothing. .  

 

 

 

Did you just say something critical about Islam?? That's a paddlin' ...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/01/muslims-demand-full-legal-protection-from-islamophobia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

It seems that Islam is the only religion afforded such protection, maybe because they are the most vocal and demanding and in the U.K. they have the demographics.   While such incidents are sad and tragic, there isn't a lot of reports when it's vice versa, this is from 2013.  I did read about this incident elsewhere so also saw other reports but didn't keep them.  There are also reports of teachers being mistreated and abused.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283777/Boy-9-hanged-bullied-white.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new UN Migration Pact — which Canada is going to sign — seeks to make migration a recognized right. So, even if they are illegal immigrants, the press won't be able to label them as such so says   https://globalnews.ca/news/4724472/danielle-smith-un-migration-pact-canadian-identity/

Keep in mind The Paris Accord is non-binding other than the condition that progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions must be reported to the UN, but there is no penalty for not doing it.   Despite the fact it's supposedly non-binding , it governs the climate policies of our current government.  

ETA:  a good piece here with pertinent questions

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/malcolm-the-un-migration-compact-the-details-are-truly-worrisome? 

The UN treaty doesn’t so much as mention the impact of mass migration on the host country and its citizens — who are often ignored and removed from any discussion on migration.

The contradictions continue.

Edited by scribblet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 3:55 PM, Army Guy said:

1. I can not show you anything that sticks out that support these concerns.

2. Perhaps you can high light some of the areas in your source documents that Canada or for that matter most western countries are not already providing ... "Hey we need to sign this because we treat immigrants like shit"

3. And I suppose now we have to call the Canadian Conservative party  a right wing nationalist party, as Scheer has just come out with his party line, "no way"

4.  he states they have a way to become binding, as they progress

5. I'm not sure what being a right wing nations party

6. If we want to talk about groups to be concerned about lets talk about the UN it self

7. What is in the pact that we do not already adhere to?

8. The compact is all about providing protections to immigrants,

9. no where does it state what actions states have to eject immigrants that lie, cheat or falsify papers, who have criminal back grounds, or even took part in abusing human rights within their own countries.... 

1. "I have nothing but vague irrational fears that I can in no way back up from the text of the document.  Nor can any of my so-called "sources" "

2. Yes, we treat migrants fairly well. 

A certain country to the south that is not wanting to sign the document has had its leader call immigrants rapists, terrorists, an infestation, an invasion, etc; tried to ban immigrants based on their religion; forcably separated children from their parents as a matter of policy and for the purpose of deterrence (and in many cases lost track of who the belonged to). A famous conservative pundit from that country recently suggested the military should cross the to the other side of the border and then gun down unarmed migrants seeking refugee status.

The rhetoric and actions of other countries with "right wing nationalist" governments or strong nationalist factions can also be used as an example. Coincidentally these are also the only ones that do not want to sign the pact.

3. Yes, he's pandering to the nationalists.  

4. Not possible

5. "right-wing nationalist" is a almost always de facto a politically correct way of saying "white nationalist"

6. UN conspiracists are nearly as sad as flat earthers and moon landing deniers

7. So what's the problem then?

8. And also works to *minimize* "irregular migration" (read refugees)

9. ?? Boot them out of the country, just like before.

 

Edited by TTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the oppositioin:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/15ysTG-_LeQJrgKihDKbUL7DPugEZV7pD/view

Canada was actively involved in drafting this Compact, so if you believe Trudeau will not abide by it, I can sell you some swampland.  The compact also says that states should “determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the global compact”, therefore the very act of signing creates an expectation if nothing else, that the signatories will take action.   It is definitely a big something and interpreted as an obligation to uphold the agreement- just as other ‘aspirational’ agreements have become law under Trudeau, in particular UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

 The Soros Open Society Foundation is now launching something called the Mayors Migration Council at the same time the UN Compact is to be signed   Sure sounds like the migrant compact at the city level.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scribblet said:

from the oppositioin:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/15ysTG-_LeQJrgKihDKbUL7DPugEZV7pD/view

Canada was actively involved in drafting this Compact, so if you believe Trudeau will not abide by it, I can sell you some swampland.  The compact also says that states should “determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the global compact”, therefore the very act of signing creates an expectation if nothing else, that the signatories will take action.   It is definitely a big something and interpreted as an obligation to uphold the agreement- just as other ‘aspirational’ agreements have become law under Trudeau, in particular UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

 The Soros Open Society Foundation is now launching something called the Mayors Migration Council at the same time the UN Compact is to be signed   Sure sounds like the migrant compact at the city level.

 

 

 

This is simply a plan to replace current (expensive) populations in the West with those (cheaper ones) from mainly Islamic countries...with the current population paying for the replacement, of course.

Trudeau thinks it's a grand idea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 8:39 PM, Army Guy said:

Now this should be an election issue, Why would we as a nation sign on to something that threatens our sovereignty , along with our own constitution, our freedoms, then again we have never really been big on those things anyways . No wonder citizens are voting for the extreme right with all this crap going on.....Was this even discussed in chambers, or is this just some air brain idea of Justin's to just sign us up without any discussion or study..... 

To bad that notion was not considered when we went into Afghanistan.

However migrant thing this is similar to the Bill C-16 for the compelled speech legislation. It's the wrong way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A column in today's Globe and Mail ("To right-wingers, the Global Compact for Migration motion is a sign the sky is falling again") castigates critics on grounds that, well, they're overreacting because the pact is essentially legally meaningless anyway. Whaaaat? So why are we signing it if it has no practical force or effect? Is it just more virtue signalling on the part of Trudeau's government or are Canadian policies going to be impacted by our membership in this club? Even the G&M columnist criticizes the tone and content of much of the pact's verbiage, noting that aspects of the pact, including language could serve to restrict the ability of media to criticize immigration policy, are essentially untenable in a democracy. Oh well, it looks like the globalists will have their way on this as seems to be the common practice under Trudeau. Hopefully next year's election will replace our current ruling party and we'll get a sensible government that rejects this kind of globalist nonsense.

 

Edited by turningrite
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...