I devoted too little space in my last column, “The Blob and Fake News,”, to the master plan of the UN for world governance, “The “Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration,” which Canada will sign on to. Or, rather, the boy Wonder, JustinTrudeau, will sign on to it.
Trudeau, premier of Canada, opined that national borders are an anachronism and obsolete, and should be abolished. In “The Blob,” I wrote:
“There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada. There are shared values –openness, respect, compassion, willingness to work hard, to be there for each other, to search for equality and justice. Those qualities are what make us the first postnational state.”
Two years later, Salim Mansur at Gatestone
The Canadian government’s recent announcement
that it will be providing more than CDN $600 million (USD $455 million) over the next five years to bail out the country’s financially strapped media outlets — as part of the fall fiscal update about the federal budget ahead of the 2019 federal election — is not as innocent as it may seem.
In response to the announcement, the heads of Canada’s media organizations promptly popped open the proverbial champagne and raised their glasses to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Unifor
, a national union that represents Canadian journalists, was even more jubilant. It felt vindicated that its slogan of “Resistance
” — which it touts as Conservative Party opposition leader Andrew Scheer’s “worst nightmare
” — had so swiftly resulted in opening the government’s wallet, and handing out taxpayers’ money, to an industry that should actually be fighting to remain steadfastly independent of any form of government backing.
In effect, Canadian “journalists,” and journalists everywhere, will become the paid shills of the government and its policies of not saying critical things about Islam or Muslims. Furthermore, rolls of duct tape will be readied to silence any such criticism or to quash it before it’s even thought of:
The Global Compact requires the media outlets of member-states to adhere to the objectives and refrain from any critical discussions of these objectives that would be deemed as not “ethical” and against UN norms or standards consistent with the ideology of globalism.
In short, journalists must refrain from pointing out the contradictions, failings, and outright lunacy of the Global Compact, or face punitive consequences. And there will be, of necessity, many failings and anti-reason policies that highlight the irrationality of the GC (Global Compact), given the nature of its “feel good” collectivist altruism. Here
is a link to the whole gobbledegook
patois word salad. It is written in UNese.
And here is how the GC “plan” opens:
GLOBAL COMPACT FOR SAFE, ORDERLY AND REGULAR MIGRATION
FINAL DRAFT 11 July 2018
We, the Heads of State and Government and High Representatives, meeting in [Marrakesh] Morocco on 10 and 11 December 2018, reaffirming the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants and determined to make an important contribution to enhanced cooperation on international migration in all its dimensions, have adopted this Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration.
“Migration”? Migrants? Refugees? Immigrants?
Austria, Croatia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, will not sign the Compact, and the prime minister of Hungary, Viktor Orban, says he will not sign it.
The U.S. withdrew from the Compact in 2017. Stefan Molyneux
delivers a thorough parsing
of the Compact and what it means, and exposes its hidden meanings, such as the populations or indigenous populations of the countries to which the theoretical 59 million migrants (or immigrants) will be “pulled (to their welfare states), together with the fact that these populations were never consulted about the alleged one-world imperative of signing onto the Compact. Molyneux calls the “Implementation” section of the Compact document a “Doberman-laced wish list
He points out that nowhere in the GC is mentioned such things as the infrastructure of the signatory countries, housing, roads, medical facilities, education, translation services, electricity, that is, how are these millions of economic “migrants” are going to be accommodated. Nowhere in it anywhere either is how the billions of dollars will be paid to upkeep and to accommodate the “migrants.” Although it is just assumed that national governments will burden indigenous populations with more taxation or simply skimp on or do away with what they are already paying for, to underwrite the upkeep of millions of “migrants” and the provision of “free stuff.” Speaking from observation, most of the invading migrants are not expected to contribute to the “sustainability” of any Western nation once once the migrants are on the welfare rolls.
Molyneux emphasizes that while there is a difference between “migrants” – which are illegal and who are basically economic border crossers (“irregulars”), according to international law – “refugees” seeking asylum from war and oppressive governments are excluded from any concern in the GC. The focus of the GC is almost wholly “immigrants”
Molyneux stresses that the GC “squishes” together the terms “migrants” and “refugees” and makes no real effort to distinguish between the two. The GC states that migration has always been a part of the “human experience,” and that the invasion of “migrants” has always been opposed by indigenous peoples, such as Native Indians, when Europeans settled into North America and revisionist historians focus on how Indians were subjected to persecution and diseases. One instance I would cite is the four separate times Rome was invaded and sacked (in 390 BC, 410, 455, and 546) by barbarians (except that this time they were invited by Angela Merkle, the Swedish government, and Theresa May; “They’re not dangerous!”).
The GC states that:
Refugees and migrants are entitled to the same human rights and fundamental freedoms, which must be respected, protected, and fulfilled at all times. However, migrants and refugees are distinct groups governed by separate legal frameworks. Only refugees are entitled to the specific international protection as defined by international refugee law. The Global Compact refers to migrants and presents a cooperative framework addressing migration in all its dimensions.
But the GC’s focus is on the state of migrants, not on the real or imagined plight of refugees (such as that of Asia Bibi
In short, the Global Compact is a detailed master plan to swamp Western civilization with a non-stop flow of migrants into our world, and to whom we must defer, sustain and never upbraid or punish for their crimes and parasitism.