UN Migration Compact

[Anonymous]

the UN Migration Compact Objective 17 basically codifies the formerly "toothless" M-103 into law

Objective 17 requirement to eliminate "all forms of discrimination" in the host population including those that call into question the political opinions of migrants. Here we can see Motion M-103 as a precursor for a larger, more comprehensive Global Compact initiative;

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/12/canada-opposition-protests-and-a-petition-against-the-un-migration-pact">https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/12/cana ... ation-pact">https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/12/canada-opposition-protests-and-a-petition-against-the-un-migration-pact



According to this


While I think we take in too many immigrants every year, we had a system that worked. We took in the third world's best and brightest. Trudeau raised the cap on immigrants and is moving away from skilled migrants that benefit this country to family class and refugees who are pure charity.

[Chuck Bronson]

Expect to learn that "Little Italy" in your neighbourhood will now turn into "Little Eritrea" under UN plans for current global migration patterns...  Of course our PM is willing to sign on.

[Anonymous]

More about  the UN Migration Compact. It' s the possible effect on free speech that has me concerned. I realize it's voluntary, but when Trudeau is re-elected he will use the voluntary agreement as a  justification for making it law.



Opposition to the UN migrant compact is broad and far-reaching





The Trudeau government and the mainstream media are not telling the truth about the UN Global Compact for Migration.



Both are casting opposition to the UN agreement as conspiratorial, far-right, and even racist, while leaving out important facts and details about the compact.



Trudeau's top aide Gerald Butts — sometimes referred to as the co-prime minister, because apparently he does the behind-the-scenes heavy lifting — led the attacks this week.



The ad quoted Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer saying, "Canadians and Canadians alone should make decisions on who comes into our country and under what circumstances. Not the UN."



In response, Butts scolded the Conservatives and unleashed a deranged criticism. "This is a flat-out lie being spread by the far-right in Europe, the alt-right in North America, and now the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada."



This story line appeared throughout the mainstream media.



Many journalists chose to leave out the fact that the UN compact is being met with heavy opposition throughout the Western world.



According to a Canadian Press news article, "almost all UN member states are poised to sign it, except the United States and Hungary."



Other journalists have echoed this talking point, stating that only a small handful of countries — all run my right-wing populist governments — are opposed to the migration compact.



It is this claim that is flat out untrue.



In the U.S., both Republicans and Democrats, such as Hillary Clinton, oppose the deal. It was Clinton herself who helped popularize the term "alt-right" — referring to both internet pranksters and racist white nationalists who have been excommunicated from the conservative movement.



Mainstream conservative voices in Canada, including Maxime Bernier, Michelle Rempel and Danielle Smith all oppose signing the UN compact.



And as for "far-right" opposition in Europe? Austria, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria and even neutral Switzerland have all backed out of the compact.



In Latvia, the country's government held a debate and a vote on the issue, ultimately deciding not to sign the UN compact. That's what a democracy is supposed to look like.



Outside of Europe, Australia, Israel and Japan have backed out of the deal, while New Zealand is engaged in a public debate and leaning towards not signing the compact.



In other words, a growing plurality of refugee-receiving countries have chosen to reject the UN Compact for Migration.



Why? Well, according to Australia's public safety Minister Peter Dutton, Australia is not willing to "sign a deal that sacrifices anything in terms of border protection policies."



"We're not going to surrender our sovereignty — I'm not going to allow unelected bodies to dictate to us, to the Australian people."



Where's Gerald Butts to call him a far-right racist? Unlike the citizens of most Western countries, Canadians have not been told the truth or been given a chance to debate the issue.



Instead of having an honest discussion about how the UN scheme will affect our immigration system and our democracy, Trudeau and his cadre of government-funded journalists have pushed lies and bullied Canadians.



The Trudeau government will ratify the UN compact on Tuesday in Morocco, signing away aspects of Canadian sovereignty without so much as an honest public debate.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/malcolm-opposition-to-the-un-migrant-compact-is-broad-and-far-reaching">https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnis ... r-reaching">https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/malcolm-opposition-to-the-un-migrant-compact-is-broad-and-far-reaching

[Gaon]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

[JOE]

Actually, that was the model which was followed during the last Syrian refugee crisis.



People were muzzled from stating their own viewpoints which contradicted the staus quo.



And the mainstream media fell in lockstep to tow the party line of what the establishment asked them to print.



Former PM Stephen Harper was vilified for being anti refugee even tho he  pledged to accept 20,000 Syrian refugees. But that wasn't good enough for the establishment even tho Harper's revised pledge far exceeded the 7,000 or so the UN initially requested that Canada accept.



I think there is some truth that the UN or certain individuals/groups within it don't want sovereign nations to have independent control over their immigration policies.



Britain is another nation which was vilified for pulling out of the EU largely over the issue of refugees.



The British accepted over 300,000 Syrians for resettlement as a member of the EU

The UN Migration Compact - the details are truly worrisome



Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer has come out swinging against a new United Nations immigration treaty that the Trudeau government will sign next week.



"Canadians want their government, not foreign entities, to be in control of our immigration system, a system that is orderly, compassionate and fair," said Scheer on Tuesday.



This is exactly right.



The UN Migration Compact is a highly controversial document, riddled with contradictions and radical claims. While many journalists accept Liberal talking points on the banality of this treaty, a close reading of the document exposes the many problems it contains.



The document promises it is "not legally binding" and merely a framework, but at the same time, it encourages countries to sign the agreement, join the UN's efforts and implement its suggestions at home.





The entire point of the UN Compact on Migration is to form the foundation of new international norms that will, in time, become international law.



The compact promises that national sovereignty and the rule of law will be respected and maintained, but then carves out special rights and protections for migrants and insists that the "well-being of migrants", including illegal immigrants, must come first.



But what about the existing citizens of a country?



What about our families, our communities, our culture and traditions? What about our rules, our laws, our safety and security? What about the costs, the impact on our schools, our hospitals, our roads and our tax dollars?



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.



The treaty insists that governments must provide "access to objective, evidence-based, clear information about the benefits and challenges of migration." That sounds good. Citizens should know about the harms and dangers associated with mass migration, as well as the potential advantages and benefits.



But wait, the sentence continues to say, "with a view to dispelling misleading narratives that generate negative perceptions of migrants."



You can either commit to telling the truth and objectively studying the issue of immigration, or, you can commit to dispelling negative perceptions about migrants.



You cannot honestly say you're doing both at the same time.



Finally, the most controversial section of this UN compact is Objective 17, which is to "eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration."



It pledges to "eliminate all forms of discrimination, including racism, xenophobia and intolerance against migrants" — without defining these words or acknowledging that in today's heated public discourse, these terms have been weaponized and are used to discredit anyone who doesn't subscribe to Liberal dogma on immigration and multiculturalism.



It instructs governments to implement laws and harsher penalties for crimes against migrants but says nothing about crimes committed by migrants.



And, most controversially, it calls on governments to intervene in the media, to promote positive stories about migrants and to cut off media outlets that tell the other side of the story.



While outlining these Orwellian guidelines for media censorship and government intervention in the free press, the compact throws in a line about "respecting freedom of expression" and "freedom for the media." As if that's any consolation for calls to punish journalists for reporting facts and telling the truth.



Canadians should join Andrew Scheer in rejecting this radical global scheme that undermines Canadian laws and traditions while pushing for mass migration and open borders.

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



I know very little  about this. But, if the UN is behind it and Trudeau won't is on board with it, it immediately raises suspicions with me

[Anonymous]

The more I read about this, the more I think it's a bad idea for Canada. If Trudeau endorses it, it has to be bad for Canadians.



FEEL-GOOD FALLACY

UN Global Compact on migration a type of Trojan horse



The danger of the Global Compact on migration, which international delegates will sign next week in Marrakesh, Morocco, is not that it will enable some clandestine international bureaucracy or judiciary to dictate immigration policy over the objections of sovereign states. It's that it will enable "progressives" within each nation's government to liberalize domestic refugee and immigration laws using the excuse that the UN made us do it.



The United Nations has no real ability to force any of its treaties, accords, conventions or compacts on individual nations. There are no black helicopters of conspiracy fame. Outside the western world, countries sign UN agreements all the time then promptly ignore them.



The UN could decree tomorrow that no country — Canada included — could deny entry by any foreigner on any grounds. And Canada could ignore that edict, so long as Ottawa had the courage to withstand criticism from the forces of political correctness.



There has been a 20% rise in refugees and migrants around the world in the past five years; 277 million last year, up from 232 million in 2013.



The Global Compact claims all it wishes to do is "foster international co-operation among all relevant actors on migration" while upholding "the sovereignty of states."



It claims to be merely a symbolic agreement on how future international co-operation on migration might work. Details to follow later.



But that's the sneaky part of the UN process. Delegates from member states agree to these motherhood declarations, which they reassure opponents are largely meaningless. Then they get busy fleshing out the real rules and inserting them into their own nation's laws, all the while insisting they have to because of a UN treaty.



The compact deliberately confuses two distinct classes of newcomers — political refugees and economic immigrants. It lumps under one label — migrants — both those seeking asylum from repression and violence and those looking for better job and income opportunities.



It is desirable to admit both classes of immigrants, but they do not have the same needs. For instance, those seeking a better economic future for themselves are clearly the kind of hard-working newcomers that generation after generation have helped build Canada. But there is not the same urgency to admit them as there is for genuine refugees who are under threat of torture or execution in their home countries.



The UN compact blurs that distinction, leaving the impression that what the diplomats who negotiated the deal (including those sent by the Trudeau Liberals) are truly after is easier access for any and all people wanting to head for the West.



The "progressives" who drafted the compact also seem to believe most terrorism concerns are really anti-muslim prejudice in disguise, so it's bigoted even to suggest security is a problem.



While the compact is non-binding on signatory countries, the second it's signed, the Trudeau Liberals, the Toronto Star and CBC, most of our foreign service bureaucrats and a host of pressure groups will begin advocating for its rights for migrants to be codified in Canadian law.



The UN will set up a secretariat for the compact that will add in details not in the original, then send investigators to each member country to report on where those countries are failing to live up to UN standards. Lib-left national governments (such as ours) will use that as an excuse to push implementation in Canadian law.



Domestic courts may even reason that because we are signatories to these conventions, our governments are obliged to abide by them, even if they are not yet ratified. Our Supreme Court has already done this with other international agreements.



That's how these things work: not an international assault on sovereignty, but the internal creep of political correctness.

[Anonymous]

By former finance minister Joe Oliver



Get ready for a transformation of our migration policy



Next week in Marrakesh, Morocco, Canada will sign the U.N. Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, which Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen said our government was actively involved in drafting.



Canada will then be politically and possibly legally committed to migration principles that could erode our sovereignty, weaken our borders and cost billions.



Yet the government intends to embark on this radical lurch to an uncertain future without a debate in Parliament, let alone any public consultation.



We cannot say the prime minister didn't forewarn us. In a moment of candour, he proclaimed, "There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada", which he described as the world's first post-national state. It was a stunning admission that he wants the country he leads to be subsumed in a kind of idealized globalism.



The government is treading on dangerous ground because polls indicate Canadians don't want legal immigration to give way to open borders. The irony is the government risks turning a compassionate population against our historically generous policy of welcoming immigrants and refugees, who in turn have strengthened Canada economically and culturally.



So far, the United States, Australia, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Israel and a number of Eastern European countries have refused to sign an agreement they believe would compromise their sovereignty and endanger their traditions and economic well-being.



It is also causing political convulsions in Germany, Belgium, Holland and elsewhere. But not in Canada, whose very own Louise Arbour is leading the charge for the UN and who claims the compact is non-binding.



Serious issue



But that may not be true for Canada. Our Immigrant and Refugee Protection Act section (3) states that, "it is to be construed and applied in a manner that ... (f) complies with international human rights instruments to which Canada is a signatory." Since the Compact declares that migrants, including economic migrants, are entitled to universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, there is a serious issue of whether our laws and policies have to conform to its principles. Furthermore, even a non-binding agreement, like the Paris climate accord, can impose irresistible political pressure on signatory states. Finally, it would be naïve to assume the compact will not, over time, impose more intrusive obligations on signatory nations.



The compact acknowledges a benign obligation "to fulfill the human rights of all migrants irrespective of their migration status", which is tied to a commitment "to facilitate and ensure safe, orderly and regular migration". Can migrants therefore go where they want, without pretending to be refugees, and assert a human rights claim to stay? This would represent a fundamental departure from the historical responsibility of nation states to protect their sovereignty, territory and the safety of their citizens.



Population grows



An estimated 250 million migrants, about 10 times the number of refugees, would have the right to move to wealthier countries offering superior social assistance. These numbers could rise dramatically, as the global population grows and more people try to escape poverty, limited opportunity and political oppression.



What discourages overseas 'irregular' refugees from travelling to Canada is distance and the concern they will be rejected after a hearing, like 91% of Haitian claimants recently. If that concern is eliminated, only cost would stand in the way of mass migration. However, the price of a one-way ticket may be affordable for millions of economic migrants or provided by countries wanting to reduce the much higher cost of housing migrants indefinitely or by sympathetic NGOS.



Since demography is destiny, the stakes for Canada could not be higher. Trudeau should not sign this attempt at international social engineering without extensive public consultation and a debate in Parliament.

[Bricktop]

I wonder who is the architect and author of this madness.



Oh wait...



SHE is a CANADIAN!!!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Arbour">//https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Arbour



Nice work, guys.



"Austria,[9] Australia,[10] Bulgaria,[11] Chile,[12] Croatia,[13] the Czech Republic,[14] Dominican Republic,[15] Estonia,[16] Hungary, Italy,[17] Israel,[18][19] Latvia,[20] Lithuania,[21] Poland,[22] Slovakia[23] and Switzerland[24] won't attend an international conference in the Moroccan city of Marrakesh to sign the agreement. The United States did not participate in the negotiation of the agreement, at the behest of President Trump.[9] "



"The Australian government has criticized the agreement, claiming that it does not distinguish between legal and illegal migrants, particularly when it comes to welfare. They have also claimed that the compact could impose obligations to support migrants even when they have returned to their country of origin. The Australian government believes that the compact would undermine their current migration policies"

[Odinson]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

[Anonymous]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

[Odinson]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

Its a good thing you are behind the atlantic then..

[Anonymous]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

Its a good thing you are behind the atlantic then..

What do you mean by that?

[Anonymous]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

It's the loss of free speech that has me concerned. It's voluntary, but will Trudeau make it law? That's the sixty four thousand dollar question.

[Odinson]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

Its a good thing you are behind the atlantic then..

What do you mean by that?

The atlantic ocean stops the biggest refugee swarms from coming to N-America.

[Anonymous]

Did Odinson's country sign on to this? I would imagine they did. NW Europe is globalist.

They are planning on it..





Look... Its not legally binding.





Certain elements have taken this as their flagship to gain political power.









The same politicians here whom are supporting this compact, are at the same time writing new laws that will cause near all of the refugees to get deported..





We are deporting 70-80% of immigrant applicants now... Thats straight away..





The number will increase in the near future.

I'm  aware of that, but like Seoul said our prime minister treats these voluntary international agreements like they were treaties.

Its a good thing you are behind the atlantic then..

What do you mean by that?

The atlantic ocean stops the biggest refugee swarms from coming to N-America.

Oh, I see what you mean.