For what its worth....

[rdytdy 5,341]

Paddy Gower shown up overseas re the interview also. Great watch & listen.

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Why didn't the MSM show this interview in NZ?

Because it didn't show the two as Nazi Fascists at all as the left purport them to be. Well worth taking time to watch.

 

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Another inept reporter without preparation caught in the headlights like Paddy Gower was. 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Anyone going to Paris?

 

[chevy86 2,704]

Rome the same Ted--well done, keep the enlightenment coming but unfortunately the horse has bolted in Europe.

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Bureaucrats to the rescue?

by Lushington D. Brady 

 

It’s no secret that free speech and critical thinking is being smothered, trampled and garroted on university campuses. “Our universities are an absolute wreck, right now,” says Camille Paglia. “It’s been a tyranny in the humanities.”

Academics like Niall Ferguson agree that the humanities in particular have been subjected to a steady Long March of Cultural Marxist orthodoxy. As Jordan Peterson says, the prime motivation of these groups is power. So, dissenting voices are rigorously quashed. Quote:

We are in the midst of a campus free-speech crisis. Universities have cancelled speakers, censored academics and charged special security fees for conservative speakers…Academics have voiced concern about the progressive mono­culture at our universities jeopardising research and teaching. Students with a different perspective are too scared to express their contrary opinion. End of quote.

 

Anecdotally, I’ve been told by students that they just don’t dare express their true opinions in lectures and tutorials, because they know they’ll be roundly shouted down. One student told me how a lecturer had told a student he was a “fascist” because he stated that he was a Christian.

Absurdly, universities blither self-serving pieties about making campuses “safe”. Echo-chambers are only “safe” for those who side with the bullies.

Worse is when politicians actively encourage this dangerous nonsense. Quote:

Opposition universities assistant spokeswoman Louise Pratt declared the “welfare” of students and staff was more important than “promoting debate”. End of quote.

All this is being perpetrated on the taxpayer’s dime. Quote:

Universities are mostly public institutions, built on public land, established by state law, and they receive the bulk of their funding from the taxpayer and state-­subsidised loans. End of quote.

So, should the government intervene? Quote:

In response to serious threats to campus free speech, a dozen US states, from North Carolina and Wisconsin to Missouri and Virginia, have legislated to safeguard free expression on campus. Legislation has been introduced, but not passed, in a further dozen states…

Australia should adopt similar legislation. This would not be a radical departure from the status quo which, following the Gillard government amendments in 2011, already requires universities to uphold intellectual freedom. This new law merely would give teeth to existing provisions by empowering the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, which regulates the sector, with a specific mandate. End of quote.

While the strangling of free expression at universities is a dire problem, I’m not sure that getting the state involved is ever the best solution. Government intervention tends to create more problems than it solves — and governments change. Consider the damage that has and is being done by leftist governments like the socialist Andrews government in Victoria encouraging creepy Cultural Marxists to peddle their Queer Theory nonsense to schoolchildren.

Forget universities, it’s in the primary and high schools, and increasingly even in the pre-schools, that the damage is done. As Paglia says, “this generation of young people have been trained” all through their school years, “to be subservient to authority”. Quote:

Federal law, and even university policies, cannot alone fix what is fundamentally a cultural and structural problem. However, they are important to send a signal to administrators, academics and students that the purpose of a university is to freely explore ideas, not to mollycoddle. End of quote.

Whatever the merits of a short-term fix in the universities, a better option would be a wholesale stripping-out of the curriculum. Decades of accretions of left-wing orthodoxy need to be swept away: and not replaced with right-wing orthodoxy, either. Or any kind of ideology. Schools need to teach kids to read, to write, to do math, and in today’s world, to code.

As for the universities, we need, as Paglia says, “rebellion…we absolutely need someone to stand up and start criticising authority figures”.

[rdytdy 5,341]

Cindy is intent on signing the UN Migration Pact . She is nothing short of stupid and this is definitely not in NZ's interests to do so. Almost everyone knows nothing about this document. Do some research on it people and you will see how dangerous this will be to the country. Here is someone who has had another look at it.

 

 

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Will NZ reject the ‘abomination’ that is the UN Migration Pact?

by Dieuwe de Boer 

 

Dieuwe de Boer

 

---

Why haven’t we heard about the Global Compact for Migration here in New Zealand? President Trump made waves when he rejected the pact, due to be signed this December, nearly a year ago. Israel, Australia, Poland, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Estonia, and the Czech Republic have since either followed suit or signalled that they would also withdraw. The list grows longer almost by the day.

Note that nearly all of these nations face direct threats from illegal migration: the USA from its southern border, the Europeans from their southern and eastern borders, Australia from its northern border, and Israel from just about every border.

Here in New Zealand, the only party that has released any statement on this pact has been the New Conservative Party, whose deputy leader Elliot Ikilei denounced it as reading like dystopian science-fiction.

We know that the National, Green, and ACT Parties are all for open borders, either wanting to prop up the economy with migrant workers or virtue signal by accepting increasingly large numbers of refugees. It’s no surprise that we haven’t heard a peep from those directions.

The silence from the Labour and NZ First Parties is more interesting, as both campaigned against mass immigration. Their policy and campaigning is actually irrelevant though; the personal opinions of Jacinda and Winston are what really matter.

 

Judging by Jacinda’s recent words and actions, she’s doing a Helen Clark 2.0 and posturing for a cushy UN job after she wraps up two or three terms as Prime Minister. She’ll have this goal in the back of her mind and she’ll be 100% on board with the Migration Suicide Pact. At this rate, she’ll have no trouble becoming the first Oceanian Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Guessing at Winston’s position is trickier. You have one group of people who keep complaining that Winston is in charge and Labour does what he tells them, and then you have another group who says that Winston has sold everything out and does as he’s told. I don’t have a horse in that fight, so I’ll go with what we can observe. Winston trades what he finds important for what he does not. Does Winston think this is important? We can postulate that he cares about other things more, since to date immigration and refugees have been low on his priority list. He knows Jacinda wants this really badly, so there’s likely some behind-the-scenes horse trading going on where she gets the Migration Pact and he gets something else.

Why haven’t our legacy media run a single article on this? I’ve scoured their search archives and can’t find anything mentioning the migration pact. Why haven’t they asked Winston or Jacinda if we’re going to sign this abomination?

If this is the first you’ve heard of the UN migration pact, then you’re in for a treat. The full document is available as a PDF download, and Stefan Molyneux’s 1.5-hour detailed analysis can be found on his Youtube channel. Faith Goldy also has a shorter 14-minute video covering the basics.

While the entire document is considered non-binding, you know that it won’t remain so for long. The pact is one massive attack on our national sovereignty and hands control of our immigration policies to the unelected global bureaucracy who get to determine who comes into our country.

It’s important to note that this pact isn’t about refugees, genuine or not. It’s not even about immigrants – people who do all the preparation, planning, and paperwork to move to a country for mutual gain. This pact is about economic migrants (formerly known as illegal aliens) who forcefully violate borders looking for a better or easier life without regard to the sovereignty of their new host nation.

There is no reference in the document to consultation with those native populations who will be at the receiving end of this migration. It does not contain details about who will be paying for this (you will), the impact on infrastructure, or any limits on the flow of migrants.

It’s a wishlist and it openly states that the goal is the full implementation of Agenda 2030. There is even the mention of “climate change” as a magic hook as to why people might wish to migrate elsewhere and it openly admits it wants to set up regular routes – a constant, unending flow – for these illegal migrants to take.

One of the worst parts is that censorship is heavily implied, as the document requires a commitment to “eliminate all forms of discrimination, including xenophobia, racism, and intolerance against migrants and their families.”

Do you have a disagreement with the pact, comrade? Off to the gulag with you.

You can bet all the migrants will be going in one direction too. From the failed states in the third-world to Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand.

Meanwhile, countries like Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation voting bloc will happily approve this with a laugh, while taking zero refugees themselves, and flooding the west with the victims of their corrupt ideologies.

 

 

 

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Eastern eyes on the western prize

by Suze 

 

We should be very thankful that we are a tiny country at the bottom of the world with the best border available to us – a vast ocean – or we might be forced to repel boats of refugees like our Aussie neighbours and send them packing to Nauru or Manus Island.  Or would we?

Ardern threatened to give Manus Island illegals a home here, indicating her disdain for aligning with Australia’s strong stance on border protection – and why would she agree with Australia? 

Ardern is a globalist who believes millions of refugees should be entitled to legitimately immigrate here and receive the same privileges New Zealand citizens enjoy. Without contributing anything to the cost, of course. IMO no borders, no brains.

International migration is a one-way street, from east to west.  It does not go back the other way. There aren’t millions of westerners clamouring to migrate to Saudi Arabia, the Middle East or Africa. Eastern eyes are on the western prize. Like little children they do not understand what underpins our culture and how their values and behaviour destroy the freedoms we currently take for granted.

Image: REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany

The tragedy is that some western leaders, like ours, do not understand this either, so they do not acknowledge the threat or attempt to protect us from it.

Millions of people want what the west has accumulated, but they will not give up their barbaric lifestyle to get it. They will bring their inhumane practices and set up camp here, taking our housing, welfare, medical care and education that we worked hard to pay for, while continuing to do exactly what they did back home.

They will swamp us. Our culture will not survive an onslaught of millions of Sharia-law-promoting Muslims.

Mass migration is a huge problem for western culture but it barely gets a mention in the media.  No one acknowledges the threat.

We lack strong political leadership to protect us from the hordes who are biding their time until they can legitimately set themselves up here on their terms, not ours. 

What a great opportunity for a bright politician to stamp their mark on the New Zealand public and secure a political future, and what a huge disappointment that no one has yet stepped up to do exactly that.

Mass migration began in 2015 and is continuing momentum because the world’s fastest growing populations are in the Middle East and Africa. Quote. 

[By 2050] Africa will be home to around 3.4 billion people – this is likely to be more than the populations of China and India combined. Such an unprecedented boom will present challenges as well as opportunities for the international community.” End of quote.

World’s Fastest Growing Populations www.weforum.org

The UN has taken responsibility for redistributing the predicted population boom by getting the global community on board with open migration. 

Softly, softly, first the “secret” EU agreement of 1995, the Barcelona Declaration, then Agenda 2030 in 2015 for sustainable development, the Marrakesh Political Declaration this year followed by the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration which is due to be signed this month.

You might assume the UN Global Compact is simply a sensible guideline for providing homes for desperate refugees from over populated and war torn countries. 

It is not. The compact is simply to continue softening the west, to set the stage for the future removal of national borders thus allowing migrants free entry wherever they choose to go. Migrants will have the right to choose where and when they go with support from host countries.

Proponents argue that because the Global Compact is non-binding,that  signing it does not commit us to anything. That is true, but it is the foundation document for open border migration in the years to come.  By signing it we are endorsing the prospect of open border migration for New Zealand.

Our prime minister will sign the document to show her allegiance and set herself up for a position with the United Nations when New Zealand politics has had enough of her, or she of it.  Make no mistake, Ardern is a globalist planning her next step on the international stage just like her predecessor, Helen Clark. Despite Ardern’s wobbly maiden speech to an almost vacant chamber at the UN this year, this speech was her foot firmly on the bottom rung of the UN ladder. Her next step up will be to sign the UN Global Compact.

Judith Bergman has written an excellent article for the NZ Centre for Political Research on the Global Compact, “Migration is a Human Right”. *

If the concept of open borders and migrant rights concerns you, and it should, you might like to email the prime minister, the minister of foreign affairs and your local member of parliament to voice your concerns.

[Ohokaman 5,825]

She is a moron plain and simple....a bit like the coalition really....

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

 

 

The EU is about to criminalise criticism of migration!

by SB on December 2, 2018 at 1:00pm

 

As revealed in the Tweet above, the European Union is set to criminalise speech that criticises migration. quote.

The criticism of migration will be a criminal offence. […] Media outlets that give room for criticism of migration can be shut down. end quote.

This shocking news can only make me wonder about Stuff’s motivation for shutting down opposing views of climate change and the Green party co-leader James Shaw’s enthusiastic support of Stuff’s one-sided and censored articles.

 

Is Stuff now a government-controlled media outlet? Are they rewarded for toeing the party line on climate change and silencing the opposing view?

Once upon a time, that question would seem far fetched, but if the European Union are going to shut down media outlets that have articles criticising mass migration, then it is no longer in the realm of fantasy that our own media could now genuinely be under pressure from our own government. The threat may not yet be overt, as they may be taking the carrot-and-stick approach. Perhaps Stuff is going to be rewarded for what they are doing in some way, such as more access to government ministers for stories? Perhaps the pressure won’t start till later when one of the editors develops a backbone and attempts to provide some balance to the series?

I feel like I have woken up inside a George Orwell novel. Is this really the world we live in now? Who could have imagined a world where the European Union is openly planning to gag the press and criminalise free speech?

Just as the UN Immigration Pact is doing so also. Freedom of speech is being shut down.  

 

---

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

On ‎08‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 9:18 AM, chevy86 said:

Rome the same Ted--well done, keep the enlightenment coming but unfortunately the horse has bolted in Europe.

Perhaps not Chevy. The French have had enough and if Macron goes Europe may well have a chance.

Worth a listen. This weekend in France could be very interesting.

 

[100 1 1,386]

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

 

[100 1 1,386]

 Praying Medic Retweeted

Santa Plissken  ‏ @WyattEarpLA 6h6 hours ag

More

Chili will NOT sign the stupid ass UN migration pact. I believe that's 19 countries now! The MAGA effect is spreading, FAST. NWO on suicide watch. This org needs to be kicked off of US soil. It is nothing but a globalist platform to destroy nations.

142 replies2,629 retweets4,668 likes

 

[100 1 1,386]

Protests in Ottawa now....21 countries pull out of Migration Pact

https://voat.co/v/QRV/2902192

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbvc-tuOShY

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

NZ to sign the UN migration pact

by Christie 

 

The man pictured above has campaigned throughout his political life on reducing immigration. He has always said that we should keep migrant numbers down and that it is very important that New Zealand keeps its unique culture. It is our geography more than anything that has enabled us to stop illegal migrants from pouring into our country, and we have also had a bit of help from Australia. Now that is all going to change. The man above, who has campaigned for as long as I can remember on lowering immigration, is one of the parties responsible for it. He is selling our country down the Nile for whatever his 30 pieces of silver consist of.

RNZ  reports: quote.

New Zealand is likely going to sign up to a United Nations migration pact this week as long as it can iron out a concern around sovereignty.

Representatives of 193 countries are gathering in Marrakech, Morocco, on Monday and Tuesday to submit intentions – or not – to sign the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. end quote.

The vast majority of New Zealanders would not want a bar of this, but it has been kept out of the media, so most people don’t know much about it. Right at the moment, most people are more concerned about Christmas shopping and the upcoming holiday season. They are unaware that our right to decide who comes to our country is about to be taken away. By the time they do realise it, it will be a done deal. quote.

National’s foreign affairs spokesperson Todd McClay said it could affect New Zealand’s ability to set its own migration policy.

“The government should not sign this agreement.

“[It] treats legal and illegal migration the same and calls for restrictions on freedom of speech and the media. It is likely to have a detrimental effect on New Zealand’s ability to set independent policy today and in the future.” end quote.

 

Deep down, we knew all along our government was always going to sign it because, if they were not, we would have known long ago. In fact, it seems their intentions had been decided back in March, but no one has raised the issue until now.

 

Credit: William Felt

The compact is non-binding, meaning there would be no lawful obligation to include its principles in future decision-making. However, by signing up to the declaration New Zealand is at the very least morally obligated to honour it.

“Although non-mandatory, [it] speaks of ‘commit,’ ‘commitment,’ ‘must,’ something like 80 or 100 times,” Mr Bridges said.

“We have the right processes and policies; we don’t need the UN telling us what to do.” end quote.

You can bet it won’t stay non binding for long. Once signed, the UN will put huge pressure on the signatory countries to take large numbers of refugees opportunistic economic migrants. That is not the only issue. The compact restricts free speech and the freedom of the press by linking criticism of migration to hate crimes, and we are signing this.

We all know why Cindy wants to sign it; she wants a job at the UN in New York, following in the footsteps of Auntie Helen, and she does not care if she has to sell us down the river to get it, but why is Winston going against one of his own underlying principles? A principle that many people supported him on? quote.

New Zealand is sending UN representative Craig Hawke to Morocco. end quote.

If we are sending someone, you can be sure he is not going purely to admire the scenery.

I am disgusted with Winston Peters about this. So many people have been fooled by him time and time again, but this is possibly the most treacherous thing he has ever done. He could have stopped it, even if Jacinda was hell-bent on signing this compact, but he didn’t, and now it looks like a done deal.

Remember all those people who rallied in the streets, stopping traffic and throwing dildos at Stephen Joyce because the former TPPA contained clauses that were seen as a threat to our sovereignty? Where are all the hordes of activists now when our sovereignty really is under threat? They are nowhere. The whole anti-TPPA movement was just a political stunt, aimed entirely at the former government. These people do not care if our sovereignty is sold out.  They think they will be happy to live under Sharia law. For some reason, they think the harsh rules imposed by Islam will not apply to them. They are wrong.

In the meantime, Winston Peters has sold his country out. Remember that in 2020, voters… although it may already be too late by then.

[rdytdy 5,341]

We have been lied to: Merkel admits Migration pact is legally binding

by SB 

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. Photo: AFP

We have been lied to.

Again and again, we have been told by both politicians and the mainstream media that the UN migration pact is non-binding. This has ensured apathy from the general public, who decided that if it was non-binding then there was nothing to be concerned about.

The pact demands that countries who sign it treat unlimited and illegal migration as a human right, which thereby turns the description ‘illegal migrants’ into hate speech and criminalises any criticism of migration.

The biggest red flag raised by the pact was its inclusion of the media in its attempt to get rid of all dissent. If media organisations criticise anything to do with migration they can be punished by having their state funding removed, while those who toe the United Nations line will be rewarded with  ‘investment’.

Voice of Europe wanted to know whether the countries that refuse to sign the pact are still bound to it because they are members of the UN. Here is what they found out. quote.

 

[…] In a frank exchange with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, Mr. Hebner of the AfD drew out an admission that it is, in fact, legally binding. As well, that it will be adopted as rule for all UN Member states once enacted.

Mr. Hebner asks: “You can see for yourself clearly that during the conference, the spokesperson for Morocco emphasised that the agreement was legally binding. He said clearly, in a literal sense, that there is a corresponding legal bond for all nations taking part as well as an obligation of implementation. You and your delegation did not raise a single word of objection to that statement but idly accepted it. I would like to emphasise that the parliamentary motion was not presented at the conference. “

Ms. Merkel’s response not only confirmed what we at Voice of Europe have been suspecting all along, the claim it is indeed binding, but that once voted and accepted it will be valid for all:

“So then, during the UN General Assembly next week, the pact will once again be up for debate and a decision will be made on whether to accept it. At this time, a member state can demand a vote. When two-thirds of the represented countries agree then it is valid for all. That’s how majority decision-making works.” end quote.

New Zealand needs to leave the United Nations. This is the stuff of nightmares. A world government that can impose its will on sovereign countries, even those who refused to sign the pact!

 

 

 

[rdytdy 5,341]

UN’s migration compact ‘reckless, unfair, and unsustainable’

by Christie 

 

Photo supplied to Whaleoil

It seems that we have signed… as if it was ever in question. With a Marxist who wants a top job at the UN in charge of the country, we were always going to sign the UN Migration Compact. At least Jacinda is true to form. The real sell out comes from Winston Peters but, once again, I wonder why we are all surprised?

The Irish publication, The Burkean has written an interesting article about the possible consequences of signing this compact… consequences we are already starting to see around Europe. quote.

This agreement is the first ever global cooperative framework on international migration. It specifies an extensive list of ‘commitments’ on migration policy, from non-discriminatory treatment of migrants to a universal right to access ‘basic services.’ It is therefore quite astounding that in many Western countries, including Ireland, it has barely been considered newsworthy, let alone the subject of a national debate. end quote.

 

It seems that a Marxist media is not something confined to New Zealand. quote.

Defenders of the pact frequently depict dissenters as harpooning an emerging global consensus on sound and humane migration policies for the sake of pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment. They dismiss dissenters’ objections by pointing out that the pact is not legally binding, and explicitly acknowledges the right of sovereign nations to set their own migration policies.

Some dissenters may indeed be tapping into anti-immigrant sentiment, but this does not automatically invalidate their objections to the pact. And while the agreement itself is not legally binding, it is nonetheless a joint commitment to a ‘cooperative framework’ for global migration policy, in which the terms ‘commit’ and ‘commitment’ occur over eighty times.

This agreement is a classic case of ‘soft law’ – a set of principles that policymakers commit themselves to, in a non-legally binding manner, many aspects of which may insinuate themselves into customary practice and gradually become legally binding policy. end quote.

We have now learned that the compact is going to be legally binding anyway. Why bother doing it if members could just walk away from it? quote.

The document proposes that we “eliminate all forms of discrimination, including racism, xenophobia and intolerance against migrants and their families.” All forms of discrimination. Not just invidious, unjust, or arbitrary discrimination, but all forms of discrimination.

On its face, this means that any policy that gives special treatment to citizens over immigrants, insofar as it indisputably constitutes a form of “discrimination”, would be unacceptable. So either this document is carelessly written, or it is advocating an end to the privileges of citizenship.  end quote.

Do you have a shortage of builders? Tough. You have to take unskilled labourers from North Africa, who speak no English and do not know one end of a hammer from another. You cannot select, or discriminate. quote.

Similarly, signatories agree “to implement border management policies that…are non-discriminatory,” without qualification. What exactly would a ‘non-discriminatory’ border management policy look like? It could mean avoiding patently offensive and arbitrary forms of discrimination. But it could also mean treating every category of migrant the same, in which case non-European and European citizens ought to have the same rights of admission in EU countries. end quote.

All immigration policy has been ‘discriminatory’ up until now. It has to be. Otherwise we would simply have hordes of people pouring over our borders. Oh, wait… quote.

In any case, the idea of recognizing a ‘human right’ to access taxpayer-funded services is riddled with difficulties. Welfare systems do not just run on goodwill or humanitarian sentiment, but on the principle that there is a proper balance struck between inward and outward payments.

With many Western welfare services, including Ireland’s, already stretched beyond capacity, attributing an unqualified right to all migrants to access ‘basic services,’ irrespective of their legal status, is reckless, unfair, and unsustainable. It is likely to hurt responsible contributors, and unfairly reward free-riding economic migrants who choose the ‘back door’ into a country in search of a more comfortable life. end quote.

Already happening and this compact will make sure it just gets worse. quote.

To sum up, the global migration pact concluded this week is fatally undermined by its failure to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable forms of discrimination, its reckless elevation of access to public services to the status of a universal human right, and its overwhelmingly one-sided focus on migrants’ rights, to the neglect of the rights of the citizens of host communities.

It is not a question of denying that migrants have rights: it is a question of acknowledging that these rights must go hand in hand with responsibilities, and be balanced against the rights of host communities, in particular their right to have a reasonable say over their own common life, and their right to selectively incorporate new members in an economically and socially sustainable manner.

Migrants must be treated at all times with humanity and respect, but bolstering their rights without due regard to the legitimate interests and claims of host communities will only lead to bad policy, resentment toward migrant communities, and social unrest. end quote.

Thanks, Jacinda and more to the point, thanks, Winston. You could have stopped this. Whatever happens now is entirely down to you.