FREE SPEECH UNDER THREAT? – UN POLITICIANS CRIMINALISES CRITICISM ON POLICIES. INTERVIEW WITH PETER WHITTLE
WRITTEN BY AARON GONZALEZ
A LEADING MEP has warned EU citizens they could be prosecuted for criticising migration policies if a new United Nations agreement is acted upon.
On 19 September 2016, the nations of the United Nations General Assembly adopted the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. The Declaration recognized a need for more cooperation between nations to manage migration effectively. A resolution was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 6 April 2017.
The Global Compact for Safe and Orderly Migration is not an international treaty and will be non-binding under international law. It will be treated like a co operative framework in ensuring countries are on the same wave length when it comes to what they hope to achieve as nations.
On 10 December 2018, the document was approved by 164 nations during the Intergovernmental Conference to Adopt the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. On 19 December 2018, the United Nations General Assembly endorsed the compact through a vote. 152 countries voted in favor of the resolution to endorse it, while the United States, Hungary, Israel, Czech Republic and Poland voted against it. 12 countries abstained from the vote. – No country ‘signed’ the compact but they will indicate their position on it by their vote.
Supporters hailed the Compact as a step toward more humane and orderly management of migration, yet opposition remains formidable fearing it will encourage more illegal migration. Protests held against the agreement in Brussels turned violent and it's led to the Belgian Prime Minister, Charles Michel, resigning.
The Crown Law Office NZ has stated as guidance to the New Zealand Government that the compact will be non-binding but will not be legally irrelevant, And "courts may be willing...to refer to the Compact and to take the Compact into account as an aid in interpreting immigration legislation" although they doubt it would have any substantial impact, so as the court considers it will be taken into account in a limited way.
Essentially it’s a globalist blueprint in order to make migration much easier. Much, much easier. The United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration is carrying out an implementation for immigration to become a universal human right.
MEP for the Netherlands Marcel de Graaff has stated:
“I would like to say some words on the global compact on migration.” “One basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech, the agreement wants to criminalise migration speech, criticism of migration will become a criminal offence,“ Media outlets that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down.
“It is declaring migration as a human right so it will, in effect, become impossible to criticise Mrs Merkel’s welcome migrants politics without being at risk of being jailed for hate speech.”
In an attempt for Merkel to increase her working force by over one million people she has endeavoured to line the path for an ‘open door migration policy’ not just in Germany, but all over the European Union.
We are not talking about the type of migration one would 100% approve of, its not going to be a flurry of computer science grads from India looking to strengthen the UK’s technology market and economy. It will mean the type of migration most of us fear most: the style of migration in which hordes of largely unskilled and often criminally deviant individuals descend onto the UK from their considerably less civilised countries and culture and to take advantage of our overly generous welfare system.
This is a major problem most mainstream news networks are ignoring. The silent majority that is tired of #openborders and #allrefugeeswelcome being force fed down their throats. Take the yellow vest protests in France. The French have been protesting for months now and not once have I seen anyone talk about it for more than a minute on television. The people are tired of not being listened to and being undermined by their own governments are not helping. The yellow vest movement has actually caught on in Canada as they protest the Global Compact for Migration.
So what is the United Nations’ solution to this problem to this upset and silent majority anger? Simple, they made it illegal to talk about this problem.
Here is the relevant section of the UN Global Compact on Migration:
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.
One of the main featured principles inside the document requests for a “whole-of-society approach” in the promotion of mass migration which includes the role of the mainstream media.
The agreement lists actions for governments to draw from, including to:
"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" and to "support multicultural activities through sports, music, arts, culinary festivals, volunteering and other social events".
“Any media outlet who fails to uphold these principles will have their funding and any material support stopped in its tracks – for those who systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants.”
On Dec 1st our government voted yes on the agreement ending anyone’s basic right to Freedom of Speech in this country. This new form of legislation could see people who criticise EU migration policies jailed and makes immigration a universal human right. Austria, Australia, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Israel, Poland, Slovakia and Switzerland have stated they will NOT sign the agreement. There may be a slight warning sign as to how toxic this compact is: when even a country as politically correct as Australia finds it too hard a pill to swallow.
The U.S. Mission to the United Nations have given a statement to the UN Secretary-General. It states that the US will be ending its involvement in the Global Compact on Migration. Stating “the agreement was incompatible with US sovereignty” and "our decisions on immigration policies must always be made by Americans and Americans alone".
Hungary followed suit in July last year - the foreign minister has said: "This pact poses a threat to the world from the aspect that it could inspire millions [of migrants]."
The UK have voted yes for this legislation to be listened to and enforced on the people where necessary. It is now a human right to turn up to a country you have no legal right in being – and the citizens of said country are helpless against this and will be jailed for criticising any of it because of the framework we and plenty of other countries have agreed to without any say so from us. We as a country need to be worried about this.
The government has reassured the public that the UN agreement will not change the ability of the UK to set its own migration policy. At the signing ceremony in Marrakesh, Morocco the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres also said "myths" surrounded the agreement.
I do need to re iterate that one side is arguing it will have no legal effect on national legal systems but Governments are free to reference the compact if need be this has been stated The European Commission. Although, people also have concerns about already being told the same “its non-binding” line before. The UN’s Agenda 21 at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit said the same thing. But it quickly became a easy to use justification for all manner of green environmental lobbyists and politicians at Westminster along with left-leaning pressure groups to force through policies as if it were in fact legally binding. In the UK, an online petition signed by more than 100,000 people asked the UK not to agree to it.
We sat down with Peter Whittle head of The New Culture Forum based at 55 Tufton Street in Westminster to discuss his views on the piece of legislation and what it may mean for Britain. Peter Whittle is a British politician. Between November 2016 and October 2017, he was the Deputy Leader of the UK Independence Party. He also ran in the 2017 UK Independence Party leadership election.
I was welcomed by his secrtary and taken to the third floor and through to the door on the right where I was welcomed by Peter. “So, Peter there hasn’t been a great deal being said on this compact, what are your thoughts on the motives set fourth on the piece of legislation?” I ask him “Essentially what the Compact will do is make illegal immigration legal. It will make migration a ‘human right’ while making easier immigration processes. It will also make it very difficult to deport illegal migrants, while seeking out to criminalise anyone who speaks out about uncontrolled immigration under ‘hate speech, xenophobia and racism’ legislation.” He states calmly, you can tell the subject is one he isn’t too happy about.
“Her Majesty’s Government signed up to the UN Compact a day before the event was due to start so we seemed pretty eager to get the ball rolling, the legislation states it is non binding so how will it affect our laws?” I asked him as he laughs at the fact we signed a day earlier “The UN Compact is not a law as such but what is known as customary international law – e.g. signatories will be expected to apply it” If we don’t leave the European Union am I right to assume this would not be any easier on the UK?” Britain has already committed to the Compact, and if we remain in the EU then we will have no choice anyway when the Directives or Regulations come down the line.Only UKIP is defending Britain in these vital areas where we are being sold down the river by our Government and political class.”
Only time will tell what makes of the Global Compact For Safe And Orderly Migration.