Thread: Austria joins Hungary and the US and will not sign UN migration pact

UK Populism

UN - Criticism of migration will be criminalized. This is fascism, plain and simple.

Video https://www.facebook.com/18092728991...1094824574653/

British goverment ‘breaks promises’ and will sign UN Migration Pact

By Laura Cat 27 November 2018



By Janossy Gergely / shutterstock.com

The UN Migration Pact has surely caused an international uproar. Countries choosing not to sign it having confirmed, or indicating they are rethinking signing, are Australia, Poland, Israel, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Croatia all following the United States’ lead in withdrawing.
The pact seeks to normalise mass, illegal immigration forever under the auspices of the UN.
This would lead one to believe that Britain’s ruling Conservative Party, having made pledges to reduce immigration “from the hundreds of thousands to the tens of thousands” in the 2010, 2015, and 2017 general election manifestos, would be on that list.
There are very good reasons to conclude that the UK will indeed sign the UN Migration Compact as there has been no discussion on the approval of it by the government in July this year. Perhaps this is to avoid a crisis such as was in Belgium, yet it seems it has been silently agreed upon.
Migration Watch UK, lead by British peer Lord Green of Deddington, has said of the pact having submitted two parliamentary questions to the government this week:
“The UK Government should make it clear that it will not sign… If they have any regard for their election promises it would be entirely hypocritical to do so.”
He requested information on whether, and how, the globalist pledge to ease and “enhance” migration would fit with the Conservatives’ long-standing promise to bring it under control and reduce it.
Vice-chairman of Migration Watch UK, Alp Mehmet, has said of the pact:
“The Compact appears to have been drafted by diplomats whose aim seems to be to ‘normalise’ mass immigration from the developing world to the West at a time when the public are very clear that they find the scale and pace of such flows to be unsustainable and unacceptable.”
In September President Trump said from the UN New York headquarters that “Migration should not be governed by an international body unaccountable to our own citizens.
“Ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries: make their countries great again.”

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/br...H4o6-U.twitter

They keep importing these terrorists and USA will have strict Visa rules.

They will be put on the Travel Ban list too.

Do not slit your own throats over allowing 3rd world violent, overbreeding, murdering barbarians into your Nation. You are already regretting it.

CHAIN DEPORTATION PACT!

BREAKING: Italy will not sign UN Migration Pact – Interior Minister Salvini

By Voice of Europe 28 November 2018



Tnymand - photofilippo66 / shutterstock.com

Italy’s Interior Minister said on Wednesday that his country will not sign the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in Morocco next month.
“Just like the Swiss, who carried forward the Global Compact up until yesterday and then said ‘everyone stop’, the Italian government will not sign anything and will not go to Marrakech,” Matteo Salvini said in the lower house of Italy’s Parliament.
Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte told the government that the “The floor of parliament must debate it. The Italian government will allow parliament to decide”.
“The Global Migration Compact is a document that raises issues and questions that many citizens have strong feelings about,” Conte continued.
“Therefore, we consider it right to put the debate in parliament and subject any final decision on the outcome of that debate, as Switzerland has done.
“So the government will not participate in Marrakech, reserving the option to adopt the document, or not, only when parliament has expressed its opinion,” he added.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/br...GwGntc.twitter

Breitbart London

40 Per Cent of Germans Fear UN Migration Pact Will Result in More Migrants

419



Sean Gallup/Getty28 Nov 2018238
2:35

Forty per cent of Germans say they fear the UN Migration Pact will give migrants additional asylum rights.

The Insa Institute carried out a survey of 2,062 Germans between Friday and Monday, asking them to respond to the statement: “I fear that the signing of the UN Migration Pact could lead to additional claims for asylum.”
Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports that 40 per cent responded they feared the UN declaration would give migrants greater rights to asylum in Germany and almost an equal number either responded “don’t know” or did not answer, while just 22.7 per cent said they did not perceive any risk of increased asylum seekers.
The migration pact, due to be signed between the 10th and 11th of December in Marrakesh, Morocco, would require signatories to open up welfare systems to illegal aliens as well as “commit to eliminat[ing] all forms of discrimination” with measures including state promotion of “diversity” and the prevention of “hate speech.”
While the United Nations claims the agreement is non-binding, legal experts have said that it is drafted in a way that creates a framework for asylum laws and occupies a “legal grey area.”

Exclusive: German Populist Leader Slams Merkel For UN Migrant Pact Deception https://t.co/YcgI1xbZkm
— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) November 26, 2018

The survey was conducted for the Union of Values — a union of thousands of conservative members of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party the Christian Social Union (CSU) — with its Federal President Alexander Mitsch saying that the CDU/CSU must take its members’ concerns seriously and ensure the Bundestag and Federal Government do not make commitments that could become binding.
“Therefore, at least in a protocol statement to be adopted, should it be stipulated that Germany rejects any future legal liability as a consequence of the pact,” Mr Mitsch said.
The CDU are set to meet for their party conference in early December — before the signing of the UN document in Morocco — but Chancellor Merkel has already signalled in the strongest terms her support for the compact, attacking concern over the controversial agreement as “nationalism in its purest form.”
Breitbart London reported that internal documents from the Federal Foreign Office revealed Merkel’s government was the main architect of the pact, claiming they had been working on the agreement since 2016 — shortly after the chancellor unilaterally suspended the EU’s asylum rules and invited over one million migrants from the Global South into Europe.

‘No Compromises’: Merkel Launches Passionate Defence of UN Migration Pact https://t.co/HcfylEemUM
— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) November 21, 2018

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/201...AHgMkvGZ2Jc0tA

Is Angela Merkel behind the UN Migration Pact? New document sheds light

By Laura Cat 29 November 2018



Alexandros Michailidis / shutterstock.com

Germany’s Deception: Internal documents from Germany’s Federal Foreign Office divulge that Angela Merkel’s government has been the main mastermind behind the controversial UN migrant pact.
The document, described by MP Petr Bystron of the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD), reveals that the Federal Foreign Office taking credit for the disastrous UN Migrant Pact, claiming they’ve been working on the agreement since 2016.
The deception runs deep, the Foreign Office having stated that the German government has been behind the Global Compact on Refugees and the Global Compact on Migration, saying that though they are not legally binding, they were both designed to be “politically binding”.
Belgian International Law professor Pierre d’Argent, has explained that the agreement sets up a “legal framework” that can be used by lawyers in interpretting the meaning of the law. “…one can imagine that in some cases before international jurisdictions, lawyers use this pact as a reference tool to try to guide them,” d’Argent said.
Alexander Gauland, Co-leader of Germany’s populist AfD party told Breitbart London:
“It’s becoming glaringly obvious that the German government was trying to deceive the public, and still is. They are trying to retroactively legalise Merkel’s illegal opening of the borders since 2015. If the AfD had not raised the topic of the Global Compact, no one would ever have known about it until it was too late.”
“Now we are discovering that this contract has been in the works for a long time, and on German initiative, no less. However, those responsible never bothered to mention it. For good reason. We will do everything we can to avert this disaster in the making,” he said further.
The US, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Israel, Australia, The Czech Republic, Italy, Slovakia and more have backed out and will not sign the pact.
“We are only responsible to our Austrian population as government officials. Austrian sovereignty has top priority for us, this must be preserved and protected,” Austrian Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache said about pulling out of the pact.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/is...8728fk.twitter

No lessons learned? German government votes in favour of UN Migration Pact

By Stan M 30 November 2018



By Ververidis Vasilis - 360 / shutterstock.com

The German government voted today with a majority in favour of the Global Compact for Migration which has been widely criticised for seeking to mix migration and asylum.
In total 372 MPs voted in favour, 153 voted against and 141 abstained. Before the votes were cast Heiko Maas, the current Foreign Minister from the Socialist Democratic Party, called the pact a great success, which would allow for safe migration.
He went on to call out critics for their ineptitude to read the pact and believes it to be in the interests of Germany.
Stephan Thomae of the Free Democratic Party mentioned the pact was non-binding by law and would lower migration pressure on Germany because it would enforce international standards on migration.
The left-wing Green party had already demanded for the migration pact to be implemented into German law even prior to its signing.
Therefore, confirming fears of critics that this pact will by no means be non-binding. Petra Pau from the Left party made a questionable remark that Berlin wouldn’t exist without migration and such that a topic could only be solved globally.
MPs from the Alternative for Germany (AfD) reminded parliament that a number of nations already announced not to sign the pact and questioned to what states people would migrate to then.
The populist AfD made clear that they would vote against this proposal. This outcome does not come as a surprise as secret papers only recently revealed Germany may have had a much larger role in drafting the Global Compact for Migration than previously thought.
Currently the US, Austria, Hungary, Australia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Poland, Israel and Slovakia have all decided against signing the pact set to be ratified in Marrakech on 10-11 December.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/no...AAnqCg.twitter

UN Migration Pact will flood Europe with 59 million migrants, MEP warns

By Voice of Europe 30 November 2018



Member of the European Parliament (MEP), Janice Atikinson

Janice Atkinson MEP: A Call to Action!
UK and EU citizens, get your heads out of the Brexit shambles long enough to write a letter to your heads of state before its too late!
The UN Migration Compact explained by Janice Atkinson MEP. The compact will be signed on 11/12 December if we don’t do something now! May, Merkel, Macron and other leaders will sign this and bind our countries to a no borders agreement.

Watch the video below to learn about the UN Migration Compact and why we need to send letters to our heads of state to tell them NOT to sign this disastrous compact!



Youtube Video https://youtu.be/IUMR6B8PbYI


https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/un...DzFZ9A.twitter

Switzerland: "Creeping EU Accession"



"...the Swiss government over whether to sign a wide-ranging EU 'framework agreement', and a controversial UN 'migration pact'... The EU has now increased the pressure by resorting to blackmail..."

Fri, 11/30/2018 - 03:30
63 SHARES
Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

Swiss voters have resoundingly rejected a referendum calling for the Swiss Constitution to take precedence over international treaties and law.


Two-thirds (66.2%) of voters in the November 25 referendum opposed the "self-determination" initiative, put forward by the eurosceptic Swiss People's Party (Schweizerische Volkspartei, SVP), the largest party in the Swiss parliament.
SVP leaders had argued that the new law was necessary to safeguard national sovereignty from further encroachment by supranational organizations such as the European Union and the United Nations.
The Swiss government countered that the proposal would undermine Switzerland's economic stability as it would require Bern to amend existing bilateral agreements with the EU, the country's largest trade partner, to bring them into compliance with the Swiss Constitution.
The proposal's defeat comes ahead of pending decisions by the Swiss government over whether to sign a wide-ranging EU "framework agreement," and a controversial UN "migration pact."
Switzerland is not a member of the EU, but has gained access to the European single market by signing a series of bilateral agreements in which Switzerland has given away large slices of its national sovereignty, including control over boundaries and immigration. In all, Switzerland has more than 120 bilateral agreements that govern its relations with the European Union.
The EU is now pressing Switzerland to sign a comprehensive "framework agreement" that would require Bern to cede even more sovereignty to Brussels. The EU, for instance, wants Switzerland to subject itself to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). If Switzerland complies with the demand, the ECJ would outrank the Swiss Supreme Court as the final arbiter of legal disputes in the country.
The EU has now increased the pressure by resorting to blackmail: Brussels is making its continued recognition of Switzerland's SIX Swiss Exchange, the fourth-largest stock market in Europe, contingent on Swiss acceptance of the framework agreement. Switzerland's current stock exchange agreement with the EU expires at the end of December; failure to renew it would deprive the Swiss exchange of EU-based business that generates more than half its volume.
Swiss leaders have said they doubt that any proposed treaty could win the backing of parliament or voters in a referendum under the Swiss system of direct democracy.
Bloomberg News encapsulated the dilemma facing Switzerland:

"The Swiss government now faces the prospect of choosing between two evils: agree to the EU framework deal only to have it torpedoed by voters in a referendum, or renege on the treaty and risk reprisals from Brussels that hurt the economy."

A key point of contention in Swiss-EU relations revolves around a long-running dispute over the EU's "Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons." The agreement, which Switzerland signed in June 1999, allows EU citizens to live and work in Switzerland, and vice versa. The original agreement applied to 15 EU member states, but with the enlargement of the European Union in 2004, 2007 and 2013, the agreement now applies to 28 EU member states, including the poorer countries in Eastern Europe.
In an effort to curb the increasing amount of crime associated with immigration, Swiss voters in November 2010 approved a referendum to deport foreigners who commit serious crimes in Switzerland.
The EU warned that deporting EU citizens for any reason would be a violation of Switzerland's treaty obligations regarding the free movement of persons. The Swiss parliament, seeking to avoid economic reprisals, eventually passed a watered-down law aimed at reconciling the will of Swiss voters with Switzerland's obligations under EU law.
SVP MP Adrian Amstutz argued that in its zeal to please the EU, the Swiss parliament's new deportation law would prove to be worthless in practice:

"According to the parliament's implementation of the law for the deportation initiative, courts would have the possibility to put aside a deportation — even in the case of the most serious offenses — via the hardship clause. Current legal practices show that judges would frequently make use of this option. As a consequence, hardly any foreign criminals would be deported."

In February 2014, Swiss voters approved a referendum to reintroduce quotas for immigration from EU countries. Proponents of the quotas argued that foreign workers were driving down wages and increasing demand for housing, health, education and transport.

The EU warned that any restrictions on access to the Swiss labor market would violate the agreement on the freedom of movement of persons, and threatened"serious consequences." The Swiss parliament again yielded to EU pressure, this time by passing watered-down restrictions on immigration.
Another flashpoint in bilateral relations involves the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In November 2014, the ECHR prohibited Switzerland from sending Afghan asylum seekers back to Italy. Although Italian authorities had agreed to take them back, the ECHR ruled that doing so would violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Prohibition of Inhuman and Degrading Treatments) because of overcrowding and poor conditions at Italian asylum facilities.
SVP leader Christoph Blocher criticized the ECHR for ignoring the principle of subsidiarity, which holds that decisions should be taken, if possible, at the local level:

"Don't we trust federal judges to decide on human rights issues? We had those principles written into our constitution well before the ECHR. The problem with the convention is that it decides things from far away. The consequences, what happens next, don't concern the judges."

Martin Schubarth, a former Swiss federal judge, echoed those concerns:

"It is unacceptable that a small panel of [ECHR] judges, who generally lack the expert knowledge about the [Swiss] legislative authority, handle matters in an undemocratic way instead of the [Swiss] authority itself."

In February 2018, Swiss public television SRF reported that the European Commission had presented the Swiss government with a 19-page "sin list" of Swiss violations of EU law.
Switzerland's ongoing disputes with the EU, and the concomitant erosion of Swiss sovereignty, prompted the SVP to sponsor the referendum to ensure the precedence of Swiss law.
The sponsor of the initiative, SVP MP Hans-Ueli Vogt, expressed surprise at the scale of the defeat — a rare setback for the SVP, one of the most successful anti-EU parties in Europe — but said he would continue to fight against "creeping EU accession."
The measure was opposed by a coalition of Swiss business groups, which convincingly argued that the referendum was a question of economics and access to international markets for the export-dependent country. "Ultimately, it is about maintaining prosperity in Switzerland and keeping the companies and jobs here," said Monika Rühl, director of the business group Economiesuisse.
Some Swiss newspapers described result of the referendum as a "fiasco" and a "serious setback" for the SVP. Others were more circumspect. "The object of the initiative was very legitimate: it was about national sovereignty and its relationship with international law in a globalized world," noted La Liberté, a paper based in Fribourg. The Geneva-based L'Express added:

"The SVP suffered a defeat because it failed to mobilize and convince beyond its base. The voters wanted a pragmatic assessment between international law and national law. Depending on the situation, one or the other should apply. The definitive prevalence of one over the other, on the other hand, is not shared by the majority."

La Tribune de Genève wrote: "What the Swiss have supported this Sunday is a pragmatic, negotiated, piecemeal approach to our national interests. Voting is in no way a declaration of love to a European Union in crisis."
The Swiss People's Party said that despite the loss, the referendum "brought a welcome and suppressed debate about the relationship between Swiss law and international law and the importance of direct democracy." The SVP added that its fight for Swiss self-determination would continue:

"First of all, the SVP demands that Switzerland not join the UN migration pact. We are counting on the pledges of the representatives of the other parties, that at the very least it is presented to the parliament with the aim of holding a referendum on the matter, so that Swiss voters can have their say about such a far-reaching pact.
"Secondly, the SVP rejects a one-sided submission to EU institutions, aimed at establishing an institutional connection of Switzerland to the EU apparatus, with a dynamic EU legal takeover and, ultimately, the subordination of Switzerland to the EU Court of Justice. A dynamic adoption of EU law would be another massive erosion of our direct democracy."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...g-eu-accession

ALIPAC Opposes UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

For Global Release | December 5, 2018


Share & Discuss this release & Meme on (FACEBOOK HERE) .. (TWITTER HERE) .. (GAB HERE) .. (ALIPAC HERE)

https://www.alipac.us/f8/alipac-oppo...ration-367373/