The UN’s plans for the control of “migration”
Get a load of this:
…[T]he United Nations is seeking control of migration policies worldwide, with a campaign configured to undermine America’s sovereignty and control over its own borders. And, yes, if the U.N. has its way, America will help pay for it.
As with many of the U.N.’s turf grabs, this campaign to co-opt national migration policy has been years in the making. Incremental in its origins, and swaddled in U.N. jargon and procedure, it has largely escaped the U.S. headlines…
this Global Compact would have the U.N.’s largely unaccountable, self-aggrandizing and often opaque bureaucracy, operating in service of its despot-infested collective of governments, set the terms for all.
The lengthy text reads like a template for setting up the world’s most politically correct welfare state, with a colossal menu of entitlements and central planning for migrants; never mind the cost to the pockets, rights and freedoms of the existing citizens. This “compact” does not restrict itself to refugees. It anoints the U.N. as arbiter of how to handle cross-border human mobility worldwide…
The UN will have no means of enforcing this, however. But why on earth should we have anything to do with this body anymore? Is it a case of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer?
Also, some of this was a parting gift from President Obama, naturally:
That all changed under President Barack Obama. During Obama’s final year in office, in 2016, with a nod from his administration, the IOM joined the U.N., which promptly declared plans to create a global plan for migration. For 2017, as a parting gift of the Obama administration, America’s $544 million contribution included $1.68 million earmarked for conferences and consultations supporting the creation of the Global Compact.
In late 2017, the Trump administration reversed that policy, announcing the U.S. would no longer support U.N. activities leading to the Global Compact…
…The U.N. pursued the compact regardless, with the IOM playing a major role in consultations and conferences around the globe…
Much much more at the link.
The #1 reason that globalist ideology is unlikely to succeed, is Russia & China.
The #2 reason it’s DOA, is the UN.
Rankings are negotiable.
Like Dems/Progs everywhere, the UN wants to control everything, everywhere. It is long overdue for a change of venue, Sub-Saharan Africa sounds great. Let’s see how many Despots brothers-in-law will still want to be Ambassadors. Perhaps.a site in Kenya, maybe Kinshasa could be utilized. Cost of living should be low.
Why doesn’t the UN start by declaring that all member nations must provide for their own citizens the rights and protections they decree are the privilege of all immigrants to anywhere?
Once they get that done, no one will have to leave home for a better place.
It is long overdue for a change of venue, Sub-Saharan Africa sounds great. Let’s see how many Despots brothers-in-law will still want to be Ambassadors. Perhaps.a site in Kenya, maybe Kinshasa could be utilized.
If Kenya, NOT its capital of Nairobi, as its mountain setting gives it a pleasant climate. Kinshasa sounds good. Maybe Lagos in Nigeria.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.”
Once you control the definition of a word, you control (win) the argument.
The difference here are the definitions of migration vs invasion, the latter being “an unwelcome intrusion into another’s domain.” OED
Just in terms of their sheer incompetence (much less their ideology, voting record, and performance on the ground), I wouldn’t allow the UN to run a corner lemonade stand.
It hardly made the news except in stamp collecting circles, but back in 2003 one or more people at the UN were able to arrange things so that some person or persons were able to back up a couple of trucks to UN Headquarters and have them loaded up with the UN’s unique and irreplaceable Stamp Archive, according to reports 77 boxes containing hundreds of thousands of items—a metric ton of original designs/drawings for stamps, dies, proofs, many hundreds of thousands of stamps, and associated items.
Information about this whole incident is extremely “hazy” and imprecise, and the UN says that it has found no records of this transaction; a sale of unique, irreplaceable, and supposedly “inviolable” UN assets that UN regulations said were forbidden to be sold, a sale of UN property which nobody who should have been aware of and signed off on/or blocked supposedly knew about or approved.
Sometime later in 2003 these irreplaceable items were bought by a collector at auction in Geneva, Switzerland, reportedly for a paltry $3+ million dollars, and since then this one of a kind collection has reportedly been split up, and pieces of it sold and resold.
According to the article cited below, the UN did receive more than $2.5 million of the auction proceeds, but the items sold are literally “unique” and “irreplaceable,” and apparently worth far more that a couple of million dollars.
(One wonders how the UN was able to receive that $2 .5 million in proceeds from this auction if no one at the UN was on some sort of paperwork as having been involved in this sale?)
Reports from when this happened, in 2003, quote UN officials as saying that “the UN was investigating.”
Curiously, over the years since this happened the UN has not bothered to publicize this incident, and the loss of its irreplaceable Stamp Archive is not mentioned on the website of the UN Postal Administration.
To quote from the 2015 article linked below:
“The postal archive sale may be yet another instance of what Paul Volcker’s investigation into the Oil-for-Food scandal described as “systemic problems in United Nations’ administration,” involving lack of accountability, oversight, or even basic clarity in the organization’s activities. Despite the historic importance of the postal archive, senior U.N. officials contacted by FOX News professed to know nothing about it — including some in departments specifically charged with approving or blocking the dispersion of U.N. historical material.”
During a brief search of the Internet, I was not able to find the text of the “Report” on this matter that the UN said—back in 2015 (12 years after the event in question)—that it was still preparing.
See https://www.foxnews.com/story/united-nations-probes-sale-of-irreplaceable-stamp-archive
It hardly made the news except in stamp collecting circles,
Gordon Crovitz called the UN ‘a Third World Kleptocracy’. Too true.