by Ivan Hečko
I am Slovakian. The predecessor nation-state was Czcheoslovakia, now two republics, the Czech Republick and Slovakia. This article is about the UN Migration Pact which our Foreign Minister is hoping to wish upon us.
First I have to explain the position of Slovakia in relation to the UN Migration Pact. Today I was listening, in my car radio, to our Foreign Minister Mr. Lajčák. He signed under the Pact, and he threatens to abdicate if Slovakia is against the Pact – and Slovakia IS against the Pact.
The public radio-station is financed by the citizens. The show’s topics were Mr. Lajčák, Migration Pact, and our approaching presidency of the OSCE. It was really good. I have not caught names of participants, I will just describe some of the content. One of the participants was the main “bullshit artist,” whose utterances were really remarkable, although the program was not intended to be amusing.
He first caught my attention by stating “…since we have a freedom of foreign policy….” I could not laugh as much as I normally would, since I was driving. It was probably meant as a contrast, compared to the period when our foreign policy was dictated by Russia. Today it is dictated by Atlantic Council and CFR in Washington, DC.
Within individual countries it is spread around by the “NGOs” paid by the Governments of Britain, USA, by NATO, Mr. Soros, and then locally by so-called ”clusters,” which are subsidiaries of the British “Integrity Initiative.”
In Slovakia we have a Euro-Atlantic Center, which is with utmost probability financed by the British Government. And it calls itself an “NGO.” I wonder if they pay taxes in Slovakia from the British subsidies?
Further, the gentleman lectured us on along the line that we cannot avoid migration anyway, so we should be getting ready for it, instead of refusing it like some homebodies.
So, only he and some like him – the “enlightened” – understand the matter, and we the citizens – in this particular case a great majority – should listen to them (!). The similarity to statements of ideologists from the old communist times is extraordinary, in fact it sounds exactly the same. Another identical feature is that he repeats phrases in “Newspeak” that he had learnt, presenting them as his opinions. His style had the sound of an ideology preacher.
Further on, he warned us against the opinion that “building a fence together with Hungarians” would help us. In this context he remarkably withheld the fact, that the opposition against this form of “migration directed from above“ already includes Austria and Slovenia, and other countries, like Australia and USA.
In Europe there are many “homebodies” too — Italy, Germany, Belgium, Poland, Estonia, Croatia, Switzerland. That is quite a number isn’t it? Apart from that, there exists an initiative of some of the above, plus Denmark and Holland, who offered to prepare a common “explanation of position” on the matter.
Whose Problem Is This?
But let us get back to the UN Migration Pact: It contains 23 Objectives, with No 2: Minimize the adverse drivers and structural factors that compel people to leave their country of origin. It also goes into some detail further on, but it only contains phrases. This objective seems to be “put aside” at the moment, as the rest of the Pact is only about moving people about.
But this objective in fact is not about migration as such, and is not about the Migration Pact, this is the only one which could really minimize the migration. Work on this objective can be started immediately, without any official approval of the Pact, with participation of just the particular country plus some appointed institution (e.g. of the UN), in charge of Objective 2.
But, as we know, most of the countries – origins of migration – have been devastated by wars and the subsequent “doing business” by a few countries, which in theory, and according to international law, should finance the Objective 2 by paying to them the Reparations of War
Reparations
Most of the Reparations should be paid by USA and Great Britain.
And the fact that nothing is moving in this direction shows that the Pact is an attempt at a swindle. It is clear, that migration moves the costs from the country of origin to the country of destination. We, and others who are against, did not devastate anything, and do not agree on sharing the costs, plus disruption of our society.
And we do not agree on some ”quiet amnesty” for those who are a cause of all this – and carrying on with it! This is absolutely simple, and someone wanting us to quietly accept the lies trying to hide behind a lot of Newspeak blarney is ridiculous. And today, when we very well know the consequences. We know a comparable situation in Germany, for example.
The UN should first of all take care about all foreign armies leaving the countries they have “conquered” and immediately set about fulfilling Objective 2, and quickly. All the other Objectives are in fact circumstantial, and a result of not acting on – a long-term disregard of – Objective 2. All the other Objectives – about moving the people around – must not be started before Objective 2 is started and running well.
— Ivan Hecko runs a blog in his native language, Slovakian. The above is a translation. He wrote to Gumshoe the other day.
Our ministry just released this video with answers to many questions that plague nations all over the world called: PEACEFUL WORDS OF FREEDOM IN CHRIST
***https://youtu.be/wLCPQb_9FaY Shalom, Lee
Goodonya, Ivan.
You are the first person I have heard mention Reparations.
When I ran for US Senate last year I bought some radio ads. Towards the end of the campaign when I knew I could not win, I used some the of the ad time to “raise issues”. One of them had to do with r-e-p-a-r-a-t-i-o-n-s-, but I avoided the word.
Gumshoe then made an article of my radio ad, and Julius Skoolafish came in with some rip-roaring comments. Please see:
https://gumshoenews.com/2017/08/10/the-polish-problem/
“Minimize the adverse drivers and structural factors that compel people to leave their country of origin.”
How about NATO just stop bombing them??
Phil Downunder hitting nail on head.
[P.S. to Dee: Whenever I sign in, they ask for my details anew. Wazza matta?]
The operative word here is “should”
Most Western Australians are also disgruntled about having to bear the brunt of gross resource mismanagement (huge hikes in gas and electricity) and financial incompetence(huge hikes in land and vehicle tax)
Unfortunately mere venting has never been known to fix anything
Berry hitting nail on head.
Very valid point, berry. Here in W.A. our Government has decided to allow fracking in our Kimberly and Midwest agricultural areas, claiming it will create jobs and income. DUH ! The events in the Eastern states with this industry have demonstrated clearly, that locals do not benefit one iota from this industry. In fact it’s the reverse, gas prices at local levels are RAISED to compete with the export costs. Thus artificially increasing the cost. Moreover the majority of such gas is fully exported, thus depriving locals of this resource, again, all evidenced in the East. Yet our State Government seems to have blinders on, and the so called scientific research they have initiated, seems unable to see this.
Secondly, discounting the Mid West areas, the Kimberly has no infrastructure to speak of, no electricity to run their equipment for compression/liquifying ect. Very poor roads, if any, and water only seasonal. So the question needs to be raised, from where is the money coming from to establish all these resources for the gas companies to avail themselves of ???
Back to the alleged scientific studies into this farce.We are told, provided these companies adhere to the “safe drilling/production practices” there is no issue with fracking. RIGHT, again there will be no Government oversight into these companies ensuring “safe drilling/production practices” are adhered to. Presumably it will be similar to ALCOA’s self governing of these issues, and EVERY West Australian knows how safe Alcoa’s production has been, especially the folks who USED to live down that way.
Recently I visited the Pilbara area of W.A. and in particular,the WITTENOOM town site and mine site. I discovered that asbestos fines have been washed out of the Gorge and tailings site during cyclone periods with the massive amounts of water flowing thru the gorge, these tailings are now spread through out the whole Pilbara, especially along the water ways where the water has deposited them when levels recceeded. Dry season comes along and the Easterlies pick up this contamination and spread it further, far and wide. Funny thing though, you wont hear any SCIENTIFIC group standing up and voicing concerns publicly of this contamination everywhere, let alone admitting it.
Now, the similarity with the asbestos spread, is going to be repeated with the dangerous chemicals used in fracking, despite the claims of ‘safe drilling/production procedures” alleged by the scientific study.
Companies operating these drilling processes use water, millions of gallons under extremely high pressure to crack the rock layers, the water is mixed with dangerous chemicals to assist in this process, thus becoming heavily contaminated and for ever un-useable for any other purpose. On top of that, it also becomes radio active from such materials bonded within the rock, ( W.A.’s indigenous peoples have been drinking such contaminated water for ages from Government drilled bores, only recently has the fact been admitted these folks have been drinking radio active water.) So, the used waste water is heavily contaminated and can’t ever be used for any other purpose. The companies then build dams and pump this water into these dams allowing the water to evaporate into the atmosphere, and all the contaminants fall to the bottom as dust or powder. Now what happens to this dust and powder when the ravaging Easterly winds arrive, and blow this crap all over the land everywhere ????
Moreover, what happens when there’s another cyclone and these evaporative ponds over flow ??? As has happened numerous times in the U.S. with the Hurricanes there ????
All this poisonous crap will be spread throughout our Midwest and the Kimberly for ever more.
No wonder I have lost any faith or trust in ANY SCIENTIFIC studies done these days, and it’s all PAID FOR BY THE TAXPAYER.
Eddy, the phrase “hitting nail on head” would not do justice.
That is a brilliant piece of research/observation.
You missed the bit where fracking wells are low yield, getting the most gas in the first year and then rapidly dropping off.
Works like this twenty years of production 200 hundreds years of worsening toxic leaking (most of the water stays in the ground getting heavily polluted until it eventually leaks out and then 2000 years of pollution until it slowly but surely disperses, becomes less concentrated, thereby less toxic.
berry. Your point is usually valid, but the yellow-vester’s venting over in France got Macron to back down!
Ivan, what a great article.
The first culprits to be forced by the United Nations (yes forced) to make reparations, are the industries that make up the industrial complexes of UK and US.
The United Nations can make its intention noticed by putting to a vote of all member nations, along the lines of “attacking nations’ organisations and businesses that manufacture military hardware that create the necessity for people to leave their homeland will be responsible for reparation to those affected. That is rebuilding towns and cities and monetary payment to the citizens affected.”
I know that Britain, France and US will Veto the vote, but it will give notice to these warring offending countries that the rest of the World is sick of their evil doings.
That is fascinating , Mal. And as far as the General Assembly goes, the vetoing powers don’t prevent a Resolution.
When a Certain Nation wants the GA to play along with the Certain Nation, it is achieved by threats, bribes, etc. This is well documented.
Mal, if you have time, please send us some info abut past reparations. Of course there was no UN till 1945 so it could not talk about WWI reparations. All done as part of the Versailles Treaty? I don’t know.
[Dee, I am asked for my name and email address every time I post.]
I support the gist of the article, particularly the need to ensure a proper economic environment within the countries of origin of much migration. The author refers here to Objective Nr. 2, which in the context is nothing but a figleaf.
There are two aspects I wish, nevertheless, to highlight.
While Reparations are certainly a noble demand, I think that the first step – before Reparations – is to ban, by international treaty, economic measusres by investors and by international institutions, such as the World Bank and the IMF, that have the foreseeable effect to undermine social and economic rights, such as the right to work, right to education, right to habitation, right to health, right to culture and other such rights. Reparations for past exploitation and destruction can come later.
Second, Slovakia and other European states continue to participate in the decision-making of the World Bank and the IMF, and shrare, therefore, the blame for the situation in Africa and other less-developed areas. While the U.S. certainly bears the greatest blame, we – inhabitants of the West – all bear the blame of having allowed such policies to fester. I do not know of any mass movements protesting the policies of the financial institutions that destroy lives and cause migration.
I therefore urge readers and people of good will who reject the Migration Pact because of their solidarity with the migrants and their nations, to concentrate their efforts in exposing the dirty policies adopted behind closed doors with the collusion of their own governments in international financial institutions. That requires some intellectual efforts but will serve to expose the duplicity of those who hide behind technical economic language.
Dear Emmett, Wow.
There seems to be three interested parties here. First, in order of urgency, there are the migrants, genuine migrants who had to escape from whatever. Then there are people, whom you mention, who are disadvantaged by the IMF – and who isn’t? Third, there are the Homebody nations with citizens such as Ivan. [Note to Ivan: around Oz, everyone is on a first name basis, no offense meant! You should worry if you get addressed more formally]
Here is a possible compromise to your suggestion, Emmett.
Arrange a decent resting place – with, say, a 2-year visa – for genuine migrants, with promise of a ticket home after their country’s infrastructure has been restored by the Destroyers.
The cost of their stay to be temporarily borne by the Homebody nation with a guarantee of reimbursement by the Destroyers.
The wok of rebuilding is to go to contractors from the affected nations, not, say, Halliburton. Payment to be made by the Destroyers.
I share Ivan’s “prejudice against invasion by migrants.” My excuse is that a society has to be made up of people who can trust one another. On a practical level I think all country’s borders should be closed. A discernible culture – and pride in one’s culture – is a necessary background for social life. Transmigrasei is deliberately aimed to wreck cultures.
The IMF was a dirty trick from the beginning. Thank you for bringing it into the discussion.
“You should worry if you get addressed more formally”
I absolutely disagree
I’ve got no problem with shop assistants calling me “dear” or “love”(very trad Sydney that one)
That’s a completely different kettle of fish to trades-persons and government officials identifying themselves on a first name only basis.
Fifty years ago the phenomena was confined to those who simply couldn’t afford to be held to account, e.g.hookers & door-to-door salesmen. Conversely, addressing anyone you didn’t know well by their 1st name was considered downright rude; even in school the teachers always called the pupils by their full names. As the World has become less people-friendly the turnaround just bespeaks social disintegration/decline.
Readers please note the intelligence level of some of the people we are asked to vote into Federal Parliament. I sent the notice below to all Western Australian Senators and all WA Federal Members by email. Below this page is the answer I received from the Attorney- General’s Department to which I had not sent any email.
Members of Parliament and Senators:
You as politicians elected to represent Australia and Australians are supposed to be the ones that formulate legislation for the good of our citizens and business. So you are not to write legislation for the benefit of a particular industry, or what the Globalist Cabal have ordered, but are required to make sure any legislation or regulations are for the benefit of Australia as a whole.
That having been said, a plethoria of concerns have been shown up in the Royal Commission into the financial industry within Australia. These concerns must be rectified even at the expense of those involved. There is no such thing as “Too Big To Fail”. If a business fails because of no outside interference, it should to allowed to fold. The fault is that of the board members who have allowed the company to operate outside normal business practises. The fault must be shared also with any regulatory body that has been set up to oversee that industry, if that body has not been seen to do it’s job properly. In other words, the financial instutution and the overseeing body must be held accountable. The officers in each of these areas must be charged with criminal offenses and if found guilty face stiff jail sentences.
In the case of the four major banks of Australia, it seems that they have been acting in an anti-competitve nature for many years which itself is a crime. They have also been involved in unfair practises against their clients / depositors. While Commercial Banks are allowed to operate as Investment Banks they use depositors savings as collateral for their gambling on derivatives and other risky investments. This must be stopped. Why should depositors’ savings be put at risk when they have no say in, or profit from those risky investments?
We the people, have been lied to by politicians and APRA in regard to the safety of our deposits in banks when the financial crash occurs. We have been told our savings will not be bailed-in. Why, then the hasty passing of the bail-in legislation in February this year, while only 7 senators were in the Senate at the time, and the Government knew that a minor party was about to table an amendment to the Bill, if the savings were not to be included in the bail-in? Not all of the population are non-thinking fools.
The only way to protect our savings and protect customers current and future against the crimes uncovered in the Royal Commission is to pass the “Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018. This is a MUST! Any other option will be regarded as an act of treason by our political class. Each and every politician who votes against the Bill will be seen to be a traitor to Australia.
Malcolm R. Hughes.
Dear Mr Hughes.
Thank you for your correspondence of 11 November to the Attorney – General, the
Hon Christian Porter, MP relating to the Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks)
Bill 2018. The Attorney – General has provided your correspondence to Attorney- General’s
Department for response.
The matters you raise do not fall within the Attorney – General’s portfolio responsibilities
so your correspondence has been referred to the Treasury for their information and response as appropriate.
The following link may be used should you wish to follow up this matter directly with the Treasury – https://treasury.gov.au/the-department/contact-us/
Yours sincerely,
Ministerial Correspondence Unit
Attorney General’s Department
Dear Mighty Mouse, This can be dealt with:
“The fault must be shared also with any regulatory body that has been set up to oversee that industry, if that body has not been seen to do it’s job properly. In other words, the financial instutution and the overseeing body must be held accountable. The officers in each of these areas must be charged with criminal offenses and if found guilty face stiff jail sentences.”
Mal I presume your remark goes to the portfolio of Porter as AG, or if he need to refer you elsewhere it should be to the DPP.
Would someone please correct me if I am wrong?
Maybe the letter should have been headed “CRIMINAL LIABILITY RE BOGUS LEGISLATION” or something along those lines, but the reply, if any, would doubtless have been no less evasive.
According to Wikipedia “Slovakia became a member of NATO on 29 March 2004 and of the European Union on 1 May 2004.”
Anyone got any ideas why?
Easy peasy. Because they have freedom of foreign policy. Just like us.
Mary and others, regarding my piece on the Banking Reform Bill. I sent an email to each Senator and WA Federal Member as politicians, not because of their possible portfolio. It was to demand that they vote YES to the Bill before Parliament, and the reasons why. However Mr Porter either deliberately or is mentally deficient has made out that I wrote to him in his capacity as the Attorney-General. I did not address the correspondence as such, but to “Members of Parliament and Senators”. I don’t think that I could have been more explicit.
I did not write demanding prosecutions at this stage, but that could be in the future, if the Commissioner is not able to do so, and Parliament does nothing to bring the criminals to court.
All please watch this video, to see the outright planned criminal behaviour of the Big Four banks Macquarie and AMP.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VStwO-KoOK0&t=124s It is a hour and 39 minutes but well worth the time.
“High immigration creates high employment .”
Doublespeak by a beurocrat suit on abc 730 report last night .
We have all been used and abused , some more than others , by these compromised idiots/traitors in power positions reading the puppet masters script .