Sustainable Development, Migration And The Multi-Cultural Destruction Of The Nation-State

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,865
2,040
We've been sold out right in front of our eyes.

SNIP:

By Patrick Wood -- Bio and Archives April 6, 2016



wood040616.jpg



Depending on where you live and how sensitive you are to the global mass-immigration crisis, your reaction to it will be somewhere between head-scratching and shell-shocked incredulity. The purpose of this report is to give you some concrete evidence about where these policies originated and to what ends they were created.

A major player is Peter Sutherland, who in past years has served as the Director-General of the World Trade Organization, as Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, as EU Commissioner, as Chairman of BP and Chair of London School of Economics Council, among other things. Most importantly, however, he is the European Honorary Chairman of the elitist Trilateral Commission.

His relevance to this article is that in 2006 he was appointed by the United Nations’ to be theSpecial Representative of the Secretary-General for International Migration.

Needless to say, whatever comes out of Sutherland’s mouth is certifiably representative of official policy of the Trilateral Commission and the global elite at large. In fact, he is one of the most respected policy-makers in the world, and many consider him to be the “father of globalization”.

The migration crisis in Europe came to global attention in the fall of 2015. Headlines like these were seen in the European press:






Sweden first opened its doors to Muslim immigrants in the 1970s. The trickle of migration was slow at first, but increased over the decades as turmoil in the Mideast produced more refugees. Today, Sweden’s culture is as much Islamic as it is Swedish. Muslims have steadfastly refused to assimilate into Swedish culture, and now the nation is paying a high social price for their naiveté: It has become the rape and gang-rape capital of the West.

In spite of the European crisis, Sutherland wrote in late 2015,

“Human mobility benefits not only migrants and their families, but their countries of origin and destination as well… No other force‚Äînot trade, not capital flows has the potential to transform lives in the sustainable, positive ways and on the scale that migration does.”

Since his 2006 appointment to the UN, Sutherland has stumped this message across Europe with great fanfare. With the combined weight of the UN behind him, governments were persuaded to further open their borders to immigration. A growing multi-cultural society, he claimed, was the only pathway to Sustainable Development.

Sutherland is the leading apologist for Federalism in Europe; that is, dissolving national borders completely and simply merging all cultures into one big happy family. The obvious shortcomings of these policies have not deterred Sutherland—or the UN—from stating that more migration, not less, is the answer to the current crisis.

At the peak of the migration crisis in November 2015, and just after the horrific Paris terrorist attacks, the headline appeared, UN warns Europe against ‘backtracking’ on migrant commitments. Really? The article scolded European leaders:

the rest of the article Here:
Sustainable Development, Migration And The Multi-Cultural Destruction Of The Nation-State
 
I have a simple theory--------about the issue of migration and GROUPS OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD and------agenda. ****LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY**** are
their INTENTIONS. And--remember the lessons of history. The lesson of history
IS-----beware the totalitarian utopianist
 
I have a simple theory--------about the issue of migration and GROUPS OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD and------agenda. ****LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY**** are
their INTENTIONS. And--remember the lessons of history. The lesson of history
IS-----beware the totalitarian utopianist
Like Solomon?
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...
 
I have a simple theory--------about the issue of migration and GROUPS OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD and------agenda. ****LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY**** are
their INTENTIONS. And--remember the lessons of history. The lesson of history
IS-----beware the totalitarian utopianist
Like Solomon?

Solomon never promised you a rose garden. He wrote the BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES (spelling?)
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...

not always------HOOMANS just roam around-----and reproduce when they get there
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...


So basically you are saying that boundaries and a nation's sovereignty doesn't matter and that they should allow themselves to be flooded with people that do not wish to assimilate into the culture AND you must support them as well? That's pretty "liberal" of you since you would be using other people's resources to make yourself feel morally superior. (snick)
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...


So basically you are saying that boundaries and a nation's sovereignty doesn't matter and that they should allow themselves to be flooded with people that do not wish to assimilate into the culture AND you must support them as well? That's pretty "liberal" of you since you would be using other people's resources to make yourself feel morally superior. (snick)
Sounds like what the Europeans did to this continent.. I don't see you lamenting your ancestors forced immigration policy on local inhabitants...but then again to you, that's another story to show your acrid retorts...
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...


So basically you are saying that boundaries and a nation's sovereignty doesn't matter and that they should allow themselves to be flooded with people that do not wish to assimilate into the culture AND you must support them as well? That's pretty "liberal" of you since you would be using other people's resources to make yourself feel morally superior. (snick)
Sounds like what the Europeans did to this continent.. I don't see you lamenting your ancestors forced immigration policy on local inhabitants...but then again to you, that's another story to show your acrid retorts...

See what happens when you don't protect your borders? Perfect example. Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Sounds like you are a globalist....want to do away with the constitution and go with what the U.N wants for us?
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...


So basically you are saying that boundaries and a nation's sovereignty doesn't matter and that they should allow themselves to be flooded with people that do not wish to assimilate into the culture AND you must support them as well? That's pretty "liberal" of you since you would be using other people's resources to make yourself feel morally superior. (snick)
Sounds like what the Europeans did to this continent.. I don't see you lamenting your ancestors forced immigration policy on local inhabitants...but then again to you, that's another story to show your acrid retorts...

See what happens when you don't protect your borders? Perfect example. Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Sounds like you are a globalist....want to do away with the constitution and go with what the U.N wants for us?
I'm an individualist, I do what the hell I want...
 
The impacts of international migration are dramatically affected by the reasons for the movement of people, and their attitudes and expectations.

The U.S., while it has had an embarrassing tradition of looking at immigrants negatively, has benefitted in the big picture, because the vast majority of immigrants have come here seeking work, and the opportunity to succeed by a combination of hard work, getting the children educated, and assimilating as quickly as possible. And God bless immigrants who came here for those reasons.

Today, immigration is often motivated by many factors that are not as positive for the receiving country - mainly, seeking the benefits of our welfare state, and seeking better opportunities for criminal activities (drug trafficking, human trafficking, various forms of fraud, etc).

Furthermore, our good-hearted desire to make people feel welcome has had the perverse effect of slowing or eliminating assimilation. We teach kids in Spanish and other languages in OUR OWN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, we accommodate dozens of different languages in our public services, we encourage people to live in little enclaves of people of the same ethnicity. Thus, they don't become Americans, the become hyphenated Americans, who resist attempts to join the prevailing culture.

And we have Islam, which we think of as a "religion," but which by its own terms is a comprehensive form of governance that runs completely counter to our own legal and cultural meme of "separation of church and state."

So in today's world, it is MANDATORY that receiving countries demand to know why any given immigrant is coming here, and to refuse them entry if it is not deemed beneficial. The fact that things suck back home is not a sufficient justification for allowing them in. And if we do allow them in, it should be temporary, without government assistance, and revocable when things suck a little less back home.

Does that make me a bigot, racist, homophobe?
 
Evidently, the bigots tht wrote the article have forgotten that migration of humans is a natural fact...Except they used to do it with conquering armies...


So basically you are saying that boundaries and a nation's sovereignty doesn't matter and that they should allow themselves to be flooded with people that do not wish to assimilate into the culture AND you must support them as well? That's pretty "liberal" of you since you would be using other people's resources to make yourself feel morally superior. (snick)
Sounds like what the Europeans did to this continent.. I don't see you lamenting your ancestors forced immigration policy on local inhabitants...but then again to you, that's another story to show your acrid retorts...

See what happens when you don't protect your borders? Perfect example. Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Sounds like you are a globalist....want to do away with the constitution and go with what the U.N wants for us?
I'm an individualist, I do what the hell I want...

As do I...glad to meet ya.
 
I have a simple theory--------about the issue of migration and GROUPS OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD and------agenda. ****LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY**** are
their INTENTIONS. And--remember the lessons of history. The lesson of history
IS-----beware the totalitarian utopianist
Like Solomon?

Solomon never promised you a rose garden. He wrote the BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES (spelling?)
You're good.
 
The impacts of international migration are dramatically affected by the reasons for the movement of people, and their attitudes and expectations.

The U.S., while it has had an embarrassing tradition of looking at immigrants negatively, has benefitted in the big picture, because the vast majority of immigrants have come here seeking work, and the opportunity to succeed by a combination of hard work, getting the children educated, and assimilating as quickly as possible. And God bless immigrants who came here for those reasons.

Today, immigration is often motivated by many factors that are not as positive for the receiving country - mainly, seeking the benefits of our welfare state, and seeking better opportunities for criminal activities (drug trafficking, human trafficking, various forms of fraud, etc).

Furthermore, our good-hearted desire to make people feel welcome has had the perverse effect of slowing or eliminating assimilation. We teach kids in Spanish and other languages in OUR OWN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, we accommodate dozens of different languages in our public services, we encourage people to live in little enclaves of people of the same ethnicity. Thus, they don't become Americans, the become hyphenated Americans, who resist attempts to join the prevailing culture.

And we have Islam, which we think of as a "religion," but which by its own terms is a comprehensive form of governance that runs completely counter to our own legal and cultural meme of "separation of church and state."

So in today's world, it is MANDATORY that receiving countries demand to know why any given immigrant is coming here, and to refuse them entry if it is not deemed beneficial. The fact that things suck back home is not a sufficient justification for allowing them in. And if we do allow them in, it should be temporary, without government assistance, and revocable when things suck a little less back home.

Does that make me a bigot, racist, homophobe?

Nope, you nailed it perfectly. This mass immigration was planned by the globalists to water down nationalism because it will then be easier to merge us into this globalist system with central authority that will usurp our constitution and traditions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top