Canem Malem
It seems you don't have any examples of trade threats on CPPR. Your quote on Myanmar's murders is about too much migrating , the opposite case. The US has numerous sanctions and trade threats for many reasons in foreign internal matters and spent a few dollars in Vietnam 1964-72.

Where does the new law say there are open borders ?

Hey Everyone,

Just to clarify that when I said 'Racism is essential to Nationalism', I did try to explain that I wasn't necessarily advocating the promotion of hardcore racial abuse between people in a manner that were to cause disharmony between them. I was just trying to examine the bigger picture.

You all should know by now that what gets my goat is the idea of Global Government.
- The idea that between the lot of us, we're incapable of deciding what's best for ourselves and our own country need to rely on foreigners absolutely disgust me on every level...
This isn't their country to decide what happens, it's ours.

So why are we adopting UN and Global Intergovernmental policies on the laws decided here?
That's not us deciding our future, that's some else saying "We know what's good for you".
That's not bloody democracy.
I'm not sure exactly what it is; but it isnt that.

And I suppose I was trying to look at 'tribalism'.
To go even further I guess I'm also trying to 'psychological evaluate the cause and effects of political correctness and understand the motives behind social engineering', if that makes any sense...

We look at this whole 'racism' issue.
It's not 'equally distributed' if thats the right word.

If whites had a TV show 'Living White' leftists and progressives would go beserk.
http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/living-black
If we created a movie called White Panther that was a place for white tribalism;
Leftists and Progressives WOULD GO BESERK.

It seems 'Tribalism' and 'Culture' is fine and good, just not for whites.

So how do we look at this on a 'psychological evaluate the cause and effects of political correctness and understand the motives behind social engineering' kind of basis?

To Armchair Critic- As always kudos AC. Every culture should have their own nation. There is a recent phenomenon of "Third World Colonialism" mainly Indian and Chinese- it seems the major reasons are- 1. unmanaged population density within those nations- 2. an expansionist Islamic culture.
All cultures try to promote and expand their culture this expansionism can result in conflict. The potential for conflict appear to be related to the size of the historical differences, previous contact between the cultures. This is why cultural interaction and immigration needs to be managed.

Posted by nicknamenick, Monday, 19 November 2018 4:47:54 AM- It seems you don't have any examples of trade threats on CPPR.

Answer- Thanks for your feedback nicknamenick. I don't expect that we will agree. Paraphrasing Voltaire- I don't agree with what you say but support your right to say it.
It's self evident and uncontroversial to us that the UN and associated groups engage in sanctions and use the UN as a forum for lobbying for or against issues internal to nations. I believe it's unfortunate that this seems to be done in the name of the UN. A government not of the people is a dictatorship. Hate Laws (Political Correctness Laws) are part of the CCPR- their effect is to legitimize change as the norm and devalue western tradition and free speech.

We have a responsibility to protect the legacy of our families, cultures, and nations.

nicknamenick speaking about your comment to Canem Malem "It seems you don't have any examples"

But it is evident you conveniently missed this one, where you have no examples.

nicknamenick Quote "But PS uses bluster to avoid thinking sensibly" That is your opinion.

Can you back up with examples where bluster has been used, at present you only have one but even then it is only your opinion of my comment.

I can back up my following statement about you with literally hundreds of examples.

"Your posts that defy translation, give people the belief you must be high on drugs or are trying to disguise your intelligence by commenting like the court jester."

I agree that internal matters are supposed to be beyond the reach of UN. But you don't really have facts to back up trade sanctions on migration or that there will be open borders.

Internally , in Oz 'hate-speech' is really libel and slander which go way back in British Law. You can't even go 100 kph through a supermarket car-park or collect groceries without paying , the dictators.

Aiden, I read it in a different document to the one linked by
Philip S. I cannot remember the exact words, but my
understanding was that it was certainly implied.
Scanning through what appears to be the original document as opposed
to the overview document that I previously read the crux of the matter
seems to be paragraphs 15 and 33.
I think a lawyer practised in this field would demonstrate that anyone
could complain of discrimination if they were refused entry.
It states that it is not compulsory for governments but ---
I seem to have lost the search facility for the document so cannot do a
proper search of the document at the moment.