I know it's long, however, after bumping into it one time today, and thinking about whether to post it or not, I decided I would...but it had been moved way down in ranking. So, rather than having this disappear like so many other things on the net, here it is. I bumped into it after readint the post today titled "Leftist Foundations Under Fire", and spotted the Carnegie name.
Without futher ado, and apologies for length, here it is.
If Mexico had a remotely honest government it would be cheaper to send aid to help them develop their country. A healthy Mexican economy would be good for everybody. However, Mexico is corrupt from top to bottom and finds it easier to behave as a big ole bloodsucker.
Interesting. The Report makes several funndamental errors in thinking, the main one being that Mexico will have any interest in halting the flow of illegal immigrants. Immigration acts both as a safety valve for a poverty-stricken Mexican society and as a nice infusion of cash, to the tune on tens of billions of dollars sent in by Mexican expats.
Mexico is hardly likey to give up either of these.
Here it is;open your checkbooks.
Mexico has acknowledged that it must take primary responsibility for its development; however, the NAFTA partners and certain financial institutions should help.
Mexico; "Sure, we'll see what we can do about the illegal immigration thing, but only after you dump a bunch of money into our country to help us with our own development, which we cannot possibly do on our own, and should not be expected to do so.
there must be an effort to stop deaths at the border
By us, of course.
The U.S. should facilitate the flow of legal migration
See? It's our fault. Always is.
it is not recommending that the two governments open the border now
No, no, that comes later, after there is nothing we can do to stop it.
This is why I generally stay away from illegal immigration threads. I do not have one positive thing to offer.
Just damn.
Give the USA until December 25, 2005 to gather enough bright ribbon to wrap around the country, north to south and east to west, with a giant bow in the center. We will then attach a "Merry Christmas Mexico" card and call it a done deal.
Coupled with the $10 million SoS Rice hand delivered a couple of months ago, should make this a suitable grand bargain...whata ya say mexico??? Deal?
This is an excellent post as it clarifies the illegal immigration situation and puts it into perspective.
I disagree with you regarding who kicked this into gear. It is my opinion that George H. Bush started the ball rolling at the end of the first Gulf War. I remember his speeches talking about the One World Order. Before this war GH Bush went to practically every country in the world to get agreements and help for this war. Because so many countries assisted in that war, this was his rationale for the One World Order. He dropped in the polls right after this. He also kept pushing NAFTA in speeches. He tried to deliver NAFTA but failed as the Democrats blocked it.
When Clinton was elected, he pushed NAFTA through with the help of Republicans. I think this is the reason GH Bush and Clinton are so buddy, buddy. There is no doubt in my mind that Hillary is picked as the next President. Whether she will win is another story.
Your links are excellent. Thanks for posting this.
Read this for some background on what is happening.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Spivey/phyllis2.htm
BTTT for later
What's to read? We already know what it says:
"Mexico is right about immigration policy.
The U.S. is wrong about immigration policy. Shame, shame, double shame on Americans. (Care for a gyros?]"
1-Improve the treatment of Mexican migrants." Okay-but first they must renounce their Mexican citizenship, break all ties with that government corrupted country and swear absolute aliegence to the USA.
2-Okay-but let's demand that human rights be protected throughout , corrupt Mexica as well as their border region. This would surely reduce the flight of Mexicans from the tyrant's who leech off their wages until they have nothing left for their families.
3-Okay, the USA is willing to contribute a mile wide stretch along our southern border for the purpose of forming a viable, no-man's land, heavily mined and surveyed 24/7 in order to guarantee it continued viability, assuming of course that Mexico agrees to do the same along it's northern border.
4-Mexico must first purge it's own government, (of the thieves and despots, by the thieves and despots and for the thieves and despots) of corruption, or same as always in Mexico, the only ones benefitting from the economy, whether good bad or so so, will be those same damn leeches.
As for that special migration policy that Meyers would have us extend to Canadians and Mexicans.A considerable herd of the world socialistic, liberal and anti every thing we stand for critic's are Mexican and Canadian, and I can't think of any rational reason for giving these snobs preferrential treatment in their desire to come and live among people they despise. But as I said earlier, if we are stupid enough to extend special immigration priviliges to those whose only apparent reason for coming here is to either loot our economy or destroy us from within-they must first renounce the culture that drove them to this land of UGLY Americans, and pledge aliegence to this ugly country, and to the ugliness for which we stand.
Truth and righteousness can only be percieved as ugly by the liars and the unrighteousness......excluding the few of course who don't know the difference.
I know this is a tad old, but I think it might be of interest to the borders list.
Possible Ping...
Maurice Strong: The new guy in your future!
http://www.sovereignty.net/p/sd/strong.html
[snip]
"This interlocking...is the new reality of the century, with profound implications for the shape of our institutions of governance, national and international. By the year 2012, these changes must be fully integrated into our economic and political life."
He told the opening session of the Rio Conference (Earth Summit II) in 1992, that industrialized countries have:
"developed and benefited from the unsustainable patterns of production and consumption which have produced our present dilemma. It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class -- involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing -- are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns."
In an essay by Strong entitled Stockholm to Rio: A Journey Down a Generation, he says:
"Strengthening the role the United Nations can play...will require serious examination of the need to extend into the international arena the rule of law and the principle of taxation to finance agreed actions which provide the basis for governance at the national level. But this will not come about easily. Resistance to such changes is deeply entrenched. They will come about not through the embrace of full blown world government, but as a careful and pragmatic response to compelling imperatives and the inadequacies of alternatives."
International Migration Policy Program http://www.impprog.ch/ Study of International Migration http://www.georgetown.edu/sfs/programs/isim/
[Snicker.] This would require Mexico to (1) reduce corruption, and (2) decide they no longer require the multiplied millions of dollars that illegal immigrants send back to Mexico.