Posted on 12/01/2004 10:44:12 AM PST by JesseJane
Immigration
If you like illegal immigration you’ll love the FTAA! FTAA advocates favor open borders. Although keeping the general public in the dark as to their real plans, FTAA sponsors admit that the FTAA is intended to follow in the footsteps of the EU – and so will lead to the abolition of meaningful national borders. National borders will become like state borders. There will no longer be an immigration problem, because there will be no more immigration – only migration of populations at will.
Proponents conceal the effect of the FTAA on U.S. borders, realizing that the American public would not support their revolutionary goals. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has clearly and correctly warned:
"There are people in the [Bush] administration, and in Mexico, and in Congress, who believe that we should do away with borders entirely. Their ultimate goal is to create this hemispheric ‘free trade’ area consolidating all of North and South America into some kind of ‘United States of the Americas.’"
Mexico’s Vicente Fox, in a 2002 address to European elites, was unexpectedly candid about these aims:
"Eventually our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union, with the goal of attending to future themes [such as] the future prosperity of North America, and the movement of capital, goods, services, and persons." [Emphasis ours]
During his address, Fox referred to a large impediment to his vision, "what I dare to call the Anglo-Saxon prejudice against the establishment of supra-national organizations."
This same vision has been endorsed by powerful people in our nation -- including some regarded to be conservative. Among those who applauded Fox's vision was Robert L. Bartley, editor of the influential Wall Street Journal:
"Reformist Mexican President Vicente Fox raises eyebrows with his suggestion that over a decade or two Nafta should evolve into something like the European Union, with open borders for not only goods and investment but also people. He can rest assured that there is one voice north of the Rio Grande that supports his vision. To wit, this newspaper."
"Indeed, during the immigration debate of 1984 we suggested an ultimate goal to guide passing policies — a constitutional amendment: "There shall be -- open borders." -- July 2, 2002 editorial entitled "Open NAFTA Borders? Why Not?"
STOP THE FTAA!!!
More at the website...
Thanks for pinging!
Are you looking to live under the United Nations Charter instead of the US Constitution? Personal freedom and antional sovereignty don't mean anything to you?
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/ Here's the link to it. Be sure to read every word in the 19 Chapters.
If I knew how to "bold" those last two sentences, I would.
Everyone complains about the Democrats, but few acknowledge that most of the Republicans are just as bad or worse when the subject of Mexican immigration comes up. The Republicans are the ones that we were depending upon to stop this invasion. They have failed.
NO MORE
extra-Constitutional b.s. that usurps our sovereignty and security.
NO MORE!
Fox is a freaking POS and Bush, our 1st Mexican POTUS, is a globalist fool.
But, we all knew this on Nov. 1st. Now, let's make some lemonade...
Your wish is my command:
It is all about a criminal class -- the upper class of Mexico and other Latin American countries -- trying to get power in the United States, and use it for their own sadistic, evil purposes! And everyone should note that the current administration is all for it. So what does that say about them?!!
Thanks! :^)
bttt
It would be remiss not to remember that Reagan was the one who issued the 1986 amnesty, and Bush was responsible for the expansion of legal immigration in 1990.
Yes, we can't forget that Reagan's amnesty only led to more illegal immigration. I often wonder if he realized what a mistake he made. Dubya has completely ignored that fact, and as a result, the numbers have increased, repeating history.
How did you do that???
Consistent with their silly little document called "The Declaration of Independence" which still baffles Spaniard whites, who believe themselves to be divinely endowed with the ownership of the entire planet.
On this forum there is a thread called "HTML Boot Camp" which is a beginners guide to HTML tags. But for now, here's the basics of what I did:
to bold, use "< b > text < / b >" -- only have no spaces between the b and the < or > marks. This means "start bolding here" followed by the text and ended with "end bold here" (that's what the backslash is all about).
Similar for italics, only use an "i".
So to do a paragraph with bold italics, you would use
< b > < i > Paragraph text here < / b > < / i >.
In other words, the tags (that's what they're called) can be nested. Again, without the spaces - those are only here to let you see the syntax of the tags. Without the spaces you wouldn't see the tags, your browser would simply use them to bold the text...
As usual you're right on the money........isn't it amazing how so many well meaning folks look at the superficial aspects of something like this and think it's just wonderful when nothing could be further from the truth......guess they don't call it the "public fool" system for nothing!
Refresher ping for me... thought I'd ping ya'll too..
~whilst looking for something, I rebumped into this old thing.. ~blowin' the dust off an old thread ping~
Bttt!
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.