Posted on 10/21/2005 12:23:51 AM PDT by janetgreen
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."
"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
"Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people."
The CFR document lays "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." The "common security perimeter" will require us to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations" with Mexico and Canada, "harmonize entry screening," and "fully share data about the exit and entry of foreign nationals."
This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.
It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet "vigilantes" on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona.
A follow-up meeting was held in Ottawa on June 27, where the U.S. representative, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, told a news conference that "we want to facilitate the flow of traffic across our borders." The White House issued a statement that the Ottawa report "represents an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership."
The CFR document calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.
Just to make sure that bringing cheap labor from Mexico is an essential part of the plan, the CFR document calls for "a seamless North American market" and for "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico."
The document's frequent references to "security" are just a cover for the real objectives. The document's "security cooperation" includes the registration of ballistics and explosives, while Canada specifically refused to cooperate with our Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
To no one's surprise, the CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.
The experience of the European Union and the World Trade Organization makes it clear that a common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway.
The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards.
The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system.
Here's another handout included in the plan. U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.
To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg" conferences.
The best known Americans who participated in the CFR Task Force that wrote this document are former Massachusetts Governor William Weld and Bill Clinton's immigration chief Doris Meissner. Another participant, American University Professor Robert Pastor, presented the CFR plan at a friendly hearing of Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee on June 9.
Ask your Senators and Representatives which side they are on: the CFR's integrated North American Community or U.S. sovereignty guarded by our own borders.
I am extremely outraged!!! We should not be footing the bill for Mexico & Canada. Besides, with the Muslin population swelling in Montreal& The Mexican state of Chiapas becoming a Muslim State, We will possibly have to re-evaluate our relationship with Mexico.
Of course, the Jihadists of the world won't become friemds w/ us if we stopped giving foreign aid to Isreal....their goal, I assume, would be to make the entire world one complete Islamic state, would it not? How you came up w/ THAT idea makes no sense to me.
As far as what I said to janet, I apologized to her. Maybe you did not see it.
I donate to FR, and have since I joined. Jim has always thanked me with a return card via mail. Jim must welcome this Conservative and his support, as he has never intimated otherwise. I must be welcomed HERE by those that count.
You can call me names, lump me in with the moonbats, call me a liberal, and doubt my American loyalty all you want. I remain confident in my Nation, my GOD, and myself.
I hope that you find peace within your heart. I only wish you would recognize the truth in someone else’s heart, instead of allowing emotion to form an opinion that is far more than false.
You do not get to determine what is, or is not Conservative. You have every right to determine what you believe personally. Until Jim Robinson (himself) asks me to vacate the premises, I will continue to post here. As a matter of fact I will ping him to this exchange, and he can ask me to leave as soon as he has read it... that is if he believes that I am not a Conservative. I'll just let his answer, or lack of one, decide.
I'll continue to work for Conservative victories. Conservative pragmatists are the ones that win elections, and the ones that you should thank for the parts of the Conservative agenda have been established. You must win elections to invoke change.
I'll leave you with a Conservative Reagan quote (I suppose that you consider him a Conservative).
When asked as to why he would meet with a Senator that had fought him on several bills he was supporting, he responded, "Show me a man that votes against me 25% of the time, and I'll show you a man that agrees with me 75% of the time". Now that is pragmatic Conservative thinking!
Have a great weekend,
LLS
I wish I could agree with you, but the goons have undone/disregarded parts of the Constitution (eminent domain, guns confiscated in New Orleans). We the people are too busy being distracted by hurricanes, murders, entertainment scandals to notice or do much. After all, Christmas was taken away and the American public (as a whole) did nothing. Look at Christmas cards - they are titled "holiday cards" on the box - even when the print inside is CLEARLY Christian.
And, part of the goons' plan is to keep us in fear, so we allow those pointless humiliating searches at the airports, voluntary pat-downs in subways, more and more monitoring of our activity, the so-called Patriot Act. Eventually we'll surrender our guns - as many cities already have done. The people haven't cried out in critical mass about those things, have they :(
I think it is fine to question financial aid to Israel, but perhaps the US should start with more obvious lapses of common sense - such as aid to North Korea. And while we are at cutting off Israel, we better cut off Egypt and the Palestinian Authority as well. Funny those that mention Israel aid, never mention the hundreds of other nations that get US aid. Especially annoying is European criticism considering their economies were saved from collapse via the Marshall Plan.
The US also gets kickbacks from Israel through the sharing of military technology.
Thank you for the ping... more pieces of the puzzle fall into place. Ever since I found out she belongs to the CFR (along with Cheney, Bush Sr., Colin Powell, so many others), I pretty much lost respect for her (and I truly respected her and would have voted for her). I now question everything she does. If only the CFR didn't control the presidential race, we might actually get a good candidate who is conservative and concerned about the peasant middle class.
BTTT!!!
Of course....ALL foreign aid is unconstitutional, regardless of which nation it goes to. The Leftists pick out Isreal due to their hatred for that nation....but I mentioned it 'cuz Israel (along w/ Egypt, which runs in 2nd place, I think) is our largest recipient of foreign aid $.
There is no anti-Israel bitterness on my part.
""Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada."
I have been following this as well, Janet. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans have no knowledge of this whatsoever!
Yes.
I posted it in hopes that the word would spread. It's frightening, isn't it? Our "leaders" need to hear from us about this monstrosity.
It is outwardly apparent that our "leaders" are all on the same page. What we appear to have here is a "Ruling Class"
who care not a wit about the middle class. Ann Coulter recently wrote about this, and Phyllis has alluded to it many times.
I am 51, and have voted straight Republican since I voted for Nixon at age 18. I am finished with parties. I will only vote for a man/woman who has a credible and lenghthy record for closing the borders.
My sentiments exactly! Principle over party. Sadly, there's not much difference in the parties anymore. It's time for a strong third party to emerge!
It will be a tough row to how, but we have to do it.
Two Republicans that I do admire are Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul.
My local Congressman, Elton Gallegly, has been in Washington for 18 years, and he was trying to close the border long before anyone heard of Tancredo.
What the bleep is wrong with Bush? Is he just a RINO globalist like Bush Sr?
The fruit doesn't usually fall far from the tree....Both Skull and Bone members too
I'm stuck with Jane Harman, who I've decided must be somehow profiting from illegal immigration.
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.