Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: backtothestreets; USF; Fred Nerks; Just A Nobody; AmericanArchConservative; Dark Skies; ...
Why is our government increasing the portion of Muslim immigrants from the Middle East from 15% to 73% so far this decade?
Our government, Democrats and Republicans alike, cannot be so blind as to not know what they are doing. WHAT IS IT? Who is dictating this policy and why?

I have been asking similar questions for a year now!!!

It is time to take our country back. The question is...How do we begin?

52 posted on 11/10/2006 2:29:08 PM PST by jan in Colorado (The ENEMEDIA...aiding and abetting the terrorists!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: jan in Colorado

Hey Jan and thx for the ping.


53 posted on 11/10/2006 2:41:00 PM PST by Dark Skies ("He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that" ... John Stuart Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: XR7; Salem; jan in Colorado
I don't recall the exact quote (or even if it was indeed a quote), but I recall Stalin used fear to manipulate the populations of the USSR and nations they invaded.

Is it even remotely possible politicians are purposely altering our demographics to raise fear within our nation to better achieve control of the masses? Dang! I hate even having such a thought cross my mind, but it is there. I've a sense of shame and disgust that I even think such a thing. Someone tell me no, this could never happen in America!
56 posted on 11/10/2006 2:49:48 PM PST by backtothestreets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: jan in Colorado

THE UN PLAN FOR GLOBAL MIGRATION

(snipped)


The dream of a New World Order was born long before socialist visionaries (including Franklin Roosevelt and the leaders of the Federal Council of Churches) enthroned Communist Alger Hiss as the first head of the United Nations.[3] [See The Revolutionary Roots of the UN] Hiss was the primary author of The UN Charter, which summarized its vision in noble terms that few could criticize.

"WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS," it began, "DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war... to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained... and for these ends to practice tolerance and... to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all.... Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco... do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations."[4]

It took the Second World War to make the new system acceptable to the people. In the wake of that useful crisis, the masses willingly embraced the UN promise of "economic and social advancement of all" under the guiding hand of the new "international machinery."

In the decades that followed, most people seemed to dismiss UN treaties and declarations as "soft laws" and policies with little effect on national sovereignty. They didn't know the many ways UN declarations would permeate national laws and policies. The mainstream media didn't tell us. So when the "The Global Commission on International Migration was launched by the United Nations Secretary-General and a number of governments on December 9, 2003," few saw the red lights.[5]

But America is awakening. An immigrant-friendly nation, it has welcomed grateful immigrants from around the world into its system. Now, it faces a new kind of migration -- one that intentionally clashes with everything we have valued and shared. Thomas Sowell summarizes some of its more obvious problems:

"Under affirmative action, combined with amnesty, [illegals] would have preferences in jobs and other benefits. Those who set up their own businesses would be entitled to preferences in getting government contracts. Their children would be able to get into college ahead of the children of American citizens with better academic qualifications. ... [I]f an illegal alien gets stopped for going through a red light... in many communities the cop is forbidden to arrest him.... Under a provision recently passed by the Senate, illegal aliens who forged Social Security cards not only get a pass, they get to collect Social Security benefits."[6]

This legalized lawlessness fuels the "crisis" needed to persuade the masses to accept mass surveillance, universal data collection, and other intrusive strategies for worldwide control. And it gets worse:

"Based on a one-year in-depth study, a researcher estimates there are about 240,000 illegal immigrant sex offenders in the United States who have had an average of four victims each."[7]

"The immigration reform bill now under congressional consideration would grant amnesty to some 10 million illegal immigrants.... Within two decades, the character of the nation would differ dramatically from what exists today."[8]

"When Sept. 11 hijackers Hani Hanjour and Khalid Almihdhar needed help getting fraudulent government-issued photo IDs before embarking on their suicide mission, they hopped into a van and headed to the parking lot of a 7-Eleven store in Falls Church, Va. That's where scores of illegal alien day laborers ply bogus identity documents to other illegal aliens from around the world."[9]

A web of secrecy and a flood of misleading propaganda hides the truth from taxpayers who cover the costs. For example, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America undermines both security and prosperity for ordinary people. Wondering why elected leaders ignore their pleas, many face rising lawlessness, litter, lost jobs, and fear of violence.[10]

The reasons are actually simple. International regulations have already bound the nations around the world to regional as well as global laws and policies. To understand their aims, let's look at the United Nation's Report of the Global Commission on International Migration [GCIM]. Chapter 6 warns us that "international migration is a complex phenomenon," and most nations (states) recognize the importance of international migration and seek to address it in a way that enables them to respect their international obligations."[1] Might the word "respect" actually imply "obedience" to international guidelines?

AN ILLUSION OF NATI0NAL SOVEREIGNTY

The subtle language in many UN documents hides the assault on national sovereignty. While sounding affirmative, it undermines any "sovereign" action that might oppose UN policies. The UN Declaration on Human Rights illustrates this manipulative language well. Its Article 18 upholds "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..." Article 19 affirms "the right to freedom of opinion and expression...."

But Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." In other words, its promise of "human rights" does not apply to those who would criticize the UN or its policies. Nor does it apply to Christians who cling to God's "offensive" truths -- or refuse to follow UNESCO's Declaration on the Role of Religion in the Promotion of a Culture of Peace.[11]

The migration issue shifts national sovereignty onto the same slippery ground. In the numbered items below, notice the GCIM's promising assurance -- followed by a clear denial of traditional sovereignty:

read more:

http://www.theamericanresistance.com/articles/art2006jun13.html


60 posted on 11/10/2006 3:29:17 PM PST by Fred Nerks (lost my tagline...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson