Posted on 06/09/2007 4:42:06 PM PDT by dvan
Pursuing the "North American" Agenda Vol. 40, No. 2 September 2006
The hottest issue at the grassroots is illegal immigration and what our government is not doing to stop it. The question most frequently heard is, Why doesn't the Bush Administration get it?
Maybe the Bush Administration doesn't want to stop the invasion of illgal foreigners and wants to declare them all legal through amnesty lite and guest-worker proposals. Maybe the Bush Administration is pursuing a globalist agenda by means of a series of press releases (without authority from Congress or the American people).
Consider this chronology.
On March 23, 2005, President Bush met at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, with Vicente Fox of Mexico and Paul Martin of Canada in what they called a Summit. The three heads of state then drove to Baylor University in Waco, where they issued a press release announcing an agreement to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
On May 17, 2005, the Council on Foreign Relations issued a 59-page document outlining a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter" to achieve "the freer flow of people within North America."
This document is full of language spelling out an "integrated" strategy to achieve an "open border for the movement of goods and people" within which "trade, capital, and people flow freely." The document calls for "a seamless North American market," allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access," "totalization" (the code word for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system), massive U.S. foreign aid, and even "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution."
(Excerpt) Read more at eagleforum.org ...
I think the system will break in an unorganized fashion.
Someone will run for President, perhaps in 2008, if not, in 2012 without doubt, and win.
That someone will attract candidates at the next House election, who will run against the incumbents, and win.
I'm not sure an "organization" can get this done, certainly not a FEC-compliant organization.
I'm a veteran of the 1967 and early 1968 McCarthy insurrection. Between New Hampshire and Oregon, you could almost feel the system breaking. I suppose in my old age, I'm feeling nostalgic.
The right guy, and the right issue, it can happen.
How so? I say not. Not technically. And not that the answer is easy. I am having trouble getting the ideas across. Nobody wants to be bothered. But there are no citizens of the status you are thinking of to whom Bush or any President of the US can be a traitor. I see your screen name. 14 must go too. People should never be citizen of any Union govt. Such should only have member States, never, Never, NEVER citizens.
I would like to ask ALL a question, very seriously, about citizenship.
If you were given a form someday asking, for whatever purposes, voter registration or otherwise,
Are you are a citizen of the North American Union (or the United Nations)?,
check Yes [_], or No [_].
Which would you check, and why? How would you feel about being asked that? It is coming you know.
This is a project of mine, a citizenship project.
The staging area for this project is my about page and you can see more about it there if you wish. It is nowhere close to being finished. Barely started.
Not to be combative...because it is NOT my intent...I dare you to speak to your neighbors about this. They'll have a glazed over look on their face and more than likely treat YOU as the one with "a problem"....
Let’s just say for now I agree with replacing the citizenship part too.
Here’s the case which established the precedent for the current interpretation of the 14th.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plyler_v._Doe
I believe that it’s a misinterpretation, or misapplication by liberal courts, of the original intent of 14. It needs to be reintroduced, revisited and redefined by the USSC.
..I'm printing this out to hand to select folks who know & respect me and will not dismiss this out of hand.
My neighbors....they're older, a lot of retired military...
..and some are clued in.
My son in law is sharp & political...
..even he needed a little convincing about this....
..although, if possible, he is to the right of me!!
...Am I ever blessed to have him in the family!...!
Kinda feel like Paul Revere....
BG, the past few weeks, especially, I wake in the middle of the night and think...
Good mercy, is this really happening?
..Is our President really doing this to our country?....It is a nightmare.
But they'll talk about the latest tabloid headline all day! sick.
bttt
An excellent assessment, Nuc1, but let's consider for a moment that congress isn't clueless, that not only congress, but the executive branch and the judicial branch as well know exactly what they are doing and they are fully aware what consequences their decisions are having on our political system.
But what can be said that would serve as a logical explanation for their bizarre behavior?
In what other set of political circumstances could one expect similar behavior?
I can think of two other reasons why our officials would be involved in a plan to destroy the nation's political, economic, and cultural system.
First of all, I don't think Congress is clueless, but are complicit -- that all three branches are following the same game plan. Nothing in politics happens by accident and the transformation of our nation has not been happening in a vacuum from the perspective of the other two branches or the public itself.
Second, let me rule out a coup by any one branch, as the other two branches would keep that off the table. Our system was designed to insure against that or we would have been involved in a domestic shootin' war a long time ago.
But in the case of the former, a slower approach not involving any overt or sudden moves would describe what has been happening. Enough happening for slow erosion, but not enough at any one time to cause an uprising or any great dissent.
Until now, that is.
We should have had a clue what was coming down the pike after 9/11 when the borders were not sealed.
Many of us reasoned correctly that if the border was not sealed, it was because a large number of terrorists were already in the country, (which the administration already knew about) and to close it for that reason alone wouldn't have been logical from the government's perspective.
Then we began looking at the large numbers of illegals that were pouring in each day -- and year and it quickly became apparent that the U.S. was going to become bankrupt in a very short period unless the pipeline was shut down completely and the current population of illegals removed.
The flood of illegals coupled with the seasonal 'nuke' scares involving the fate of 16 American cities became the rally point for the people's movement to close the borders. TPTB behind the open borders policy committed a tactical blunder when it chose not to address the issue, or even throw the people a few crumbs of feigned interest to assuage the fears of the people.
It mis-gauged the resistance and ignored the pleas to close the borders until the pleas became loud enough, then unwisely tried to play catch-up with the amnesty bill, which failed, leaving the fate of the nation up for grabs. In the meantime, many folks started sounding another alarm concerning the NAFTA Super Corridor and plans for the North American Union, and it wasn't long before it became obvious that the open borders policy was deliberately put in place, for it was to play a major role in the creation of the NAU, the plan for which will officially be presented to Congress this fall.
At this late date, it is unknown and anyone's guess what will happen next. Stay tuned!
Sounds like a project for the FR Think Tank to kick around.
Very true post. I hope people listen.
There is a complete section on this incorporated into S.1348.
A little parable...a hospital company I once worked for wanted to sell a hospital in its string of properties but couldn’t because its clause with D.C. stated that as long as the hospital was profitable, it had to maintain the hospital as a viable entity or sell it back to the city. If the hospital were to become unprofitable, the corporation could then close the hospital and then dispose of the property as the city would not want to deal with an unprofitable entity as well.
What the corporation did was to give the installed union at this hospital everything it had demanded in terms of health care and compensation. Then the hospital went from clearing several millions in profit each month to losing 1 then 2 then up to twelve million a month before the corporation announced the closure of the institution, all because they were able to use the greed of the union against itself!
Why mention this parable on this site? They are doing it to us on a massive scale in Washington so that the nation is bank-rupted and we are forced thru blind panic to accept a new order and reduced life style with a complete loss of rights and our loss of American identity!
Our materialism is being turned against us and we shall lose our country unless there is a massive grass roots effort to turn this situation around. We might have to do with less for a while in order to save our country!
read this....good assessment
Yes!
It isn’t an NAU thread without the big colorful maps.
Down with highways!
Asphalt is the devil’s playground.
post# 51
Uh, because it's a sign of mental illness to believe it?
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.