Posted on 05/19/2006 6:56:03 AM PDT by Dark Skies
President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.
Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA to include Canada, setting the stage for North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.
President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.
The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:
At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.
What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:
In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.
To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.
The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.
The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:
The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.
Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.
Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?
This kind of nonsense doesn't even rise to the level of moonbat.
I think it's inevitable that we will annex Mexico. Why should US citizens pick-up the tab (and lose our national identity in the process) dealing with another 100m of their citizens without getting anything in return?
danke.........
Of course, you may be correct and I will give it serious consideration.
It would also help if this wasn't being slanted to hurt the President.
<
It is no joke.>
The report absolutely exists -it's just doesn't say anything like what the conspiracy people claim.
Compare the membership of the CFR to those that are on the House and Senate Foreign relations committees.
There is no 'or'. The Constution clearly authorizes controlling the border and citizenship. It does not authorize going 'whole hog on the whole pot'. To entertain any other idea, is to consider the overthrow of our government for something else.
We cannot 'annex' Mexico. We can conquer them (which would be abrogating our constitution), or we can allow Mexican citizens to vote to become a territory of the United States, then allow the states to vote on whether to let them in.
>>Also look up the membership at the CFR site<<
thney have a lot of famous members.
About the same portion of important Washington folks belong to the CFR as the portion of Atlantans who belong to the best country club.
>> But these conspiracy rants detract from real discussion of the plan - the major flaw in the plan is that it doesn't deal with 12 million+ illegals already here.
Of course, you may be correct and I will give it serious consideration.<<
Cool. All I would suggest is looking at the source materials first hand.
"Free trade" and open borders are two sides of the same coin.
Not at all. Free trade between nations requires that there be nations capable of freely trading.
For there to be nations capable of freely trading requires that there be nations, period, which requires borders.
Ireland is a great example. They lowered tariffs and taxes, which the rest of the EU has not done. Therefore, Ireland has enjoyed greater growth and proseperity than the rest of the EU countries. Now, if the EU forces Ireland to raise its taxes to be more in line with France and the rest, well, that's not free trade. Free trade requires nations like Ireland to be able to set their own pplicies with regard to taxes and the rest. Free trade trade is based upon tax competition, NOT tax harmonization... And that requires regulated borders. Which country in the Middle East has been forced to regulate its borders carefully with a wall? That's right, Israel. Which country in the Middle East has the most open trade policies? Right--- Israel again.
What major flaw? If borders are non existent and we are the North American Continent, there won't be such a thing as illegal aliens.
I came to this conclusion a while back and have been posting my thoughts on it regularly on this forum.
The behavior of our president and certain members of the US senate has been very confusing relative to the illegal immigration issue, but I believe I finally understand the underlying dynamic of the situation. Many people think the president and certain senators:
1) have a heart for illegal immigrants- WRONG! or
2) are reaching out to illegals and trying to build their respective voting constituencies for the future- MOSTLY WRONG!
The overarching truth is, in their worldview, it's a world of business and sovereign nations only serve to restrict business operations and ultimately, profits. Who needs borders? Free trade, cheap labor, and open borders for all! Yep, they're all one world government whores sold out to their big business constituents. That's the only explanation that is consistent with their actions over the last 20 years. In truth, they've all sold us down the river for big business and a one world government which will benefit.... you guessed it.... big business.
I think we are on the same page. We know what is happening today. We know who is abrogating their repsonsibilities. My suggestions are hints at where policy initiatives today may lead us. Nothing more need be said.
DOBBS: Border security is arguably the critical issue in this country's fight against radical Islamist terrorism. But our borders remain porous. So porous that three million illegal aliens entered this country last year, nearly all of them from Mexico.
Now, incredibly, a panel sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations wants the United States to focus not on the defense of our own borders, but rather create what effectively would be a common border that includes Mexico and Canada.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On Capitol Hill, testimony calling for Americans to start thinking like citizens of North America and treat the U.S., Mexico and Canada like one big country.
ROMANS: The idea here is to make North America more like the European Union. Yet, just this week, voters in two major countries in the European Union voted against upgrading -- updating the European constitution. So clearly, this is not the best week to be trying to sell that idea.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/09/ldt.01.html
Hmm... News from CNN. Yeah, they certainly don't have any motive in smearing President Bush.
It's a credible theory, since it fits so many of the bizarre facts: The Bush family embracing Bill Clinton, the strange deference of our President to Vicente Fox, the refusal of GWB and our elites to hear the will of the people regarding massive Latin American invasion, etc. Our President seems hell-bent on merging us with Mexico, "our friend and neighbor."
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.