I had known about this, but was just pointed to the document today by Conservative Blog Therapy. I have mentioned that President Bush’s behavior can only be explained if he was a “One Worlder” or Globalist. This one is going to make you really angry, because our government is planning to sell our country’s sovereignty down the river.
President Bush is following a plan laid out in a 2005 report entitled “Building a North American Community” published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report was commissioned to study the Bush administration’s actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union. From said report:
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.The three countries of North America are each other’s largest
trading partners. More than 80 percent of Canadian and Mexican trade
is with its North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) partners.
Almost one-third of U.S. trade is with Canada and Mexico. Trade
among these three countries has tripled in value over the past decade.In addition, cross-border direct investment has increased sharply, contributing
to the integration of the three economies.
North America is also energy interdependent, though not energy
independent. In 2004, Canada and Mexico were the two largest exporters
of oil to the United States. Canada supplies the United States
with roughly 90 percent of its imported natural gas and all of its
imported electricity.In addition, all three countries face common security dangers, from
terrorismto drugtrafficking to international organizedcrime.Addressing
these dangers is a major challenge in this dynamic region: the borders
between Canada, the United States, and Mexico will be crossed over
400 million times in 2005.
Here is where it gets interesting.
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.
This drives the point home:
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.
I don’t see a wall, enforcement, or deportation fitting into this plan can you?
Connecting The President’s position with these CFR recommendations explains the President’s push for amnesty, or earned citizenship, and open borders.
**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.
Right on the Right Has picked up the story and he has a video
Filed under: Illegal Immigration, News
Rounding Up Illegal Immigrants (no, just a roundup of posts)…
The Senate isn’t paying any attention to the Americans they supposedly represent. Here’s the latest example: Jezebel Lives in Washington via blogbat As many of you who are duly not shocked already know, the Senate voted to kill two very…
From Joe Sixpack – Spot on, Vicente Fox
CNN reports on the latest “immigration reform” progress http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/19/immigration/index.html
Buried about center mass in the article is this tidbit …
Mexican President Vicente Fox repeated his opposition to barriers Thursday.
“The Mexican government has talked on multiple occasions about your construction of walls — of barriers — on the border. They do not offer an effective answer for a relationship of friends and partners,” he said.
Spot on, Vicente. But then, despite the superficial veneer, whoever said we were friends …?
Un amigo no permite que sus perros caguen en la yarda del otro amigo.
The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII) Weekend Wrap up!…
More on Mexico’s double standard Who should we blame for our illegal immigration problem? I was researching the California problem with some areas attempting to allow illegal aliens a foothold and registration to vote in LOCAL school board elections w…
CAII Roundup XXV…
……
O well what can i say, but this is typical CFR talk. They’re being pretty consistent with past behaviour. Senator Gary hart at the CFR, Sept 14,2001, 3 days after the the big event, guess what he calls for. Am sure uve guessed it. It’s on video by the way.
Well that is the thing with trade blocs, they just grow bigger & bigger. NAFTA,EFTA,the EU and just so that we can reduce the barriers between between the EU and EFTA, we can make something like the EEA and of course the whole we all can work for mutual benifit under the big umberala of the GATT/WTO. Lets drop more boundaries, more boundaries, who needs boundaries, right!!!
This card was always going to be played at sometime or the other, i mean this is just the CFR being the CFR. This is what they were created for.
And how about a single currency for a single trade bloc, Europe has the “Euro”, so what would you think about the “Amero” (almost sounds like two sons of nero)? One trade bloc,
That last part seems to have gotten edited some how, but as i was saying we already have a single trade bloc & single currency elsewhere now. There certainly seems to be potential for two. How much longer before they push for what they’ve always said they wanted? I mean they’ve said it so there’s no denying it. Bush H.W said it, Gary Hart said it and many more are fall in this list.
I don’t know Dar, but I am unhappy with the whole dang concept. Globalization is not a good thing IMO.
I agree, im not in favour of it either. But what can i say, i’ve been mocked for quite a while telling people it was coming and what more can I say, its happening right here before our very eyes. I mean it has never been a question of astrological predictions nor could I ever be charged with making such predictions, all I’ve done is paid attention to their own words. How long (how very long) have they spoken about it. Take the Euro for instance, its not like it happened within a day, or even a year. Its plans were drawn up years before.
If we speak of globalization, what’s really wrong with it? Well really speaking , there’s nothing inherently wrong with it. It’s like “money” or perhaps like a “corporate monopoly”. Are these evil? No, not at all. But its the person behind it & the power that it can or is even likely to draw from its use that makes it dangerous.
So the questions I’ve encouraged people to ask so many times before, who are these people, where do they come from and what do they stand for? Are they nationalists or globalists? Now people speak of being patriots, I mean it’s a good thing isn’t it? But doesn’t that mean recognizing the politicians and policies that do not work in the best interest of nations & its people.
I remember elsewhere on the blog someone (I think it was sbonner) said they did not want their taxes being used to pay for Moussaoui’s time in prison & that death would be first preference. Of course that is your money so that is your right to choose. I didn’t want to say it at the time, but such is the power of anger that it blinds people from seeing the bigger picture.
Well lets see, given a choice, who would you lash out at first, the globalist who destroyed your previous financial system, set up a new one & used it to burden you with debt & robbed you with your taxes without you even knowing about it, or Moussaoui?
Moussaoui didn’t even take part in 911, but if he has been convicted for his “intent”, at least prison is a way of distancing him away from what is at least assumed to be genuine (i.e.his intent). But in the case of your globalist financial system, the taxes you pay first goes towards paying the interest on a debt (that shouldn’t exist in the first place) for borrowing money that doesn’t exist either. And if death is the first preference for moussaoui (who didn’t actually rob or kill anyone), what do these people deserve, for this isn’t intent but something in operation. And if moussaoui has been convicted for his intent , remember this will come to an end cause he will surely die one day. But the taxes you pay for a debt you don’t even know about was being paid for before you were even born & will never end (unless they realize this debt with your property) for this kind of theft is perpetual. This debt keeps increasing & so does the interest and so unlike moussaoui, you keep paying more of a cut from your taxes than before.
I always tell people to watch the money, because its how things get done in this world. A financial system creates money (money) and money buys everything from terrorist & terrorism to the liberties & freedoms of nations. Free trade, how was this sold? Yes people were told cost barriers could be broken and that factors of production could be acquired across borders without any restrictions and that the customer would ultimately benefit. Oh yes I can see that really happening!!!!!! Who the hell has been benefiting so far, if not the corporations? Money has a way of lying to people and people ought to realize that. People have been conditioned for far too long and the mainstream news is part of this problem (They don’t lie, they just don’t tell you the whole truth).
Every time there is a major conflict, something new is always created out of it. New & more powerful authorities get created & they are all created to suck you into the same global system. If you think all disasters & all forms of terrorism exist by accident, you better think again. Look back in time & study it, you’ll see how these things really work. Look at the institutions that came out of WW1 & WW2. Europe & America have already had a global reform plan since then, now it’s going to happen in the Middle East. And this again is certainly less of a shallow theory cause I didn’t say it, they did. From what ive seen, they usually follow what they say. As for me I’ll be all to glad if it didn’t happen. I take no pleasure in being mocked while making people realize who their real enemies are (one way or another people will ultimately find out anyway, time will tell even if the facts dont). Sadly (& I really mean that) I have been correct for quite a while. The time to decide whether national sovereignty & independence will prevail over global interest is now & not any time later.
O something out of the way, let me take this opportunity to correct an error i may have made elsewhere on this blog. I think it was my first ever post(i was ticked off back then, may have caused an error in the info as well). I did say the Federal Reserve was not Govt institution (and neither is it federal nor are there any reserves) but i may have also incorrectly stated that it is privately owned. The latter part is incorrect & is often the general misconception amongst those who do seem to have spotted the error.
Actually the Fed is neither govt owned nor private but a hybrid, with stock certificates owned by 12 banks. However control is still a private hands if you examine further details and the fact that the govt borrows its money & that the nation pays for this debt further reinforces this fact.
Dar, I have known about one worlders for about 20 years, but I try not to attach conspiracies to it, and i have never been for it. The vulcans have not landed, and it will be great for third world countries, but not for the U.S. To bring them up you have to bring the 1st world countries down.
All that said before people get all wrapped in my personal stake, I could care less personally, I purposely live a simple life, and will be living even simpler next year. Other than caring about the future of this country, I have no stake in this fight.
P.S. when I wrote this one I thought about you Dar. hehe
thought this update might be worth checking out
http://www.rense.com/general74/dollar.htm