IS THIS AMERICA?
By Mary Ann Collins
August 9, 2007
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/007/america.htm
[SNIP]
BUREAUCRATS GIVING AWAY PARTS OF AMERICA
Bureaucrats in the State Department are in the processing of
giving eight Alaskan islands to Russia. This includes hundreds
of thousands of square miles of sea beds that are rich in oil,
gas, minerals, and fisheries, worth billions of dollars. In
addition, because of their location, these islands are of
strategic military importance.1
Since when do bureaucrats have the power to give away American
territory, especially when it compromises our national security?
We aren't talking about the President, and Congress, with advice
from the military. We are talking about State Department
bureaucrats.
These negotiations have been kept secret from the American
public. Congress has been bypassed. The will of the people has
been ignored.
An organization called State Department Watch has tried to make
people aware of it. However, the Attorney General of Alaska
issued a "Cease and Desist" Order that prohibits them from
telling people about it.2
So whatever happened to the Constitutional guarantee of free
speech?
This is precisely the kind of situation where free speech is
most needed. A bunch of bureaucrats are giving part of America
to Russia, along with much needed oil reserves. And they are
gagging concerned citizens who want the American public to know
what is going on.
The Alaska legislature asked the Governor and Attorney General
of Alaska to fight the giveaway. The vote was nearly unanimous
in both houses of the State Legislature. However, the Governor
and Attorney General refused to do anything about it.3 Is this
America?
GIVING OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY TO A "NORTH AMERICAN COMMUNITY"
In 2001, the Institute for International Economics published
Robert A. Pastor's book "Toward a North American Community:
Lessons from the Old World for the New." Taking the European
Union as a model, it discusses ways of creating a union between
the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Some people refer to this
as being a North American Union, similar to the European Union.
Basically, this means giving up America's national sovereignty.
The starting point is the NAFTA trade agreement. It is notable
that the starting point of the European Union was also a trade
agreement.
In 1957, six countries signed the Treaty of Rome, to pool their
steel and coal resources. That began a series of events that
resulted in today's European Union. In May 2007, the European
Union celebrated its 50th anniversary. First it was called the
European Economic Community.
Then it was called the European Community. Now it is called the
European Union. Such things are accomplished one stage at a
time.4
By pages 114-115 of the book, Pastor's vision of economic
integration has expanded. It develops to the point that he
discusses the possibility of developing a common currency, the "Amero"
(similar to the Euro of the European Union).
Chapter 7 is titled, "Is a North American Community Feasible?
Can Sovereignty Be Transcended?" Please stop for a moment and
look at those words slowly and carefully.
Pastor is talking about whether or not it is feasible to develop
a "community" that takes priority over our national sovereignty.
He takes it for granted that it would be good to do this. His
only question is whether or not it is feasible, at this time, to
make it work in practical terms.
On pages 152-154, Pastor discusses "alternative approaches to
sovereignty." He talks about the possibility of developing a
"political entity that could transcend traditional conceptions
of sovereignty."
To "transcend" national sovereignty means to abolish it, for all
practical purposes. You might retain some of the trappings and
some of the vocabulary, but in essence, there would be no more
real national sovereignty.
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) strongly approves of
Pastor's approach. The CFR was founded in 1921 in order to build
a "network of globalist support groups."5 (Globalism is an
approach to politics that sees individual countries as being
"states" in a global government. One approach would be to have
something comparable to the United Nations govern the world.
Another approach would be to have every nation become part of
something comparable to the European Union.)
The CFR is highly influential because its membership includes
high- ranking politicians. Among them are Senators and
Congressmen, some of whom are running for President in 2008. In
addition, there are high- ranking politicians who have
connections with the CFR (and are thereby influenced by it),
even though they are not members of it.
In 2005, the Council on Foreign Relations (along with its
Canadian and Mexican counterparts) produced a Task Force Report
which was published as a book with the title "Building a North
American Community." The Task Force has three "co-chairs" (one
from each country) and three "vice chairs" (one from each
country). Robert A. Pastor is the American Vice Chair of the
Task Force. (You can get the book at Amazon.com. Just search for
the title.)
According to the Foreword, the CFR Task Force offers detailed
proposals that are based on the "Texas summit of March 2005."
This was a meeting that President Bush held at his ranch with
President Vicente Fox of Mexico and Prime Minister Paul Martin
of Canada. After that meeting, the three heads of state issued a
press release announcing that they had made an agreement to form
the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
The Foreword also says that the "central recommendation" of the
report is the establishment of a "North American economic and
security community" by the year 2010. The boundaries of this
community would "be defined by a common external tariff and an
outer security perimeter." In other words, going from Mexico to
Canada via the United States would be similar to going from
Virginia to Maryland, via Washington D.C. The identity would be
trinational, rather than national. We would lose our national
sovereignty.
On page 8, the report recommends the establishment of "a common
security perimeter by 2010." This would effectively remove any
security perimeters between the three countries. So our security
would be at the mercy of Mexico and Canada. This would not be
good, because a lot of terrorists are already getting into
America across the Mexican border. (See Congressman Tom
Tancredo's book "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's
Border and Security.")
On page 10, the report recommends that by the year 2010, the
groundwork should be laid for enabling a "freer flow of people
within North America" (i.e., from Mexico to Canada). On page 25,
it recommends "open skies and open roads." Judging by its
failure to secure the Mexican border, the Bush administration
appears to agree with these recommendations.
Phylis Schlafly's article "Pursuing the ‘North American' Agenda"
gives a good overview of the situation.6 The Eagle Forum has a
web page with links to numerous articles on the subject.7
We can expect the recommendations of the Council on Foreign
Relations (CFR) to be taken seriously, because many of the
Democrats and Republicans who are running for President in 2008
are either members of the Council on Foreign Relations, or else
have ties with it. In addition, others are globalists, and the
CFR is a globalist organization. (The following information
comes from the "US Presidential Candidate Fact Sheet" of Hope
for the World, Summer, 2007. The research was done by Gary Kah
and Carl Teichrib.)
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES -- Joe Biden is President Emeritus of the
Council on Foreign Relations. Hillary Clinton was a guest
speaker at the CFR. In addition, her husband founded the Clinton
Global Initiative. Both Clintons are strongly globalist.
Christopher Dodd is a member of the CFR. John Edwards is a
member of the CFR. Al Gore has been a speaker at the CFR and
appears to be generally supportive of the organization. There is
no definitive CFR membership information, but many secondary
sources present him as being a member. Mike Gravel doesn't
appear to be a CFR member, but he is strongly globalist.
Dennis Kucinich is not a member of the CFR, but he is strongly
globalist. Barack Obama's wife Michelle is the director of the
Chicago Council on Global Affairs. (This is the Chicago branch
of the CFR, but under a different name.) Barack Obama has spoken
at the CFR in Washington, DC and at the Chicago Council on
Global Affairs. Bill Richardson is a member of the CFR.
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES -- Sam Brownback doesn't have any
connections with the CFR. Neither does Jim Gilmore. Newt
Gingrich is a member of the CFR. He is also a 33rd degree Mason.
Rudi Giuliani has given presentations to the CFR. The law firm
that he works with (Bracewell & Giuliani) is directly involved
with the NAFTA superhighway program.
Mike Huckabee doesn't have any substantial connections with the
CFR or other globalist organizations. Duncan Hunter has
consistently voted against globalist free trade programs. John
McCain is a member of the CFR. Ron Paul is the founder of the
Liberty Committee. He has consistently opposed globalism. Mitt
Romney isn't connected with the CFR. Tom Tancredo isn't
connected with the CFR. He has taken a strong stand on securing
our borders. Fred Thompson is a member of the CFR. According to
the US Presidential Candidate Fact Sheet, he may not be as
conservative as he appears. Tommy Thompson isn't connected with
the CFR.
MOB RULE
FULL REPORT:
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/007/america.htm