- The Iraq War funding deal that the Democratic leadership
worked out with the White House has something for everyone--except the
American people who, for the most part, are tired of this interminable
war and want our troops to come home. In this sellout deal, the White House
gets even more money than they requested and, worse, the bill has been
split into two parts that provide cover for both sides of the political
spectrum. As John Nichols posted on The Nation Blog, "It's not a compromise,
it's a blank Check!
-
- The Democrat's own constituency on the Left is steaming
mad as the word gets out about this sellout. Here's an excerpt from John
Nichols' posting [my comments in brackets]: "The question is not whether
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid flinched
in their negotiations with the Bush administration over the continuation
of the Iraq occupation. They did. Despite some happy talk about benchmarks
[ benchmarks are unenforceable and merely provide a fig leaf of accountability]
that have been attached to the Iraq supplemental spending bill that is
expected to be considered by Congress this week, the willingness of Pelosi
and Reid to advance a measure that does not include a withdrawal timeline
allows Bush to conduct the war as he chooses for much if not all of the
remainder of his presidency.
-
- "This failure to abide by the will of the people
who elected Democrats to end the war will haunt Pelosi, Reid and their
party--not to mention the United States and the battered shell that is
Iraq. This 'compromise' legislation is such an embarrassing example of
what happens when raw politics overwhelms principle--and political common
sense--that House Democrats have divided the $12O billion measure into
two sections. That will allow Republicans and sold-out Democrats to vote
for the president's Iraq funding, while anti-war Democrats and their handful
of Republican allies can vote 'no.' Then both Democratic camps can vote
separately for the second section--including a federal minimum-wage increase
and more than $8 billion in funding for domestic programs--while Republicans
oppose this section.
-
- Presuming that both parts pass the House, they will then
be sent to the Senate as a single bill for members of that chamber to accept
or reject. The end result of this confusing set of legislative maneuvers
will be twofold: Lots of House members will be able to avoid accountability
for their votes [and go on record for "opposing" the bill while
letting it pass], while Bush will get his blank check. Even Pelosi says
she'll vote against the Iraq funding section of the House bill because
it lacks 'a goal or a timetable' for extracting U.S. troops from the conflict
[But she will refuse to hold the bill hostage and cut off even a portion
of funding]. But, no matter how she votes, Pelosi will have facilitated
a process that gives the president more war funding than he had initially
requested." Indeed. This should be proof enough that the Democrats
are not in real opposition to this globalist administration.
-
- As for the administration's part, recent verbage by the
Bush military staff indicates that the US is adopting a "Lily Pad"
model of military response in the Middle East which envisions a ring of
sealed-off permanent bases in Iraq that would provide launching pads for
"rapid response."
-
- As Thinkprogress.org reports, "In testimony before
the Senate Appropriations Committee this month, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman
Peter Pace uttered a 'carefully worded' statement revealing that the Pentagon
had no plans to fully withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq [even] if legislation
passes Congress mandating troop redeployment:
-
- PACE: "'Sir, we have published no orders directing
the planning for the overall withdrawal of forces. We do have ongoing replacements
of forces, and we do change the size of the force over time so that that
system is available to either plus-up or draw down, but we have published
no orders saying come up with a complete plan for total drawdown.'
-
- "NPR investigated Pace's statements and found one
scenario being considered within the Pentagon would maintain a strong U.S.
military presence in Iraq for several decades into the future. This so-called
'lily pad' strategy entails keeping a 'series of military installations
around Iraq,' with tens of thousands of U.S. troops remaining in the country
for as long as a few decades...with a total of maybe 30-40 thousand U.S.
troops in Iraq for a long period of time, lasting, maybe a few decades."
-
- "While 60 percent of Americans are calling for a
withdrawal of the U.S. from Iraq, the Pentagon is instead making preparations
for an unending occupying presence." Very telling, and confirms what
I have been saying in the briefs for years.
-
- In the meantime the quagmire continues in Iraq. The most
discouraging part for Iraqis and Americans who want this all to end, is
that there is no one accountable for the continual failure and carnage
of the occupation. As IPS wrote this week, "Killings, crime, lack
of medical care, collapse of education; the list goes on. But with the
occupation by U.S.-led forces now into a fifth year, and a supposedly democratic
government in place, no one knows who to hold accountable for all that
is going wrong." That's because the Iraqi government has no control
over the country nor control over its revenue, and the US government continues
to insist that "the Iraqis have to step up to the plate and solve
the problems" ---ranging from the insurgency to the lack of operating
infrastructure. Iraqis justifiably see no end to the deteriorating situation
and those who can continue to make plans to leave the country.
-
- PENTAGON RETALIATES AGAINST MEDIA WHO WON'T GO ALONG
-
- Editor and Publisher reports this week that "Bureau
Chief John Walcott and current and former McClatchy Pentagon correspondents
say they have not been allowed on the Defense Secretary's plane for at
least three years, claiming the news company is being retaliated against
for its reporting." As our readers will remember from the Bill Moyer's
expose on media complicity with the White House (on justifying the war
in Iraq), the Knight-Ridder/McClatchy news bureau was the only establishment
media source reporting that the intelligence was skewed.
-
- "'It is because our coverage of Iraq policy has
been quite critical,' Walcott told E&P. He added, 'I think the idea
of public officials barring coverage by people they've decided they don't
like is at best unprofessional, at worst undemocratic and petty.'"
In my view, it has everything to do with controlling the media. Those that
don't go along with the globalist agenda get not-so-subtle hints that,
if they persist, they will be denied access.
-
- US CONTINUES LONG HISTORY OF ARMING TERRORISTS
-
- The US has long been complicit with the PLO and its late
corrupt leader Yasser Arafat in providing terrorist groups under his umbrella
(Fatah, et al) with secret funding sources (via secret Swiss bank accounts
set up by Israeli agents in collusion with international money launderer
Marc Rich--who Clinton pardoned) and arms. It is still going on under the
guise of "combating terror" by arming one group supposedly to
counter another.
-
- As Worldnetdaily.com reported, "A Fatah convoy of
three trucks was stopped by Hamas at a makeshift checkpoint at Dabit Circle,
a northern Gaza town, according to Hamas sources. Hamas abducted 18 Fatah
gunmen and seized stockpiles of American weapons that were in the vans,
the sources said. The U.S. in recent months reportedly transferred large
quantities of weapons to Fatah, purportedly to back Abbas' military organizations
against Hamas.
-
- "The last confirmed U.S. weapons transfer to the
Palestinians took place last May and consisted of 3,000 assault rifles,
but WND reported multiple other transfers later were delivered to Fatah,
including a cache of 7,000 rifles last January and about 8,000 assault
rifles in February."
-
- A similar policy was well underway during the Clinton
administration. Under George Tenet's leadership at the CIA, the White House
made a secret deal with the PLO/Fatah faction in the Palestinian Authority
to training 60 PLO "policemen" at the CIA's "Farm"
in Virginia. They were trained in building sophisticated bombs and trigger
devices (which has nothing to do with policing). This technology went back
to Gaza and has contributed to the increased sophistication of remote controlled
car bombs. These are now being used extensively in Iraq as well.
-
- So, while the US continues to blame Iran for arming insurgents,
the main technology the insurgents use is "made in American."
The CIA's black operations branch launders these technologies through third
party terrorists so they can plausibly deny any involvement.
-
- Lastly, we should never forget that Saddam Hussein got
his biological and chemical warfare technology through US companies (connected
to the Bush family of investments). As in so many areas of conflict, the
US is found playing both sides of the fence--while the public is allowed
to see only the side of the equation that says, "Our government is
protecting our freedoms." In reality, our government is secretly fomenting
the smaller conflicts that justify larger wars. In doing so, the White
House is able to justify whittling away at our freedoms, being "necessary
to secure our liberties"--what few we have left.
-
- BUSH AUTHORIZES NEW COVERT ACTION AGAINST IRAN
-
- ABC news is supposedly in "hot water" for revealing
this new embarrassing piece of intelligence. One administration source
even referred to it as "treasonous." Really? This is more hyperbole
than reality. Keep in mind that establishment news sources like ABC get
all their leaks from official government sources. If this is treason, then
the government is the traitor. The administration has manipulative reasons
for making these leaks public.
-
- Brian Ross and Richard Esposito of ABC news report [my
comments in brackets], "The CIA has received secret presidential approval
to mount a covert 'black' operation to destabilize the Iranian government,
current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter
on ABCNews.com.
-
- "The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity
[naturally, though the government knows who they are since they tap all
reporters phones] because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President
Bush has signed a 'nonlethal presidential finding' that puts into motion
a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda,
disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial
transactions [nonlethal supposedly means that no lives will be put into
danger because of this covert action. This is to pacify Congressional intelligence
committees who must be made aware of these 'findings.' Of course, if the
purpose of the covert action is to provoke an eventual attack on Iran,
the process will end up very lethal!].
-
- "... The sources say the CIA developed the covert
plan over the last year and received approval from White House officials
and other officials in the intelligence community. 'There are some channels
where the United States government may want to do things without its hand
showing, and legally, therefore, the administration would, if it's doing
that, need an intelligence finding and would need to tell the Congress,'
said ABC News consultant Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism
official... Officials say the covert plan is designed to pressure Iran
to stop its nuclear enrichment program and end aid to insurgents in Iraq
[that's the cover story].
-
- "Current and former intelligence officials say the
approval of the covert action means the Bush administration, for the time
being, has decided not to pursue a military option against Iran. 'Vice
President Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike [That's
a bit of an understatement--he's running the show],' said former CIA official
Riedel, 'but I think they have come to the conclusion that a military strike
has more downsides than upsides.' [At least, for now. The administration
knows it clearly needs some more antagonism to justify going after Iran.
The public's patience for warmongering is almost gone, and some further
provocation is needed.]
-
- "... 'I think everybody in the region knows that
there is a proxy war already afoot with the United States supporting anti-Iranian
elements in the region as well as opposition groups within Iran,' [True,
and this weakens our case against Iran's supposed covert support for insurgencies
in Iraq] said Vali Nasr, adjunct senior fellow for Mideast studies at the
Council on Foreign Relations. 'And this covert action is now being escalated
by the new U.S. directive, and that can very quickly lead to Iranian retaliation
and a cycle of escalation can follow,' Nasr said." Ah....now there's
the essence of the provocation--induce some sort of retaliation by Iran
that will justify the US attack.
-
- US warships have entered the Gulf of Hormuz this week
on another "exercise." McClatchy Newspapers reports that, "As
the United States and Iran prepare to hold talks on stabilizing Iraq, tensions
between Tehran and Washington are ratcheting up again. [The talks are meant
to give the pretext of diplomacy for the US so it can defuse any future
charge, after striking Iran, that it failed to seek a diplomatic solution.]
-
- "The U.S. Navy on Wednesday began its largest war
games off the Iranian coast since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, with
two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers leading a flotilla of nine ships,
dozens of combat aircraft and more than 2,100 Marines. As the air and sea
exercises commenced, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency reported that Iran
is expanding its nuclear program [another convenient revelation for timing
sake] which U.S. officials charge is aimed at developing nuclear weapons.
in defiance of U.N. Security Council demands that it suspend uranium enrichment."
-
- "Another example of the back-and-forth: As U.S.
forces in Iraq continue to hold five Iranians it seized from a diplomatic
facility in Irbil in the Kurdish zone, Iran has detained three Iranian-Americans,
among them Haleh Esfandiari, a leading Middle East expert at the at the
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. [which
has provided a rallying cry for all Western academics, beating the drums
for US intervention]... These developments are part of a wider pattern
of tit-for-tat actions and reactions that some members of Congress, U.S.
officials and Arab governments worry could escalate into an armed confrontation."
As I said, that's the purpose of all these antagonizing gestures.
-
- "VOLUNTARY" KYOTO QUOTAS BY STATES
-
- As part of the massive Global Warming propaganda campaign,
environmentalists have leaned on various state governors to jump on the
global warming bandwagon in order to bolster their "green" credentials.
Naturally, this is intended to "embarrass" the federal government
into mandating actions which the states are doing "voluntarily."
It continues to amaze me how so many high elected officials spew the absolutely
false assurance that "no credible scientist doubts that man made factors
are causing global warming." In fact, there are hundreds of credible
scientists and meteorologists that have vehemently and publicly denounced
this falsified agenda.
-
- But, we've sunk to new lows since the US Senate rejected
the Kyoto Treaty by a vote of 95-0. One of my subscribers has duly taken
note of the role of state governors in this propaganda campaign: "What
is taking place now is that this is being implemented State by State. This
past Monday Governor John Huntsman of Utah signed [along side macho/mindless
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger] a rather harmless document that
called for voluntary action [supposedly California would buy power only
from coal fired power plants that have signed onto the "green"
initiative to reduce carbon dioxide output]. It was titled the Western
Region Climate Action initiative.
-
- "When you read this initiative and compare it to
Kyoto, it is basically the same. It will use a 'cap and trade' mechanism
for greenhouse gases, set goals, etc. And of course while it is voluntary
this is worse than legislation. If there was an attempt to do this through
a mandatory method it would require legislative action. Since it is voluntary
it requires no legislative action. Instead, we will very likely see State
Agencies implementing rules and policies that will meet the goals and methods
of this initiative, with no legislative oversight and almost no publicity.
People and press follow the Legislature - no one shows up for a Rule Review.
I am calling it Kyoto-Lite because it is voluntary... Thus far Washington,
Oregon, California, Arizona, New Mexico, British Columbia and now Utah
have signed on." His point about bypassing legislation, while having
the effect of law, is quite ominous and symptomatic of the new sophistication
in tactics.
-
- ROMNEY AND HIS BLACKWATER ADVISOR
-
- As Presidential candidate Mitt Romney continues to climb
in popularity, his penchant for relying on establishment insider advisors
is telling about how he is allowing himself to be controlled--for purposes
of impressing the establishment. This week Romney hired Blackwater executive
Cofer Black as a senior campaign advisor to advise him on national security
issues. Romney is carving out for himself the mantel of continuing the
Bush "war on terror," while distancing himself from what he calls
"errors of implementation."
-
- Romney himself is heading for more trouble after calling
for a "doubling of the US prison camp at Guantanamo" during the
second GOP debate. If he wants to go in that foolish direction, Cofer Black
is the one to take him there. Background: Black has been a vice president
at Blackwater for the past two years and was a former director of the CIA
Counter-terrorism unit before and after 9/11. The Blackwater leadership
team is full of Bush administration insiders. Cofer Black has indepth knowledge
of US falsifying the hunt for Osama bin Laden and building up a phony "war
on terror."
-
- Jeremy Scahill, has recently authored a critical look
at blackwater. His book (a New York Times bestseller) is called "Blackwater:
The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army." His book has
been so effective at bringing negative light on the growing mercenary movement
that Erik Prince, Blackwater's CEO, wrote an article to the Grand Rapids
Press defending his organization and denying that it is a mercenary group.
He claims Blackwater is "a team of highly motivated and capable security
professionals serve at the request of the United States government. Furthermore,
Blackwater professionals do not engage in offensive missions. You would
be correct in calling them a team of bodyguards, but very wrong in using
a description of them as a 'private army."
-
- Yes, that's the official version, but Prince is being
disingenuous in his protestations. Blackwater has, in fact, already floated
a proposal to the government to let it do contract offensive operations
in Africa and elsewhere in order to eliminate warring factions that threaten
UN "peacekeepers." Clearly there is the intent to broaden Blackwater's
role into offensive operations--if they aren't already doing so covertly.
-
- Scahill easily debunks Prince's claim that Blackwater
is not a mercenary organization: "there's all sorts of definitions
that one can apply to the term 'mercenary,' but he says it's a professional
soldier serving a foreign power. Now, according to Prince's Op-Ed, it would
seem as though Blackwater is just this team of patriotic Americans serving
their country. But the fact of the matter is that Blackwater has recruited,
hired and deployed mercenaries from countries like Colombia, Chile, Bulgaria,
Poland, Fiji -- the list goes on and on."
-
- Blackwater, like other mercenary surrogates of our gloablist
government, exhibits the tell-tale signs of judicial immunity from wrongdoing.
As DemocracyNow reports, "A landmark lawsuit brought by the families
of four employees of the security firm Blackwater USA killed in Iraq three
years ago has been partially derailed. This week, a federal judge ordered
the lawsuit to be decided behind closed doors in arbitration -- allowing
Blackwater to avoid public examination of its practices in Iraq. One of
the three arbitrators could be William Webster, who served as head of the
FBI and CIA under President Reagan and has personal and business ties to
several Blackwater lawyers."
-
- Blackwater lawyers have argued their cases with an interesting
combination of dubious tactics. When they need to avoid Congressional scrutiny
about their finances or crimes in Iraq they always claim to be a "private
organization." When taken to court in a civil suit, they claim immunity
as an "arm of the US military." They want it both ways. Only
one thing is for sure: these types of black operation companies have no
principles. You don't get into the exclusive mercenary club unless you
demonstrate a willingness to do everything the government tells you to,
legal or not.
-
- This is the primary reason the public needs to fear them:
It won't be American troops used to arrest American dissenters who defy
our government taking us into a New World Order. It will be American mercenaries
like Blackwater, Dyncorp and MPRI that fill the growing lists of concentration
camps being built. There are dozens of smaller mercenary groups as well.
When one large group gets discredited, as did Dyncorp over its sex slaves
in Bosnia, another is allowed to rise up and take its place.
-
- BUSH RE-AUTHORIZES MARTIAL LAW
-
- The only thing new about this story is that a supposedly
conservative Christian president just reauthorized the set of Presidential
Executive Orders and laws that give the president total dictatorial power
merely by declaring a national emergency. Sadly, there are no limits to
the reasons a president can use to put us under his "emergency authority.
As Paul Joseph Watson of Prisonplanet.com writes, "Americans have
officially been living under a dictatorship since at least 1933.
-
- "New legislation signed on May 9, 2007, declares
that in the event of a 'catastrophic event', the President can take total
control over the government and the country, bypassing all other levels
of government at the state, federal, local, territorial and tribal levels,
and thus ensuring total unprecedented dictatorial power.
-
- "The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential
Directive, which also places the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge
of domestic 'security', was signed earlier this month without the approval
or
- oversight of Congress and seemingly supercedes the National
Emergency Act which allows the president to declare a national emergency
but also [supposedly] requires that Congress have the authority to 'modify,
rescind, or render dormant' such emergency authority if it believes the
president has acted inappropriately."
-
- However Jerome Corsi, "who has studied the directive
also states that it makes no reference to Congress and 'its language appears
to negate any requirement that the president submit to Congress a determination
that a national emergency exists." While this signing is called a
reauthorization, there are changes that are being made to the law, and
they have not been debated in Congress, nor addressed by public hearings.
-
- AMERICANS DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REAL THREATS
-
- A new poll has emerged that indicates how much the American
public's perception of threats are managed by the media and its penchant
for mouthing government assertions.
-
- Donald Kirk reports that, "These results stand out
in a poll conducted by the American Security Project in which 27% of the
2,000 respondents named Iran as posing 'the greatest threat to American
national security'. That percentage was more than double the 13% who believe
Iraq poses the worst threat, the 12% who put North Korea in that category,
or the 10% who named China. No other country came close - just 2% of Americans
see Russia or Afghanistan as the greatest threat, while 1% named Israel
or Mexico as the most feared.'
-
- The most ominous of the medium-term threats are Russia
first, with China second, mainly because Russia has so much advanced weaponry
and China is in the middle of the building and development process. All
the rest of the smaller terrorist states are mere surrogates and puppets
of these two predator nations. In the long-term, China will become the
big threat, as Russia wears itself out in the next world war against the
West.
-
- REAL REASON FOR NOT RENEWING THE START TREATY
-
- Reuters wrote that "The United States plans to let
a landmark nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia expire in 2009 and
replace it with a less formal agreement that eliminates strict verification
requirements and weapons limits, a senior U.S. official says." This
comes on the heals of a steady stream of Russian announcements that it
is backing out of compliance issues in the treaty. Instead of blowing the
whistle on Russian duplicity, we replace the treaty with "informal
agreements" that remove any requirements for strict verification of
continued Russian cheating. I have continually warned about this pattern
of US duplicity in covering up for Russian offensive war preparations.
The globalists are covering for Russia's military resurgence that is essential
to Russia's ability to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on America in
the coming years (after China is ready to take on its attack role in the
Far East)
-
- MORE AGENT PROVOCATEURS FOUND IN LATEST TERROR THREAT
-
- Give it time, and government agent-provocateurs are found
in EVERY government prosecution of high-profile terrorist threats. As Counterpunch
Magazine reported, "To listen to government officials and the mainstream
media, the six New Jersey men arrested for allegedly plotting an attack
on the Fort Dix military base were well organized and nearly 'ready to
strike.' But like all of the government's claimed victories in 'fighting
terrorism,' there are disturbing holes in the story that should raise questions
about scapegoating and scaremongering.
-
- "The U.S. attorney's office in New Jersey announced
May 8 that five men--Jordanian-born U.S. citizen Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer;
Turkish-born legal U.S. resident Serdar Tatar; and brothers Dritan, Eljvir
and Shain Duka, ethnic Albanians from the former Yugoslavia who were reportedly
in the U.S. illegally--had been charged with 'plotting to kill as many
soldiers as possible in an armed assault at the Fort Dix Army base.'
-
- "The FBI says it learned of the supposed plot when
the men went to a Circuit City store and asked a clerk to transfer a jihad
training video of themselves onto a DVD [amateur terrorists led by the
FBI or CIA always are instructed to do the stupidest things in order to
get caught]. They were arrested after allegedly attempting to purchase
weapons from an undercover FBI agent.
-
- "But the extent of their supposed military-style
'training' appears to be trips to a firing range in the Poconos and playing
paintball in the woods. According to the Washington Post, the indictment
against the men 'indicates that the group had no rigorous military training
and did not appear close to being able to pull off an attack.'
- "The media's reports [This is typical--they always
have "links" to al Qaeda or jihadist"] on the arrests immediately
deemed the six as 'Muslim fanatics' and 'Jersey jihadists.' But some of
the men were known to be not particularly religious. In fact, according
to the New York Times, investigators have quietly admitted that 'there
is little indication that they were devout--or even practicing--Muslims.'
-
- "Perhaps most troubling [and key part of this report],
however, is the FBI's use of two paid 'informants' in the case. One of
the informants, according to the Times, 'railed against the United States,
helped scout out military installations for attack, offered to introduce
his comrades to an arms dealer and gave them a list of weapons he could
procure, including machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades.' That begs
the question: how far would the supposed 'plot' have gone had the FBI not
been there to push it forward?" If we knew the full story, we would
see that, as in all the British terrorist plots, it was the government
informants that were trolling the internet for disaffected Muslims who
could be lured into the plot. It is the government that goads them into
these acts.
-
- IMMIGRATION AMNESTY BILL FAST TRACK DELAYED
-
- The White House has cut a secret deal with the pro-amnesty
forces of both parties in the Senate and were prepared to ram it through
the Senate before the Memorial Day recess. But public outcry and opposition
in the more conservative House has been so strong that the "reform
coalition" decided to take more time. The AP reported that "Senate
leaders agreed Monday that they would wait until June to take final action
on a bipartisan plan to give millions of unlawful immigrants legal status."
-
- "Since agreement on the major provisions of the
bill was announced late last week, a firestorm of opposition has ignited
across the country. Senators and representatives are reporting heavy volumes
of phone calls and emails expressing outrage with the legislation they
believe represents the largest 'amnesty' program ever contemplated by the
federal government. [Naturally] President Bush yesterday attempted to tackle
the concerns of those opposing the bill -- denying again he would ever
support an "amnesty" bill." Sure.
-
- In typically deceptive fashion the measure makes promises
to tighten border security and workplace enforcement (which are only adone
or enforced in token amounts) in exchange for a wholesale amnesty wherein
the total population of illegals is immediately granted "probationary
legal status." One of the Orwellian aspects of the workplace enforcement
provision is that employees, including all citizens, will have to start
presenting original birth documents to their employers in order to keep
their jobs. Again, through one crisis after another we get closer to the
totalitarian practice of forcing everyone to carry certified identity papers.
-
- I won't comment extensively on the bill this week as
there are going to be a lot of changes and amendments proposed, but what
it looks like we are going to get, is some form of amnesty with little
enforcement. One of the new roadblocks to the deal is a Democratic proposal
to cut in half the temporary workers visas, which the administration opposes.
The importation of 400,000 skilled foreign workers each year does impact
US employment, and some Democrats want this stopped.
-
- We are also seeing some very disturbing fine print come
out of this White House bill. There are sneaky little additions of language
that will facilitate the hated North American Union that the Bush administration
is trying to foist on the public, without public hearings. The Bush administration
is hoping this language will get lost in the heat of the immigration debate.
-
- WorldNetDaily.com reports that "The controversial
'Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007,'
[Don't you hate the euphemistic titles they put on these bills?] which
would grant millions of illegal aliens the right to stay in the U.S. under
certain conditions, contains provisions for the acceleration of the Security
and Prosperity Partnership, a plan for North American economic and defense
integration, WND has learned.
-
- The bill, as worked out by Senate and White House negotiators,
cites the SPP agreement signed by President Bush and his counterparts in
Mexico and Canada March 23, 2005 -- an agreement that has been criticized
as a blueprint for building a European Union-style merger of the three
countries of North America. 'It is the sense of Congress that the United
States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership
for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard
of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration,'" There
you have it--pushing integration as a remedy for "reduced immigration."
That's like saying, were going to open all our borders as they do between
European states and the illegal immigration problem will go away. Well
the immigration won't stop, only the enforcement--because unlimited entrance
would be legal.
-
-
- World Affairs Brief, May 25, 2007. Commentary and Insights
on a Troubled World.
-
- Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution
permitted.
-
- Cite source as Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief <http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com>
http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com
|
