A look behind America's immigration nightmare
By Steven Yates, MichNews.com, April 20, 2006
On April 7, the United States of America narrowly averted—or at least delayed—a disaster. Congress recessed without passing an immigration bill that would have provided a track to U.S. citizenship for well over 12 million illegal aliens. Whether Congress will cave in to the increasingly vocal illegal alien protest movement when they reconvene remains, as of this writing, to be seen. Among the factors holding back the Senate that day were hundreds of angry phone calls to Senators. For a change, middle America spoke loudly and clearly: we do not want amnesty-for-lawbreakers!...
Unfortunately, stopping bad immigration bills is only part of the battle. Possibly not even the largest part. The real question: what, precisely, are we going to do with between 12 and 25 million illegal aliens? What are we to do when they are being openly encouraged by their own government, via Mexican President Vicente Fox, and not exactly being discouraged by our political and corporate establishment?...
...Corporations have developed an addiction to cheap labor, after all, and so, indirectly (in the form of lower prices), so has the American public. Even if cheap-labor jobs for illegals were to dry up, for the same reasons as above we shouldn’t think the illegals would just pack up and go home....
There’s something else we’d better factor into the equation: given President Bush’s remarks calling for more federal powers to deal with emergencies (Katrina-style disasters or an alleged bird flu pandemic), this Administration seems to be looking for an excuse to declare martial law and be done with it. The days when the feds at least had to pay lip service to the Constitution would be over. I can’t think of anything more likely to bring martial law to America than riots by illegal aliens erupting in several cities at once.
We need to realize that the illegals are not here simply ‘to do jobs Americans won’t do’ but because powerful people want them here, and planned the present crisis. The last weekend in March, Bush met with Fox and new Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Cancun to discuss the progress of the year-old Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP is a set of initiatives involving the three national governments, numerous multinational corporations, and NGOs. The long-term goal, never stated openly, is the erasure of the borders between the three nations and the establishing of a supranational entity along the lines of the European Union—a North American Union, if you will. The SPP—like its predecessors NAFTA and CAFTA—offers a direct long-term threat to the sovereignty of this nation. It should be looked at in conjunction with Building a North American Community, published also approximately a year ago by the Council on Foreign Relations.
Among the consequences of erasing the borders would be the diminishing of representative government and genuine free enterprise, as decisions would be made by bureaucrats in “trade authorities” (this is already happening). Big business would have the money (also known as the power of the purse); big government would have the political clout (also known as the power of the sword). Those small businesspersons not selected for “partnering” would lose out, and end up seeking work in the low-paying services sector or in government. A borderless North America would be perfect for sending what is left of America’s middle class to the poorhouse, especially once the CAFTA nations are added to the mix. This is the nasty truth about “free trade” (equals managed trade) and the free migration of peoples as envisioned by the globalist power elite....
Fox... told a Madrid audience two years later, “our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union.”
Small wonder he is encouraging illegal immigration!
That members of the power elite would use the European Union as a model is not surprising, given their aim, which for decades has been to bring this country down!...Birthrates among native [European] populations are falling, while those of the unassimilated minorities are skyrocketing. It might be worth noting that the secular Enlightenment belief in the perfectibility of man took root there first, as did fractional reserve central banking / money lending, and socialism of every variety (Marxist, democratic, fascist / corporatist)....
We should not be deluded by all the harping about “free trade,” or see it as the “triumph of capitalism over socialism.” It’s useful to remember that the EU was originally sold to the individual nations of Europe as a “free trade zone.” I keep coming back to Europe, because the Europeans have always been ahead of us on the curve. Talk of “economic integration” was in the air among Europe’s intellectual class as far back as the 1950s. But if you knew what to read, you could learn the truth:
“[P]olitical considerations are more important than economic ones. Since the existence of Europe is at stake, integration is more of a political than an economic desideratum. Political integration can be facilitated by economic cooperation, but mere economic union is unthinkable.” Economic Integration: Theoretical Assumptions and Consequences of European Integration, by R.F. Sannwald & J. Stohler (Princeton University Press, 1959), p. 42.
On our side of the Atlantic:
“A global human conscience is for the first time beginning to manifest itself…. Today we are … witnessing the emergence of transnational elites … composed of international businessmen, scholars, professional men, and public officials. The ties of these new elites cut across national boundaries, their perspectives are not confined by national traditions, and their interests are more functional than national…. [I]t is likely that before long the social elites of most of the more advanced countries will be highly internationalist or globalist in spirit and outlook.” Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, by Zbigniew Brzezinski, (Viking, 1970), pp. 58-59.
“More directly linked to the impact of technology, [today’s liberal democracy] involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled and directed society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control.” Ibid., pp. 252-53.
“[T]he ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down…. [A]n end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” Richard T. Gardner, “The Hard Road to World Order,” Foreign Affairs (published by the Council on Foreign Relations), April 1974.
And, from a recent installment in Dennis Cuddy’s series, this astounding observation merits repeating: “One must act in Europe as if nations were to remain sovereign, in order to convince them to surrender their sovereignty…. The sovereignty lost at the national level does not pass to any new subject. It is entrusted to a faceless entity,…. And those who are in command can neither be pinned down nor elected…. That is the way Europe was made, too: by creating communitarian organisms without giving the organisms presided over by national governments theimpression that they were being subjected to a higher power…. I don’t think it’s a good idea to replace this slow and effective method—which keeps national States free from anxiety while they are being stripped of power—with great institutional leaps. Therefore I prefer to go slowly, to crumble pieces of sovereignty up little by little….” Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato (Vice President of the EU’s Constitutional Convention), to Barbara Spinelli in an interview for La Stampa (July 13, 2000).
Over a century ago, the socialist founders of the Fabian Society spoke quietly of “penetration and permeation.” They invented gradualism: “Make haste slowly.”... Fabian Freeway, by Rose L. Martin (Fidelis Publishers, 1968), p. 14....
All this might seem rather far afield. This is just to underscore the fact that our present immigration crisis is just part of a much larger process, long in the making. This process has specific goals, most of them probably unknown to the immigrants or their ringleaders. It is part of the campaign these authors describe openly, which aims at one world: the hegemony described above, directed by men (and a few women) motivated exclusively by economic gain and political power. A world with no meaningful national borders—and no exclusive rights for individuals, including private property rights. A world having abolished both free enterprise and government by consent of the governed. Illegal immigration thus can’t be battled singularly, independently of the larger effort to destroy this country and institute corporate-socialist global hegemony.
We The People will be helpless in responding effectively to the current crisis unless we make a concerted effort to identify who the enemies of America really are and understand how this crisis was brought about....
Read the complete article.
In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.