This is why we do not get any meaningful immigration reform:
The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: Next Steps
The three leaders of North America agreed to advance the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) by focusing on five high priority initiatives:
1. The North American Competitiveness Council.
2. Advancing Cooperation on Avian and Pandemic Influenza.
3. North American Energy Security Initiative.
4. North American Emergency Management.
5. Smart, Secure Borders. Leaders agreed to complete the following activities, to contribute to smart and secure borders, over the next twenty-four months:
Collaborate to establish risk-based screening standards for goods and people that rely on technology, information sharing and biometrics. Develop and implement compatible electronic processes for supply chain security that use advanced electronic cargo information to analyze risk and ensure quick and efficient processing at the border; Develop standards and options for secure documents to facilitate cross-border travel; Exchange additional law enforcement liaison officers to assist in criminal and security investigations; Develop coordinated business resumption plans at border crossings to ensure legitimate trade continues. To address border violence, United States and Mexico signed an Action Plan to Combat Border Violence and Improve Public Safety. Officials of the two countries in Nogales, AZ- Nogales, Sonora and Laredo, TX- Nuevo Laredo completed protocols on border security and public safety.
Obviously, it would be very insulting to Mexico to discuss anything so crass as a fence or a wall or even a problem with the border. President Bush agreed to all this and there isn't a word here about immigration or control of borders. Congress huffs and puffs about immigration reform but the real work is being done behind the scenes by an "elite" of NGO's, academics and businessmen, or as Tiger labeled them, A Shadow Government. Unfortunately, their goals and vision seem to be in conflict with the rest of America's. Your country is being replaced with the North American Union. The pieces of the puzzle are begining to fall into place. It's time to wake up America.
ht: Tiger at Observanda
The New World Order advances each day.ReplyDelete
It is not even commented upon, much like three continuing days of Mohammedan riots in Brussels.
"... It looks as if immigrants youths want to turn nightly rioting during the Islamic holy month of ramadan into an annual tradition. Around 8:30pm last night violence erupted again in Brussels, the capital of Europe. The riots centered on the Brussels Marollen quarter and the area near the Midi Train Station, where the international trains from London and Paris arrive. Youths threw stones at passing people and cars, windows of parked cars were smashed, bus shelters were demolished, cars were set ablaze, a youth club was arsoned and a shop was looted. Two molotov cocktails were thrown into St.Peter’s hospital, one of the main hospitals of central Brussels. The fire brigade was able to extinguish the fires at the hospital, but youths managed to steal the keys of the fire engine. ..."
Three Nights of Mohammedan riots
World seems more and more like a plot from Deus ExReplyDelete
I guess I was mistaken to think that 9/11 destroyed the assumptions made by these transnational types. Guess it just attests to how wacky the Muslims are if they draw any ire of the NWO or w/e you call it.
As in the US, the average European is fed up with illegal immigration the article refers to it with this juicy part DR:ReplyDelete
.."The authorities are especially nervous since the Belgian municipal elections are being held on Sunday October 8th. It is likely that the elections will be won by anti-immigrant, “islamophobic” parties. Since ramadan will not be over on October 8th and many immigrants might perceive a victory of the indigenous right (as opposed to their own far-right) as an insult, Muslim indignation over the election results in major cities may spark serious disturbances.
According to a poll published today the Vlaams Belang party is set to win 38.6% of the vote in Antwerp (compared to 33,0% in the previous municipal elections six years ago).
Imagine that; the ones who see the threat and call it what it is, have a "phobia". Those that do not see it are surely at a minimum"enlightened".ReplyDelete
Power Line has a piece about Tony Blankley’s recent essay on the surrender of Pakistan to Waziristan.ReplyDelete
Blankley concludes, “We must come to terms with reality -- and soon. We are going to have to substantially increase the size of our army and Marines to face the growing threats to our national security.”
Add to this U.S. general warns ,and time is wasting.
“Leadership, persistence, manipulation, sheer force of will -- these are the missing elements.”
Can I play devil's advocate here?ReplyDelete
You could of course build a wall along all your borders or along just the trouble spots, but a wall is not an end-state. It simply ups the ante and changes the game to the benefit of the defender, so to speak. This idea is evident in Israel's Gaza strip barrier, which became as much of a focal point of terrorist strategies as it was a barrier.
A wall is just another tool, a classic one, and it must be managed appropriately, just as any other resource deployed in the name of security. The wall would conceivably be selectively permeable and would admit certain things. It would allow Barnett's good "flows" to traffic in with minimal obstruction, while weeding out the bad ones.
Something like a "flow" refers to a phenomenon different from just any illegal or group of illegals crisscrossing the desert. I think its a conceptual attempt to bundle together everything that makes, for instance, illegal immigration possible, from inexpensively subverted enforcement regimes to welcoming and profitable incentives on the otherside, be they welfare, Democrats or shady employers.
While I suppose you could have police or border patrol raiding every actor involved in these bad flows, it may be equally helpful to establish a regulatory process that more elegantly conforms to patterns of good and bad flows in the area. If you slap a wall down, you obstruct the good flows as much as the bad.
A well-regulated wall can attempt to weed-out & welcome, and a multilateral framework seems the most sensible way to do this, right? The framework proposed here seems to seek balance. Weren't the same notions of doom said about NAFTA?
Is Fukuyama wrong and the End of History is also the End of Democracies: They were unable to reasonably conceive of policy and became embroiled in cultural absurdity.ReplyDelete
To preserve any sort of stability, nation states had to create new halls of authority above the fray of agitating rabble, lest the security of entire economies be held captive by moribund post-national fashion and fancy, by a population proudly devoid of identity and ignorant of imperatives?
Good catch on Chiarelli. His words should carry weight with Rumsfeld and Bush. Look for Maliki to get a visit soon or pay another visit to Washington. It's long past time for the Iraqis to get tough with the militias. I noticed the other day that al-Sadr now says "do not attack the occupying infidels." The Iraqis must show the necessary resolve or we say "adios."
Neoconservatives can conceive of democracy as a means of creating local power, or recreating national power upon a better foundation. The benefit of doing so is often measured in security, and the projects in Afghanistan and Iraq attest to the faith these advocates have in these methods of sustainably securing locations.ReplyDelete
Is this proposed framework not an effort to achieve sustainable security in a region no more likely spared the passionate turmoils of Huntington's world than London or France?
Find the post on Newt Gingrich or just google him and read his plan. Of course, the wall is not the end of the matter, it simply facilitates an orderly work program.ReplyDelete
Isn't the Long War predicated on the cultural nature of recent conflict, and how culture will not so quickly be proven unreasonable, as the ideologies before that were mere blocks of procedures were proven folly before?ReplyDelete
How does one even change culture? Is there a rational design for doing so?
In absence of a means of changing culture, might it not be best to sit back, pick off the outliers and the ascendants and let the soup burble its way to 2200?
"While I suppose you could have police or border patrol raiding every actor involved in these bad flows, it may be equally helpful to establish a regulatory process that more elegantly conforms to patterns of good and bad flows in the area. If you slap a wall down, you obstruct the good flows as much as the bad."ReplyDelete
The problem, Bloody, is that very few of the people who want a wall would trust the government, with all of its special interests and ties to business, to actually enforce any "smart" policy. If it already enforced our laws as they stood, we wouldn't have nearly this big a problem, if a problem.
The wall is something that the grass roots demanded because it cannot be subverted by loopholes and a lack of enforcement, or rather, any lack of enforcement is clearly visible by the holes IN the wall. It isn't perfect, but it is something that is out of the government's hands once it is up - and is fairly easy to keep tabs on.
It is pathetic we've gotten to the point where we have to work around a government that cannot be trusted, but that's how it is seen by many. A way over their heads and generally out of their hands.
At least that's how I see it. I don't expect it to work, but what I think would work, I don't trust the government to enforce. The proof is in the last 20 years.ReplyDelete
Well, I shoul say:ReplyDelete
"At least that's how I see it. I don't expect it to work fantastically, but what I think would work better, I don't trust the government to enforce. The proof is in the last 20 years.