Welcome Ladies and Gentlemen,
It seems it is time to put aside the gun issue and start looking at the immigration situation here in the United States. I’m not sure if Obama just
has a lot to address during his second term and needs to move on from gun control (as he was forced to address it due to recent occurrences), he is
attempting to divert the attention of the 2nd Amendment to another “high profile” controversial topic, or maybe he is once again attempting to
revisit the North American Union agenda, but one thing is for sure he is off to a rapid start this term. One thing I have noticed is that there is a
lot of Presidential activity for 2 years and then mostly campaigning for the next term which is disgraceful in my opinion as the President should be
working hard for the nation throughout the entire term not campaigning, as their actions should be able to speak for themselves. With the burst out of
the gate maybe his is attempting to push for more possible Presidential terms, but that is a whole other discussion. I am just trying to put it all
together in order to make sense out of the rapid shifts in agendas.
As the topic of immigration will be upon us next week, I thought I would take a few minutes and help those who are unfamiliar with the current status
of this issue to understand the basics and give those that have opinions on the upcoming issue addressment a place to voice their opinion on where it
should go and or be handled as well as a place to discuss Obamas proposals due next week.
The North American Union
As the issue of the North American Union concerns more than just the United States (it concerns Canada, the United States, and Mexico directly and the
rest of the World Indirectly) I will begin with its description. The North American
(mostly known for the NAFTA Superhighway
and the unified currency the
is the merging of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. It is a scary concept for all three countries as it could eliminate the founding documents and
Governments of all three countries. What this means for the U.S. is an elimination of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as a new founding
document is formed, which actually goes without saying (sorry). This concept was first brought to the attention of the public when George H.W. Bush
signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP with Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas,
on March 23, 2005 without the knowledge of Congress. (See article Published: 06/13/2006
). The SPP deals
20 different working groups spanning a wide variety of issues ranging from e-commerce, to aviation policy, to borders and immigration,
involving the activity of multiple U.S. government agencies.
According to the article the reason it was kept from the public was
did not want to get the contact people of the working groups distracted by calls from the public,” Source>>
In “The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada,” Jerome
Corsi makes a conspiratorial case that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, the Council on Foreign Relations and me were secretly conspiring to create a North
American Union in the same way that Jean Monnet and others established the European Union – step-by-step. “Our national sovereignty is in
danger,” he warned.
I went looking for the original agreement in order to link it here but low and behold it has been systematically removed
from the internet. Even the cached are gone. Here
is a site which discusses the
removal and contains some quotes form the SPP website, which has also been removed as well as the websites for the Canadian and Mexican counterparts
(they obviously do not wish anyone to know what is really going on due to the massive rally of U.S. Patriots against it). You can find information on
the original by looking for it but because the Obama administration has decided to move forward on it you have to detail your search for Bush in order
to get relative results. Here
is a 2007 Canadian release in regards to the
President Obama/s administration rebranded the SPP. Reporting for World Net Daily
Jerome Corsi reported on 09/13/2009,
"President Obama is continuing President George W. Bush's effort to advance North American integration
with a public-relations makeover calculated to place the program under the radar of public opinion and to deflect concerns about border security and
The Obama administration has “rebranded” and “refocused” the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North
America, or SPP, to advance the Bush administration’s agenda of North American integration under the rubric of the “North American Leaders
Summit,” a less controversial banner, according to confidential sources in the U.S. Department of Commerce and State Department who agreed to speak
with WND only if their comments were kept off the record. Here is a
Congressional Research Service “Overview and Selected Issues” report from Jan. 22nd 2010.
With the fact that NAFTA
and the SPP
have been in the works since Clinton and that Obama/s administration is beginning to address immigration once again, I would be on the lookout for a
furthering of the North American Union agenda to be hidden within the pages.
Immigration: Current Policies and Statistics
In regards to immigration things have certainly changed since the days of Ellis Island
used to only take a few hours to gain admittance into the United States as an immigrant. In the 1920s Congress began to limit the number of immigrants
by country of origin. In the 1960s it again became more limited based on skill sets of workers. Today it is a much different story. Basically it goes
like this, If you are an American Citizen and you are bringing your spouse or children into the country obtaining a visa is almost immediate, but a
U.S. Citizen attempting to bring an adult Mexican born child into the country have as long as an 18 year wait for a visa to come available(19 for
Filipino). Basically, visas are reserved for the educated, the affluent or people who have spouses or parents in the USA and can entail a 20 year
wait. Under today's rules, most immigrants must be sponsored by a family member or by an employer and they must prove to the U.S. government that the
immigrant has skills that are in short supply (honestly with all the unemployment I personally think this would be pretty hard to do). The biggest
backlogs are for a handful of countries that have historically sent large numbers of people, mainly Mexico, India, South Korea, China and the
Having a limited number of allowable visas has hurt immigration to the U.S. in several ways, but it is mostly due to those that acquire visas legally
and out stay their time limit without becoming citizens. With the outlandish waiting periods for visas it is faster, simpler, and less expensive to
come into the country illegally. There have been discussions on raising the number of visas given but "America is already at an unsustainable level of
hyperlegal immigration," said William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee. "Anybody that's complaining
about us not letting enough people in legally is full of it."
are some articles regarding current
issues in the immigration agenda by USA Today.)
In recent years, lawmakers and immigration experts have proposed several changes to reduce the illegal population, including:
• Making more visas available for Latin America and nearby countries. The shortage of visas and the resulting 18- to 25-year wait prompt many
people to enter the USA illegally
• Reinstating Section
245(i), a provision in the immigration law that expired in 2001. It allowed spouses and children in the country illegally to stay while awaiting
an immigrant visa and after paying a fine.
• Passing the Dream Act, which would allow children brought to the USA illegally by their parents to achieve
permanent residency if they attend college or serve in the military.
In all, there were about 11.1 million illegal immigrants in the USA in 2009. That's one of every four foreign-born people in the country. The
arguments today, for the most part, has to deal with the unemployment of U.S. Citizens and jobs being given to non-citizens as well as the flood of
illegal immigrants jumping the borders. If you click on the USA Today link above you will see the controversial legislation that was passed and being
enforced in Arizona. Honestly, I think the controversy stems from 3 sides, Natural U.S. Citizens wanting jobs and a stable economy, the Natural and
Non-Natural Citizens wishing to bring their families into the country, and those that are looking for a better life (some would say at the expense of
the Natural Citizen) that are entering the Country both legally and illegally.
For further information on statistics I highly recommend visiting this link
Excerpts from the link:
Immigrants largely arrive through legal channels
• There were 39.9 million foreign-born people in the United States in 2010.
o 44 percent were naturalized citizens.
o 24 percent were legal permanent residents.
o 29 percent were unauthorized migrants.
o 3 percent were temporary legal residents (such as students or temporary workers).
edit on 26-1-2013 by Agarta because: Fixed Coding