Saturday, September 29, 2007

Open Borders - America is Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Revelation 6:6, 14:8, 18:3,11

..And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.
..And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city.
..For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
..And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:

"The economy is a tool to serve us. It is not a demi-god to be served by society."
-Sir James Goldsmith

Doesn't Nancy Pelosi look like a deer in the headlights? I've never seen a more stupid looking politician - with the exception of George Bush. This is a perfect example of how the American voter is in between a rock and a hard place these days. We've got the Republicans driving us into a ditch of economic ruin with an open border policy that just won't die. A factory export program that is second to none and a illegal labor import program to bring in cheap workers for the few industries we have left. Under the banner of Free Trade the Republicans are digging an economic ditch for America. The Democrats only solution appears to be to dig the ditch deeper. Not much of a choice there. America is truly between a rock and a hard place - and I'm not talking about the rock of Christ.

We need some fresh blood in Washington. No more Bushes, no more Clintons, and please, no more nitwits like Reid and Pelosi. Duncan Hunter is the only candidate I really like - and Tancredo - and they have been marginalized by the media. They know how to build a fence. Electing more Democrats to solve this problem is like opting to drive America's economy into a brick wall at 50 mph instead of the current 40 mph. That is the choice. Tax and spend Democrats or Tax-less and Spend-more Republicans. That is what I call being stuck in between a rock and a hard place without a good choice. Bush or Clinton? When it comes to open borders there is no difference.

Deficit spending is ruining America. Deficit spending is bankrupting America. Deficit spending is turning us into a slave nation of indentured servants by having us serve the private banks that are run by the Federal Reserve. There is nothing Federal about the FED. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the hen house. They are living high on the hog from the accumulated interest earned from America's debt. The deficit for the Federal budget is alone over 9 trillion dollars. 400 billion dollars a year is what the American taxpayer has to pay - just for the interest to that debt. Our entire national debt is over 48 trillion dollars and soaring. No - that is not a typo. Think about it. But Pelosi and Bush don't want to build a fence to protect our economy. They want to give away our economic strength and advantages to the Mexicans. Why? Compassionate conservatism? Liberal white guilt? Socialist ideals of income redistribution is more like it. It is easy for the elite to come up with plans like this. It doesn't affect their incomes. It is not coming out of their pockets. They are the ones reaping the big profits from exploiting third world countries in the name of Free Trade - the new economic world order. So the filthy rich get filthier and the poor get poorer.

This is according to Kenneth F. Scheve a Professor of Political Science at Yale University and Matthew J. Slaughter a Professor of Economics at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth who also served on the White House Council of Economic Advisers from 2005 to 2007.
Globalization has brought huge overall benefits, but earnings for most U.S. workers -- even those with college degrees -- have been falling recently; inequality is greater now than at any other time in the last 70 years. Whatever the cause, the result has been a surge in protectionism. To save globalization, policymakers must spread its gains more widely. The best way to do that is by redistributing income.
Unfortunately they recognize the economic problems due to globalization but fail to realize it is caused by the very trade policies they promote. Instead of fixing the real problem they opt for the typical socialist band-aid solution of income redistribution through even more manipulation of the tax code. Please - enough already with the taxes!

Here former Mexican President Vicente the Fox, shares his vision of a North American Union with us.
"I'm talking about a community of North America, an integrated agreement of Canada, the United States, and Mexico in the long term, 20, 30, 40 years from now. And this means that some of the steps we can take is, for instance, to agree that in five years we will make this convergence on economic variables. That may mean 10 years we can open up that border when we have reduced the gap in salaries and income."
- Former Mexican President Vicente Fox (August, 2000)
I hear you Vicente, loud and clear. "Soon the whole world will hear you". Reduce the gap in salaries and income. Open up that border. The intentional strategy to transfer wealth from the haves in America to the have nots south of the border by free trade and immigration policy. Economic variables? Isn't that the same line that the three Amigos used after the last SPP meeting on jelly beans in Quebec last August? It just goes to show that even though Mexico and Canada have different leaders now, it is the same open border agenda. Liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, Bush or Clinton, Fox or Calderon. It is the same old song and dance of the NAU. The new theme song of the New World Order.
"...We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a New World Order -- can emerge"...
-GHW Bush (September 11, 1990)
European multi-millionaire Sir James Goldsmith testified before the Senate Commerce Committee in 1994 on G.A.T.T. (General Agreements on Tariffs & Trade), which codifies trade agreements between countries under the auspices of the WTO or the UN. He described in detail how free trade agreements and globalization policies are simply a means to transfer wealth from America and industrialized countries to under developed third world nations. A redistribution of wealth on a global scale. A serious mistake. It becomes clear why they are pushing so hard for immigration reform. It is part of the plan to transfer our wealth to Mexico and South America.
"With the GATT, America will go from a trot — under the NAFTA — to a headlong gallop into total economic and social destruction."
"It must surely be a mistake to adopt an economic policy which makes you rich if you eliminate your national workforce and transfer production abroad, and which bankrupts you if you continue to employ your own people."
"Think again… one thing I pray you do. This is the single most important economic act the Western world has ever taken… it will change the life of every American." -Sir James Goldsmith
Here a few of the Marxist ideas of this new economic world order proposed in the G.A.T.T. treaty. Suffice it to say it is unadulterated one world socialism.
"...(b) The broadest co-operation of all the States members of the international community, based on equity, whereby the prevailing disparities in the world may be banished and prosperity secured for all."
"All efforts should be made to reform the international monetary system with …the following objectives:
"(h) promote an increasing net transfer of real resources from [America] the developed to the developing countries;…
"IV (a) To formulate an international code of conduct for the transfer of technology [from America] corresponding to needs and conditions prevalent in developing countries…
"(e).... Preferential treatment should be given to imports and the exports of those [developing] countries;…
…all member States [including America] pledge to make full use of the UN system in the implementation of the present "Programme of Action", …in working for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order and thereby strengthening the role of the UN in the field of world-wide cooperation for economic and social development.
One world economic domination by the elite through the UN is what this trade treaty portends - all in the name of Free Trade.
The Communist maxim is: "From those according to their ability, to those according to their need". This statement from the NAU article, Chertoff, Gutierrez, Rice: Plotting Bush's North American Union, shows just how communist the idea of free trade can be.
Communist Manifesto author Karl Marx must be smiling. Speaking in 1848 to the Democratic Association of Brussels, Marx said, "In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade."
In his Manifesto, Marx wrote, "The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationalities." Remember that this is the CFR’s goal, as noted in my first bullet. For decades, CFR members have dominated the administrations of our presidents, whether they call themselves Republicans or Democrats.
Notice Marx spoke to the Democratic Association of what is now the HQ of the all powerful European Union in Brussels. While the press writes of the EU in glowing terms those in Europe that are now subjected to the autocracy of Brussels are not so happy - realizing all to late they have lost their economic freedom and national independence. Not a good trade for the illusion of economic power. But that is exactly what the CFR proposal of an NAU is for America.
"For the first time, "North America" is more than just a geographical expression. NAFTA was merely the first draft of an economic constitution for North America...
The U.S. Congress should also merge the U.S.-Mexican and U.S.-Canadian interparliamentary groups into a single "North American Parliamentary Group." This might encourage legislators to stop tossing invective across their borders and instead start bargaining to solve shared problems.
- Robert Pastor, North America's Second Decade from Foreign Affairs (January/February 2004)

Bush laughs at NAU conspiracy theories

Recently, President Bush stated that he found these fears of an SPP/NAU conspiracy "amusing." Judicial Watch does not find it amusing and is calling for complete transparency and disclosure in the matter. Something the Bush Administration has so far failed to do. A new freedom of information lawsuit was filed on Aug 10 by Judicial Watch for the release of NACC influence on the Commerce Dept, which advises our government on the SPP process. Judicial Watch's complaint is that the "Agency’s Use of
NACC (North American Competitiveness Council) in Violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act".

Our Panderer in Chief also shares his views of our blooming relationship with Mexico:
"By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the New America."
"Some still look at Latin America through old stereotypes."
"But I see a hemisphere of 500 million people, striving with the dream of a better life. A dream of free markets and free people, in a hemisphere free from war and tyranny. That dream has sometimes been frustrated -- but it must never be abandoned."
"Should I become president, I will look South, not as an afterthought, but as a fundamental commitment of my presidency. Just as we ended the great divide between East and West, so today we can overcome the North-South divide."
"But the ultimate goal will remain constant ... free trade from northernmost Canada to the tip of Cape Horn."
- U.S. presidential candidate George W. Bush in a campaign speech on the Western Hemisphere and Latin America, Miami, Florida (August, 2000)
Free Trade and Globalization have become the Trojan horses of the New World Order. Under the guise of Free Trade they plan to spread democracy to a globalized economy. Or should I say impose? Now this all sounds well and good when you read about it in the news but what does it really mean for America?

This is Dr. William L. Pierce's explanation:
In brief, it is a utopian system in which the U.S. economy (along with the economy of every other nation) will be "globalized"; the wage levels of U.S. and European workers will be brought down to those of workers in the Third World; national boundaries will for all practical purposes cease to exist; an increased flow of Third World immigrants into the United States and Europe will have produced a non-White majority everywhere in the formerly White areas of the world; an elite consisting of international financiers, the masters of the mass media, and managers of multinational corporations will call the shots; and United Nations "peace keeping" forces will be used to keep anyone from opting out of the system.
This explanation from
Zbigniew Brzeninski is a little more ambiguous but just as scary!
"The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values."
– Zbigniew Brzeninski, National Security Adviser to Jimmy Carter and President Bush as co-chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force; executive director of the Trilateral Commission
A more controlled society unrestrained by traditional values? Is that anything like Fasicm Zbigniew? And of coarse we couldn't leave out the "money changers" from the FED:
"A global economy requires a global currency."
- Paul Volcker, Former Chairman, Federal Reserve, Single Global Currency
Here is Alan Greenspan sharing his version of the commie income re-distribution plan with us in his new book: The Age of Turbulence - Adventures in a New World (Order?)
"He maintains that immigration reform, "by opening up the United States to the world's very large and growing pool of skilled workers," will help reduce the inequality of incomes.
- Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve (September, 2007)
It becomes very clear that all these powerful men are in complete agreement about our future. In fact that is the very agenda behind our open border policy. The redistribution of our wealth to the poor countries of Central and South America. It is a diabolical plot that drives immigration reform. Why would we be worried about inequality of incomes except that they plan to create a community of North America or a North American Union. If Fox knew about it, who told him? Maybe Bush told him. Although Bush is not the one behind this plan. He is just working for them. Who is "them" - then? A very good question. They are a slippery bunch. But you can find them in CFR meetings. You can find CFR members in SPP meetings and think tanks on foreign policy. You can find CFR and Trilateral Commission members all through our government - especially the State and Defense and Commerce Dept.

Well looky here! It's CFR day in the Oval Office. Notice how they all get along so very well. Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. A regular bipartisan love fest. I'll give you a hint. It's just a game they play called politics. These are the men and women holding the reigns of power in America. Coincidentally they never have to elected. They are always appointed by the politicians we elect. They are never scrutinized by the press. It is a very unique arrangement that the CFR has developed. They have found a way to have power and control and influence in all areas of the Executive branch without having to be themselves elected.
A very convenient arrangement indeed. It is very communist.

The Council on Foreign Relations is the American Branch of a society which originated in England... (and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established."
- Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations, mentor to Bill Clinton
We can't finish this expose of the New World Order without mentioning the "mother" of all Internationalists, David Rockerfeller. Without a doubt he is a key player in the scheme to de-industrialize America and render her impotent and helpless. A plan that has been many decades in the works. The Rockerfeller family and money has intimately connected with both the CFR and Trilateral Commission. Organizations whose stated goals are to create a one world government. The Rockerfeller family traditionally call themselves Republicans. They are certainly not Reagan Republicans. They are an elite family who figured how to take advantage of America's freedom and make lots of money. Some people really admire that. I'm not a Rockerfeller Republican. The ability to make millions without any regard as to the moral consequences of that gain is not an admirable character trait in my opinion.

"No man can serve both God and mammon."

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years........It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

- David Rockefeller in Baden-Baden, Germany 1991, thanking major media for keeping secret for decades the movement of the prophetic one world government.
The NWO are attempting to create an economy to be served by all. Build a fence and it will stop the NAU plans. Defeat the NAU and we will stop the NWO. Stop exporting America's industrial strength to poor third world countries and it will stop the NWO plan to bankrupt America. Stop spending money we don't have on government programs we don't need and we will stop the plan of the world bankers to make slaves of us all.

We the American people have the power and can still stop this but we must wake up and JUST BUILD THE FENCE.

Rep. Pelosi criticizes border fence

EDINBURG, Texas (AP) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called a plan to build fencing along parts of the Mexico border a "terrible idea" that overlooks local communities.

Pelosi made the comments during her trip to the Rio Grande Valley for the annual Hispanic Engineering, Science & Technology Week conference at the University of Texas-Pan American.

"I have been against the fence, I thought it's a bad idea even when it was just a matter of discussion," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "These are communities where you have a border going through them, they are not communities where you have a fence splitting them."

And finally here is one last quote from David Rockerfeller, revealing who he really is and who he really is for. I can assure you - that is not America.

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
- Quote from David Rockefeller's Memoirs (2002)
"I am concerned for the security of our great nation, not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.”

-General Douglas MacArthur

Many of the quotes used here can be found at Americans for Sovereignty . It is an excellent site and source for info on the SPP/NAU, the Amero, and the NAFTA Superhighway.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Greenspan reveals he is pro illegal immigration

Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Fed and in the eyes of many one of the most brilliant people in the world, has been on a book selling media tour recently. While promoting his new tell all book, The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World (Order?), he has made a number of statements which have me questioning if he is senile or just really dumb.

The first statement of his that really irked me was this:

He explains how an advanced economy hinges on property rights, the rule of law, a culture of trust, contracts, debt, reputation, self-interest and "creative destruction" -- the scrapping of old technologies and processes.

He argues, for example, that the loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States -- from the steel, automobile and textile industries to computers and telecommunications -- "is a plus, not a minus, to the American standard of living."
He maintains that immigration reform, "by opening up the United States to the world's very large and growing pool of skilled workers," will help reduce the inequality of incomes.

When I read this I nearly fell out of my chair. Here is the justification for sending not hundreds but thousands of factories to China and Mexico. The loss of manufacturing jobs improves our standard of living? Not for those that lose their jobs. This last stuff is absolutely insane in my opinion. Reducing income equality? Sounds a like a socialist. I guess it didn't affect his salary though did it?

So tell me O wise one. How do you improve the standard of living and reduce the inequality of incomes at the same time? His idea is apparently to outsource our factories and then import illegal labor to work in the ones we have left. Which by the way he calls a "growing pool of skilled labor". This is a man who completely out of touch with reality. Yea - when NAFTA ruins all the farms and small business left in Mexico, then you have a growing pool of unskilled peasants coming across the border looking for work. Meanwhile the average working American can look forward to a job in computers or telecommunications?

So I see here once again why the SPP open border agenda is being crammed down our throats by a bunch or rich, wealthy, elitists who stand to make a lot of money from it. Why would we have to worry about the "inequality of incomes" in Mexico unless they had a plan to create a North American Union. So the master manipulators have to import millions of illegal immigrants to lower our excessive wages? Nice to know they care. So what does Greenspan know about SPP that he is not telling?

Then he states about the current Mortgage crises:

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan admits he "didn't really get it" that the subprime lending trend was significant enough to hurt the economy until very late 2005, but still defends his lowering of interest rates from 2001 until 2004 that critics say caused the crisis in the first place. "While I was aware a lot of these practices were going on, I had no notion of how significant they had become until very late," he tells Stahl. "I really didn't get it until very late in 2005 and 2006."

And then he goes and contradicts himself on the same issue:

While denying responsibility for the Mortgage and housing crisis. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan responds to critics who charge that the Fed contributed to the housing bubble and subprime mortgage mess by keeping interest rates low for so long, "This particular problem was an accident waiting to happen."

So which is it Alan? I don't remember him warning anybody about it in 2005 or 2006.

Then he goes on to proclaim about his own legacy:

"I'd like very much for people to say, 'Well, he caused all of that.'

O.K. that is exactly what I'm saying. You helped cause this mess. I guess in his mind that doesn't include the current mortgage crises which he admits he did not foresee. Or the recession of the late 90's and early 2000. Both of which critics attribute to his policies. It seems to me he is just a self serving individual trying to get back into the limelight and sell his book.

And then he proceeds to endorse Hillary Clinton:

"Very smart. She is probably everything that everybody says about her. She wouldn't be a bad president."

And all this comes right before the elections of 2008. A so called Republican promoting Hilary and Bill. Coincidence? I don't think so. I think this Emperor has no clothes left.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

La Voz de Aztlan celebrates EPR and Al Qaeda attack on US

The recent EPR terror attacks on Mexico's oil infrastructure went virtually unnoticed and unreported in the MSM. However the impact on the Mexican and U.S. economy is far from insignificant. In the recent article shown below, notorious MECha and Aztlan proponent Ernesto Cienfuegos, celebrates it as an attack on the US economy. With scarcely concealed pride he calls the recent EPR terrorist attack on Mexico's oil infrastructure an Al Qaeda success. Does he know something we don't know? He surmises that only someone that is an "experienced bomb maker" would be able to do this. He states that Mexico is worried about the sophisticated and much more powerful Improvised Explosives Devices (IED's) that EPR is now using.

On his website you can find links supporting two of the four insurgent/terrorist groups operating in Mexico. EZLN and the Mexica Movement. According to this website there are four main Indigenous and Guerrilla warfare movement groups in Mexico. The Mexica Movement is the only one that has not been implicated in any attacks to this point. They are currently involved in the recruiting in the US and run perhaps the best racist I hate white site on the internet. They actively stage protest rallies and recruit the gullible on college campuses. They are especially active in California and Texas. Nice to know that at least they appreciate the liberty that our country allows them spread their Marxist propaganda.

Popular Revolutionary Army (EPR)
Zapatist National Liberation Army (EZLN)
Zapatist National Liberation Front (FZLN)
Mexica Movement (Indigenous Movement of the People of Anahuac)

The Zapatistas have been the most active in fighting the Mexican government in the '90's. A current state of truce exists officially since 2000 when Vincente Fox was elected. The EPR is thought to be connected to EZLN but for obvious political reasons they function as a separate group. They are the ones attacking the government today. Have they been trained by Al Qaeda as Ernesto seems to indicate? Does he know something because of his open connection to two of these groups seen on his website?

The House report released in 2006 titled A Line in the Sand, FBI Director Robert Muller confirmed in his testimony:

"that there are individuals from countries with known al-Qa’ida connections who are changing their Islamic surnames to Hispanic-sounding names and obtaining false Hispanic identities, learning to speak Spanish and pretending to be Hispanic immigrants."

It also states that:

"Islamic radical groups that support Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamiya Al Gamat are all active in Latin America. These groups generate funds through money laundering, drug trafficking, and arms deals, making millions of dollars every year via their multiple illicit activities. These cells reach back to the Middle East and extend to this hemisphere the sophisticated global support structure of international terrorism. While threats to our nation from international terrorism are well known, lesser known threats spawned by narcoterrorism reach deeply into this country."
The Washington Times reported on September 28, 2004, that the notorious MS-13 gang had held meeting with the terrorist group, Al Qaeda. The meetings were rumored to concern methods of smuggling humans into the United States across Mexican borders. Police indicated that Al Qaeda had sought a partnership with MS-13.
The question that needs to be asked is this. Is EPR receiving training from Al Qaeda? Is that where they have learned to build their more sophisticated bombs and IED's? Intelligence reports have suggested that Latin American terrorists are receiving training at Al Qaeda camps in North Africa. Could this be the result?

Ernesto threateningly states that, "It would be much wiser for President Calderon to negotiate with the EPR" rather than hire Strategic Forecasting, Inc. for security. What is he a foreign policy adviser now? Is he an ambassador of peace for the EPR? Shall we sit down with the devil and discuss this. How long will it be until they bring their terrorism into Texas, into the heart of America? How long before they are openly doing Al Qaeda's dirty work in America?

The Aztlan movement are open supporters of the Zapatistas and the Mexica Movement and from this article I can now safely assume EPR as well. So effectively they support all the Marxist revolutionary groups operating in Mexico and the US. Mexico is ripe for the revolutionary propaganda of left-wing socialist groups because of the economic problems and increased poverty and corruption in Mexico exacerbated by NAFTA and now the richest man in the world, Mexican Carlos Slim. To try and solve their internal problems Mexico is now exporting their Marxist revolution to America.

And that same revolution is being imported into the US by the Bush Administration's implementation of the open border policies of the SPP agenda. Greed and pandering to big Business and Mexico seem to take priority over common sense and national security needs. The SPP agenda is in direct conflict with the overriding national security need to secure our borders. Six years after 9/11 the situation is actually worse. Yet Bush tells us he is protecting America by fighting terrorism in Iraq. Meanwhile he leaves continues to leave our southern border undefended and open to terrorist counter attack.

And MECHa scuzzballs like Ernesto Cienfuegos only add fuel to the fire. Not a wise move GW. I consider Bush's actions to be criminally negligent and the incompetent Michael Chertoff deserves the same condemnation as well. Will the inability of the Bush administration to connect the dots lead to another horrific terror attack on the U.S.? I would hope not but it does not appear that they are currently aware of just how dangerous this situation is. It is imperative for our national security that we secure the border now. Not in 12 years. Not in 8 years. It needs to be done now. Duncan Hunter says he can build a fence from California to Texas in just 6 months. I believe him. That is why I support Duncan Hunter for President in 2008.

Mexican insurgents cause record $80 per barrel crude oil price

Al-Qaeda's goal to collapse the US. economy appears on track

Ernesto Cienfuegos
La Voz de Aztlan

Los Angeles, Alta California - September 12, 2007 - (ACN) The new bombings of six facilities of Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) by the Ejercito Popular Revolucionario (EPR) early Monday caused the price today of U.S. light crude for October delivery to rise to a record $80.00 per barrel. At the same time the dollar fell to a new all-time low against the Euro. The 13-nation Euro rose to $1.3901 today, topping all previous records.

A military spokesman of the EPR said that they placed 12 explosive devices each on 12 pipelines of Petroleos Mexicanos located at La Antigua, Ursulo Galvan, Omealca, Mendoza, Cumbres de Maltrata in the state of Veracruz and in Cuapiaxtla in the state of Tlaxcala. The explosives were detonated simultaneously at 2:00 AM on September 10. The EPR also carried out successful bombings of PEMEX facilities in the states of Queretaro and Guanajuato in July.

The EPR has in the past condemned the Vicente Fox and the Felipe Calderon administrations for selling out Mexico's petroleum resources to US interests. They believe that Mexican oil revenues are being siphoned off by the super rich and are never used to benefit the desperately poor Mexican people. The EPR claims that this is one reason why millions of Mexican workers have been forced to migrate north of the border.

The insurgent attacks have also caused massive losses in the Mexican economy. The industrial sectors have reported losses of over 200 million dollars since Monday. The lack of natural gas alone has affected over 375 large corporations in the states of Mexico, Puebla, Aguascalientes, Queretaro, Tlaxcala, San Luis Potosi, Michoacan, Jalisco, Guanajuato and the Federal District. Over 10,000 workers are presently idle. Many of these are already heading to the USA.

Yesterday, work at the following auto plants was suspended: Volkswagen, in Puebla; Chrysler, in Toluca; General Motors, in Silao; Ford, in Cuautitlan; Honda, in El Salto, and over 100 suppliers of auto parts in various states are presently closed..

In addition, steel industry representatives have reported that 60% of steel production has been halted due to the lack of energy caused by the EPR bombings of the PEMEX pipelines.

Mexico is the number two oil exporter to the US and as such figures greatly in the security of the country. Al-Qaeda has already made it one of their goals to starve the US of critical petroleum based energy in order to force the collapse of the economy. With this much at stake, the US Department of State has already made moves to assure the continued flow of Mexican oil across the border. The Calderon government has contracted with the CIA controlled SY Coleman Corporation based in Arlington, Virginia to provide security for the PEMEX facilities, something that could backfire on the PAN Party administration. It would be much wiser for President Calderon to negotiate with the EPR.

In addition, the Strategic Forecasting, Inc. (Stratfor), through the US State Department, is now offering its services to President Felipe Calderon. Stratfor is supposedly a private intelligence agency founded in 1996 in Austin, Texas but insiders know the outfit as "The Shadow CIA". Stratfor analysts say that the EPR has "evolved greatly". They believe that the recent sophisticated operations by the EPR can not be the work of simple "campesinos". Stratfor says that they believe the recent bombings were led by very experienced bomb makers. They note that the recent operations against PEMEX have evolved greatly from what is usual for the group. The range of the attacks are much more widespread and are coming much more frequent. They are also worried about the much more sophisticated and much more powerful Improvised Explosives Devices (IED's) the EPR has been using.

Original article

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Senate votes to block Mexican trucks test

Nice to know that the Bush Administration is so concerned for our safety. The American consumers are sick and tired of selling out our safety and security for cheaper products. We are losing jobs and factories and revenues to import cheap stuff from China that comes through Mexico. They only want to ship stuff through Mexico to avoid cost of doing business for the longshoreman and teamsters Unions. Are those idiots on strike again? You would think that they would strike for something other than higher wages. Apparently their corrupt leaders have been bought and paid for. Is there a shortage of truck drivers too now in the US?

And six years after 9/11 the Bush Administration pushes forward relentlessly to keep our southern border porous and open. No real security concerns from Mexican trucks. No way any bombs or terrorists could be inside them. I feel like I'm living in some make believe world of corrupt politicians.

Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:51pm ET
By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate voted on Tuesday to block funding for a Bush administration test program to let Mexican long-haul trucks operate in the United States under 1994's North American Free Trade Agreement.

One day after a fiery truck accident killed dozens in Mexico, the Senate approved an amendment to a transportation spending bill that would cut off funding for the test, which the administration authorized last week to run for one year.

The House of Representatives has passed a similar measure.

The White House on Tuesday threatened to veto the broad transportation bill because it would spend more money than President George W. Bush requested. It said the administration opposes any restrictions on the cross-border trucking program.

The administration said "it has the necessary safeguards in place to ensure a safe and secure program."

A tractor-trailer loaded with explosives blew up in a huge fireball on Monday after hitting a pickup truck in the northern Mexican state of Coahuila. At least 29 people were killed.

Calling the accident a warning to proceed cautiously, North Dakota Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan led the effort to deny funding for the program. Dorgan questioned Mexican truck safety rules, as well as the handling of the test by the Bush administration, which he said "rushed to implement the pilot program late last week -- literally in the dark of night."

He said the Transportation Department authorized the program too quickly, despite a report that found numerous problems with Mexican truck safety records.

Dorgan said the vote against the program was "a turning of the tide on the senseless, headlong rush this country has been engaged in for some time to dismantle safety standards and a quality of life it took generations to achieve."

The pilot program involves both Mexican trucks operating in the United States and U.S. trucks being allowed to operate in Mexico, within limits on both sides.

Arizona Republican Sen. John Kyl, defending the program in Senate floor debate, said the test would involve a maximum of 100 Mexican companies and 500 to 600 trucks on U.S. roads.

"It is worth giving this program a chance ... It is much more efficient and much cheaper for American consumers if those Mexican trucks can travel in the United States," Kyl said.

Missouri Republican Christopher Bond said, "There is some strong support for allowing these trucks to run in the United States." He cited a letter of support for the program from agribusiness interests that said NAFTA promises the program.

John Hill, an administrator in the Transportation Department, called the vote to block the program "a sad victory for the politics of fear and protectionism."

Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown compared pressure to open up U.S. roads to Mexican trucks to the kind of free-trade pressures that opened U.S. markets to tainted food and toys from China "because it serves multinational corporations."

Brown said, "This pilot program doesn't make sense ... Too often in this chamber we write trade deals that ignore consumers and coddle corporations."

On the overall transportation bill, the Senate approved on Monday an amendment providing $1 billion more for bridge renovations nationwide after last month's collapse of a span in Minnesota and fears that other U.S. bridges were unsound.

© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.

Six Years after 9/11 - Safer But Not Yet Safe?

The following article was written by DA King and published in the Insider Advantage Georgia.

I find it very troubling that the Bush administration's open border policies have so many detrimental effects on our national security. I would call it criminal negligence. And all for Big Business interests that really control America. Thanks a lot GW. The next time I see you crying on TV I'll be wondering why you shed such crocodile tears.

Security On The Border, Sept. 12, 2007 - Feel Safer?
By D.A. King

“We must be vigilant.” – President George W. Bush, in an address to the nation following the 9/11 attacks - Atlanta, Georgia. November 8, 2001.

(9/12/07) The sixth anniversary of the unspeakable horror of September 11, 2001 is behind us, the heartbreaking memorial ceremonies and speeches are over and we now begin our seventh year facing life in America knowing we are targets of crazies who will do anything to attack us in our homeland.

Most adult Americans will never forget that clear-blue morning in 2001. “Everything will be different now,” I remember thinking, still tearful and numb from the shock of watching the second airliner fly into the World Trade Center.

But everything is not different now.

While it is true that we must now partially disrobe to board an airplane, that we carefully pre-package our toothpaste and liquids in our carry-on luggage for inspection, and that the American government cannot process passports to its own citizens in anything resembling a timely manner, a glaring and nationally suicidal truth remains.

In a war on terror, American borders remain less secure than Disney World.

In post-9/11 Washington, try to get into a Senate or House office building – or the White House gift shop - without submitting to a scan and a possible search.

Note the very efficient fence that protects the home of the president.

In a 2004 letter to constituents promoting what much of Congress and the president refer to as ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform,’ the senior Senator from Arizona (and now, again, presidential candidate) John McCain quoted U.S. Border Patrol statistics which estimate that in the year 2002, “nearly four million people crossed our borders illegally”.

About 10,000 a day.

In addition to violation of the law, entering the U.S. “illegally” means uninspected and usually in places other than through authorized ports of entry.

It is not exactly a secret that anyone in the world has only to make it to Mexico and then walk into America by stepping over a barely-there barb wire fence that would not make a respectable or effective cattle pasture in Georgia.

Feel safer?

In a 2006 report from the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security that somehow went un-noted by the mainstream media, anyone willing to take the time could read that the estimates of illegal entries into our nation in 2005 were between four and ten million.

Titled “A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border,” the report offers some other very disturbing findings. Among them:

* During 2005, Border Patrol apprehended 1.2 million illegal aliens, of those 165,000 were from countries other than Mexico (“OTMs” in Border Patrol speak).

* Of the OTMs apprehended, 650 were from what are labeled “special interest countries” – designated by the American intelligence community as countries that could export terrorists.

* Border Patrol estimates that they are able to apprehend 10-30% of the total illegal crossers.

Do the math.

Feel safer?

The report goes on:

* U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigations have revealed that aliens were smuggled from the Middle East to staging areas in Central and South America, before being smuggled illegally into the United States.

* Members of Hezbollah have already entered the United States across the Southwest border.

* Each year hundreds of illegal aliens from countries known to harbor terrorists or promote terrorism are routinely encountered and apprehended attempting to enter the U.S. illegally.

While six years after 9/11, the American president and the Department of Homeland Security promise that “operational control” of the border is coming, the House report tells us “The Mexican drug cartels wield substantial control over the U.S.-Mexican border. Law enforcement on the border agree that very little crosses the respective cartel territories, or “plazas,” along the Southwest border without cartel knowledge, approval, and financial remuneration.”

According to a May report in the Washington Post, “Federal officials became alarmed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks when they discovered they could not account for 314,000 immigrants who had been ordered deported, including 5,046 from countries where al–Qaeda was present.”

Six years later, DHS now says there are more than 600,000 illegal aliens roaming America who are already under deportation orders.

Vigilant indeed.

On September 12, 2007, think about this fascinating reality: Even after 9/11, Immigration and Customs Enforcement periodically apprehends illegal aliens working in “secure” areas all over America – including airports and military bases.

Feel safer?

On September 12, 2007, security is far better in major American newspaper offices and network television buildings than on our borders.

Americans may want to ask what we would have said to anyone, who on September 12, 2001 would have predicted the present state of homeland security six years in the future. And why it is all so sadly true.

Because as Americans, we are America, we may want to ask political candidates the same questions.

Because virtually open borders means bargain wages and an expanded market, here is a hint as to why: Follow the money - even in a war on terror.

Feel safer?