08.31.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:01 pm by Administrator
I, your humble narrator, viewed both these videos in the same day.
One is relatively new. The other, 40 years old.
The differences–mind-boggling.
Whether Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or what have you, I pray you join me in this meditation.
The United States was based on a premise of respect for the individual. We should each be committed to the collective. That may seem contradictory, but it’s not. When the collective recognizes the individual as its cornerstone, the collective is stronger.
The USA has pulled the World out of some deep stuff. We lead through it–up and down. I couldn’t be prouder, or would ever wish I were from another nation. It’s ours to complain, and ours to act.
It is the difference in Socialism and, certainly, Fascism, and certainly the difference of who we are as True Americans, the respects and loyalties to the individual freedoms.
That makes us stronger than anything else ever having been subjected to “diplomacy.”
God bless America. And God bless us all.
This AIN’T America no mo, okay?
Red Skelton’s Pledge of Allegiance
Permalink
08.19.09
Posted in Culture, Immigration, Nationalization, North American Union, journalism, politics at 11:32 am by Administrator
Phyllis Schlafly
TownHall.com
President Obama went to Guadalajara, Mexico, in August as part of his promise to “rejoin the world community” and become a “citizen of the world.” He participated in a conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
These cozy meetings of the so-called three amigos used to be labeled the Security and Prosperity Partnership. The three North American heads of state met in Waco in 2005, in Cancun in 2006, in Quebec in 2007 and in New Orleans in 2008.
After conservatives exposed the mischievous goals, the amigos accepted the Hudson Institute’s helpful suggestion to change their name. Now they call themselves the North American Leaders Summit.
Prestigious internationalist think tanks, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Hudson Institute and the Center for Strategic & International Studies, explained the real purpose of these high-level get-togethers. These meetings were planned to be the first steps toward a North American Union modeled on the European Union, with open borders and a common currency, which Canada’s Fraser Institute prematurely labeled the amero.
The words “union” and “amero” have become embarrassing, so the goal has now been identified as “economic integration” and “labor mobility.” The Guadalajara joint statement reaffirmed the purpose of “integrated economies,” and that still means allowing unlimited access for cheap labor from Mexico to take U.S. jobs.
President Calderon demanded unlimited “labor mobility” and asserted that it is “unthinkable” for the United States to function “without the contribution of the Mexican laborers and workers.” He also wants free access for Mexican trucks to all U.S. roads and U.S. citizenship for Mexicans living illegally in the U.S.
Canada’s Harper wants all three to pledge to work “together on a North American focus against climate change in order to assure and guarantee a new international covenant that is efficient and truly global.” Harper also complained about the “buy American” provision in our $787 billion stimulus law.
Obama reaffirmed his commitment to pass the Cap-and-Trade bill so he would be hailed as a hero at the upcoming United Nations climate-change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. He promised to “take the lead by reducing U.S. emissions by 80 percent by 2050″ and to “work with other nations to cut global emissions in half.”
Obama also promised to “continue to work to fix America’s broken immigration system,” which most people see as code words for amnesty for illegal aliens. He did not promise to stop the flow of illegal drugs and people coming across our southern border, but he did say he wanted “to stem the illegal southbound flow of American guns and cash that helps fuel this extraordinary violence.”
In other words, he was blaming the United States for Mexican drug violence. In fact, most of the guns found at Mexican crime scenes are not American, and U.S. taxpayers are already generously footing the bill to train Mexicans to fight the drug war.
Fortunately, Obama did not pledge to open our roads to Mexican trucks, which may be his only concession to American public opinion so far in his presidency. Congressional law forbids the entry of Mexican trucks, and the latest Rasmussen Survey shows that 66 percent of Americans oppose lifting this congressional ban.
Under NAFTA, the United States agreed to let Mexican trucks operate freely in our country after 1999 so long as they meet U.S. safety standards. But they have never met them — and nothing in NAFTA requires us to admit trucks that don’t meet U.S. standards.
Highway safety is the primary reason why Americans are adamantly opposed to allowing Mexican trucks on our roads. The problem is not only the wear and tear on our deteriorating highways from additional tens of thousands of heavier, environmentally dirtier trucks.
U.S. truck drivers are limited to 10 consecutive hours of service, but Mexican drivers typically drive up to 20 hours a day. Even if limits are imposed, nobody knows how many hours they are behind the wheel before reaching the border.
In contrast to U.S. requirements for truck drivers, Mexico has no credible system of driver training, licensing, drug testing, physical and age requirements, safety inspections even for brakes, weight limits, insurance, or nationwide criminal or driving-record databases.
U.S. law requires commercial drivers to be able to “read and speak the English language sufficiently to converse with the general public, to understand highway traffic signs and signals in the English language, to respond to official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and records.” But Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters testified at a Senate committee hearing last year that when Mexican drivers respond to our questions in Spanish, her employees nevertheless check the box for English-proficient.
Permalink
08.17.09
Posted in Culture, Immigration, Islam, politics at 4:55 pm by Administrator
British National Party, BNP.org.uk
The controlled media has finally admitted what the British National Party has been saying all along: that all of Europe stands on the brink of being overrun and colonised by masses of Third World Muslim invaders.
An article entitled “Muslim Europe: the demographic time bomb transforming our continent” recently published in The Telegraph could have been lifted directly from previous articles on the BNP website.
Written by Adrian Michaels, the article says that the “EU is facing an era of vast social change” caused by “Europe’s low white birth rate, coupled with faster multiplying migrants.”
According to Mr Michaels, this will “change fundamentally what we take to mean by European culture and society.”
The BNP has been the only party to warn about the coming demographic tidal wave which, if left unchecked, will extinguish all of Europe and bring an end to thousands of years of Western civilisation.
Mr Michaels also said, “Britain and the rest of the European Union are ignoring a demographic time bomb: a recent rush into the EU by migrants, including millions of Muslims, will change the continent beyond recognition over the next two decades, and almost no policy-makers are talking about it.
“The numbers are startling. Only 3.2 percent of Spain’s population was foreign-born in 1998. In 2007 it was 13.4 percent. Europe’s Muslim population has more than doubled in the past 30 years and will have doubled again by 2015. In Brussels, the top seven baby boys’ names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza.”
Mr Michaels goes on to point out that the altered population mix has far-reaching implications for “education, housing, welfare, labour, the arts and everything in between.”
According to figures quoted by Mr Michaels, “EU numbers on general immigration tell a story on their own. In the latter years of the 20th century, the 27 countries of the EU attracted half a million more people a year than left.
“Since 2002, however, the latest EU report says, net migration into the EU has roughly tripled to between 1.6 million and two million people per year.”
According to the US’s Migration Policy Institute, residents of Muslim faith will account for more than 20 percent of the EU population by 2050 but already do so in a number of cities.
“Whites will be in a minority in Birmingham by 2026, says Christopher Caldwell, an American journalist, and even sooner in Leicester. Another forecast holds that Muslims could outnumber non-Muslims in France and perhaps in all of Western Europe by mid-century. Austria was 90 percent Catholic in the 20th century but Islam could be the majority religion among Austrians aged under 15 by 2050, says Mr Caldwell.”
Karoly Lorant, a Hungarian economist who wrote a paper for the European Parliament, calculates that Muslims already make up 25 percent of the population in Marseilles and Rotterdam, 20 percent in Malmo, 15 percent in Brussels and Birmingham and 10 percent in London, Paris and Copenhagen.
Despite spelling out the problem in detail, the article makes the obligatory snipe at the BNP and other European political parties which have opposed the mass immigration policies of the ruling elite.
Permalink
