Regional Conference Weighs in on Voter ID and Redistricting

May 26, 2026 NewsHound

On their Facebook page, the South Central (regional) conference posted a statement yesterday about voting rights. Here’s the statement:

Some Online Comments:

• “For all those saying this is inappropriate? Remember that this church was founded on the abolition movement, religious liberty (for all), and supporting public policies that improve the social fabric (as misguided as temperance was). The SDA movement was progressive and political”
• “As a SDA, and a person of color. I would like say this to this woke conference that no one is denying anyone to vote, especially me since I've been voting here in Georgia for many years. BTW...Showing your id to vote, is not racist. Perhaps the racists is the South Central Conference, please stop speaking for us, thank you.”
• “No one is being denied the right to vote. Redistricting needs to be done in some cases to prevent the gerrymandering that has gone on for years. The church needs to stay out of this.”
• “So what exactly is this letter saying? As far as I know, if you are a US citizen you have the right to vote. If you have to show identification to prove you are a citizen, I don't see the problem. Why would redistricting cause any issue? You still have that right. These are genuine questions, not arguments. Im not looking for opinion, I'd like facts.”
• “This is pure politics dressed in holiness robes. Gerrymandering voter districts by race is illegal! That it has been done, and a slight bit of it is now being UNdone, is not a civil rights issue to begin protesting.”
• “I wonder where the similar outrage post was when Virginia, California, New York, Massachusetts, etc. were all making similar redirecting changes. Strange how SDAs had no concern with politics then?”
• “Thank you for this statement! HOWEVER!! This is NOT the stance of “the church“ by and large ( that a party or candidate is not endorsed). We need to address that. We are here because of “the church’s“ participation in what got us here in the first place.”
• “Not like some SDA members care what is voted for. We voted on “no” women pastors but here we are.”

SDA MICHIGAN GC SNEAKY SECRECY, VOTE ICHABOD! VILLAGE SDA PASTOR TAARIQ...

Therezinha Barbalho Ordained into the Gospel Ministry

June 27, 2019 By Communication 

Therezinha Barbalho Ordained into the Gospel Ministry




Pastor Therezinha Barbalho stands with her husband, Zeli Leite, and President Bill Miller.

Potomac administration recently had the privilege of ordaining Therezinha Barbalho, pastor of the Silver Spring SDA Church (Md.), into the gospel ministry.

“The call to ministry isn’t when someone says we couldn’t have done that without you,” said President Bill Miller, during the service. “It’s not when committees recommended you for ordination, a degree, interviews or endorsements. The call to ministry is when we hear His voice and we walk with Him into the human mess. The call to ministry is learning our limits and learning to trust in the God that is there with us.”

Barbalho says she felt called to pastoral ministry at the age of 18 and went on to graduate with a degree in theology. She worked as a Bible worker in Belém, São Paulo and later pursued a law degree. Even while practicing as a licensed lawyer in Brazil for 13 years, she continued to serve as a volunteer minister. After moving to the United States, Barbalho served as an associate pastor for the New Jersey Conference and later came to Potomac to pastor the Richmond Brazilian church (Va.)—where she held her first baptismal ceremony—and the Silver Spring church (Md.), where she works to date.

“I receive this moment, so needed for 32 years, understanding that God is making me, and promises to make me, more and more dependent on him,” shared Barbalho, during the service. “That is how I receive this blessing. I thank the Seventh-day Adventist Church for trusting that I can become fully dependent on Him.”

Source

Trudeau hosts Obama, Pena Nieto for Three Amigos summit

Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto and U.S. President Barack Obama will join Justin Trudeau in Ottawa for the Three Amigos summit on Wednesday.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Mexico's President Enrique Pena Nieto, left, and U.S. President Barack Obama meet on Wednesday in Ottawa. (SUSAN WALSH / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO)

 
By ROBIN LEVINSON KING

Staff Reporter

Wed., June 29, 2016



The three amigos will be together again, this time with new blood, as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau welcomes leaders from both the United States and Mexico.

Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto and U.S. President Barack Obama will join Trudeau in Canada’s capital Wednesday for a historic state visit cheekily dubbed the Three Amigos summit. The last time the three North America leaders got together for such a visit was in 2014 in Toluca Mexico, when Stephen Harper was prime minister.

Air Force One is expected to land at 10:15 a.m. The three politicians will then get down to business, discussing everything from trade to climate change and indigenous rights.

Pena Nieto has already arrived in Ottawa on Monday, after visiting both Quebec City and Toronto.

Wednesday’s meeting is expected to be significantly warmer than last time, when Harper was unwilling to budge on Mexican visa restrictions to Canada and Obama kept mum on whether he would approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

The pipeline was officially rejected last November, but all signs point to a chummier get together this time around.

At a joint press conference on Tuesday, Trudeau and Pena Nieto announced that contentious restrictions limiting Mexican nationals’ travel in Canada would be lifted by Dec. 1. In return, Mexico will open their markets to all Canadian beef exports later this year.

And since Trudeau’s state visit to Washington D.C. in March, relations between the U.S. and Canada have been downright bro-tastic, with the two world leaders frequently trading friendly barbs in the press.

With files from Star staff


Source

North American Leaders Meet, With Brexit and Trump Clouding Ties

Josh Wingrove



Mike Dorning








June 28, 2016 — 5:00 AM EDT Updated on June 28, 2016 — 3:43 PM EDT



Obama, Trudeau and Pena Nieto hold summit Wednesday in Ottawa
U.K. vote, U.S. presidential race weigh on pro-trade agenda



The shadow of Brexit and rising protectionist sentiment loom large as U.S. President Barack Obama meets his North American counterparts to bolster the world’s largest trading bloc.

Obama, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto hold the so-called Three Amigos summit Wednesday in Ottawa, with fallout from the U.K.’s vote last week to leave the European Union raising pressure to show confidence in their own alliance. The countries will vow to produce more clean power and cut methane emissions while strengthening economic ties.


QuickTake
Britain and the EU



Risks to North America are palpable, as Brexit roils global financial markets and anti-trade rhetoric ramps up in the U.S. presidential campaign. The meeting -- Obama’s last, and Trudeau’s first -- comes amid opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership and disputes over visas, lumber, and beef. Yet all three countries see the summit as an opportunity to double down on easing trade barriers.

“This is a moment for North America to say we stand united, we stand together,” Chrystia Freeland, Trudeau’s trade minister, told Bloomberg TV Canada’s Pamela Ritchie on Monday. “And as a continent, we have a partnership that believes in the importance of building bridges rather than building walls.”

Given the impact it’s had on world financial markets, Brexit will be discussed at the summit but won’t be the focus, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday.

All three countries have signed but not yet ratified the 12-nation TPP. The deal faces hurdles in Congress and is opposed by presumptive U.S. presidential nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, with the latter vowing to “rip up” the North America Free-Trade Agreement and other pacts.

“I’m going to tell our Nafta partners that I intend to immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal by a lot -- not just a little, a lot -- for our workers,” Trump said in a speech Tuesday in Monessen, Pennsylvania. “If they don’t agree to a renegotiation, which they might not because they’re so used to having their own way,” he said, “then I will submit under Article 2205 of the Nafta agreement that America intends to withdraw from the deal.”

Increased ‘Uneasiness’

Republicans, whose support is critical, are wary of getting out of step with the rank and file, having lost high-profile party figures in populist revolts. Brexit will only increase “uneasiness” toward trade, according to former Republican Congressman Vin Weber, now a partner at lobbying firm Mercury LLC. “What happened in Britain and what’s going on in American presidential politics absolutely has an effect: It makes everybody more nervous,” he said.

Wednesday’s summit is the first since 2014. Last year’s was postponed by Trudeau’s predecessor Stephen Harper in part because of tensions over the Keystone XL pipeline, which Obama rejected after the new Canadian prime minister took office. This year’s meeting will “focus on creating jobs, strengthening North American communities, and building a clean growth economy,” Trudeau said in a statement.

“Certainly Brexit will be on the agenda,” said Mark Feierstein, the U.S. National Security Council’s senior director for western-hemisphere affairs. “It’ll be evident to Americans and people beyond that when North America speaks and acts as a single unit, it’s really for the good of our citizens and people around the world.”

Environment, Immigration

The countries will pledge to produce half their electricity through non-carbon-emitting sources by 2025. That “aggressive goal” will require “ambitious” measures, according to senior Obama adviser Brian Deese. Mexico is also joining a pledge made in March to cut methane emissions.

This week’s talks take place amid a dispute over a visa restrictions Canada placed on Mexicans to stem asylum claims, a thorn in the ties between the countries.

“There’s a lot of confusion in Mexico, hurt feelings and disenchantment with Canada over this issue,” said Laura Macdonald, a professor of political science at Ottawa’s Carleton University.

Trudeau and Pena Nieto announced Tuesday during a bilateral meeting that the visa restriction would be lifted effective Dec. 1, and that Mexico would fully open its borders to Canadian beef as of Oct. 1.

U.S. Protectionism

The Brexit vote was “a very big shock” for the three leaders, whose economies under Nafta collectively exceed that of the EU, according to John Kirton, director of the University of Toronto’s G-7 Research Group. As a result, the trio is under more pressure to display unity and declare “globalization is good for us and we still deeply believe it and are reaping the rewards as we speak,” Kirton said.

Polls show a wave of opposition to trade agreements. Americans, by a margin of 65 percent to 22 percent, say they want more restrictions on international trade, according to a Bloomberg poll in March. The same poll found Americans believe Nafta is a trade deal gone awry that has done more harm than good.

Deals in Limbo

The 12 TPP nations have until February 2018 to ratify the pact. Chances of the U.S. doing so this year were slipping even before the Brexit vote, according to Alec Phillips, a Washington-based economist with Goldman Sachs Group Inc. “Our expectation was already reasonably low that it would happen,” he said.

Trudeau, who describes himself as “extremely pro-trade,” has the parliamentary majority to approve the deal though he hasn’t yet taken a clear position. Mexico has already submitted TPP to its Senate for review and expects a vote later this year.

Canada has instead focused on its trade pact with the EU, which it still hopes to ratify under the Brexit cloud. Canada made changes to the pact this year and Freeland said Brexit will hasten the push -- a view not shared by Harper’s former foreign minister.

“The EU trade deal is not helped by what happened,” John Baird said in a Bloomberg TV interview last week. “There’s growing anti-globalization sentiment, there’s anger at elites. This is the big unknown the British people have thrown at all of Europe.”


Source

.

What Has NAFTA Done In Its Twenty Years?

Photo by Jill Replogle / KPBS

Above: The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is now two decades old.


Monday, December 16, 2013

By Jill Replogle


Twenty years ago, on Dec. 8, 1993, President Bill Clinton signed the North American Free Trade Agreement into law.

At the time, it was an unprecedented idea: Eliminating nearly all tariffs and trade barriers between two developed countries, Canada and the U.S., and another, Mexico, that was struggling with very high levels of poverty and weak infrastructure.

As we’ve reported, trade between the U.S and Mexico has quintupled since NAFTA took effect, on Jan. 1, 1994. And yet lines to cross the border are longer than ever, thanks to concerns over terrorism, drugs and illegal immigration, and insufficient border infrastructure.

NAFTA’s failure to address the movement of people across borders largely is responsible, some say, for mass illegal immigration to the U.S., one of the most contentious national issues of our time. And despite a major attempt by the U.S. Senate and Obama administration to address the problem this year, compromise seems far away.

On NAFTA’s 20th anniversary, many are lauding its accomplishments in boosting commerce and setting a template for free trade around the world.

Trade among the three countries has reached more than $1 trillion a year. And jobs in manufacturing and auxiliary industries have helped lift millions of Mexicans out of poverty.

Still almost half of Mexico’s population lives in poverty. And entire villages are terrorized into silence and inactivity by drug lords.

While Mexico’s economy shows healthy growth, returning migrants — either deported or moving back on their own, often struggle to find jobs. Many focus all their efforts on getting back to the U.S.

In a recent op-ed, the Wall Street Journal calls for “NAFTA 2.0,” saying North America has lost competitiveness and needs a new boost.

As the U.S. moves through negotiations on new trade pacts, notably the Trans-Pacific Partnership, NAFTA’s legacy surely will play a role.

JILL REPLOGLE, Fronteras Reporter


Related Content
U.S. Commerce Secretary Looks At 20 Years Of NAFTA | October 28, 2013
Arizona Versus Texas For Border Trade? Not Even A Contest | October 8, 2013
In Wake Of NAFTA, States Eye Global Supply Chain With Envy | October 29, 2012



Source
.

The Complete Idiot's Guide to the New World Order

aenfroy87

Published on Apr 11, 2008


Google:

The Council on Foreign Relations
The Bilderberg Group
Trilateral Commission
New World Order
North American Union
Military Industrial Complex
Federal Reserve
Security and Prosperity Partnership
Martial Law
Freedom to Fascism
Big Brother Society
Police State

FAIR USE NOTICE: We are making this material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights,economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

.

Barack Obama hosts Canada and Mexico leaders for talks

2 April 2012 Last updated at 13:22 ET

The three leaders are to discuss energy issues amid a backdrop of high gas prices and unemployment

US President Barack Obama is hosting three-way talks at the White House with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.

Talks usually centre on border issues and the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).

This year the summit could also touch on a disputed US-Canada oil pipeline.

President Obama, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon are meeting weeks before a broader regional summit to be held in Colombia.

The Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, is to be held in two weeks' time.

No major agreements are expected to be signed at Monday's summit, which will see the three leaders hold a joint news conference.

The meeting was originally planned to take place in Hawaii in November, but had to be rescheduled after a top Mexican official was killed in a helicopter crash.

Thorny issues

The three leaders are expected to address ways in which to boost the economic recovery, as well as energy - with Mexico a major oil exporter and Canada unhappy over the fate of the stalled Keystone XL pipeline.

The pipeline would transport crude oil from the tar sands of western Alberta to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast.

The White House refused to approve the project, amid concerns that the route passed through the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region of the US state of Nebraska.

Mr Harper has previously said he was disappointed by the White House decision, and indicated that Canada would consider selling oil to China, as an alternative.

Mr Obama has said exports would be a key component of the US recovery. Canada represents the biggest market for US exports, followed by Mexico. The US, though, is the biggest consumer of both Canadian and Mexican goods.

But trade between the US and Mexico has been overshadowed by violence from drug cartels struggling to control smuggling routes into the US market, and Mexico's complaints of weapons bought in the US moving south.

The leaders also face differing political climates at home. Mexico is holding elections on 1 July, and Mr Calderon is not eligible for re-election; meanwhile, Mr Obama faces re-election in November.

Mr Harper, who has been in office since 2006, won a new term in office in May 2011.

Source

Insider reveals secrets of North America plot

PREMEDITATED MERGER

No ‘conspiracy theory,’ scheme hatched by CFR was sold to Bush, now Obama

Jerome R. Corsi - October 23, 2009

NEW YORK – The integration of the United States with Canada and Mexico, long deemed by many as little more than a fanciful “conspiracy theory,” was actually an idea promoted by the Council on Foreign Relations and sold to President Bush as a means of increasing commerce and business interests throughout North America, according to a top Canadian businessman.

Thomas d’Aquino, CEO and president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives – the Canadian counterpart to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – confirmed in an interview recently published in Canada the accuracy of what WND first reported over three years ago: namely, that the Council on Foreign Relations was the prime mover in establishing the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.

Published by the Metropolitan Corporate Counsel Oct. 4, the d’Aquino interview verifies that the creation of the SPP was not a “conspiracy theory” but a well-thought-out North American integration plan launched by his organization, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, along with the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States.

Full story

Source: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113913

.

THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION HAS ARRIVED

THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION HAS ARRIVED

By Betty Freauf

August 12, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

You’ve heard President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel’s statement about never passing up a crisis? The disgruntled grass roots are rising up against any government health care plan. House speaker Pelosi and others are calling the uprising “Astroturfing” suggesting that it really isn’t true grassroots but some organization behind the scenes are doing what Barack Obama did as a “community organizer” and now that the tables are turned on them by individuals and not collective actions by some community organizer, they are perplexed.

My own neophyte Congressman Kurt Schrader in office for the first time since January is in our area but his staff advises me he is having no open town hall meetings and this was confirmed on a recent radio station. He is simply meeting one on one with people. These traitors to our Constitutional Republic are traveling with bodyguards and police protection in some areas. In our representative government the power flows from God to the citizen to representatives. People elect legislators, Congress people, senators, presidents, governors and judges and the officials are accountable to the electorate, not the other way around. Constitutional rights and due process are upheld and limited government is the result. However, in direct government also known as mobocracy, which we are experiencing now is the result of the people ruling by emotions causing lawmakers to legislate on impulse. There are no absolutes and righteousness. The staff at my Congressman’s office didn’t know these entitlements that are breaking our country are unconstitutional. He didn’t seem to have a clue!

Recognizing Obama’s diminishing popularity with those who are suffering voter remorse, I find it to be an act of desperation by the Democrats as they are going on an attack of people who are opposing the Obama socialist agenda calling them among other things, “angry mobs.” The Democrats have complete control so why are they so paranoid? Maybe they fear disgruntled Americans may start throwing shoes toward elected officials showing disgust and disrespect as they do in Muslin countries.

The Obama administration seems completely ignorant and tone deaf if they can’t realize these are people of all different stripes from all parties so I have come to the conclusion that Obama is trying to goad what he sees as “evil-right wingers” into doing something more serious and my great fear is that some idiot is going to take the bait. My first inclination was the Obama administration would arrange to have deliberate agitators sent into these meetings. FOX listeners saw on their television news the appropriately dressed and armed Black Panthers and by their very presence intimidating voters in an incident in Philadelphia last November. Attorney General Eric Holder decided not to pursue a civil criminal indictment against them. Please remember this same A.G. Holder classifies pro-lifers and pro-gun Americans as terrorists. And now I hear Obama has sent e-mails to his ACORN and SEIU union thugs to infiltrate these town hall meetings and Pelosi is referring to the protestors as Nazis. This could get ugly! Is it President Barack Obama’s hidden intent to then sign an Executive Order declaring Martial Law? Martial Law is rule by the military and comes into existence when civil government can no longer maintain law and order. The Posse Comitatus Act doesn’t allow government to use our military against citizens but it didn’t stop President Clinton and Attorney General Reno at Waco, Texas when they attacked the Branch Davidian killing innocent people. If this is the case, the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Writ of Habeas Corpus (right to trial by jury) can be suspended. In any late fascist shift, the final stage is the establishment of government by emergency decree or actual Martial law and the leader is above the law and he becomes the decider – not the uniter as Obama claimed in the presidential campaign.

The Feds already have a plan in place to train clergy to “quell dissent” during Martial Law. In 1962 the Supreme Court redefined the separation of church and state. The court wrote its own commandments and expelled prayer and Bible reading from public schools leaving a vacuum for drugs, sex, occult religions and guns to fill. These double minded sycophants want “separation of church and state” but now they suddenly would want pastors to “quell dissent” when they should be busy winning people to the Lord. They decry Christian involvement in public policy while at the same time they want to use pastors to facilitate tyranny? Unbelievable! Constitutionalist and Congressman Ron Paul says the stock market will eventually collapse but Martial Law provisions are in place to deal with economic discord. So it is apparent they have long been aware that the possibility of continued, unrestrained unconstitutional centralized government with Caesar as arbiter of morals and “truth” was going to cause a problem.


It is common knowledge to those who are informed and not brainwashed that enemies attack when their target is most weakened and divided and an Executive Order by the “uniter”, President Barack Obama for Martial Law, would serve the purpose of further weakening and dividing our nation creating an atmosphere for our enemies to invade. It’s called Politics of Distraction Eternal encirclement, plus internal demoralization plus thermonuclear blackmail leads to progressive surrender. That long as been the goal of the communists and China has devoted much of its newly found economic strength to building one of the most modern armies in the world. Their one-child policy aborts baby girls but favors boys for a strong military. America’s capitalists and government leaders at the highest level and even our consumers are willing to ignore China’s egregious human rights abuses as long as the entrepreneurs make profits, the government officials get campaign contributions and the consumers are able to buy cheap goods. We may have bought the rope that will hang us!

Whether or not the Chicago rioters of ’68 intended, an article in the 9/1/2008 New American said the effect of their actions was to further empower the government they claim to oppose, and to further erode the personal freedoms of all Americans. One of the most important results along those lines was the creation of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, the main federal agency that has been involved in nationalizing our local police departments over the past four decades.

At the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle in 1999, riots occurred and troops had to be called in for mass arrests. Was it a psychological game plan to prepare American for a coming state of emergency? Other miscellaneous military actions in cities across the U.S. have occurred scaring the daylights out of people who were not informed about what was going on and only reported in the areas in which they occurred.

The April 1999 McAlvany newsletter reported that as part of the new Clinton anti-terrorism initiative, the U.S. Army conducted a series of exercises near Corpus Christi, Texas. Without notice to local residents, black helicopters with elite troops from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, descended upon the towns of Kingsville and Port Aransas bombs bursting and guns blazing, with real explosive and live ammunition, simulating a raid against real terrorists. Additional military exercises were held in Anniston, Alabama and Monterey, California.

When the Rajneesh invaded Central Oregon in the early 1980s and followers from the world came to Oregon to worship the Baghwan, our Governor Vic Atiyeh carried a Martial Law order with him at all times fearing violence by the Rajneeshee. When Martin Luther King was shot, rioting in Washington, D.C. caused Martial Law to be declared throughout the city and troops were marching up and down.

Our law enforcement systems have gradually been transformed into Soviet-type management of the American people. Law enforcement that once was a shield of the innocent is now a weapon in the hands of government. With the passage of the USA Patriot Act and all legislation following has effectively militarized law enforcement in the U.S. In 2004 Democrat presidential candidate Senator John Kerry spoke of a comprehensive commitment to national service by Americans of all ages, telling college students “change starts with you” and giving aid for college tuition for national service and now we hear President Barack Obama suggesting the same program. Volunteerism is already a requirement for high school seniors to graduate. Could this easily develop into something reminiscent of Hitler’s Brown Shirts? You say it couldn’t happen here? Read by a retired sheriff far more knowledgeable than I am.

Remember the border patrol agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean who were sent to prison for doing their jobs? Well, recently I read in Jerome Corsi’s 2007 book The Late Great USA that presidential administrations since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have pursued strategies consistent with precipitating a merger of the U.S., Mexico and Canada (North American Union). Mexico demanded the prosecution of these Border patrol agents and President George W. Bush and his Attorney General Alberto Gonzales complied. And then Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, the illegal Mexican smuggling drugs across the border who got shot in the butt turned around and sued the Border Patrol for $5 million for violating his civil rights. Corsi writes the Bush administration’s lack of protection of our Southern border and his close ties with U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton in El Paso who decided to protect “the civil rights” of illegal immigrants, even when they were involved in smuggling large quantities of marijuana into the United States further frustrated many Americans.

Readers will recall it was under President Bill Clinton and the Republican controlled Congress that we were given NAFTA. House Speaker at that time was Newt Gingrich, frequent guest on FOX. Talk show host, Rush Limbaugh also promoted NAFTA. Mexico’s intervention into American border law enforcement is another indication of our gradual ceding of our sovereignty. Corsi writes our government has lost the resolve to secure our borders and to enforce our laws. The message from the White House to the Border Patrol and all other law enforcement officers couldn’t be clearer: When it comes to illegal aliens, “hands off!” After the Ramos-Compean imprisonment, all law enforcement officers encountering illegal aliens now must consider the political ramifications of their actions…they could end up in prison! A 5/5/1969 article by Susan L.M. Huch in the American Opinion wrote that the whole pattern of drug abuse meshes nicely with the Communist campaign to generate hostility toward law-enforcement personnel and to foment conflict between the generations. It is therefore not at all surprising that at the base of the promotion of marijuana are hundreds of “underground” Marxist tabloids, pushing drugs at American youth as instant Nirvana.

In addition to calling the disgruntled “right wingers” an “angry mob” and “Nazis,” to add insult to further injury now the Obama administration has established a “squeal” website for people to report about alleged falsehoods by their friends, relatives and neighbors about the House health plan that even Barack doesn’t know what is in it. They are looking for snitches. This only inflames people, which leads me to believe this is all planned. Barack wants trouble!!!

The Obama administration hates the free enterprise system and now insurance companies in general, who often must abide by silly state regulations such as in vitro, birth control pills and abortions that drives up the cost. I’ve been told insurance companies pay a percentage to states for every premium they collect. Think of the additional revenue the states will lose if all the insurance company employees are put out of work but think of the jobs in Washington, D.C. that will be required to administer yet another bogus governmental agency and all of them will be on the premium health care plan that the elected officials enjoy. Think Job Patronage.

The breakdown of social values has created moral, spiritual and political chaos opening the door for the political tyranny. Forgetting that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, materialistic and hedonistic Americans who weren’t paying attention to national problems and ignoring the few voices crying out in the wilderness as our freedoms were unraveling stitch by stitch are trying to play catch up; however, they are finding great opposition because the enemy is well organized while new comers haven’t even been to boot camp not alone ready to fight the battle. Glenn Beck’s 9/12 project is a step in the right direction so it is Onward Christian Soldiers.




Source: http://www.newswithviews.com/Betty/Freauf145.htm

North American Leaders Pledge Action on Swine Flu, Economy, Security

North American Leaders Pledge Action on Swine Flu, Economy, Security
By Kent Klein
Guadalajara, Mexico
10 August 2009

Mexican President Felipe Calderon,(C)US President Barack Obama (L) and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper talk before NAFTA summit, 10 Aug 2009

The leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico have concluded their brief summit by pledging more cooperation to fight the swine influenza A-H1N1 virus and illegal drug cartels as well as to strengthen the North American economy. As VOA's Kent Klein reports from Guadalajara, Mexico, U.S. President Barack Obama also gave a spirited defense of his policy toward Honduras.

President Obama, Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper have left Guadalajara with a promise to work together to prepare for the next swine flu outbreak, expected later this year.

Mr. Harper said the three nations can build on their previous efforts. "The excellent cooperation among our three countries was effective in helping to manage the initial outbreak, and we will continue our cooperative efforts," he said.

President Obama said greater cooperation is imperative throughout North America. "With science as our guide, we resolve to continue taking all necessary preparations and precautions to prepare for the upcoming flu season, and protect the health of our people. This challenge transcends borders, and so must our response," he said.

The three leaders also concentrated on boosting the regional economy, which has suffered in the global recession. Mr. Obama promised aggressive and coordinated action to restore economic growth.

The president and the Canadian prime minister reaffirmed their support for Mexican President Calderon's war against illegal drug cartels.

But Mr. Obama pressed his Mexican counterpart to be careful to observe human rights. "I have great confidence in President Calderon's administration, applying the law enforcement techniques that are necessary to curb the power of the cartels, but doing so in a way that is consistent with human rights," he said.

Mr. Calderon responded, through a translator, that he is most concerned about the right of Mexican citizens to walk the streets in safety. "The struggle, the battle, the fight against organized crime is precisely to preserve the human rights of the Mexican people," he said.

President Obama downplayed disagreements with Canada over the "Buy American" provision of the U.S. economic stimulus plan. Mr. Obama said the clause has not endangered the billions of dollars in commerce between the world's two biggest trading partners.

All three leaders reaffirmed their support for democracy in Honduras and called for the return of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, who was ousted in a coup on June 28.

Mr. Obama responded angrily to criticism of U.S. involvement in efforts to restore Mr. Zelaya to power. "The same critics who say that the United States has not intervened enough in Honduras are the same people who are always saying that we are always intervening, and Yankees need to get out of Latin America. You cannot have it both ways," he said.

Prime Minister Harper then defended U.S. policy. "If I were an American, I would be really fed up with this kind of hypocrisy. The United States is accused of meddling, except for when it is accused of not meddling," he said.

The North American summit also served as a prelude to the G-20 summit of major and developing economies, set for September in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the October summit on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Mr. Harper is scheduled to visit the Washington in September, and he agreed to host the next North American summit in Canada next year.

Source: http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-08-10-voa27.cfm

.

Agenda-Driven Response: HAARP and the Army's Land-Grab in Colorado

- by Deanna Spingola ©, 22 June 2008

Unfortunately, despite the government's responsibility to protect citizen's rights, it is blatantly obvious that the government is following an alternative, deliberately destructive agenda including: rural cleansing of the resource-producing population, economic destabilization, runaway inflation, unrestrained immigration, illegal surveillance, the NAU, deteriorating infrastructure, ethnic disparity, de-population through war, disease, toxicity, and chemtrails; selective response to "natural" disasters, destruction of the middle class, seizure of private property and obliteration of God-given liberties - all at the hands of an elite ruling class - crony monopoly capitalists and war profiteers, intent on stealing and controlling the earth's resources, a contrived diminishing food supply and the surviving useless eaters, still obedient and moderately productive. What happened to that illusive balance of power?

At the president's discretion, along with those covert councils who supervise him, and without congressional or constitutional oversight, fifteen Executive Branch Secretaries control all federal bureaucracies which exert dictatorial power over every aspect of our lives. These agencies and their many sub-agencies facilitate U.N. programs including Agenda 21, developed during the Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, June 3-14, 1992. These regulatory, metastasized Departments are: Agriculture (1889), Commerce (1903), Defense (1947), Education (1979), Energy (1977), Health and Human Services (1953), Homeland Security (November 25, 2002, absorbed FEMA in 2003 which was created by Presidential Order on April 1, 1979), Housing and Urban Development (1965), Interior (1849), Labor (1913), State (1789), Transportation (1967), Treasury (1789), and Veterans Affairs (1988), and the Attorney General (1789).1

Significantly, under the Bilderberg-approved George W. Bush, cabinet-level status was granted to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, created December 2, 1970) and to the U.S. Trade Representative (1962).2 In addition to power over our children through education, price of gas through manipulation of energy, etc., this allows a sitting president to bypass Congress regarding anything and everything that has to do with the environment - a veritable Pandora's Box. With cabinet-level status for the Trade Representative, the president may sign treaties without congressional approval. A declaration of war, once required, was quietly disbanded with the current, unconstitutional king's cabinet structure.

The elevation of the EPA was first attempted in March 1990 under G. H. W. Bush. He wanted it in time to celebrate Earth Day on April 22, 1990.3 Clinton also attempted to empower the EPA which, like FEMA and Nixon's 1972 Regional Councils, is divided into ten regions (for better control) - see maps. The EPA declares its Agenda 21 commitment, as noted on the web site.
The Army makes it perfectly clear that it intends to seize private property in southeastern Colorado. They don't "need" the land for training purposes - that is a pretext. They have sufficient mega military training bases in Iraq (along with the world's biggest and most expensive embassy), also on plundered land. The power of eminent domain is an oft-used seizure tactic; there are others. On February 4, 2008, Not 1 More Acre!, advocates for the beleaguered citizens of southeastern Colorado, said: "The Pentagon and its military contractors are continuing to push plans to more than triple the size of the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado - in contravention of a law passed by Congress which forbids them to do so."

Remember, the Pentagon and the Department of Defense, since 1947, are under the jurisdiction of the king's cabinet. Congressional leaders, frequently indebted to campaign contributors and deep-pocketed lobbyists, go through the legislative motions and pass laws they can't or won't enforce. Many sincere officials are out-numbered by the compliant power-loving majority, who long ago abdicated their sworn responsibilities - just like those who handed America's financial resources to the Federal Reserve private bankers - the internationalist bankers who currently manage the president, his cabinet, elections and the monopoly media's talking heads.

Despite sounding conspiratorial, it is a fact that the U.S. has the capability of manipulating "the climate for military use." They have applied those "modification techniques" for "more than half a century" covertly maneuvering "weather patterns, communications and electric power systems as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the U.S. to disrupt and dominate entire regions" - against "enemy countries, friendly nations" or even, dare I say, the U.S. to "destabilize economies, ecosystems and agriculture."4

According to a top-secret congressional hearing held March 20, 1974, the military used weather modification in Vietnam and by 1977 was spending $2.8 million a year on weather-modification research; the same year that the United Nations banned the "hostile use of all environmental modification techniques." Allegedly, the U.S. discontinued all weather-modification research in 1979.5

HAARP, initiated in 1992 by Advanced Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI), a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Corporation (ARCO) "was developed as part of an Anglo-American partnership between Raytheon Corporation "which owns the HAARP patents, and British Aerospace Systems (BAES). The HAARP project is one among several collaborative ventures in advanced weapons systems between the two defense giants. APTI (including the HAARP patents) was sold by ARCO to E-Systems Inc, in 1994."6

"BAES was involved in the development of the advanced stage of the HAARP antenna array under a 2004 contract with the Office of Naval Research. The installation of 132 high frequency transmitters was entrusted by BAES to its U.S. subsidiary, BAE Systems Inc. and their Electronic Warfare division. In September 2007, BAE Systems Inc. received the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) top award for "outstanding leadership and engineering innovation in designing, constructing, and activating the Defense Department's High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) instrument." "HAARP, the world's largest and most capable ionospheric research facility, will serve the U.S. scientific and defense communities for the next 30 to 50 years." HAARP was dedicated June 27, 2007 and is "jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and DARPA.78

The Department of Defense and the CIA, the president's enforcement agencies, has contracts with E-Systems, founded in 1964. The CIA is "the intelligence-gathering and covert-action arm of the president." It is not "some sort of independently run mythical loose cannon."9 E-Systems, owned by war-profiteer Raytheon since 1994, "manufactures and distributes electronic systems and communications networks, including electronic warfare equipment, navigation and reconnaissance machinery, and highly sophisticated spying devices."10 In the early 1970s, E-Systems installed communications equipment on the President's Air Force One.11 This created an airborne command post for the Pentagon and the White House. This "Doomsday Plane" enables the president to manage a nuclear war.12

Although, there is no hard evidence that HAARP has or will be used for military purposes, the involvement of the Department of Defense would decidedly suggest such use. After all, they are not recognized for life and health improvement studies. Advanced technology and weaponry would provide ample opportunities to achieve their ultimate "full spectrum dominance," including the "globalization of the world's economy."13

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) "has a mandate 'to assess scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of climate change.' This mandate includes environmental warfare. 'Geo-engineering' is acknowledged, but the underlying military applications are neither the object of policy analysis or scientific research in the thousands of pages of IPCC reports and supporting documents, based on the expertise and input of some 2,500 scientists, policymakers and environmentalists."14 How convenient - just ignore the horrific possibilities and implications.

HAARP was unable to detect the "precise location of tunnels and underground shelters which was defined as a "serious weakness in the Department of Defense plans for precision attacks on hardened targets and for counter proliferation." Therefore, increased funding of $75 million a year was allotted, in May 1994, for further research.15

Residents of southeastern Colorado had already suffered through seven years of drought, accompanied by major financial losses due to the skyrocketing cost of hay, for which there was no assistance.16 Benefits, financial or otherwise, are typically and repeatedly extended to well-connected corporations - rarely to independent, struggling producers.

Then in December 2006, two back to back blizzards delivered record snow volume of 3 to 4 feet, with snow drifts as high as 10 to 18 feet causing financial losses of at least $500 million, economically devastating the people.17 During the storms, between 10,000 and 15,000 cattle perished from starvation and exposure. The numbers increased as the snow melted and more carcasses were revealed. The area affected was home to "345,000 head of cattle and calves, 23,500 head of producing sows and 112,000 head of sheep and lambs."18 Livestock contributes 70% to Colorado's agricultural gross product."19

The record storms forced "the closures of Interstate Highways 25, 76 and 70, as well as U.S. Routes 350, 36 and 85." Following Holiday Blizzards I and II, as they were named, more than a foot of additional snow fell on January 4-5, bringing the total snowfall for 16 days to more than 80 inches in some areas.20

On January 16, 2007, newly elected Governor Bill Ritter wrote to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns asking for federal "financial assistance to offset livestock and agricultural losses and to help prevent additional cattle deaths." Additionally, he sought funds to "help cover" the costs of "snow removal and emergency rescue operations." Ritter wanted the USDA to "declare the following counties disaster areas: Baca, Bent, Cheyenne, Crowley, Huerfano, Kiowa, Las Animas, Lincoln, Otero and Prowers counties,"21 some of the same land that the Army had targeted for seizure.

The federal government offered emergency "loans" to the ranchers and farmers, people who already had burdensome bank loans.22 The state also offered funds for "the rescue and recovery of livestock." But, the most immediate help came from other ranchers - neighbors helping neighbors. Legislation was approved for those who suffered livestock losses based on a presidential disaster declaration. Ranchers then counted on federal help.23

Unfortunately, there were restrictions. According to their disaster declarations, "thousands of dead cattle" apparently were not "enough of a disaster" for the U.S. Department of Agriculture who "denied disaster relief and the attendant low-interest loans" to the ten Army-targeted counties devastated by the blizzards in southeast Colorado.24 Lack of assistance might force some discouraged ranchers to sell their land. Although ranchers were not "holding their breath" for state or federal relief, such relief was desired and somewhat expected, given other disaster declarations programs instigated by FEMA and the USDA.25

Governor Ritter expressed disappointment over assistance conditions that were impossible to meet. It was an additional setback to ranchers and farmers who watched their livelihoods dissolve after "prolonged drought followed by devastating storms." Ritter, along with a state delegation appealed the USDA decision against granting low-interest loans. However, the ranchers had "sustained such terrific losses that more bank loans" would not have kept "them from going under."26

The Emergency Farm Relief Act of 2007, in the works for several years, would have provided payments to ranchers for livestock losses due to floods, wildfires, hurricanes and blizzards. However, USDA denial was based on its assessment that the counties had not suffered 30 percent production losses - not economic losses."27 "One factor leading to the limited assistance was that livestock do not fall under USDA crop disaster designations, since livestock are not a crop."28

Additionally, freezing rain during those December 2006 storms resulted in "significant ice accumulation" causing "tens of thousands of people" in the five affected states to lose electrical power, "paralyzing much of the Great Plains. Ice accumulation also downed trees and communication towers."29

"The worst victims of the December storms, particularly in Colorado's High Plains, were cattle; thousands were trapped by heavy snow and strong winds, which created drifts up to 20 feet in some areas. Strong north winds caused unbelievable blizzard conditions, with drifts as tall as two-story buildings."30

That blizzard may affect cattle reproduction for years to come. Bulls experienced reproductive problems "due to frozen testicles." Cows whose embryos died in early pregnancy due to the cold were vulnerable to deadly infections. Large numbers of "stillborn or aborted calves" resulted in a decreased "number of replacement females. Such reproductive problems resulting from the blizzard may have an economic impact for the next three to five years."31

Some hay deliveries arrived weeks later, too late for the deceased cows. "Some ranchers felt the distribution could have been timelier in execution. Ranchers and farmers have not received federal disaster relief and emergency aid, such as money for livestock rescue and recovery."32 Too little, too late - just like New Orleans and currently, Iowa. FEMA immediately responded on 9/11. Debris, which may have provided evidence, was hurriedly cleared away, an anomaly in such circumstances. The EPA, also very quickly, declared that the toxic air was harmless. People, trusting authority, accepted the falsehood. Many individuals developed serious health problems and have since died.

Colorado applicants for assistance had to leap through numerous hoops despite very public, appeasing, sympathetic rhetoric and philanthropic performances associated with the Presidential Snow Emergency Declarations. One may view the After Action Report. Yes, folks, we can trust the government - NOT!

HAARP: Part 1HAARP: Part 2Who's Controlling the Weather?HAARP - Nature Modification WeaponChemtrails and Fort CarsonJust why/how did healthy, 51-year old Brig. Gen. Bruce Barlow (scroll down) die? He was stationed at Fort Carson.

Endnotes
1^ President Bush's Cabinet
2^ Ibid
3^ "House Panel Votes to Elevate The E.P.A. to Cabinet Status," New York Times March 14, 1990
4^ Michel Chossudovsky, "Weather warfare, Beware the US military's experiments with climatic warfare," December 7, 2007
5^ Drake Bennett, "Don't like the weather? Change it," July 3, 2005
6^ Ibid
7^ Ibid
8^ USA. BAE Systems space weather research facility wins top award
9^ Pete Brewton, The Mafia, CIA & George Bush, the Untold Story of America's Greatest Financial Debacle, 1992, Introduction
10^ The Princeton Review, Internship: E-SYSTEMS
11^ Brazil: Amazon Contractor Raytheon has CIA Ties by Pratap Chatterjee, Inter Press Service, December 3, 1995
12^ Chossudovsky, op. cit.
13^ Ibid.
14^ Ibid
15^ HAARP: Detection and Imaging of Underground Structures Using ELF/VLF Radio Waves
16^ State, ranchers fear record loss of cattle, Toll from snowstorms expected to rattle beef industry in Colorado by Deborah Frazier and David Montero, Rocky Mountain News, January 3, 2007
17^ Amy Gillentine, Colorado's ranchers face 7-figure losses because of last month's Snowfall
18^ Gov. Ritter Seeks Federal Aid For Livestock Losses, January 16, 2007
19^ USDA Press Release: USDA Approves Blizzard-Relief Loans To Ranchers In 10 Southeast Colorado Counties, January 26, 2007
20^ December 20-21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard
21^ Gov. Ritter Seeks ... op. cit.
22^ USDA Press Release, op. cit
23^ Amy Gillentine, op. cit.
24^ Editorial, Ranchers deserve federal aid, February 13, 2007
25^ Emergency Responses for High Plains Cattle Affected by the December 28-31, 2006, Blizzard by Bimal Kanti Paul, Deborah Che, and Vicki L. Tinnon, Department of Geography, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas Quick Response Research Report 191. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Natural Hazards Center
26^ Editorial, Ranchers deserve federal aid, February 13, 2007
27^ Ibid
28^ Bimal Kanti Paul et al, op. cit.

29^ Ibid
30^ Ibid
31^ Ibid
32^ Ibid

About the Author

Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution. Deanna's Web Site

.

Source:http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Commentary/HAARP_Colorado.htm

.

.

Will The SPP Rise Again?

Will The SPP Rise Again?

By Dana Gabriel http://www.borderfirereport.net/dana-gabriel/will-the-spp-rise-again.php


By all accounts, the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) appears to be dead, despite no official announcement by the governments of Canada, the U.S. or Mexico. There have been numerous calls to replace the SPP. Although the means of achieving deeper continental integration may vary, the objectives remain the same. The global elite have not abandoned their vision for a North American Union and are now counting on their new puppet, President Barack Obama, to carry on with this agenda.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, was told in late February of this year that the controversial SPP was likely dead. CEO and president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE), Thomas d’Aquino, testified and answered questions before the committee. He admitted that the it was probably only a matter of time before the SPP was replaced. D’Aquino stated, “Why it will be replaced is because the energy, environment, trade, financial regulation, and agriculture, all these things that we do in the form of millions of cross-border transactions everyday are going to have to be co-ordinated." In addition, he emphasized the importance of Canada-U.S. bilateralism, but cautioned against cutting Mexico out of the equation. The Carleton University’s Canada-U.S. Project was released to the public in the new year and called for wholesale changes to the SPP.

The CCCE is made-up of 150 of Canada’s top executives who comment on public policy. It is a virtual whose who of Canadian corporate sector elites. Since its inception, the CCCE has had intimate ties to both the Liberal and Conservative parties, with many of their proposals being implemented into policy. The CCCE was a driving force behind the Canada-U.S. FTA and later NAFTA. Some of their recommendations also became part of the SPP. Their president, d’Aquino, has participated in and co-chaired many reports and policy paper initiatives pushing for deeper North American integration. So, when he says that the SPP will probably be replaced, he is not just blowing smoke.

The SPP is the brainchild of business and political elites and has essentially carried on where NAFTA left off. This is a corporate driven agenda spearheaded by working groups and unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who are laying the foundation for a North American Union. Many in the business community have been disappointed with the SPP’s progress, feeling that their recommendations are not being implemented fast enough. The SPP might have outlived its usefulness under its current name, but it is doubtful that multinational business elites are about to abandon it entirely, unless there is something to replace it.

Ahead of the North American Leader’s Summit in New Orleans in April of 2008, it was apparent that the SPP was in trouble. Think tanks such as the Fraser Institute, were calling for expanding and speeding up continental integration, but at the same time were recommending changing the SPP’s name, in an effort to save and revitalize the process. The Hudson Institute also acknowledged that it may be necessary to redesign and relaunch the SPP. Robert A. Pastor, who is considered by many to be the architect of a proposed North American Community, later admitted that under Bush, North American integration had stalled. He stated that the new president would probably discard the SPP. This agenda has at least publicly been placed on the back burner, especially given the current economic climate, but the SPP will rise again in one form or another.

Obama has all but waffled on his promise to renegotiate NAFTA and minus a few slight cosmetic changes that might be made, the flawed trade deal will remain intact. It is possible that economic, political, as well as social instability could be used as an opportunity to further advance the creation of a North American Union. The crisis in Mexico could be used to setup a North American security perimeter. Plans for deeper continental integration are still alive and whatever direction they may take, you can be sure that big business will be intimately involved.

Dana Gabriel writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, and other issues.

Contact: newworldordermustbestopped@hotmail.com

.

Missouri State Police Think You And I Are Terrorists

March 17, 2009

Thanks to a concerned Missouri state policeman, a nationally syndicated radio talk show host stated that he was alerted last week to a secret Missouri state police report that categorized supporters of Congressman Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself as "'militia' influenced terrorists." The report, he said, "instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties."

Ignoring the threat of Muslim terrorists, the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report focuses on the so-called "militia movement" and "conflates it with supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order."

This report is not original, of course. During the Clinton administration, a Phoenix Federal Bureau of Investigation and Joint Terrorism Task Force explicitly designated "defenders" of the Constitution as "right-wing extremists." However, the MIAC report significantly expands on earlier documents and is the first known document to actually name names.

According to the MIAC, opposition to world government, NAFTA, federalization of the states, and restrictive gun laws are a potential threat to the police. The MIAC report also refers to Aaron Russo's film, "America: Freedom to Fascism."

The story exposing the MIAC report states, "The MIAC report is particularly pernicious because it indoctrinates Missouri law enforcement in the belief that people who oppose confiscatory taxation, believe in the well-documented existence of a New World Order and world government (a Google search of this phrase will pull up numerous references made by scores of establishment political leaders), and are opposed to the obvious expansion of the federal government at the expense of the states as violent extremists who are gunning for the police. It specifically targets supporters of mainstream political candidates and encourages police officers to consider them dangerous terrorists."

See the report here:
http://www.infowars.com/secret-state-police-report-ron-paul-bob-barr-chuck-baldwin-libertarians-are-terrorists/

The Columbia Daily Tribune also carried the story last Saturday. It quoted Missouri resident Tim Neal of Miller County. "When Neal read the report, he couldn't help but think it described him. A military veteran and a delegate to the 2008 Missouri Republican state convention, he didn't appreciate being lumped in with groups like the Neo-Nazis.

"'I was going down the list and thinking, "Check, that's me,"' he said. 'I'm a Ron Paul supporter, check. I talk about the North American union, check. I've got the "America: Freedom to Fascism" video loaned out to somebody right now. So that means I'm a domestic terrorist? Because I've got a video about the Federal Reserve?'"

The Tribune's report also acknowledges, "The [MIAC] report's most controversial passage states that militia 'most commonly associate with third-party political groups' and support presidential candidates such as Ron Paul, former Constitutional [sic] Party candidate Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate last year."

The Tribune report also said, "Neal, who has a Ron Paul bumper sticker on his car, said the next time he is pulled over by a police officer, he won't know whether it's because he was speeding or because of his political views."

See the Columbia Tribune report here:
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/mar/14/fusion-center-data-draws-fire-over-assertions/

I realize that there are people who will dismiss this kind of story as insignificant. They shouldn't. This is very serious and should be treated as such. Anyone who knows anything at all about history knows that before a state or national government can persecute--and commit acts of violence against--a group of people, they must first marginalize the group from society's mainstream and categorize it as dangerous.

Rome did exactly that to Christians, as did Mao's China; Hitler's Germany did the same thing to Jews; Stalin's Russia did the same thing to political dissenters, etc. That a State police agency in America would actually infer that people who supported Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself in a political campaign are somehow indistinguishable from violence-prone "militias" is beyond insulting: it is a smear campaign, and might should even be regarded as a hate crime!

Beyond that, the MIAC report paints with a very broad brush. In addition to supporting Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself, a review of the report reveals that opposition to any of the following risks someone being classified as a potential "domestic terrorist":

The New World Order
The United Nations
Gun Control
The violation of Posse Comitatus
The Federal Reserve
The Income Tax
The Ammunition Accountability Act
A possible Constitutional Convention (Con Con)
The North American Union
Universal Service Program
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
Abortion on demand
Illegal Immigration


Again, if you oppose any of the above, or if you supported Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself, you risk being labeled a "domestic terrorist," according to the MIAC.

Do you not see how dangerous this kind of slanderous labeling can become? It could affect your flight status when you try to board an airline. It could affect your application for sensitive jobs. It could affect your adjudication before a court or judge. It could make you a target for aggressive law enforcement strategies. It could affect your being able to obtain a passport. It could affect one's ability to purchase a firearm or receive a State concealed weapon permit.

This is very serious business! We are not talking about private opinions. We are talking about law enforcement agencies. And remember, most law enforcement agencies share these types of reports; therefore, how many other state police agencies have similar reports floating around? Probably several. Plus, how do we know that this report was not influenced by federal police agencies? We don't.

Rest assured, I do not plan to take this lying down. As one who is personally named in the above report, I demand a public retraction and apology from the MIAC and Missouri State Police. I can tell you that my family is extremely distraught that their husband, father, and grandfather would be labeled in such a manner. I am also not ruling out legal action. In addition, I am discussing an appropriate response with Ron Paul and Bob Barr. I will keep readers posted as to what comes of these discussions (as I am at liberty to do so, of course).

In the meantime, I encourage everyone who believes in the freedom of speech and who believes that the MIAC report is an egregious miscarriage of justice to contact the appropriate Missouri police officials. Here is the contact information:

Email address: Brandon.middleton@mshp.dps.mo.gov


Missouri Information Analysis Center
Division of Drugs & Crime Control
P. O. Box 568
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0568
Phone: 573-751-6422
Toll Free: 866-362-6422
Fax: 573-751-9950


And lest one thinks that none of this concerns him or her, I would like to remind you of the lament of Martin Niemoeller back in the days of Hitler's Germany. Niemoeller was a decorated U-Boat Captain and pastor of great distinction. An avid anti-communist, Niemoeller at first supported Hitler's rise to power and was hesitant to oppose the violations of civil rights against various groups he personally found distasteful. It did not take long, however, before Niemoeller realized that when laws protecting the rights of all were removed from some, no one was safe--including him. Unfortunately, he learned his lesson too late, as he, too, was persecuted and imprisoned by Hitler's State Police. Here is what Niemoeller said about his indifference:

"They came first for the communists, and I did not speak up-
because I was not a communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak up-
because I was not a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak up-
because I was not a Jew;
And then they came for me-
and there was no one left to speak up."


So, those of you who think you have nothing to fear because you did not vote for Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or me, or because you do not live in the State of Missouri need to think again. As I have repeatedly said, we either have freedom for all, or we have freedom for none. Truly, secret police reports such as the one above threaten the liberties of us all.

So, will you speak up now or wait until they come for you and no one is left to speak up?

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090317.html
.

P.S. Highlight added for emphasis........... Arsenio

Deeper North American Integration Still in the Cards

Deeper North American Integration Still in the Cards

By Dana Gabriel http://www.borderfirereport.net/dana-gabriel/deeper-north-american-integration-still-in-the-cards.html

Many Canadians view a Barack Obama presidency as an opportunity to further renew Canada-U.S. relations. This includes a more North American approach in dealing with challenges that face not only the continent, but the world as well. The Security and Prosperity and Partnership (SPP), a trilateral initiative between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, has stalled and in some cases, Canada-U.S. bilateralism has also been hampered. Many policy papers and reports are still calling for deeper North American integration.

The policy paper entitled “From Correct to Inspired: A Blueprint for Canada-U.S. Engagement” was released to the public in January of this year. It was prepared by Carleton University’s Centre for Trade Policy and Law and outlines how the Canada-U.S. partnership can be rejuvenated. It details how Canada can help Obama further reshape America’s role in the world. At almost every turn, the report promotes stronger U.S. relations and emphasizes how Canada must present itself as a valued partner on broader global issues. The report recommends more Canada-U.S. bilateralism in areas of security, trade, energy, and the environment. It also proposes an annual bilateral summit between the two countries to foster more cooperation. It suggests that Canada’s influence and visibility with the new administration might be reduced, if its mission in Afghanistan is not extended beyond 2011.

In addition, the Carleton University Canada-U.S. Project calls for deeper integration and recommends moving beyond NAFTA through separate North American bilateral initiatives. This would still be within the trade agreements framework. On Obama’s pledge to fix NAFTA’s labour and environmental provisions, the report notes that Canada should not worry, as any such move is directed more towards Mexico. It does caution against Canada using its energy resources as a weapon and bargaining tool. The report acknowledges the failures of the SPP and calls for wholesale changes. It blames the sometimes unnecessary inclusion of Mexico from preventing more meaningful Canada-U.S. bilateralism. According to the report, Canada should pursue a NAFTA policy of trilateralism when necessary, but on certain matters, Canada-U.S. bilateralism should be a priority.

A recent trilateral effort put forward by the Arizona State University’s North American Center for Transborder Studies, also calls for deeper integration. In the policy paper entitled “North America Next: A Report to President Obama on Building Sustainable Security and Competitiveness,” it urges the new administration to further improve relations with its NAFTA partners. The goal is to build a more North American strategy and it suggests that this could be achieved through further energizing and expanding the current Trilateral Leaders Summit. The report calls for developing an effective North American trade and transportation plan, which would include an integrated multimodal transportation system. This sure sounds like the NAFTA Superhighway! According to the report, this could be partly paid for by a joint, revolving fund for infrastructure investment. The report also calls for harmonizing freight transportation standards, a special trucker visa, along with complete NAFTA truck access inside all three countries. There has been an ongoing battle to prevent Mexican long-haul trucks access to U.S. roadways beyond the current 25 mile commercial zone restriction.

In advance of Obama’s visit to Canada, a coalition of organizations was stressing the importance of Prime Minister Stephen Harper to commit to a transparent and thorough renegotiation of NAFTA. The Canadian coalition included the Council of Canadians, the Sierra Club of Canada, the Canadian Auto Workers and the Canadian Federation of Students, as well as other organizations. In the letter addressed to Harper, they call for the elimination of the energy clause in NAFTA, which requires Canada to export oil and gas to the U.S., even in time of shortages. They also recommend that the prime minister place a moratorium on the negotiation and ratification of all Canadian bilateral free trade agreements, as well as an end to the SPP. There are other concerns in regards to NAFTA as many Canadians would like to see water excluded from the agreement. This includes a ban on bulk water transfers, along with safeguards against NAFTA Chapter 11 challenges.

There are fears that under an Obama presidency that many on the left will go to sleep, now that Bush is out of office. This includes in Canada, where the left have been instrumental in exposing the SPP and fighting deeper integration into a North American Union. In most instances, North American integration is still very unpopular, but this is a very deep-rooted agenda. Even with a new president, it will likely carry on in some form or another. It is imperative that concerned citizens in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico continue to resist any move towards a North American Union.

How realistic is a North American currency?

How realistic is a North American currency?

Commentary: Uniting U.S., Canada, Mexico money could result from crisis

By Todd Harrison

Last update: 6:12 a.m. EST Jan. 28, 2009

"World, hold on. Instead of messing with our future, open up inside." -- Bob Sinclair

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Thomas Jefferson once said: "When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on." As the global financial system pushes on a string, investors are desperately trying to hold tight.

The New World Order is upon us, full of hope, promise and a fair amount of fear. In our recent discussion regarding the direction of our country, we noted the risks of catering to conventional wisdom and the implications for the U.S. dollar.See MarketWatch column on New World Order.

The Minyanville mantra is to provide financial news you need to know before you know you need it. That's a fine line to walk, as foresight often flies in the face of mainstream acceptance.

In 2006, it seemed counterintuitive to forecast a "prolonged socioeconomic malaise entirely more depressing than a recession." See Minyanville column.

For years, the notion of an "invisible hand" was conspiracy theory until we learned that the Working Group on Financial Markets was a central policy tool. See Minyanville column.

And now, as we gaze across our historically significant horizon, we must open our minds to thoughts and ideas that may seem foreign to folks conditioned by the past and stunned by the present.

Currency crossroads
As governments take on more risk -- as they price assets on behalf of the market and transfer debt from private to public -- the common denominator, or release valve, becomes the currency.

If our economic condition is allowed to take medicine in the form of debt destruction, the greenback will appreciate, and asset classes as a whole will deflate. If we continue to inject drugs that mask symptoms rather than address the disease, the likelihood of a seismic readjustment increases in kind.

The deflationary forces in the marketplace are pervasive, and the "other side" of our current equation, hyperinflation, may be years away. Given the magnitude, breadth and pace of the global financial epidemic, however, we must explore each side of the twisted ride.

Years ago, the Federal Reserve wrote a "solution paper" regarding the need to combat zero-bound interest rates. The concern was the flight of capital from the U.S. and an option discussed was a two-tiered currency, one for U.S citizens and one for foreigners.

Canadian economist Herbert Grubel first introduced a potential manifestation of this concept in 1999. The North American Currency -- called the "Amero" in select circles -- would effectively comingle the Canadian dollar, U.S. dollar and Mexican peso.

On its face, while difficult to imagine, it makes intuitive sense. The ability to combine Canadian natural resources, American ingenuity and cheap Mexican labor would allow North America to compete better on a global stage.

Experience has taught us, however, that perceived solutions introduced by policy makers and politicians don't always have the desired effect.

Unintended consequences
I've long contended that, much like the Internet prophecy proved true -- but not before the tech crash -- so too would globalization, albeit not without painful-yet-necessary debt destruction.

To get through this, we need to go through this. If we're not allowed to go through it, foreigners will seek alternative avenues. Remember, for holders of dollar-denominated assets, seeds of discontent have been sowing under the surface for years, with the greenback off 30% since 2002.

More likely than not, global leaders will watch how our new administration attempts to tackle the financial crisis before taking drastic steps. They understand that co-dependent risk exists as a function of the derivatives that interweave our financial infrastructure. If they could disassociate from our economic ecosystem without inflicting massive damage on themselves, they would have done so long ago.

If forward policy attempts to induce more debt rather than allowing savings and obligations to align, we must respect the potential for a system shock. We may need to let a two-tier currency gain traction if the dollar meaningfully debases from current levels.

If this dynamic plays out -- and I've got no insight that it will -- the global balance of powers would fragment into four primary regions: North America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. In such a scenario, ramifications would manifest through social unrest and geopolitical conflict.

This particular path isn't something one would wish for, but the cumulative imbalances that steadily built in our finance-based economy must be resolved one way or another. Therein lies the critical crossroads we together face as our wary world attempts to find its way.

Scary? Yes. Probable? Not so much, at least for the time being. Possible? Certainly, although I'll again offer that it could take years before the pieces of this prickly puzzle fall into place.

Effective money management dictates weighing the entire probability spectrum of potential outcomes and factoring them into our decision making process. While the notion of a seismic currency shift may seem obscure, we must respect the possibility long before it becomes front-page news.

For if we've learned anything through the last few years, proactive thought provocation is a necessary precursor to effective preparedness.

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/do-we-need-north-american/story.aspx?guid=%7bD10536AF-F929-4AF9-AD10-250B4057A907%7d&print=true&dist=printMidSection