A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
Not too long ago, immigration was a major issue in the GOP primary, but now that Obama and Romney are head to head neither talks about it very much -- at all. Well, they do when they are speaking to Latino audiences.
I understand that both sides want the Latino vote. But let's be honest -- and clear -- here. Only one side will get the Latino vote just as only one side will get the black vote. The democrats will get both because they bought and paid for their votes.
I have not changed my mind about rounding up all the illegals by placing a bounty on them. A couple of "good ole boys" from my neck of the woods would have a couple of school bus loads ready to head to the border by sundown! As uncomfortable as that might be for some, there comes a time when fighting a forest fire one must light his own backfires.
By now, every American knows the federal government has no intention of securing our borders. Anything they say to the contrary is a bald-faced lie.
A question: Where does federal property end and state property begin along the southern border? What, other than the expense, is to stop a state bordering Mexico from falling back to its southernmost edge and securing the border with whatever means that state feels is necessary? It could be a fence, a wall, mine fields, National Guard patrols (with loaded weapons and permission from the governor of that state to use lethal force),whatever that state deemed necessary to stop the invasion of their state.
OK. Now I'll give you the answer as to why it will never be allowed. The states are no longer sovereign. State sovereignty died at Appomattox, Virginia in April of 1865.
Any state that even tried to do as I outlined above would be met with federal troops on their soil in a matter of days -- if not hours.
Now here is what, I think, Americans do not understand, that Americans have not yet been able to grasp. There has been a quiet move afoot, for a few years now to "merge" Mexico, the United States, and Canada into a single entity.
The new country is being referred to, at least temporarily as the "North American Union."
We first learned about the efforts toward forming a North American Union during the George W. Bush Administration. It was vehemently denied by the government. But, there was just too much evidence to the contrary to buy the governments protestations that no such talks were underway. In fact, the group charged with the discussions is the the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). It has been described by the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States as a dialogue group to provide greater cooperation on security and economic issues.
We found traces of the beginning of this North American Union idea as far back as 2003 with some indication that plans were afoot even before 2003. " ... the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) — Canada’s most powerful interest group made up of the CEOs of the 150 largest corporations in Canada, many of which are subsidiaries of foreign, predominantly American, corporations — in January of 2003, issued a press release announcing the creation of their North American Security and Prosperity Initiative. In this, they proposed five main changes to be undertaken in the North American political-economic landscape: “Reinvent borders, maximize regulatory efficiencies, negotiate a comprehensive resource security pact, reinvigorate the North American defense alliance, and create a new institutional framework.” SOURCE: http://www.globalresearch.ca/security-and-prosperity-partnership-of-north-america-spp-security-and-prosperity-for-whom
(May we suggest that you read the entire article at Global Research. Just click the URL immediately above.)
Once you understand that the goal is a North American Union you quickly grasp why the US is so unwilling to enforce the immigration laws already on the books.
We learned that the NAU was supposed to be based on the European Union idea. Now that we have learned just how fragile the EU really is, I have to wonder of the NAU promoters are still as eager to advance their plans.
Soon after the election, no matter who wins, Americans are going to see a brisk move in Congress for "comprehensive Immigration reform." When it happens, just remember, it's all about creating the North American Union. Besides, the only thing wrong with our immigration laws today is the fact that the federal government refuses to enforce them.
Now you know why.
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) did so much damage to small towns in America, whose residents depended upon jobs in small manufacturing plants, that many have yet to recover. Many companies shuttered plants, seemingly over night, and moved them to Mexico leaving hundreds without jobs. It happened time and time again. It ruined the economies of small town America. No wonder the government is keeping NAU negotiations on the "down-low."
This is the answer, in my opinion, as to why there has been so little discussion of illegal immigration in the presidential campaign by either side. They really don't want to create a stir this late in the game and draw attention to ongoing negotiations aimed at the creation of a North American Union.
My point here is -- that no matter who wins the presidential election -- little will change in America's way of addressing the illegal immigration issue. Much will depend upon what Congress does on comprehensive immigration reform.
It behooves all voters to look carefully at the candidates for the US House and US Senate November 6th. Call them out on their stance on illegal immigration.
The US does not need comprehensive immigration reform. What the US REALLY needs is a government that will do its job by enforcing the immigration laws already on the books. I just don't see that happening any time soon.
J. D. Longstreet