Home Forums Miscellaneous Topics Second Amendment US Aims to Dismantle Borders.

Mr Paul Cellucci, Ambassador to Canada suggested the borders between Canada, the<BR>United States and Mexico be dismantled with<BR>the aim of achieving a more fully integrated<BR>economy.What are your thoughts on this?<P> GOOD HUNTING<BR> GEORGE

George, this don't surprise me at all. I am a Christian, and I've learned of the coming "one world government" that the Bible predicts. We will see more and more pressure for things such as this in the future. Folks are so blind to what is going on. The U.S. is the last strong hold of personal rights, and each day they slip a little further into the abyss.<P>Understand, I have nothing against Canada, but I think that the U.S. needs to protect it's sovreignty if our rights are to survive.<BR>7mmbuster

What do I think? I thnk Canada is hurting with it`s pro socialistic policies on everything. Opening the border would allow them to to get the best we have and giving nothing in return, because they have relatively little to offer.

It's our screwed up politicians with their extreme left views...don't blame us all! I think Canada has a lot to offer... fresh water, lumber, power, minerals, hunting and fishing opportunities...but then again if the left wing politicians have their way... hunting and fishing will be a thing of the past!

I have always thought that the southern border to Mexico was a waste of time and money. And the northern (Canadian) border is a joke. I would like to se a "United <BR>Staes of North America" where Canada and all of Central America was part of the USA. Maybe we should start with Ontario and Quebec.

Machinist,<BR> Not in my life time.<P> GOOD HUNTING<BR> GEORGE

4pwr and Machinist, you obviously don't know anything about Canada. First of all, a good percentage of our oil, natural gas and water from out west goes to the US already. If we were to take away the border the US would use up ALL our natural resourses that you need so badly. That is the only reason that the US would want to do away with the border. My 2 cents for what it's worth.......deadeye

deadeye,<BR> Thanks.I wonder what would happen if<BR>a new Government in Ottawa says that no more<BR>fresh water was to flow south of the border?<P> GOOD HUNTING<BR> GEORGE

Anti, <P>I think if they did the same with electricity BC Hydro'd go broke in a week. I personally brokered deals that probably payed for Gordon Shrum, or at least the generating equipment. Lord only knows about West Kootaney (?). Of course BPA abrogated the biggest deal, and won the court case. They controlled the transmission path. [img]images/icons/crazy.gif" border="0[/img]

I have heard that, I believe it was within the next ten years, that we will be using US currency, so why wouldn't the borders be next. The borders being dismantled would be met with mixed emotions on both sides I'm sure, with advantages and disadvantages to both. We would both be thinking the other is going to get the best the other has to offer. For most of us Canadians it would be the threat of the loss of our natural resourses. I'm sure it is inevitable, but not in our life time I'm sure.......deadeye [img]images/icons/crazy.gif" border="0[/img] [img]images/icons/crazy.gif" border="0[/img]

Isn't Canada still deciding whether or not it wants to be one Country itself? Seems like not too long ago there was a fairly close vote about Quebec (and maybe some other parts?) separating.<P>Some here are talking like Canadians would love to become part of the U.S., I'm not sure that is necessarily true. (Whether or not the U.S. wants them).<P>I can't even imagine how opening the borders would effect the social welfare system. Lets face it, Mexico's wages aren't quite up to where the U.S. and Canada are. There would be a lot of people moving north into both countries. Over time I'm sure everything would equalize, but it would be a lot of years.<P>I guess I don't think it is necessarily a bad idea, I just don't think it is a good one. There would be a lot of details to work out first.

Before this turns into a Canada VS US forum, I just want to mention that I think (and most would probably agree, or hope), that it won't happen in our lives. It's inevitable that the UN aims for it to happen with their New World Order, but I wonder what they plan to do with each countries constitutions??? I know that you Americans would not want to throw away your Constitution (and I don't blame you), and I am sure that many Canadians wouldn't want to give up our Charter of Rights (I know I know it's a joke)! If anything (and I am not being a treasonist here... I love my country, but with each blunder our politicians create), I would gladly adopt the 2nd Amendment!

Mexico only wants the border disolved for Mexicans to come to US and recieve the riights of Americans without becoming citizens. Immigrants are at an all time high in this nation yet application for citizenship is in rapid decline. Why...remember the old cliche of "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free.".<P><BR>Why Is America Negotiating Away Her Sovereignty?<BR>By Allan Wall <BR>FrontPageMagazine.com | July 3, 2001<BR>WHY IS AMERICA NEGOTIATING away her sovereignty? There is simply no other way to adequately describe the present negotiations with the Mexican government over U.S. immigration policy. Rather than being left to the American people to manage, through their elected senators and representatives, the establishment of a bilateral working group to deal with U.S. immigration policy indicates that the sovereign right to control its own borders and immigration policy is being negotiated away to the Mexican government. <BR>The problem is, the Mexican government is not negotiating in good faith. The goal of the Fox administration is to continue using the United States as a safety valve. Mexico's white elite government wants as many of the country's poorer and darker-skinned citizens as possible to emigrate to the U.S. They also want the American taxpayer to provide Mexican immigrants, legal or illegal, with government benefits that they can't obtain in Mexico. And, they are working hard to maintain the loyalty of Mexican immigrants in the U.S., so that even if they become American citizens, their primary loyalty will be to Mexico. These goals are not new - the previous Zedillo administration had them as well- but the Fox administration is bolder in their application and has a more coordinated and strategic manner of carrying them out. <BR>Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Casta�eda, in Phoenix at a meeting of Latino journalists on June 21st, dictated a non-negotiable program that the Mexican government expects the Bush Administration to follow. Casta�eda made it clear that he would brook no compromise - "It's the whole enchilada or nothing, we can't slice it one piece at a time." <BR>What exactly is included in Casta�eda's list of demands? Basically, the complete surrender of U.S. sovereignty over immigration policy. America must legalize all Mexican illegal aliens, loosen its already lax border enforcement, establish a guest worker program (during an economic downturn) and exempt Mexican immigrants from U.S. visa quotas! Not only that, but the Mexican government is demanding that Mexicans living in the U.S. receive health care (provided by the American taxpayer) and in-state college tuition. As Casta�eda aptly described such demands during a visit to Tijuana on June 27th, "We must obtain the greatest number of rights for the greatest number of Mexicans in the shortest time possible." (Remember, he is referring to rights for Mexicans in the United States, not in Mexico!)<BR>The Mexican government is demanding a complete capitulation of the United States on immigration policy and national sovereignty. What's also amazing is that nothing of substance is being offered in return. Mexican government officials have taken their measure of the Bush Administration and concluded that they probably can demand and receive much of what they want. They are not even very secretive about it. Casta�eda referred to the United States's transfer of immigration policy from domestic policy to international diplomacy, pointing out that such a change "is totally, radically new". Such a change is quite satisfactory to Casta�eda, who once wrote that "Some Americans.... dislike immigration, but there is very little they can do about it."<BR>Casta�eda is not alone in the Mexican government in his utter contempt for U.S. sovereignty. Ernesto Ruffo, Mexico's Commissioner for Northern Affairs advised would-be illegal immigrants that ".... if the border patrol finds you, try again." Fox himself calls illegal aliens "heroes", and the Mexican government recently distributed thousands of survival packets to Mexicans preparing to make the trek north as illegal aliens (the packets included lists of California hospitals where illegals could obtain free medical care). <BR>The Mexican government is also determined to retain the loyalty of Mexican immigrants, regardless of legal status or citizenship. National Security Adviser Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, before taking office, wrote in an editorial here in Mexico proposing the mobilization of Americans of Mexican ancestry as a tool of Mexican foreign policy. Juan Hernandez, head of the Presidential Office for Mexicans Abroad clearly stated that "We are betting that the Mexican American population in the United States .... will think Mexico first." This should be considered an insult to the many patriotic Americans of Mexican ancestry - they of course are not the problem! The problem is a growing number of newer immigrants is indeed remaining loyal to Mexico. And Fox&#8217;s promise to grant voting rights to Mexicans living in the United States sets the stage for a massive increase in double citizenship. If not checked, the not-too-distant future could hold the prospect of millions of people voting in both countries and - Fox hopes - voting in the interests of the Mexican government! <BR>The big question is - will the government of the United States of America defend the nation's sovereignty - or completely sell out to the Fox government? A national discussion of U.S. immigration policy is long overdue anyway. For too long criticism of immigration and assimilation policy have been considered taboo, but American citizens have every right to question present policy, as they do of any other public policy issue. Clearly, different Americans have different opinions on these matters. But the answers to fundamental questions about the nature of America's future should at least be determined by Americans themselves. They should not be negotiated away by the Bush Administration and then imposed upon them by the Fox Administration of Mexico.<BR>Allan E. Wall is an American citizen who has lived and worked in Mexico since 1991. Presently employed as an English instructor and administrator, Allan has legal permission from the Mexican government to live and work in Mexico under the rubric of an FM-2 migration document (No. 312448) for which he had to pay $1,816.00 pesos for renewal this past year. Allan would be glad to receive questions or comments (pro or con), at allan39prodigy.net.mx.