My Blog List

Sunday, January 22, 2012

“Divided, We Are Hopelessly Sinking In Quicksand!”

The PPJ Gazette

People are a great deal like electrons.  When they get too close to each other, they are repelled by each other’s negative charge and can never come together, except in times of immense heat and pressure …. like in a Black Hole, or a world war ….. or the rise of tyranny.”    Ron Ewart


When the attack comes, whether foreign or domestic, people that are divided will run in all directions in a panic, just like the people did on the cruise ship that ran aground off the West Coast of Italy a week ago and sent the passengers scurrying in all directions, looking for anyway they could to exit the sinking cruise liner and save their lives.  There was no guidance and no plan, there was just pandemonium, an irrational human response that can lead to death.

Americans today, are not much different than the passengers on that stricken ship.  We are running in all directions with no guidance and no plan.  America is more divided now than it ever was and it will be our un-doing if we allow it to continue.  Without a course correction resulting from conservative unification, America will sink deeper into the quicksand of apathy, indifference and wholly desperate ideologies, with no chance of escape.

We are divided, even within our own ideologies.  Conservatives or liberals cannot agree between themselves on their ideas or visions of what America should be.   To make matters worse, politicians in either party are more interested in the reins of power than they are in the heavy responsibility of guiding this nation in accordance with the blue print laid out for us by the Founding Fathers in our constitution, a constitution for which millions of brave men and women gave their lives in its defense over these last 235 years since freedom was born, when a “shot was heard ’round the world.”

The difficulties we face as Americans come from the differences in those two ideologies and the direction that either ideology will take America.  One ideology is steeped in enabling weakness and dependency ….. for votes. The other is founded on individual strength, self-reliance and independence.  In all respects of the two opposing ideologies, the former must be funded by the latter as the strong among us always have the responsibility of supporting the weak among us, whether we would like to or not if government has its way.  The serious flaw in the former ideology (Progressivism) is that weakness and dependency will grow within it to a point at which there are more dependent people than there are independent people.  The flawed system breaks down when it reaches that point and maybe even before.  Those that are dependent on the system will fail with it and there will be no one to help them since the country will be broke.  It is already happening in Greece.

The strength of the latter ideology (Conservatism) is that it breeds independence and self-reliance.  The attributes of independence and self-reliance are the foundation of individual freedom.  Freedom cannot exist without them.  History has proven that a weak nation will eventually succumb to a stronger nation, or collapse from within.  A nation that becomes corrupt by fostering weakness and dependency for votes will disintegrate into bankruptcy and chaos; or conquered by a stronger, more determined force; or unwillingly merged into another nation. (think the one-world-order)
Europe’s model of socialism and rampant dependency has shown us that it never works and will always fail.  Is America destined to follow Europe into the same pit of despair?

If America is to be restored to the vision of the Founding Fathers as a free and prosperous nation, the only ideology that can accomplish it is the one that has in its foundation, the principles of self-reliance, independence, free choice, free markets and individual freedom.  Any other ideology is doomed to failure, national bankruptcy and eventually, enslavement.

However, in order for that one ideology to prevail, those that believe in that ideology must unite around the simple principles of self-reliance, independence, free choice and individual freedom.  Any other course will divide the ideology and render it impotent.

If we as Americans can’t agree on the basic principles that we are sovereign, free Americans that have declared our independence from all foreign nations and dictates and governed by a blue print called the Constitution and that the land we now occupy is sovereign land for all legal Americans subject to our laws, we have no hope whatsoever of solving the problems we face today.  Remember!  Our domestic enemies are those people in power, or those that lobby those people in power, who attempt to manipulate us like puppets and divert our attention away from the fact that we are sovereign, free citizens of this great and exceptional country called the United States of America.  We cannot expect to defeat a foreign enemy if we cannot vanquish a domestic enemy.

Our problems and our divisions exist because of the human failing that makes us focus on one single issue, while ignoring all the other very important issues that secure our freedom and liberty.  Many times that single issue has a great deal to do with what we are receiving in the form of government assistance.  Sometimes that single focus has to do with religious beliefs, or the abhorrence of war, or perceived unfair treatment, or discrimination due to race, creed, national origin, or the color of our skin.  Although these issues may seem very real to those involved, they tend to overshadow why we are Americans, why we are exceptional and why we have built the most powerful and most generous nation on earth.  It is because we are free, but we won’t be free much longer if we do not unite on some absolutely fundamental principles.

Divisions within any group can be overcome by first determining what issues upon which most of the group can agree and cast aside for the moment, those issues upon which they do not agree.  Since most people have good hearts and fair minds, the group can then form a strong bond around the agreed-upon issues.

But you ask, what does the group do about those issues for which there is no agreement?  That’s the tricky part.  If we lose sight of that which unites us and only focus on that which divides us, there is no hope of coming together and we are like the electron with a negative charge that repels all other electrons. 

In the hopes of uniting more of us on those simple principles, we have created a survey for groups of people to determine where they agree and how to forge a bond within the group over those agreed-upon issues.  We then discuss how to deal with those issues over which we do not agree.  That survey is part of a group of documents that we have created that we call the “20 Documents to Freedom“, or as we also call it, our “S-O-S Kit“.  It is a useful exercise for groups of 10 or more.   It grows even more useful if the results are shared with other groups that have taken the survey.

One might ask why does it take a disaster to bring Americans together?  Why was it that America rallied in solidarity after Pearl Harbor, to take on a World War and defeat two enemies on two different continents and two separate oceans?  Why was it that after 911 America came together in common purpose to “get” the culprits that would dare attack us?  Why was it that that coming together only lasted for about 4 to 6 months before we split up into thousands of fractions of self-interest and started attacking each other again?  Why is it that so many Americans are so ignorant of the problems we have created for ourselves and the foreign and domestic enemies and our so-called benevolent friends like the United Nations, that are taking huge bites out of our freedom and sovereignty?  Ignorance is not bliss it is suicidal.

Are we not Americans?  Then why is it we have been played like pawns by our government and special interests, such that we now fight with each other instead of challenging the enemy that we allowed to make us what we are?  Why is it we have allowed outside forces to manipulate us so that we look more like immature elementary children fighting in a school yard, than mature, clear-thinking, informed adults?  Why is it we have forgotten that the foundation of freedom is unalienable individual rights, free choice, free markets, independence, self-reliance and personal responsibility, that are supposed to be PROTECTED by government under the framework of our Constitutional Republic, not ERODED by government as it has been doing for 100 years or more under Progressivism?

But take heart!  There is a shift in the winds of politics and there still may be hope for America yet.  Since the 2009 town hall meetings turned ugly against Obama care and since the 2010 election when several Tea Party candidates were swept into the U. S. House of Representatives by the voters, the other side senses a movement in this country that is contrary to Progressivism, a false ideology that has been growing in America for over 100 years. In this power struggle of ideologies, Progressives will pull out all of the stops to defeat Conservatives. 

They will lie, cheat and manipulate elections to remain in power.  Propaganda advertising, to sway the naive among us, will be unrelenting.  Half the American population, that have been bought off for their votes, is behind and supports them.

The mainstream media idolizes and promotes them.  Our public schools and colleges indoctrinate our children with Progressivism, multi-culturalism and Collectivism with a vengeance.  It’s everywhere.  How on Earth can we stop them?

Ladies and gentlemen, “The Parallax Prophecies” predicts that if the conservative movement in America does not unite, en masse, behind the principles of freedom upon which they can agree and set aside those issues upon which they cannot agree, this protracted ideological battle that is raging throughout the land will continue indefinitely until what is left of America will be totally unrecognizable from the vision of those who planted the seeds of freedom in a diverse people, on a new continent, 11 score and 15 years ago. We either unite in freedom, or unconditionally surrender and sink ever deeper into a bottomless pit of shifting, oozing quicksand ….. never to rise again.

Rest assured, this writer will never surrender and we will keep pumping out words of freedom, hope and inspiration until our life ends, or we are silenced by those with whom we take issue.  Until then, watch for our informational and inspirational messages that emanate each week from ….. ”The Parallax Prophecies

Ron Ewart, President
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RURAL LANDOWNERS
P. O. Box 1031, Issaquah, WA  98027
425 837-5365 or 1 800 682-7848
http://www.narlo.org,

http://www.narloltd.com

Saturday, January 14, 2012

End of Nations: Canada, the US and the "Security Perimeter"

Global Research




American President Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Harper have unveiled a new border security agreement that has received scant attention in the American media. However, far from being a new arrangement, what this accord represents is only the latest in a chain of usurpations of national sovereignty.


Find out more about the path toward the North American Union on this week's GRTV Backgrounder.


TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: http://www.corbettreport.com/?p=3502


When Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and US President Barack Obama announced the much-anticipated border agreement between the two countries at a press conference in Washington last week, those mainstream media outlets that bothered to cover the story at all compensated for the lack of details about what specifically is going to be accomplished by this accord by focusing on issues of no practical significance.


The Globe and Mail, for example, ran an entire article about how Harper and Obama’s personal “friendship” allegedly effected the deal, which was in reality and admittedly struck by bureaucrats in months of closed-door negotiations.


A variety of trade magazines and corporate websites released vague laudatory statements about the “streamlining” of the border.


But the story itself, which generated few headlines at all in the American media, was not about what specifically will change at the border so much as the border is increasingly being redefined as just one part of a broader security perimeter that in fact encompasses both the US and Canada.


The agreement in fact comprises two so-called “action plans,” one entitled Beyond The Border and the other the Regulatory Cooperation Council. The former plan focuses on border security with the explicit aim of creating a security perimeter that encompasses both countries. The latter is meant to harmonize regulations for business, facilitating cross-border trade.


The security agreement uses the threat of terrorism, crime and health securities to announce an increasing merger of the two countries’ border security, including an integrated entry-exit system that will involve full sharing of individuals’ biometric details between the two governments by 2014 and even the creation of integrated cross-border law enforcement teams with authority to collect intelligence and conduct criminal investigations on either side of the border.


The regulatory plan, meanwhile, aims to standardize agricultural regulations on such items as maximum pesticide residue limits as well as develop standards and regulations for potential future products and industries like nanotechnology.


Although the plans detail certain steps that can be or are being taken, the majority of the information is about agreed-upon shared values and the possibility of cooperation.


In light of the relative paucity of detail about these “action plans,” media outlets chose to illustrate the general points of the agreement with seemingly random examples, such as this one about breakfast cereals.


Keen-eyed observers of this trivial example of the effects might have noted a striking similarity to the way that Prime Minister Harper tried to deflect criticism of the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement that sought to merge the governments, security forces and regulatory framework of the US, Mexico and Canada, back in 2007 by talking about jellybean regulations.


On one level, reducing these agreements to regulations on cereals and jelly beans marginalizes the legitimate criticism and fears about the erosion of national sovereignty implicit in these talks. It also serves to keep the public disinterested in the issues by painting them as dry and unimportant talks about bureaucratic affairs.


What this similarity in rhetoric unwittingly reveals, however, is how this latest agreement is in fact nothing new, and can only be properly understood as the latest point in a continuing process of merging the bureaucratic, regulatory and military functions of Canada and the US that has in fact been taking place for a decade.


In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the two countries began work on reshaping the nature of the world’s longest undefended border. This resulted in the Canada-US Smart Border Declaration, an agreement signed in December 2001 that contained much of the same rhetoric as the recent agreement, including vows to coordinate security and law enforcement efforts in the name of facilitating the flow of people and goods between Canada and the States.


This led into the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a trilateral framework between the governments of the US, Canada and Mexico that began a process of regulatory integration. Formally launched in 2005, the SPP quickly caught the attention of the public on both sides of the border, and as freedom of information requests shed more light on the process, including the almost total domination of the partnership in closed-door meetings by big business, the SPP’s annual summit quickly became a flashpoint for political activism.


In the light of public scrutiny, the SPP was shelved in 2009, but many of its initiatives and recommendations continue on behind the scenes. SPP documents, for example, show how Canada’s controversial no-fly list was in fact part of a trilateral agreement, with the 2006 report to leaders in fact mandating the program’s June 2007 launch date.


Meanwhile, the military merger of Canada and the US has proceeded in its own series of mutual agreements, beginning with the creation of NORTHCOM, the United States Northern Command, in 2002, which charged the US military with the protection of the United States, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Mexico and Canada.


In February of 2008, the Canadian and American militaries signed an agreement allowing troops of either country to cross the border and carry out operations in the other country in the event of an emergency, such as civil unrest.


In 2010, the two countries signed the shiprider agreement, allowing the operation of specially designated vessels to patrol the shared waterways of the two countries by joint crew, consisting of both Canadian and American law enforcement. This agreement is cited in the new border proposal as an example of how cross-border policing can be implemented.


Now, with increasing “cooperation” between cross-border law enforcement, Canadians will be expected to allow American officials to pursue their investigations of suspected criminals on Canadian soil. And the process of harmonization means that Canada may even be expected to allow the use of drone surveillance, an idea presently being used by the US to patrol the Canadian border and even to pursue criminal investigations of American citizens far away from the border.


Although there are many individual aspects of this latest accord that are worrying, from the militarization of the border to the harmonization of regulatory frameworks to allow for the lowest common denominator in food standards and other areas, to the increasing sharing of information about citizens between the two countries, perhaps the most worrying aspect is the project itself. As many have warned, these seemingly bland border proposals, a story so dull that it has barely been covered at all by the American press, may in fact be used to slip in a North American Union through the gradual merging of the two countries’ bureaucratic systems.


The most insidious part of this process is that it is not subject to legislative oversight of any kind, and is taking place in behind-the-scenes discussions between high-level bureaucrats outside of the glare of public scrutiny, a point that is readily conceded by the proposals’ proponents.


Last week I had the chance to talk to Paul Hellyer, the former deputy Prime Minister of Canada, about this agreement, and whether the border security threat that the US is using to justify the process is in fact a ploy to obscure an underlying agenda, the drive to merge Canada and US in a de facto union.


Regardless of whether this particular agreement bears fruit for those seeking to bring the two countries into a closer union, or whether it is just another waypoint on the road of a much longer and more detailed process, the very real concerns about the erosion of national sovereignty implicit in this deal is one that those in power are eager to see avoided. So far, they are being aided in that quest by a media that chooses to avoid the hard questions about this series of agreements to the extent that they cover them at all.


As always, the power belongs in the hands of the people. Without significant pushback from the public, however, the momentum of these border agreements might be enough to make the North American Union an inevitability. Alternatively, the public can fight back by making this into a key political issue and informing others of the potential threat to the survival of both the US and Canada as sovereign nations.