BORDERS? WHAT BORDERS? TAKE A BINATIONAL VACATION
By: Paula Devlin
The U. S. Constitution states in Article I, Section VIII , "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions."
That would be a lot easier if there were not a 60 mile-wide buffer zone on the U.S. side and a 180 mile-wide buffer zone the length of the US/Mexican border. It is administered by bureaucracies of both nations. Binational is the buzz word. Environmental health is the smokescreen that will kill all of us. H.R. 254 passed the House on February 26, 2004, and the Senate on March 12 and shockingly "(2) amend[s] the definition of Ďborder regioní to include the area in the United States that is within 100 kilometers of the international boundary of the United States and Mexico and the area in Mexico that is within 300 kilometers of the international boundary between the United States and Mexico." This area includes major cities such as San Diego; up to 7 miles south of Tucson; Las Cruces; El Paso; McAllen, and Brownsville in the US and cities as far south as Chihuahua and Monterrey in Mexico under this "border region" government.
The blurring of this border started with The La Paz Agreement in 1983, which called for cooperation among the border states on certain environmental problems that had started to present at that time. NAFTA, removing historic trade barriers, created a monster in unplanned development and urbanization just south of the border. Appropriate infrastructure failed to keep pace with growth. (One can only wonder if these factories are still producing or have been relocated to China.)
Keeping the borders clearly defined, carefully monitoring traffic and retaining each nationís sovereignty wasnít what big business wanted. They wanted cheap labor and no tariffs. The parasites who run these NAFTA companies made a mess and left it for others to clean up. The wealth they created went into their pockets and now the U.S. taxpayer is being stuck with the bill for both sides.
Subsequent to the La Paz Agreement, Border Region XXI (EPA) was developed and implemented, followed by Border 2012 (www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/index.htm ). The Statistical Commission and Economic Commission for Europe, the Conference of European Statisticians, the Commission of the European Communities, and Eurostat put together a paper entitled "Proposed Core Environmental Public Health Indicators for the U.S.-Mexico Border Region" (available on the UN website). They all talk about sustainable development. They are experts. They know everything, including how not to spook the natives.
Sustainable development is very high-sounding, but it gives me the willies. It is part of an agenda to make the world perfect, to treat the earth as a goddess to be appeased. It doesnít include the U.S. as we know it for much longer. The mainstream press will make note when it is a done deal. Until then, anyone who thought they owned property within 60 miles of the Mexican border better buy a few tanks and a private army to protect it. The feds will take it by hook or by crook, just as they did when they wanted the land occupied by the Spanish in the southwest after the Civil War. Already they are doing it through the BLM and other "environmental" policies. Mankind is seen as the enemy.
The BLM has created conflict between itself and landowners and Border Patrol. The BLM doesnít want the Border Patrol to track illegals on "public land" and doesnít want ranchers raising cattle because they are not "indigenous".
This strategy has all been carefully mapped out by the UN in its Agenda 21. It is reflected in the Mission Statement of Border 2012 program: "To protect the environment and public health in the U.S. Mexico border region, consistent with the principles of sustainable development."
They define sustainable development as "conservation-oriented social and economic development that emphasizes the protection and sustainable use of resources, while addressing both current and future needs and present and future impacts of human actions".
Border 2021 describes problems and offers protocols for dealing with them. The thing that makes the whole program suspect is that it doesnít name any problem in particular except used tires. So sitting anywhere but next to one of the alleged problems, we cannot be sure they exist. We are told about it, but never given any photographs or addresses or names of the perps. If the problems were in the United States, there are laws already on the books to deal with them.
They talk about health problems and the case of the Mad Cow and the sick chicks in San Antonio come to mind. Were strict border controls in place and the buffer zone a no-manís land, these diseases would not be crossing into our country. Our economy is not dependent on the cross-border cock fight business. The Mad Cow probably wasnít. (Didnít they send the specimens to England for analysis? Isnít that suspicious?).
The most disturbing thing about all these programs is that they are not government of the people, by the people and for the people. The people are being manipulated beyond their wildest nightmares by the use of subtle, carefully-honed scare tactics. The "Proposed Core Environmental Public Health Indicators for the U.S.-Mexico Border Region" defines the target audiences as, "1Ö political officials and general publics in the U.S.-Mexico Border region; 2Ö environment and public health practitioners and managers in the U.S.-Mexico Border region. This implies that adapted materials and media should be used for these audiences."
State governments and Congress have lost sight of their duties. They have been targeted and are the famous useful idiots. We cannot deny that there are problems along the border, but the solutions should never include surrender of our national sovereignty and our statesí rights to nebulous socialism imposed by the UN parasites working towards the one world government.
Based on those who proposed H.R. 254, we probably need legislation that bans all dual nationals from holding public office or even being employed by the government at any level. We donít know where their allegiance lies, but if they canít make a 100% commitment to the United States, there is no reason for taxpayers to support them or trust them.
If a candidate cannot be elected without illegals voting, maybe he shouldnít be elected at all. Thatís stealing and a poor start for a job that demands the utmost integrity.
"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Paula Devlin is a former New Englander who bolted to the Rocky Mountain West, where the air is clean, the stars are brilliant and men still put their pants on one leg at a time. Paula is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.
Paula Devlin can be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Published in the March 31, 2004 issue of Ether Zone. Copyright © 1997 - 2004 Ether Zone.
We invite your comments on this article in our forum!