Behind the Headlines
Video of the Week
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)
The UN has its hand out
for more money
from the United States as NAFTA continues
the rape of America's job base.
America's labor force reels under the negative impact of a dozen years
of the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] that
was forced through the Democratically-controlled Congress in 1993 by the
co-presidency of Bill and Hillary Clinton, the United
Nationsnot content with the speed in which the "going-out-of-business"
sale of the United States is taking place through NAFTA's theft
of America's job basenow has its hands outstretched for whatever
pocket change is left in the frayed britches of the American consumer.
The UN just issued
its 3,000 page UN Millennium Project report that was compiled
by the research of 265 globalist scholars, environmental scientists and
poverty specialists over a period of three years in which it concluded
that the United States and 21 other "rich" nations need to greatly
increase their overseas development assistance programs this year in order
to achieve their stated objective of cutting in half global poverty for
a billion people in the next ten years. (The UN doesn't seem to
understandas the American electorate, and the voters in the other
"rich" nations dothat promises from politicians are simply
worthless rhetoric spoken for the benefit of the media to get votes. In
the United States and the other "rich" nations, the people understand
the emptiness of a politician's promise. Nobody actually expects them
to keep their word because, frankly, they never do. Politicians are, first
and foremost liars who forget the promises made to their constituents
as soon as the words pass their lips. It's rhetoric. Hyberbole.
Don't take my word for that.
Let Hillary Clinton tell you in her own words. On Nov. 11, 1993
Bill, Hillary, TFM (Thomas Mack McLarty), RN (Roy
Neel), IM (Ira Magaziner), GS (Gene Sperling), and
RH (Richard Herget) met at the White House to discuss the fate
of Hillary's doomed Health Security Act of 1993 that was
dying a bitter death in the Congress. The protocol of that particular
meeting (the transcribed notes) was one of five meeting protocols, bearing
a San Francisco postmark, that arrived at several American newspapers
across the country around December 10, 1993. None of the newspapers who
received them (to my knowledge) used the contents of any of the five protocols.
The entire Protocol of White House Conference of Nov. 11, 1993and
the logic for using itappears as chapter ten of Whatever
To America? The meeting began with an update on the progress
of NAFTA, which was slowly working its way through the House and
Senate. The protocolwhich
the Clinton White House denounced as fiction at the timebegins:
"The President opens the discussion
by giving an overview of the NAFTA situation. In his view, this
matter will probably be passed by the House. Republican support, with
a few exceptions, is assured. (HRC: After all, it's their bill.)
It was this legislation Bush-41 could not get through the Democratically-controlled
Congress. It was also the reason he did not get a second term since he
lost the support of the framers of the New World Order who needed the
legislation passed to achieve their objective of redistributing the wealth
of consumer product-saturated America to those nations who were destined
to become the consumers of tomorrow. Reluctant Democrats are
being lobbied intensively and it will prove to be successful. (TFM:
But we have to be careful not to predict a quick victory. It should go
down to the wire...if we are certain of the votes...to make the President
look better.) The President agrees with this view. The
second matter on the agenda is the projected final form of the Health
Security Act. Here the President expresses his opinion that
there is probably too much opposition in Congress to pass this as it stands.
(HRC: If they swallow NAFTA, they can certainly pass this as it
America? by Jon Christian Ryter; pg. 220; Hallberg Publishing
© 2001.) (Note: the red text is the verbatim transcript of the
conversation that took place that evening in the White House war room
as it was recorded in the White House protocol for that particular meeting.)
Political rhetoric. Deceit. The Clintons, using the liberal media
to sell the public, promoted NAFTA as a "jobs for America"
piece of legislation. They knew better. They knew it would drain millions
of jobs from America. But when you have a chance to become the most
powerful couple in the world, its easy to sacrifice someone else's joband
lifestyleto gain power. Both Bill and Hillary would
sell their soul to the devil for power without batting an eye or worrying
about the eternal consequences. Hillary already sees herself as
the 44th President of the United States if Article II of the Constitution
doesn't get in her way in 2008. Bill Clinton daydreams about becoming
the 1st President of the world if the UN charter doesn't get in his way.
Most liberal politiciansparticularly
the Clintons and other socialists in the House and Senate like
Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry and Nancy Pelosiwould
rather give our tax dollars to some other countryparticularly one
that hates Americans, rather than let the American people invest the fruits
of their sweat equity in their own future. (Perhaps one like Indonesiawith
the world's largest Muslim populationthat just threw the American
military tsunami relief team out of their country after telling us to
make sure we left our contributions on the table when we left...but not
to let the door smack us in the butt on the way out.)
Since most of the non-English
speaking third world nations in the world hate America, we need to wake
up to the notion that regardless how much money we give them we aren't
going to succeed in bribing them into liking us. As you can see from the
reaction of the government of Indonesia that desperately needed all the
physical and financial help they could get in the tsunami crisis, they
didn't even pretend to like us.
took our money and the care packages we delivered like it was due them,
and then rudely snubbed the American fleet that came to helpwith
a raised index finger salute as the Indonesian government told us to get
out of Dodge. Once we finally admit to ourselves that America is an isolated
Christian island in the sea of multicultural biases against Christiansin
which we have only a very small handful of friends that we can count on
around the globewe can, and with a clear conscious should, begin
to focus using all our financial resources at home to feed, cloth, educate
and provide jobs for poverty-stricken Americans in America. America
became the most powerful economy in the world through the sweat equity
of its own culturally and ethnically-diverse citizenry who learned how
to work together without killing each other to build a truly great nation.
Nobody ever gave America
a handout. America grew strong because it was an island fortress that
shielded its economy with high tariff walls that protected the economic
system which provided jobs and job security for the American worker. American
was internally secure because we actually guarded our borders to minimize
the influx of illegal aliensand we had a Border Patrol Service and
an Immigration Service that were dedicated to rounding up illegals and
deporting themnot a bureaucracy trying to figure out how to provide
monetary benefits for illegals that simply entice increased waves of them
to enter the country illegally as our current president attempts to open
the doors between Mexico and America and welcome illegals with open arms
because thirty-one years of liberal abortion policy brought about the
assassinations of almost 54 million unborn babies by their mothers. Abortion,
the slaughter of the unborn, was largely responsible for the destruction
of Social Security by eliminating 54 million future workers and consumers
who would have helped keep it solvent.
Had abortion never been legal
in America, this nation would not be below population replenishment levels.
NAFTA would never have been enacted. Five million jobs would not
have left this country. And we would not be having this discussion.
time we closed the doors to America's job pantry and padlocked them. Hillary
Clinton may not have realized it on November 11, 1993, but the American
people weren't swallowing NAFTA when 538 Congressmen and Senatorswho
knew who filled their reelection coffers and which way they were expected
to vote on the jobs drain billwere preparing to cast their votes
to begin the jobs rape of their constituents.
American workers in New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Ohio, Michigan, and the textile
belt in the South who believed the Clintons' lies, discovered through
the pink slips they received in their pay envelopes that NAFTA
was a job export bill that provided a swinging door that let tariff-free
cheap third world merchandise,
wearing American brand names, back into this country for the American
consumers who still had jobs, to buy.
What continues to amaze me
is that the American consumer is still buying third world goods as more
and more American jobs leave our shores for the growing industrial communities
in the most socialist nation in the worldcommunist Chinawhere
American-born transnational corporations are relocating their manufacturing
facilities because they can pay slave labor wages sans benefitsand
there are no government regulations that strangle the free enterprise
system. Think about that one as you dig through the "help wanted"
classified ads in your local newspapers this weekend.
Unfortunately, the bureaucrats
and the one-worlders inside the DC beltway know we can't lock the doors
since they are the keepers the keys. The transnationalist industrialists
who bought the best government known to man know that, too. So does the
UN which has had their hands in everyone's pockets since 1945 (and
is now seeking the right to dig into a few more pockets by levying a global
tax on one day's earnings of every employed worker in the world). I guess
that's why the UN has some expectations that they will get eventually
what they need to cut world poverty in half within the next decade.
Professor Jeffrey Sachs*,
a Columbia University economist who headed up the
project said he hopes the UN Millennial Project Report will
stimulate the governments of the world's richest nations to tax their
people just a little bit heavier so they can spend more to solve the problems
of the world's
poor. "We are in a position to end extreme poverty within our
generation," Sachs said in the report he presented on
Monday, Jan. 17, 2005 to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Sachs condemned the United States, England and the other industrial
nations for failing to live up to their "commitment" at the
2000 UN Millennium Summit to set aside 0.7% of their gross national
product to fight global poverty. (NOTE: it
is important to understand that none of the legislative bodies of the
governments of the world nor the national leaders of those countries made
the pledgealthough several of the world's 189 member nations did
send appointed delegates to observe, and who were given voting rights
that obligated their nations. The
pledge was largely made by NGOs like the Council on Foreign
Relations, the Sierra Club, the International Red Cross,
the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Trust, the Johnson-Wood
Foundation, the Pew Foundation, the AFL-CIO [which gained
NGO-status in exchange for their quiet acquiescence to the massive
loss of union jobs in the United States], and some 500 or so other special
interest groups that include local and regional special interest groups
that have voting rights on programs that will become binding upon their
nationsalthough the NGOs were never elected by the people
of those countries to represent their wishes. The NGOs represent
only the interests of the one-worlders within the globalist movement.)
That's pretty much what you call a stacked deck. The only organizations
whose credentials are certified as "voting members" are those
who agree with the overall agenda of the globalization of the world. The
only disagreement among them are the methods by which the redistribution
of America's wealth will be accomplished.
Sachs noted in his
report that only five countriesDenmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,
Norway and Swedenhave met their obligations. The world's 22 wealthiest
nations have fallen far short of the mark, providing only about $69 billion
for global poverty reliefabout 0.25% of their GNP (or less than
half their commitment). The report recommended those nations increase
their commitment by another 0.44%, generating $135 billion more in 2006,
and up to 0.54% ($195 billion) by 2015.
Let's face it, folks.
Anyway you parse the words, this is a global tax levied by the United
Nationssomething forbidden it by its own charter. Of course, it's
a "voluntary" taxjust like our own federal income tax.
United States government provides the UN with a stipend equal to
0.15% of its $11 trillion GNP$16.3 billion last year for
overseas poverty assistance. According to the UN Millennial Project
Report, our government needs to cough up $30 billion more each
yearfor a sum total of $46.3 billionto hit 0.07% of GNP.
The report came on the heels of a statement by senior UN official Jan
Egeland wgo said the United States and other "donor" nations
had been "stingy" in their tsunami relief contributions.
The increased funding, the
report stated, was needed to build the commercial infrastructures of the
economically-emerging third world countries, improve healthcare and fight
AIDS; improve crop yields through modern agricultural principles, equipment
and fertilizers; preserve the environment (of course); provide mandatory
free education and, of course, provide jobs so that the human capital
of the third world can take their rightful place as the primary consumers
of the 21st century as the new profit-center of the businesses of the
transnational industrialists in the decades to come.
Since the most affluent nation
in the world, the United States, shoulders the bulk of the world's debt,
those same transnationalist bankers and industrialists to whom that debt
is owed, must take care that the job transition does not cripple America
since it is the American people and not the emerging nations that is expected
to pay the freight for the rape of the job base of America. If the global
bankers and industrialists miscalculate and the financial bubble bursts
and the economies of the G-7 nations collapse simultaneously, a doomsday
domino affect will occur and the economies of every nation in the world
will crash, bringing about an economic catastrophe that will make the
Crash of 1929 look like a baby's burp.
Well, once again, you
have my two cents worth on this subject.
*It should be noted that Sachs
is a wolf in sheep's clothing. While the media painted him as an honest
broker who was given an assignment by the UN through which an unbiased
report would be issued, the reality is Sachswho does hold the chair
as Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbiais the Director
of The Earth Institute and Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development.
He is also a special advisor to Kofi Annan. Sachs is a UN advisor specializing
in the governments of Latin America, Eastern Europe and the former Soviet
Union, Asia and Africayour basic third world countries. He works
with international agencies to promote poverty reduction through the elimination
of the debt owed by poor countries to the 22 wealthiest nations.