Sunday, January 13, 2008

Are Some Forms Of Border Security More About Keeping People In Than Out?

Americans might be interested to know that to cross the Canadian border that the U.S. government will require them to be carrying a passport even if they have other legitimate forms of identification. However, most recall precious little is being done to stop the flow over our own borders of those with no proper reason to be here with no intentions of leaving.

Taken together, this dichotomy proves that the Orwellian notions of border security bandied about in the media and public policy circles have little to do with protecting the United States but are about controlling the American people.

These contradictions and inconsistencies not only have unsettling implications for the present but also even more startling consequences for the future.

Though not much is made about it in the mainstream press more titillated by Paris Hilton’s jailhouse fantasies, if one digs deep enough one uncovers increasing whispers about a so-called North American Union where the United States, Canada, and Mexico will be merged into a single world economic and strategic entity.

If those backing this geopolitical rearrangement are conspiring to allow millions to remain here that have no business staying as a prelude to a massive demographic realignment, kind of makes you wonder why all of a sudden elites are so eager to strengthen borders for those seeking to leave a specific jurisdiction while going out of the way to abolish them for those wanting to come in.

If the United States, Canada, and Mexico are on the verge of becoming a united continental territory while more tightly monitoring those with the intentions of returning home while doing little about those with no intentions of doing so, that can only mean that eventually if the borders between what were once sovereign independent countries are to become nothing more than the boundaries between states (or provinces it you happen to live in the land to the north), does that mean that eventually one will have to show one’s passport to cross the internal boundaries between states or provinces.

At this point in American history, such a possibility seems ludicrous since we are pretty much allowed to come and go as we please. However, police states such as the Soviet Union have been no stranger to the use of internal passports.

Some will respond, “But what does this have to do with the United States?” You’d probably be shocked to learn more than you might realize.

Following the 9/11 attack upon the United States, Charlotte Isberbyt in a number of columns posted at titled “Former KGB Head To Help Spy On Americans” and “United States-Russian Merger: A Done Deal?” takes note of how a number of high-level administrators at the infamous Soviet security agency have been hired by our own government as consultants shuffled back and forth between various bureaucracies so as to maintain plausible deniability about having the scoundrels in any particular employ and to best share their perspectives on how to more efficiently control the population in terms of movement, travel plans, and all other sorts of activities we normally take for granted. Foremost among the proposals, Isberbyt notes, ranks internal passports (passed off to the American people under the slightly more palatable euphemism of “national identity cards” though just as odious when one considers how they will be used under the authorization of the Real ID Act).

Those lining up to come here legally, go elsewhere, or even citizens traveling within our own borders are not the ones threatening to undermine our nation nor the ones swarming here demanding we alter our way of life to suit foreign idiosyncrasies and proclivities.

By Frederick Meekins

No comments: