The Agenda Behind the 'Refugee' Crisis on the Border

Editor's Note:  Whether or not you support open borders the following report should concern you.

Aaron Dykes
Truth Stream Media

Behind the endless throngs of desperate Central American children arriving on the U.S. border and a steady wave of illegal immigrants from Mexico and beyond is a covert plan for global economic warfare — those building up the world of globalization are tearing down the sovereignty and financial strength of the United States and Europe to make way for the coming corporate new world order.

A generation of sending American jobs offshore under NAFTA, GATT and the WTO, dumping cheap corn on Mexico thereby destroying millions of farming jobs and unleashing disruptive retailers like Wal-Mart upon the fragile economies of Latin America have created turmoil, uncertainty and rivers of human migration… and along with it bitter tension and discord over the dynamics of immigration, illegal immigration and the struggle for a lasting standard of living under the New World Order.

The globalist plan to wreck our national sovereignty has been unfolding for awhile now…things are just speeding up in recent months.

Aaron Dykes lays out his research in the video below to illustrate what’s actually going on right now with the full globalist plan behind this “sudden” (read: planned) so-called “humanitarian crisis” emerging on the U.S.-Mexico border. It’s all part of instituting a new world order.

Aaron Dykes co-created TruthstreamMedia.com, where this first appeared, with Melissa Melton as an outlet to examine the news, place it in a broader context, uncover the deceptions, pierce through the fabric of illusions, grasp the underlying factors, know the real enemy, unshackle from the system, and begin to imagine the path towards taking back our lives, one step at a time, so that one day we might truly be free...

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Be the Change! Share this using the tools below.

Global Peace and Humanity

Global institutions target humanity

Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD 

Are the 21st century, are knowledge-based philosophers and practitioners incapable to rationalize human priorities for peace and harmony to safeguard the besieged mankind from the scourge of WW3? Was Immanuel Kant more proactive and intelligent more than 200 years earlier to think of the best of the mankind in “Perpetual Peace” plan?

The prevalent global realities speak of a contemporary world devoid of rational thinking and priorities for peacemaking and peace-building.

With countless resources of knowledge and intellect, the world has become a dangerous place – a touch-button age capability to undo the entirety of mankind as if it was burden on the shoulders of the traditional warmongers affluent throughout the industrialized nations. Political and secretive war manufacturing industries are flourishing, but peace is not the priority of any assembly-line major establishments. It is not that the essential priorities are wrong in the mindsets and intellectual pursuits of the international warlords managing the global governance. They hold peace conferences but follow the war agenda.

Alternative Markets, Barter Systems, and Local Co-ops are the Lifeboats That Will Save Us

Interview with Brandon Smith, founder of Alt-Market.com

Eric Blair

More and more people are becoming aware of the complete system failure we're experiencing in the United States and around the globe. As the true nature of the control system is revealed, people tend to feel as Howard Beale did in Network when he said, "first, you've got to get mad...and scream, I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" 

But once that anger at being lied to for so long subsides, then we must get on with the business of taking action to make the world more just and hopeful for our children.  Many people will take to the streets to protest certain aspects of the current system. Others will do everything in their power to inform or warn their peers of the coming iceberg. Those are good and necessary functions, but they won't stop the Titanic from sinking.

It seems the broken system will continue to take on water despite the best efforts to affect change within it.  That's why some are suggesting to jump ship now before they run out of lifeboats.  By jump ship, I mean function outside of the system as much as possible.  The faulty economic system is only propped up by our belief and support of it.  When we operate outside of it using alternative markets, barter systems, local cooperatives, and competing currencies, we not only provide a lifeboat to many frightened passengers, but the paddles as well.

Below is my email interview with alternative market activist and founder of Alt-Market.com, Brandon Smith.  He explains the need and benefits of using alternative markets as a form of protest and survival:

EB:  What was your motivation for starting Alt-Market?

The Permanent Unemployment Economy

click to enlarge

James Hall, Contributor

The official underreporting of the unemployment statistics is a well-known fact. The cavalier dismissal of the systemic dismantling of the market economy by the Obama administration is undeniable. Notwithstanding, the lack of living-wage jobs is not simply a partisan issue.

Ever since the adoption of the globalist free trade betrayal, the national suicide of the free enterprise economy has continued. Transiting skilled employees into government dependents is an overt component of the "New Age" of reduced wealth and servitude for the ordinary American.

Consider the logic of the consequences of offshoring our manufacturing base. Once the jobs are gone, the prospects for good paying substitution jobs become rare. Without the ability to sell value-added products generated from meaningful margins, affording generous pay scales to a prosperous middle class is impossible.

Edward Steves and his Million Dollar Gold Arbitrage: A Lesson in Wealth Preservation

Dees Illustration

Jason Kaspar
Activist Post

During the Civil War, an independent thinker from San Antonio named Edward Steves made a savvy business move that would forever change his fortune and that of his family for generations. He made a bet against a dying currency in favor of the only currency that has never failed.

In Texas, truth and myth are often blurred, as stories of what the human spirit accomplishes are stretched into tall tales for open camp fires and star filled nights. Perhaps the story of Mr. Steves borders on exaggeration. Perhaps not. In either case, the moral offers a profound lesson in wealth preservation and accumulation.

U.S.-Canada Perimeter Security and an Integrated North American Command

Dana Gabriel
Be Your Own Leader

While few details have emerged surrounding talks between the U.S. and Canada on a North American security perimeter, there is little doubt that deeper military integration between both countries will play an important part of any such deal. Plans for a common security perimeter have renewed calls to expand the NORAD bilateral air defence model to include ground and naval forces. There are also efforts to increase security cooperation in the Arctic and further integrate military command structures.

As part of the Tri Command Vision, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), and Canada Command (Canada COM) are working closer together in the defense and security of North America. Moving forward, the Tri Command strategic goals are to, “Improve unity of effort with each other and with our respective mission partners; develop a culture of continuous collaboration and cooperation in planning, execution, training, information management, and innovation; enhance intelligence and information sharing and fusion.” In order to better achieve these objectives, “The Commands shall develop and share comprehensive, situational awareness and a common operating picture, and must strive to interact seamlessly with each other and with our respective civil authorities, non-governmental organizations and other mission partners.” The Tri Command is part of efforts to merge the three commands into one.

Is the Global Economy Going Rogue? Why We MUST Start Living More Locally…Before It’s Too Late

The elephant in the room of our political dithering and partisan complaints is a global economy that’s too big not to fail. Learn about five indicators that the elephantine economy is about to go rogue and make localization a cutting-edge survival skill.   

Ellen LaConte
Activist Post

No doubt you’ve heard the great news: Globalization is going to save the world. Sure, things are (really) bad right now, but as more nations join the global economy, their economies will become more integrated, and their interests and goals will become more aligned. As the economic playing field levels, perceived inequalities between ethnicities and belief systems will be ironed out. We’ll all work together to combat problems like global warming. And, ultimately, we’ll all be borne forward on a tide of economic prosperity until we reach the shores of a big, happy, peaceful, unified world.

It all sounds very progressive and promising. Too bad it’s just a collective pipe dream—and a very dangerous one.

While there have been some voices of dissent, they’ve been largely drowned out by the assurances of those getting rich from the global economy. The prevailing attitude seems to be that globalism is good—or will be as soon as the bugs get worked out.

What most people can’t seem to grasp, or perhaps more accurately don’t want to believe, is that globalization not only ain’t all that, it’s the exact opposite of what we should be doing. It’s a system that’s doomed and for a simple reason: It goes against the laws of Life itself. Life evolved local and regional economies that couldn’t burn and churn through Earth’s finite supplies of resources. It put global economies that could out of business. Simply put, the global economy is too big NOT to fail.

Alan Watt Poem of the Day: Elite Raised to Rule Over Brainwashed Fool

Alan Watt

Alan Watt
Cutting Through The Matrix

"The Great Global Society to Be Pushed On the Many,
Sustainability and Greening as Good Excuse as Any,
Difficult for the Majority to Believe There is a Plan
Hatched When Great-Grandpa was a Young Man,
Generations Bled by War or Taxed in Quiet Sufferance,
Ignorant of Planned Future with Feudal Global Governance,
You'll Work to Serve the Grand World State
And for Bureaucrats Dining on Golden Plate,
Every Night You'll Stumble Home to Shared Accommodation,
Bumping into Everything, Caused by Electric Deprivation,
Yet You'll Be Kept Alive as Long as You're of Use,
Bright Side is You Won't Last Long When Plagues are All Set Loose"

* Reprinted with permission from Alan Watt.   

Alan Watt is a researcher into the forces behind major changes in historical development. His background is that of a renaissance man in three professions, plus having various books published in religions, philosophy, poetry, mainly under pseudonyms. For much of his life he was heavily involved in the music industry; he has played with some of the most well-known artists and groups.  Born in Scotland, he watched the subtleties of politics and media as they guided the population of the U.K. covertly into a European amalgamation. He has been warning the North American people for some years now that the same process of amalgamation is being carried out. With historical documentation, he shows how cultures are created and altered by those in control, always to lead the people like sheep into the next pasture. Learn the true esoteric meanings of mystery religions from one who knows. Learn the science of Religion Creation-Domination. The latest book trilogy (Cutting Through Volumes 1,2,3) attempts to deprogram the reader from his/her indoctrination. These books help stimulate the individual's mind into a higher, truer perception. 12 Hour MP3's in history/religions from ancient times to present augment the books.

For Alan's current items for sale and to download hundreds of free talks by Alan visit:CuttingThroughTheMatrix.com and AlanWattSentientSentinel.eu

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

The Push for a Single Unified North American Regulatory Regime

Dana Gabriel
Be Your Own Leader

It was surprising that bilateral relations with the U.S. did not play a more prominent role during the recent Canadian election considering that both countries are pursuing a trade and security agreement. In fact, the issue did not really surface until the dying days of the campaign. After winning a much coveted majority government, Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are moving ahead quickly with perimeter security and regulatory harmonization negotiations. NAFTA and the defunct Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) both addressed issues such as regulatory cooperation. The push for a single unified North American business-friendly regulatory regime continues on different fronts. 

In the final week of the Canadian election campaign, consumer advocate and four-time candidate for President of the United States, Ralph Nader warned about Canada-U.S. deep integration. In an open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, he raised concerns over the lack of transparency regarding talks between the two countries on a trade and border security deal. Nader cautioned that a, “North American Security Perimeter Agreement will wrap many Canadian concerns — your Arctic, water, energy, anti-monopoly and foreign investment reviews — in a bi-national security blanket.” He added, “The corporatist lobbies and what President Eisenhower warned Americans about in his farewell address 50 years ago — ‘the military-industrial complex’ — will favour this lucrative and anti-democratic initiative.” Nader also explained in his letter to Harper, that, “Canada’s prudent bank regulation prevented a Wall Street style collapse of your economy.” North American deep integration is a corporate-led agenda designed to foster privatization and deregulation. 

Free Markets and Socialism: An Alternative View

Transitioning from socialism to pragmatic, technological solutions.

Building things, making things, technological and scientific 
progress moves forward the frontier of human knowledge
and makes all that follows in its wake more accessible and 
affordable to the average person.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Bangkok, Thailand April 29, 2011 - Why is medical care subsidized by insurance schemes and socialism? The answer is quite obvious in that medical care requires highly trained practitioners and state-of-the-art technology to provide the absolute best care. Such trained practitioners and technology is of limited supply, in great demand and thus incredibly expensive to procure for the average person without financial assistance, be it from insurance schemes or socialist handouts.

However, perpetually subsidizing medical care will never address the underlying cause of its scarcity and in turn, its incredible price. Subsidizing is also unsustainable economically. It requires rationing and difficult "moral" decisions to be made regarding who receives what treatment. Such scenarios belittle both human dignity and the full potential of humanity in general.

Of course no one could seriously suggest people deserve to be denied medical care for the simple fact that they cannot afford it. The sad reality is that many people do not receive the best treatment available, subsidized or not, because neither they nor the state can afford it. So what is the answer? When is it ok to subsidize political solutions and what can be done to find permanent, pragmatic, technical solutions?

Answering Objections to a Tariff

Ian Fletcher

Activist Post

It’s only fair to answer some of the objections to the idea of an import tariff that I and others, like possible presidential candidate Donald Trump, have recently proposed.

One common objection is simply that our trading partners would just shrug it off by increasing subsidies to their exporters.

They are constantly alert to threats against their trading position: China, for example, was recently reported in China Daily as increasing export rebates on 3,800 items “to maintain growth.”

This would, obviously, force us into an endless game of matching these moves on a country-by-country, industry-by-industry, and even product-by-product basis.

However, such subsidies by our trading partners would be restrained by the fact that they would be very expensive in the face of an American tariff. Right now, these subsidies are relatively affordable only because they don’t have to climb an American tariff wall. But if they did, their cost would increase dramatically.  

Why Donald Trump is Right on Trade

Ian Fletcher
Activist Post

The usual suspects are racing to debunk Donald Trump’s foray into the most serious protectionism—a 25% tariff on China—proposed by a major presidential candidate since Patrick Buchanan ran in 1992.

They know this is big.  Our long-delayed national trade debate has begun.

I have expressed reservations about getting obsessed with just China before.  But broadly speaking, Trump is right on the money here. Nothing less than an actual tariff or the equivalent is ever going to get Beijing to stop gaming the international trading system to America’s disadvantage.

This matters, big-time.  Because until we sort out America’s trade mess—which must start by zeroing out, or close to it, our $600 billion-a-year trade deficit—our economy will never truly be healthy again.

Jobs are the aspect of this everyone understands.  But what a lot of people miss is that the current budget fight, and the angst over our mounting national debt, are also intimately connected to trade.

So Trump is onto something even bigger than people realize.

The Famous (and Almost Never Understood) Theory of Comparative Advantage

Ian Fletcher

Activist Post

You can read about the free trade controversy for months and never hear about it.  But in the minds of real economists, it’s there all the time, and it’s big. I’m talking about the so-called theory of comparative advantage, the theoretical lynchpin—in the view of free traders and protectionists alike—of the case for free trade.   It has an unfortunate reputation for being too technically tricky for non-economists to understand, but I think this is a shame, because this myth tends to shut ordinary concerned citizens out of the debate. Therefore, I’d like to take a shot at explaining this theory.

The theory is ultimately wrong, for reasons I spent half a book discussing.  And in a future article, I’ll explain why. But for now, let’s just get clear on what it says.  That’s the price of admission for engaging in serious debate on the issue.

Empire -- Cracking Up (Charlie McGrath)

YouTube -- crabbydogtrix

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H2201...
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/broke-and-getting-broker-22-jaw-dro...
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/03/defense-secretary-libya-did-n...

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Economists Are Hopelessly Naïve About International Trade

Ian Fletcher

Activist Post

The economics profession, or well over 90 percent of it according to polls, continues to support free trade. Above all, most economists remain stuck in a cheery “win-win” fantasy of how trade works and are unable to see the brutally adversarial dynamics of trade in the real world.

The basic justification for their delusion, of course, is David Ricardo’s venerable 1817 theory of comparative advantage.  However, economists do not consider free trade justified today simply on the strength of the original 1817 theory alone. Ricardo’s ideas have been considerably elaborated since then, and they generally use sophisticated “computable general equilibrium” (CGE) computer models, built upon his work as the foundation, to assign actual dollar amounts to the purported benefits of free trade. 

As a result, it’s well worth looking at problems with these models a bit in order to understand why economists remain so confused. 

The Collapse of Globalization

Chris Hedges
TruthDig

The uprisings in the Middle East, the unrest that is tearing apart nations such as the Ivory Coast, the bubbling discontent in Greece, Ireland and Britain and the labor disputes in states such as Wisconsin and Ohio presage the collapse of globalization. They presage a world where vital resources, including food and water, jobs and security, are becoming scarcer and harder to obtain. They presage growing misery for hundreds of millions of people who find themselves trapped in failed states, suffering escalating violence and crippling poverty. They presage increasingly draconian controls and force—take a look at what is being done to Pfc. Bradley Manning—used to protect the corporate elite who are orchestrating our demise.

We must embrace, and embrace rapidly, a radical new ethic of simplicity and rigorous protection of our ecosystem—especially the climate—or we will all be holding on to life by our fingertips. We must rebuild radical socialist movements that demand that the resources of the state and the nation provide for the welfare of all citizens and the heavy hand of state power be employed to prohibit the plunder by the corporate power elite. We must view the corporate capitalists who have seized control of our money, our food, our energy, our education, our press, our health care system and our governance as mortal enemies to be vanquished.

Economic Nationalism: Fair or Foul?

Ian Fletcher

Activist Post

Because we have a national government, because Americans care about what hap­pens to their economy, and because it is the national debate on the question that will bring changes or fail to, our trade problems will be fixed in Washington or not at all.  As economist Herman Daly of the University of Maryland, best known for his work on ecological economics, puts it, “Free trade makes it very hard to deal with these root causes at a national level, which is the only level at which effective social controls over the economy exist.” 

Unfortunately, critics of America’s trade mess are often confronted with the idea that caring about the well-being of other Americans more than foreigners is either a) irrational or b) downright evil.

It’s the latter category that concerns me here.  

Time to Quit Pining for a “Level Playing Field” in International Trade

Ian Fletcher

Activist Post

One of the most common plaints from those who are upset about America’s current trade mess is “just give us a level playing field.”  In particular, this is what one tends to hear from American businesses (at least those which have resisted the siren song of offshoring) that are hard pressed by “unfair” foreign competition.  It’s hard not to be sympathetic, and on an individual basis, my heart goes out to them.

Unfortunately, the whole idea of a level playing field in international trade is basically a mirage as an aspiration, and we’ll all be better off if we stop pining for one right now.

As I pointed out in a previous article, the concept of “fair” trade, while of some finite usefulness in the context of things like fair trade coffee, is basically a non-starter as a serious solution for economic problems, either here or abroad.  And unfortunately, the cry of  “all we want is a level playing field” is just another way of asking for fair trade. 

The fundamental problem is this: a true level playing field would require not just equal rules for international trade, but also that nations have the same domestic economic policies, as these can also confer an export advantage.

The Globalists' Egyptian Gambit: ElBaradei

From the Council on Foreign Relations to the Brookings Institute, Globalists agree. Mohamed ElBaradei for (Egyptian) President 

source

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer

Activist Post 

 It was previously reported that Mohamed ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group.

The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair."

While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt. Apparently ElBaradei isn't the only one who thinks so either.

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) senior fellow, Project for a New American Century signatory, and Bush wrangler Elliott Abrams elaborated on the sort of "intervention" the United States should be committed to in his piece "Less 'Engagement,' More Democracy" in the New York Times. In his piece he criticizes the current policy of engaging with nations he deems repressive regimes as equals and calls for a revisit to George Bush's "freedom agenda." In other words - the export of "democracy" that has brought America the trillion dollar military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of thousands of US soldiers' lives and the lives of millions of foreigners killed, maimed, or displaced.

Expanding U.S.-Mexico Economic and Security Cooperation

image source: Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel
Be Your Own Leader

There were growing concerns over drug violence prior to the recent U.S.-Mexico summit, along with other issues which have been a source of friction between the two countries. Despite any perceived tension, both leaders showcased their bilateral partnership and vowed to enhance collaboration. They focused on immigration, along with economic issues and took steps to end the long-standing dispute over cross-border trucking. The leaders also agreed to further deepen their cooperation in combating drug cartels.

During a Joint Press Conference following their bilateral meeting, President Barack Obama praised Mexico as a valued partner and thanked President Felipe Calderon for, “being here today to deepen the cooperation that is so essential to the prosperity and security of both of our countries.” He noted, “we’re moving ahead with plans for a 21st century border so people and goods can cross securely and efficiently. We’re working to coordinate and streamline regulations and get rid of unnecessary trade barriers to make it easier to do business together.” Obama also announced, “we finally have found a clear path to resolving the dispute over trucking between our two countries.” He added, “I look forward to consulting with Congress and moving forward in a way that strengthens the safety of cross-border trucking, lifts tariffs on billions of dollars of U.S. goods, (and) expands our exports to Mexico.” Under NAFTA, the border was to be opened to Mexican trucks, but safety concerns blocked the provision’s implementation. In the coming months, negotiators are expected to table an agreement that will include a phased-in program to settle the issue.