by Chuck Baldwin

When George W. Bush was President, he greatly advanced the prospect of integrating the United States with a North American Union (NAU). With no thanks to most Christian conservatives or the mainstream news media, hundreds of thousands of patriotic Americans rallied against this proposal and–at least temporarily–seriously stymied Bush’s draconian dream. But if you thought President Barack Obama would be content to let the NAU die a natural death, think again.

Reporting for World Net Daily, author/researcher Jerome Corsi recently reported, “President Obama is continuing President George W. Bush’s effort to advance North American integration with a public-relations makeover calculated to place the program under the radar of public opinion and to deflect concerns about border security and national sovereignty.

“The Obama administration has ‘rebranded’ and ‘refocused’ the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, to advance the Bush administration’s agenda of North American integration under the rubric of the “North American Leaders Summit,’ a less controversial banner, according to confidential sources in the U.S. Department of Commerce and State Department who agreed to speak with WND only if their comments were kept off the record.”

As further evidence of President Obama’s determination to continue the Bush policy of a commercial union between countries (or “League of Democracies” as John McCain called it), Corsi also reported, “President Obama has actively backtracked on his campaign promises to renegotiate NAFTA to get provisions more favorable to American workers.”

Corsi also wrote, “In the Ohio and Pennsylvania Democratic Party primaries, candidate Obama had pledged to renegotiate NAFTA as part of his appeal to workers in the states that have lost manufacturing jobs under the free trade agreements negotiated by Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush.”

However, Obama is now viewed as reneging on that campaign promise by appointing University of Chicago economics professor, Austan Goolsbee, as chief economist and staff director of the newly created Presidential Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which is chaired by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. Obama also appointed Goolsbee to the Council of Economic Advisors, or CEA, which is charged with assisting in the development of White House economic policy, according to Corsi.

Readers should know that Goolsbee is a fellow traveler of Robert Pastor, longtime professor at American University. And readers should well remember that Pastor is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and one of the chief promoters and architects of the NAU. Of course, Volcker is also a member of the CFR. In fact, at last count, President Obama has appointed at least 20 members of the CFR to key positions within his cabinet and administration.

Back in June of 2006, I interviewed Dr. Corsi regarding Bush’s attempts to merge America into a North American Union. To listen to that interview, click here.

Ever since the administrations of George Herbert Walker Bush and Bill Clinton, one fact remains constant: regardless of petty partisan differences, the push for globalism continues. Both Bush administrations (Republican) and the Clinton and Obama administrations (Democrat) enthusiastically have embraced and endorsed the doctrines and principles of global unification. That equates to more than two decades of determined effort by both Republican and Democratic Presidential administrations to compromise U.S. sovereignty and independence. It also helps explain why neither recent Republican nor Democratic Presidential administrations have had any intention of securing our borders and putting a stop to illegal immigration–and why they all promoted the creation of the NAFTA superhighway.

And just as George W. Bush was willing to betray conservatives and Christians in order to achieve global unification, so, too, Barack Obama is willing to betray union workers and America’s tradesmen in order to accomplish the same agenda.

When will the American people wake up and realize that for the last twenty years, both major political parties (at the national level) have been co-opted by globalists and internationalists who have no respect or appreciation for U.S. sovereignty, and who desire to create world government? When will they look past party labels and start seeing these globalists for what they really are: traitors to the principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and upon which America was established?

I urge readers to watch very carefully–and prepare to vigorously resist–as Obama attempts to finalize what his predecessors started: the complete implementation of a North American Union and related globalization. You won’t find this information in the mainstream news media, of course. It will take independent writers and reporters to keep us abreast of these developments, and this we fully and faithfully intend to do.

In the meantime, know that those of us who believe in an independent and sovereign United States of America still do not have a friend in the White House–political party label notwithstanding.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

by James Dunnigan

American intelligence officials have confirmed what has long been suspected, that the new Chinese J-10 fighter was built using Israeli technology. Russian engineers also admitted that the J-10 had such technology. The J10 looks something like the American F-16, and weighs about the same (19 tons). Like the F-16 the J10 has only one engine. It’s no accident that the J10 resembles the F-16, because Israel apparently sold them technology for their Lavi jet fighter. Israel had abandoned the Lavi project, because of the high cost and availability of cheaper alternatives (buying F-16s and F-15s from the United States.) But the Lavi was meant to be a super F-16, and incorporated a lot of design ideas from the F-16 (which the Israelis were very familiar with, as they used them, and had developed new components for them.) The Chinese denied any Israeli contribution, but Russian engineers say that China had one of the Lavi prototypes. . Pakistan is believed to have provided the Chinese with one of their F-16s for examination. There does appear to be a lot of F-16 technology in the J-10.

In the end, the J10 did not perform all that well in air combat, so the Chinese have been reconfiguring some of them as a fighter-bomber (the J-10C). This version can carry over four tons of bombs and missiles and has been equipped with a fire control system for delivering missiles and smart bombs. The Chinese designed targeting pod is similar to the Israeli Litening, and they were showing it off as early as 1998. American warplanes use a later version of the Litening. The J10C will have a weapons officer to concentrate on hitting things on the ground. China already has over 90 J10s in service, and Pakistan has some on order.

Reinforcing Failure in Afghanistan

by Ron Shirtz

Throughout July and August of this year, US forces suffered almost 90 soldiers killed in Afghanistan. Heeding recommendations from military leaders and his advisors, President Obama has approved sending 17,000 troops, which includes a 5,000-member Marine Regimental Combat Team, to support the overextended combat troops in southern Afghanistan. While these numbers may seem impressive, in military terms this is the equivalent of scrounging couch change trying to pay off a balloon mortgage payment.

The desired purpose of the additional troops is twofold: To train pro-US Afghan troops, and help secure territory taken from Taliban forces. Concerning the former, recent events have demonstrated that our Afghan allies have as much enthusiasm to fight as the ARVN did in the Vietnam War. On the latter objective, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has hedged his bets by telling General Stanley McChrystal to be “forthright” in requesting the necessary forces to get the job done, while adding this disclaimer:

“I have expressed some concerns in the past about the size of the American footprint, the size of the foreign military footprint, in Afghanistan, and clearly I want to address those issues,” Gates said during a visit to Fort Worth, Texas.

“And we will have to look at the availability of forces, we’ll have to look at cost. There are a lot of different things that we’ll have to look at once we get his recommendations, before we make any recommendations to the president.”

This is a nothing more than a veiled confession that the US military is stretched to the breaking point. Somehow, General Stanley McChrystal must find a way to secure a country twice the size of Vietnam, with only a third of the troops that were employed in that disastrous Southeast Asian war. As a previous secretary of defense once said, “yougo to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want.” So much for a change from the previous administration, eh?

This token reinforcement of troops tragically demonstrates the cliché of hope triumphing over experience. It reeks of the same desperation that existed during the Battle of Stalingrad. General Paulus 6^th Army, consisting over a quarter of a million men, was bogged down in the rubble and ruins of the city. On November 7, 1942, in a bid to break through the stubborn Russian resistance at the factories, Hitler personally authorized the deployment of five combat pioneer battalions. In a brutal war involving millions under arms, much was riding on these three thousand elite soldiers to break the stalemate. After five days of intensive fighting, these specialized combat engineers suffered one thousand casualties. Though they made considerable gains in pushing back the Russian defense line, in the end they ran out of steam, and could go no further. Twelve days later, on November 19, the Soviets launched a massive counteroffensive, Operation Uranus, that doomed the entire 6^th Army.

While US forces cannot be defeated in a climactic conventional battle in Afghanistan, they will lose trying to secure the geography and defeat a people that offer them nothing substantial to grasp as leverage for victory. I sense that our government knows very well this token force is nothing more than a political sop to give the impression that something is being done to gain victory in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, President Obama must being be feeling more akin to LBJ than FDR in attempting to pass a national health care bill while maintaining an expensive military occupation overseas. Attempting to build the Great Society while making the World Safe For Democracy at the same time has as much chance as Hitler’s Germany winning a two-front war. None at all.

Meanwhile, the constant trickle of US soldier’s deaths continues – One here, a few there, day after day, persisting like a constant bloody drip from a leaky faucet. Instead of stopping the leak, our country chooses to be distracted by louder issues such as who will win the next American Idol competition, or the ongoing news marathon on the life and death of Michael Jackson. Every couple of days, somewhere in the US, flags in various parts of the country are set at half-mast to honor those local men and women sacrificed in this winless war. If our government’s goal for an ongoing commitment in Afghanistan (and Iraq) comes to pass, then I humbly suggest leaving all US flags permanently at half-mast, to save time and effort. Better yet, upside down as well.