AMERICA'S SECURITY IS NOT THE FIRST THING ON THE MINDS OF MOST OF OUR NATIONAL LEADERS

America's Security is NOT The First Thing On The Minds Of Most of Our National Leaders  

By Brannon Howse

I think the evidence is now overwhelming that national security is NOT foremost in the minds of most of our national leaders. Their actions have led me to believe that national security is not what the war in Iraq has been all about because if it were, why would we: 

·        Have halted the building of a border fence between American and Mexico?

·        Only check 1% of cargo ships coming into the U.S. as to their contents?

·        Not be screening ALL contents being shipped on America's commercial aircraft?

·        Have watched as President Bush signed an Executive Order that is allowing Mexican trucks to come over our border without being checked as to their contents?

·        Sit by and do nothing about 20 million illegal aliens here in the U.S. not knowing who they are, where they are, and what they are doing -- much less if they are terrorists?

·        Have rushed to build the U.S. Embassy for the Middle East in Bagdad that has cost over one billion dollars?

·        Have watched the George W. Bush Administration argue before the U.S. Supreme Court against his home state of Texas and in favor of the globalist and their international courts to the detriment of the U.S. Constitution and our national security? Thankfully the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against President Bush.    

We are spending $12 billion per month to free Iraq, secure their borders and make them safe for democracy yet our national leaders have left our country at great risk.

We are at risk because our leaders are not really concerned about national security or because they don't have the courage of their convictions to make the tough decisions no matter how unpopular with the liberal media and no matter how politically incorrect. 

With 20 million illegal aliens in our nation, and known terrorist sleeper cells, is this really the time to weaken the 2^nd Amendment? Yet, as Larry Pratt reported on our website, President George W. Bush recently allowed his Solicitor Paul D. Clement to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court that any and all guns can be controlled or banned if a federal court finds that to be reasonable restriction or ban. The brief he filed asserted, with no proof whatsoever, that there is an "unquestionable threat to public safety that unrestricted private firearm

possession would entail.."  Is this what is best for our national security? Is this not the time to keep America's men armed so they can defend their families and the homeland?

Now to add insult to injury, Bill Gertz has revealed that the leaders of America, who are not leading, are now printing passports overseas instead of here in the U.S.A. These are not just any passports but passports with sensitive computer chip technology that if obtained by our enemies can be used to produce counterfeit passports. Is this in the best interest of our national security?

Our Constitutional Republic is rushing toward socialism and a financial meltdown while we try to spread "freedom and democracy around the world." We can not and should not be the policeman of the world. One of the factors that lead to the fall of the Roman Empire was that they went bankrupt fighting all over the globe.

U.S. Senator John McCain gave a speech on March 26, 2008, that has clearly revealed that his first priority is not America's national security. Mr. McCain, like most of the Democrats and Republicans in D.C., are more committed to the multinational business titans and special interest groups than America's interests.

In his speech McCain made it clear he wants America to get the a-o-k from the international community before we act in our own best interest and comply with the U.S. Constitution. As McCain said:

Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want, whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed. We need to listen, we need to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our Democratic allies. When we believe international action is necessary, whether military, economic, or diplomatic, we will try to persuade our friends that we are right. But we in return must be willing to be persuaded by them.

Is this what is best for our national security?

Do you wonder where McCain stands on the North American Union being pushed by President George W. Bush and his State Department? Guess no further, McCain is all for merging the United States, Canada and Mexico into one Union. In his March 26^th speech McCain said:

Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.

Security and prosperity?  Interesting choice of words McCain. For those who do not know, Security and Prosperity Partnership is the name of the plan to merge Canada, America and Mexico into the North American Union. Do you think this is what is best for America's national security,  the American people and American wages?

Thomas Stict, who was at one time the president of Applied Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences, Inc. in San Diego, California and a member of the U.S. Department of Labor's SCANS (Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills) testified before the 101 Congress and confirmed what the social engineers really desire:

Many companies have moved operations to places with cheap relatively poorly educated labor. What may be crucial, they say, is the dependability of a labor force and how well it can be managed and trained- not its general educational level, although a small cadre of highly educated creative people is essential to innovation and growth.

A North American Union will not be good for national security but it will turn us into a third world country of dumbed down cheap worker bees that are easily controlled.

I really wish we could elect national leaders that did not use national security as a smoke screen to fund their globalist agenda while putting our national security at great risk.

By Brannon Howse Email: Brannon@worldviewweekend.com Click here for bio and archived articles

Good, except for one thing... Posted On: 03/30/08 09:50:37 AM Age 21, NC All there of them are wolves hiding in sheep's clothing to some extent. One world government? Posted On: 03/29/08 02:57:29 PM Age 61, MO Christians are not called to have defeatist attitudes. We can choose to live under an anti Christian one world government, or we can choose to live under the headship of Christ. Christians are called to occupy while their Master is away. (Luke 19:12-27). Christians are not given license to sit back and do nothing to stop evil while waiting on Christ's return. George Cancilla ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT Posted On: 03/29/08 08:57:49 AM Age 47, MO Yea, it's coming sooner than we like to think. Already, America is no longer the largest economy, that honor now belongs to Europe. So, first we created NAFTA, then we combine currency, then we eliminate borders, language, and culture. Next, we say let's all get along, quit fighting, and live as humanity should. We will build a tower of Babel and worship the god of panthyism(?). You can call this god of everything anything you wish since he is the god of our own devising he can be Allah, Buddah, Jesus, whatever because they all want love, peace, and non judgemental harmony. The intolerant God's of your parents were fables of years of fearful thinking. But now we know we have nothing to fear because with the advent of instant communication we know the kook in China is really just working for that new TV just like we are. Sound plausable? John There is an answer Posted On: 03/29/08 07:31:52 AM Age 52, MN There is one presidential candidate who has the answers to these issues and has stated them very clearly since the beginning of the campaign. His name is Ron Paul. True lovers of liberty need to wake up to the fact that the major parties are controlled at the national level by the same elite power brokers. If we are ever to overcome their influence we must start at the grass roots level and retake them. A lot of good people who know better are going to vote for John McCain out of fear that Clinton or Obama might become our president. Which is better - to have a wolf or to have a wolf in sheep's clothing? I'll take the wolf every time. The last thing we need is John McCain as our president. Thanks for this Excellent Piece Posted On: 03/28/08 01:52:54 PM Age 41, WI Seeing this is alarming. But what should voters do when faced with McCain vs. Obama or Hillary? Your piece is the truth about McCain and he is anything but a conservative. But what do we do now to help our country? Do voters' voices even matter anymore in Washington? What America Needs Posted On: 03/28/08 11:34:13 AM Age 79, IN Your article was so correct! Our politicians are no longer interested in the US or its internal status. We are being sold out by both parties. Yes, we will become a third class nation with no middle class. You will be either poor or well off. We have seen this coming for some time. The citizens of our country need a wake up call if we are to continue being a republic instead of a socialistic society. Our choices for leadership this coming year are not great. Are there any lesser of evils? Is there anyone who could lead in the right direction? I don't know! We need to become a nation of prayer till God intercedes in our entire process. There is something rotten in DC Posted On: 03/28/08 10:11:18 AM Age 61, MO National security will always be threatened by globalism. The nature of globalism threatens both the physical, social, cultural, and economic structures of a nation. Multinational corporations promote globalization because it is in their economic interests to do so. They desire to eradicate national borders in order to take advantage of cheap labor in Third World countries and then to sell the products manufactured there to First World countries without having to deal with tariffs and quotas. Eventually, however, all countries become Third World countries, creating a profit problem for these companies because of their inability to sell their products at a desirable profit. It does no good to make a product at lower cost when not enough people have money to buy it at any price. Through campaign donations to politicians, these multinational corporations bribe politicians to betray their constituents’ interests. Globalists dare to suggest that it is good for America when a factory shuts down and relocates to Mexico or China, or anywhere out of the country. It is economic treason when politicians in DC think that sending jobs to China and importing cheap foreign labor (illegal immigration) is the proper thing to do. The dissemination of the American military in many places throughout the world does nothing for our national security, but it protects the interests of the multinational corporations who have bribed our politicians to serve their interests. The extremely high costs of such military deployment is in itself a threat to our national security. Unrestrained capitalism is just as bad as communism or socialism. Under socialism, big government oppresses the citizenry of a nation. Under unrestrained capitalism, big business oppresses the citizens by way of their government. I call this corporate fascism. Unrestrained capitalism brings about the formation of monopolies, rising unemployment, a tendency to centralize private and government wealth, and multiculturalism. There is a certain amount of protectionism required from each nation’s governments, if liberty is to be preserved. Economic freedom can only exist if tradition and religious faith are preserved. George Cancilla eyeopener Posted On: 03/28/08 09:42:05 AM Age 51, OK We seem to gravitate toward a one world government. I guess it will happen someday. It makes me wonder what would happen to the global market if Japan, China and Russia suddenly combined their currency. The euro is worth more than the dollar. How is this possible when oil money is traded in U.S. dollars? Your article make me wonder if combining North American countries is only about the big chess players looking like a bigger player on the global market. I don't understand how assimulating the peso will make the dollar stronger unless the balance is to come from the cheep labor. Thanks for the eyeopener on what is going on behind closed doors.