Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

Cheap Labor Chess

The real costs of “cheap” immigrant workers

March 14, 2006

How much does it really cost the economy of the US to provide so many of our unskilled labor force jobs to immigrant workers? At first glance it of course looks like a surefire way to save money for businesses and even homeowners, when it comes to getting a cheaper job, but as is always the case with something that seems too good to be true, it is.

The argument that immigrants “do the menial jobs that no one else wants,” is a fallacy. As I have mentioned before, I have stopped at fast food restaurants in areas with no immigrants or minorities, and the indigenous population is more than happy to have those jobs. They need to provide for their families as well, yet they were born here and have an established past in our economy, which is where one of the hidden costs lays.

When American workers earn money, they return their dollars back into the local, state, and national economies. Not so with many immigrant workers who send their dollars back to their home countries for two reasons: retirement, and funding of additional family members to come to this country and repeat the process. This is taking billions of dollars from the US economy annually; money that never returns.

Aside from the obvious redistribution of American dollars into foreign bank accounts, there are other elements to the equation that many people fail to see, or even understand. Businesses and homeowners are concerned more with the bottom dollar; the immediate cost-effectiveness that these workers appear to offer, than the long term costs and consequences of their actions. This is once again fueled by greed; make all you can at the moment with no thought to future repercussions in the economy or how it will affect other important factors. Removing dollars from the economy is only one pitfall in the trap of hiring immigrants from poor countries.

Once you remove all work-related aspects from the equation, one of the biggest costs to having cheap immigrant labor in this country is the burden they put on our medical and welfare system. Undocumented workers are generally uninsured so they have no medical coverage, yet there is a law in this country that states that no one can be turned down for medical care at a hospital. Good luck to the hospital in recouping the costs from a non citizen or illegal alien. You and I pay the difference in higher insurance rates, and higher costs for medical procedures.

While the male of the “hard working immigrant” family may be hanging siding or roof shingles, you can almost bet that his wife and children are collecting welfare and food stamps. Who pays for that? We do, through our tax dollars. This cheap labor isn’t looking so cheap anymore, is it? But wait, there is more. Let us return to the work-related costs themselves, and continue our probe.

We obviously need a workforce; however, we can't be a society of bosses without workers. We need carpenters, plumbers, and electricians to build our houses. We need waitresses and cashiers, but we must never push aside our own people to accommodate an infestation of immigrants from poor countries who cannot provide for themselves when they arrive. Lower income White families are traditionally very important to our social structure, and this is why it maddens me so, to see undocumented, uninsured, or unlicensed workers undercutting our native workforce because they don't pay for the same insurances or abide by the same rules that we do.

When you obtain a business license, most municipalities will require that you carry business insurance, be properly licensed and bonded, and if you are in a building trade, have the proper training and certification, and abide by local and national building codes. This costs money, and a lot of it - particularly if you are required to carry Workers Compensation - which is extremely cost prohibitive for the small business owner. We all understand the concept of low overhead, but fly-by-night roofing and siding companies comprised of immigrant workers - many of them undocumented (illegal) - take cost-cutting too far, to the point of illegal or outright dangerous environments.

Chances are, if you as a homeowner hire one of these companies or “contractors” to save money on your job over a domestic contractor, they will not be properly licensed or insured. That means the job will probably not meet building codes, and is most likely inferior or even dangerous (and cost more money for a skilled tradesman to fix what was done incorrectly the first time). Still don’t care? The homeowners who hire these uninsured workers will pay dearly, if one of them gets hurt while on their property; oh yes! If you as a worker are not insured and you are injured, you can sue the homeowner for all your medical expenses, real or contrived. Many people are cheapskates and hire these workers at cheaper rates, but will then realize his or her cut rate job wasn't only crappy, it just cost them their home and life savings because Paco slipped and fell off the roof.

“Tough break,” you may say to yourself, “but that doesn’t affect me.”

It most certainly does! That’s an extra half-million dollars in judgments or settlements that just left for El Salvador, Pakistan, or Mexico, never to return to our economy, plus the monetary burdens on the homeowner who was successfully sued by an illegal alien. He will have lost his house and may even have to file for bankruptcy and apply for welfare or food stamps to survive. Who pays for that? Certainly not the immigrant workers. We do.

In addition to labor-intensive jobs in the workforce, we also need nurses and medical staff; firefighters and police officers, taxi and bus drivers, assembly line workers, and even the simple people that hold “Stop” and “Slow” signs along the highway. We need what we have now; just with our own people keeping our society going. Our society isn't obsolete; it just needs a new paint job, and that paint needs to be manufactured here in America.

In the long run, between the dollars sent to other countries, job displacement, fixing shoddy and inferior work, skyrocketing medical bills, and free handouts, the so-called “cheap labor force” is going to cost this country more money than it ever saved on a few jobs. Our economy is like a game of chess; the seemingly simple moves we make now affect the outcome of the game later on. Cheap labor is the equivalent of the pawns, and using them up early will only leave your king wide open for checkmate down the road. The seriousness of the problem is that this is no game; the future of our economy is at stake, and China is poised to be the bishop that wipes our king from the board of Cheap Labor Chess.

Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

Unintended Prejudices

January 2nd, 2006

Many of you read my column for my political information but do not consider yourselves to be racially motivated in your particular views. For those of you, I have a question:

Why is it that two people can dislike the exact same thing, yet one is called a bigot while the other is not? It is a condition that I refer to as “unintended prejudices.” Most people hold in some way, shape, or form, prejudices of one sort or another without even realizing it. They hate the problem, but fail to realize where the root of that problem lays in their attempt to avoid the label of racist or bigot.

Take for example, a group of people common in the Appalachian region of North Carolina where I live, and a few other states, known locally as “Halfbacks.” In the small mountain communities, these people are mostly despised by locals, who view them as rude, snobbish, and out to take over these communities - by and for - themselves. Halfbacks are basically Northerners who moved to Florida and then to Appalachia to retire or to operate home-based businesses, therefore being halfway back. I asked a good friend of mine whom I have known for twenty-two years, the other day, if he is an anti-Semite. He quickly assured me that he is not. I then asked him to relay his personal angst to me regarding Halfbacks, or as they are known by another name in the mountains, Floridiots (remember, these people do not consider themselves prejudiced, because these terms have no religious or ethnic connotation).

He began recounting how rude they are, how they buy entire communities and attempt to cordon off those areas to the locals, how they treat the locals as inferior, etc. I asked him once more, if he was anti-Semitic and once again, he said he was not. I then asked him to tell me who the Halfbacks are, where they originate from, and what some of their surnames are. He finally admitted that most are originally New York and New Jersey Jews that have relocated to the mountains of Appalachia. He stated however, that he dislikes them not because of their religion, but because of their actions (acting like Yankees, as if that is not another prejudice), therefore he was not anti-Semitic. And there, my friends, lays the heart of the problem.

The traits that he witnesses on a daily basis are no different than those which the “real” anti-Semite witnesses as market-cornering and monopolizing, job favoritism, Jewish supremacy, and separatism, yet my friend refuses to see that the root of the problem lays with the person or group of people, and not their religion. He is under the misconception that in order to be prejudiced against the Jewish people, you must hate their religion, and not their actions. The same holds true for people who state that in order to be bigoted against Blacks; you must hate their skin color and not their reluctance to adapt to a non-tribalistic society. Disliking someone as a whole for any reason is still prejudice, whether you admit it to yourself or not.

Similarly, other people may swear that they are not prejudiced against Mexicans, yet they will curse the illegal immigration problem or the fact that many of our signs, instructions, or telephone prompts are also in Spanish. I must be missing something here; apparently then, it is the Germans, Irish, and Italians who are demanding these Spanish signs and working for less than minimum wage, not the Mexicans, who are absolved of all wrongdoing by the politically correct. These people blame the results instead of the root of the problem, thereby exempting themselves yet again, from the politically incorrect label of bigotry. This exemption however, exists only in their narrow minds

“But Doug,” many of you will certainly argue, “just because some people are bad doesn’t mean that they all are!”

I agree. I will also note that while not every single hornet in the nest may sting you, the majority of them will, and you will not be selective in your dislike for stinging insects now, will you? The actions of the many will inevitably reflect the image of the collective, and whether you consciously realize your dislike for someone or not, if you look deeply enough, you will find your own unintended prejudices hidden somewhere within your excuses (whether you admit it to yourself or not).

Why multiculturalism will fail

December 1st, 2005

            As the days pass, more and more people - and not just Americans anymore - are beginning to develop xenophobic or outright racist behavior.

A perfect example of this is the recent rampage of senseless rioting in France that has caused billions of dollars in damages by supposedly frustrated Black Muslim youths. I sometimes get frustrated by exorbitant interest rates on my credit card, but I don’t overturn cars and set them ablaze, or smash store windows and loot from poor shopkeepers. Neither French nor Christian, these invaders from North Africa have demonstrated why it is impossible for unlike peoples to ever live together in harmony. You cannot put wolves and bobcats in the same cage and expect them to coexist peacefully. To expect otherwise is nothing short of ignorance. Yet it is the man or woman who points this out, who is accused of ignorance or worse yet, of racism.

Another example can be found in our own country, during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. While people struggled to cope in the watery, post-apocalyptic world of New Atlantis, they found it necessary to break into businesses and steal such basic necessities as TVs, stereos, expensive clothes, and firearms to survive. I found it interesting, in a Darwinist sort of way, that the few Whites caught on film were carrying food, while the Blacks were proudly showing off their new plasma TVs and Gianni designer fashions. Did someone have their priorities skewed, or was it simply my bigoted imagination seeing what it wished to see? It must have been my imagination, and I must therefore also be a bigot for simply observing this and pointing it out.

America is often referred to as the Melting Pot of the World. There was a time when this was true, but no longer. A melting pot is basically a crucible, into which like or similar metals are placed and melted together to form an alloy; an amalgamate that is usually stronger and superior to the individual metals themselves. An example of this would be combining copper and tin to make bronze, or iron and carbon to create steel.

You cannot however, put unlike materials into a crucible and expect them to amalgamate; it is a physical impossibility that violates Einstein’s law of E=MC2. An example of this would be attempting to mix steel and plastic, or oil and water into a new compound. In the animal world, it would be attempting to crossbreed an alligator and a water buffalo. In the human world, it is referred to as multiculturalism, dissimilar and unlike societies attempting to morph into a single one. It too is an impossibility, albeit a cultural one.

When the first immigrants came to this country, they were for the most part, all Caucasoid peoples. You had Russians, Germans, Poles, Italians, English, and Irish; all God-fearing people, working side by side. Together they created a workforce; an alloy that bred the best characteristics of each country into the blood of the working man. They created labor unions; they went on strike and stood in solidarity with one another. Then, that all changed.

Now, we have not only the Europeans that founded this country, we also have Africans, Arabs, Orientals, and mixed-blood Mestizos trying to force their cultures upon us in our own country. They may be offended to hear the words, “In God We Trust,” and our lawmakers cringe at the threat of legal action by the ACLU. No longer are we a melting pot of like people, we are a chamber pot of multiculturalism; a cultural and economic cesspool where we clash with one another over laws, common sense, and decency. Our cultures will never be able to assimilate, and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

We are different in every way; in our music, in our treatment of women, and our perception of right and wrong to name a few. The tribalistic behavior that causes Africans to steal sneakers, or kill because of an insult does not fit into our society. The Muslim ownership of women or the desire to commit genocide against so-called infidels, does not fit into our society, and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

Christmas vacation has now been renamed Winter Break, to embrace not only the Christian (founding) holiday of Christmas, but also Hanukkah, Kwanzaa (a made-up holiday created by Blacks in 1972, that has no meaning whatsoever), and now the Muslim holiday of EID. We can no longer say, “Merry Christmas,” without offending someone, but must instead say, “Happy Holidays or Season’s Greetings,” and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

When a 911 operator answers the phone and is greeted by a foreign voice, it wastes valuable minutes attempting to determine their culture and language, as well as taxpayer dollars on an interpreter. It may also cost a human life for another, real emergency, not a simple inquiry of where the nearest taqueria is located. One country? We should also be speaking one language then, but we no longer do, in fact it has been suggested to make Spanish an official second language in America, and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

Some people wish to be left alone; to preserve their heritage, but they are called racists and bigots; haters. These people do not hate; they love. They love their children, their own culture and customs, and their own skin tone, but they are forced to - like the wolf and the bobcat – coexist in a giant cage called America, yet they are expected to do so peacefully. This is once again not possible, and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

Forcing everyone to live together and demanding harmony, is only asking for trouble. It is like mixing the ingredients of a shock-sensitive explosive together and placing them in the back of a crowded bus with worn out shocks. Like gasoline and air, mixed and compressed in an engine cylinder, we are under extreme social pressure and awaiting the spark that ignites the entire mess and causes a violent explosion of frustration and hatred.

It is just as fundamentally wrong to force people to be together, as it is to force them to be apart, and that is why multiculturalism will fail.

Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

A British “bobby” learns the value of firearms, freedom, and why Americans love to shoot

*October, 7^th, 2005

I recently had the opportunity to meet a British “bobby,” or police officer. In the U.K., officers are forbidden to carry firearms unless they are part of specially trained (SWAT) units. Firearms are reserved only for those special units.

This particular officer is a constable (county police officer), and has been on the job for more than thirty years. In that time, he has never fired or even carried a gun. With the exception of the special armed units, the only weapon allowed for carry is a truncheon (nightstick). Wow.

The bobby was staying with a friend of mine, who invited several members and friends of law enforcement to his place for a cookout. This friend has a small shooting range out back, and I thought it would be an excellent opportunity for this English officer to be given the chance to shoot.

I brought a .40 handgun, AR15, AK47, and a .50 BMG rifle to shoot, and to let him fire as well, as I knew he would never again have the opportunity. He was astonished that I had brought around 1200 rounds of ammunition in two ammo cans to shoot for the afternoon. You see, in Britain it is illegal to possess more than 50 rounds of ammunition, even with a special Government license to own certain firearms. He was stunned that I could own that many rounds, let alone shoot them all in an afternoon!

He watched as I demonstrated the proper loading and function of the AK47, as well as safety positions, and all the necessary precautions. After watching me fire several dozen rounds, he was comfortable enough to try it himself. He was slightly nervous at first, having never fired a gun in his life, but quickly adjusted to shooting and did very well in fact. After firing about sixty rounds, he looked at me and remarked, “I am beginning to understand why Americans love to shoot.” Aha! I was making an impression on him! I had to continue.

After another hour or so of shooting, during which I demonstrated and test fired the .50 BMG rifle I had brought, it was nearing time to return to the house for socializing. Before we left however, I loaded ten rounds into the magazine and asked him to follow me to the target. He had no idea what I was thinking, but followed me nonetheless. I handed him the rifle and told him to point it near the bottom of the targets (there is a solid backdrop of dirt and stumps) and to pull the trigger as fast as he could. He looked at me quizzically, but proceeded to follow my directions.

By the time the third round had left the barrel, he was grinning from ear to ear, and upon emptying the magazine, returned the rifle to me with a huge grin on his face.

“Yes!” he exclaimed. “Now I understand!”

In one afternoon, I took a man who had never fired a gun in his life and even questioned their recreational use, and converted him into an enthusiast. He now understands how much liberty we have in this country that most of us take for granted, and realizes that firearms ownership is not just about hunting or defense but the enjoyment of shooting as well.

In addition, we talked about many differences in English and American laws, and freedoms in general. Earlier in the day, someone had commented about an old house in the area, complete with reconditioned slave quarters. I asked if they had reconditioned them by sweeping the dust off the dirt, and the bobby informed me that had he made that same comment in Britain, he would lose his job as a police officer and his pension!

Those who have been raised in restriction know no differently, but those of us who have been born as free men and women and have tasted liberty, know its true meaning. When oppressed people are freed, oftentimes they do not know what to do with their new freedoms. I know what to do with mine; protect them, and share my knowledge with the rest of the world. We must continue to fight for our liberty if we are to retain it - what little remains - and not allow them to be taken by illegally-passed doctrines like the Patriot Act, CAFTA, proposed LOST, or Executive Orders that have no legal basis other than, “I said so, so it’s the law.”

It’s not; keep fighting for what is right, and perhaps one day, other countries will become truly free, and learn the same lessons realized by that constable from Blackpool, in Lancashire County, U.K. on a summer afternoon. He took home with him a true understanding of what we have all taken for granted for so long.

As a thank you for the lessons that we all learned that day, and for the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fire weaponry seen in Britain only on the “telly,” this constable presented me with his hat badge. For those of you not in law enforcement, officers routinely exchange departmental patches, but the exchange or gift of insignia is reserved only for those who have made a significant impact on your experience. I am honored to be the recipient of his hat badge; to make that sort of impact on a man who was earlier that day, almost anti-gun. May he spread the experience of liberty in his own Country.

* Note: This article was originally written last year.

Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

But it is custom in my homeland!

October 5th, 2005

For many of us over the past five to seven years, we have noticed the influx of “cultures” assimilating into our neighborhoods. When I say cultures, I don’t necessarily mean immigrants from other countries. What I speak of, is the sudden rise in immigrants who refuse to understand that they left their own country behind and are now living in ours.

Once heard only in the rural counties, it is now commonplace for residents of suburbs everywhere, to be awakened to the raucous sound of a rooster crowing at the crack of dawn. These roosters do not belong to the elderly residents who bought these houses in their 20’s, nor do they belong to their children or grandchildren. These roosters belong to the Mexican, Vietnamese, and Hmong immigrants that have invaded our sovereign neighborhoods and reduced them to third world villages.

So we, as native Americans (not to be confused with American Indians who have been mislabeled by the politically-correct media [and my Spell-Check tried to capitalize the aforementioned word - native - because it’s been programmed by the same PC people]) call our local animal control and complain. If we’re lucky, they will send someone to investigate. They will tell these people that it is a violation of city ordinances to keep livestock and fowl, yet they will almost always be greeted with, “But it is custom in my native country!”

Here’s a news flash Pedro, Vihn, and Chai, this isn’t your native country! It’s mine, and if I work second shift, I should not have to be awakened in the middle of my night by your foul fowl. Do I go to India and expect to raise and slaughter cattle on my land because it’s customary here? No. Do I go to Saudi Arabia and raise pigs for meat? Heck no! Then why should they come here and behead and gut chickens in their yard while my neighbor’s granddaughter looks on in horror?

A few weeks ago, my neighbor called the landlord of the house next door to her, because the Mexicans living there were penning chickens under the deck, and the rooster was crowing less than twenty feet from her bedroom window. I’ve got news for you; had that been my bedroom window, the .22 would have come out and I would have been sound asleep again in less than three minutes!

A few days later, the same neighbor looked out her window to see her yard filled with smoke. She dashed out the door to discover it was emanating from, you guessed it; Little Oaxaca next door. They had a bonfire blazing away, and soon raked it around, hung a pot over it, and began cooking in a kettle in the side yard!

Ten years ago, my cats began disappearing. One day, one of them showed up with a trap wound on his back leg, which had to be amputated. My cats began disappearing when a Vietnamese family (all 23 of them) moved in on the street behind me. Coincidence? Perhaps. You be the judge.

We are forced to listen to roosters and Mariachi bands blaring in our once-quiet neighborhoods, while chickens and (pet) cats are slaughtered for food. We are told, “It is custom in my homeland.” Our hunters are gunned down in cold blood on their own property because, “It is custom in my homeland to murder you for insulting me.”

Okay, let’s play the game both ways then. I remember a time when it was the custom in my country, for a convicted murderer who shot four of his unarmed victims in the back, to be taken to the public gallows or nearest tree and “be hanged by the neck until dead.” That is the custom in my homeland. Now love it or leave it.

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

Are the recent hurricanes an unforeseen boon to speed up Sustainable Development?

September 28th, 2005

Gas prices are first and foremost on everyone’s minds, as we prepare for another assault upon our gulf (oil) shores. We saw gas prices soar in the wake of Katrina due to gouging, but on average they only went up about a dollar across the country. This was with a supposed 1/3 of our nation’s gasoline either knocked out of production or unable to be refined. That means that the price has been artificially padded for quite some time (as if we didn’t already know this) to be able to absorb that much of a loss and only increase prices by a dollar. We can safely assume that a second blow to the petroleum industry will push prices through the roof.

Oil companies see a way to claim a cause for higher prices, pushing the price of a gallon of gasoline ever higher. This will eventually reach a point where it will cause the bottom to fall out of the industry. People simply will not be able to afford gas. It will cost more to commute to work than to pay bills. Decisions will have to be made: gas or lunch? Gas or the credit card bill? I can hear it now: “Sorry Boss, I can’t make it in today; I’m outta gas. I’ll have to wait until my paycheck deposits before I can get more to come back to work.”

Now this may sound farfetched, but in reality, it is not that outlandish. At $5 a gallon, it would cost $100 to fill a twenty gallon tank. At 10 MPG for an SUV, that would get you 200 miles. If you live 20 miles from work, five days of commuting would use that $100 every week, not inclusive of gas needed for errands and other necessities. Add to this, the cost of fuel added to the price of goods you buy, and you are now talking about an extra $200 a week taken from your paycheck. Many people live paycheck to paycheck and cannot even afford to buy lunch every day. This will force people out of their jobs and it will force others into bankruptcy.

People will demand an alternative and our government will conveniently have one. They will explain the evils of urban sprawl and personal vehicles, and tout mass public transit and overcrowded cluster housing to solve the problem. They will point to Europe as an example. We have unknowingly asked for Agenda 21 to be handed to us on a silver platter. With Smart Growth, our rural areas will be declared green areas, and we can rely on rail transportation instead of our personal vehicles to travel from town to town. We can also rely on being forced to live in giant Co-op Cities to make it work.

It seems to me that using a natural disaster to hasten the process will accomplish two things: first, it will artificially increase the price of our gas and generate the fuel collapse much sooner, and second, there will be no one to point the finger at. Mother Nature herself will be left holding the bag on this one. Worst of all, we’ll gladly ask for own demise by demanding alternatives, and the alternative most likely to arise is a socialistic commune called Smart Growth.

Pay close attention to what goes on in the next few months. As people ask the government for more help, they will be only too happy to oblige. Just remember, with everything comes a price, and the price for free stuff is freedom.

Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

L.O.S.T.

Law of the Sea Treaty

September 26th, 2005

         As the acronym indicates, this treaty is indeed very bad. Created in the 1970’s by then-president Jimmy Carter, it was overturned by Ronald Reagan - one of the most farsighted presidents of modern time – in 1982. For twelve years we remained free of this beast, only to have it reappear in 1994 with Bill Clinton signing the treaty, and sending it to the Senate for ratification. It sat dormant however, until Oct. 7, 2003. The treaty mysteriously appeared on the Foreign Relations Committee hearings calendar on Oct. 14 (my birthday, of all days) and again on Oct. 21, 2003, but no opposing voices were allowed to present testimony. This is precisely the same procedure used with the Convention on Desertification in 2002. Once again, we are being railroaded by the UN and there is nothing we can do! Like the Federal Government, they have gained power simply by taking it, only now; the Feds are getting a taste of their own medicine from the UN.

So what exactly is LOST? This treaty effectively turns over control of all the world’s oceans (and anything contained within them) to the United Nations. This is nothing short of redistribution of wealth, as it any country with a surplus will be disallowed use of its own waters while underprivileged nations can reap the rewards. That is more commonly known around the world as communism, but then again, we have always known that this is the agenda for the UN and the New World Order. Everyone is equal; no property ownership for the People, and now, no ocean rights for the Nation.

LOST has been signed by 145 countries; only the US remains as the last major holdout. What will happen if George Bush signs it into law? Let’s examine some of the results of LOST, should it pass:

LOST will give the UN legal authority over 2/3 of the planet’s surface, the power to tax American corporations, and give control to nearly all the oceanic commerce and travel on Earth. It will create two major areas of domination. The first is known as “The Area,” and consists of all the salt water in the world. The UN states that all resources (minerals [oil, natural gas, etc], sea life [fish, seafood, and mammals], and even the air above the ocean, are “common heritage of Mankind.” More Georgia Guide Stones language, folks. You really need to visit and read them for yourselves, if you can.

The second is known as “The Authority,” and is the self-imposed police agency (UN Navy) to enforce these usurpations of sovereignty. Incidentally, none of the member nations will be given veto authority to stop a decision if enough members join forces on an issue. Each nation will be given one vote, but none will have the power to put a veto in place if the issue is too extreme.

Going back to “The Area,” any activity that affects the seabed, such as mining or drilling for oil, would require a permit (even in our own waters). The original price for such a “permit” was $500,000! Madeleine Albright negotiated a much more reasonable price of only $250,000. Wow, thanks Aunt Madeleine. I feel so much better now. The Authority can also demand royalties from any minerals extracted from the seabed as well.

Any ship we wish to board in search of drugs or terrorists will need to be approved by the UN prior to doing so, once again, even in our own waters! This will cripple the US Coast Guard and render it completely useless, which of course, is the whole idea.

Additionally, LOST will give the UN power over the “Global Commons.” Here is where we get to the airspace I referred to earlier. The UN defines the Global Commons to include “outer space, the atmosphere, and the environment that supports human life.” From, “Our Global Neighborhood, p. 251. What?! Outer space? Just where will this line be defined; 100 miles, 1 million miles, the edge of the solar system, or the extent of the entire Universe? Does Starfleet Command approve of this boundary as well? Do the Klingons realize that the UN now assumes control of their airspace?

Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, is attempting to run this through without a single vote by our congress. No debates, hearings, or recorded votes. Contact your congress people and tell them you want this voted on, and you want them to vote “No!”

If LOST passes, we will lose the right to mine, drill, and fish in our own waters, Americans can be punished in a World Court for alleged violations, our Coast Guard will be powerless to enforce our waters, the UN can dictate who flies over the ocean or into space, and will most likely lead to the creation of the UN Navy to enforce the demands of The Authority.

Like the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto Protocol, and a slew of other globalist “laws,” LOST will only add to the loss of sovereignty of every nation on this planet (whether they are members or not), and the loss of individual rights of every man, woman, and child on Earth. If this treaty is in fact allowed to pass, we will indeed have LOST. Everything. Any nation that stands in defiance will be invaded and destroyed.

Without the US, the UN is nothing. We must not allow LOST to pass in this country! We must convince our politicians to vote on the issue, and to vote against it. Then, we must convince them to get us out of the UN once and for all. As long as the UN exists, our freedom, liberty, and even our very lives, are in peril.

Top o' the Morning

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

Global Taxation; the UN’s latest scheme to attack our sovereignty

September 21, 2005

You heard me correctly. The United Nations, in their quest for complete world domination, is now pushing for a tax on every working man and woman on the planet, and the less taxes you currently pay, the more you would be required to relinquish to the Global Income Tax!

It seems that every time we turn around, there is yet a new nightmarish proposal emanating from the mouth of the Dictator General of the UN, Kofi Annan. Not surprisingly, Leftist congressional power mongers John Kerry and Hillary Clinton have voiced support for this rape of our individuality, and destruction of our sovereignty as a free nation - and even worse - Clinton/Gore lackeys in the IRS and Department of the Treasury are actively pushing to allow the IRS to share your tax information with other nations!

The United States currently covers 22% of the UN’s budget; almost a quarter, yet we have no more votes than the smallest country that contributes only a mule and ten sacks of flour. We are, and have always been, the monetary foundation for the UN, but now that is no longer enough. In true communist fashion, the UN wants to take the rest of our dollars and redistribute them for the benefit of less fortunate countries. Over 100 nations have endorsed this outrageous scheme, and with good reason; we’ll be paying for most of it!

The UN, like every other communist regime, believes that no one should have more than someone else, regardless of whether they have earned it or not. To them, a successful country like the US that is based on capitalism, must have stolen their wealth from poorer countries, and we must give back to those countries from which we have swindled our standard of living.

I don’t know about you, but I think that if your best architects can’t design anything fancier than a dung hut, that’s your ignorance, not mine. I for one am tired of being blamed for the problems of those who cannot, and will not, get off their butts and earn a living. This is taxation without representation; the very thing we revolted against Britain over, but worse, it is global taxation without representation.

Under this proposed theft by an internal agency named the International Tax Organization, the UN would not only impose these global taxes, they would attempt to force nations like the US that have relatively low taxes, to raise them to the same outrageous level of seizure, as high-tax socialist countries like Canada. Additionally, the ITO would allow countries to collect taxes from citizens who have emigrated to other countries, and require countries to share financial information to implement the collection of income taxes from citizens who earn income in other nations. There you have it; A WORLD INCOME TAX.

This time however, the UN may have bitten off more than it can chew. In 1996 Senator Jesse Helms from my state of North Carolina, pushed a bill into law that can actually force us from the UN once and for all. Thank God for “Senator No,” as we called him, with affection.

Public Law 106-113 states that advocating a global tax by the UN, is grounds for immediate suspension of US funding to the United Nations! We must contact our representatives in the House and Senate, and let them know that we oppose a global income tax, and that they must support the complete withdrawal by the US from the UN.

The UN is no longer a peacekeeper, but instead a huge dictatorship hell bent on global domination. Bill Clinton has clearly stated his desire to succeed Kofi Annan as Secretary General of the United Nations. Lord help us, should this occur. We need politicians who will stand up for the sovereignty of Americans; not only against the UN, but against our own Federal government when it threatens our states’ sovereignty as well.

Senator Helms had a reputation for doing what was right and sticking to his guns no matter what. This earned him many enemies, but also a lot of respect from freedom-loving Americans as well. If only we had people like him to represent us in every state! One day we will, and those people will be elected on the Nationalist Party ticket to represent your best interests, not the communist agendas of the UN and other One-Worlders who wish to reap the rewards while forcing us to toil in modern day cotton fields.

D.A. Hänks, NatParUSA columnist / commentator

The privatization of our law enforcement agencies

This is an area of great concern to me. Depending where in the country you reside, you may have experienced the “outsourcing” of various public duties to private corporations. This can range from something as simple as garbage collection, to actual law enforcement duties.

The idea is that a private corporation can do a more efficient method of executing (I hate to use that term) certain positions by eliminating red tape. Sounds innocent enough, but when you deal with a governmental agency, you are still dealing with a legal entity, and therefore, a court system. The private sector shirks due process by the use of arbitrators - more private corporations - to circumvent the court system, yet give a legal ruling!

Perhaps you have noticed this on your credit card statement as well. If any disputes arise, you agree (by signing all the fine print) to resolve the dispute by an arbitrator. Additionally, the ruling of an arbitrator is final; there is no appeal. No wonder the CEOs go for this! This is basically a private court system, and it should have no place under the Constitution of the United States. In fact, the very idea of a private arbitrator violates the 6^th and 7^th Amendments of the Constitution! We have the right to have our day in court, yet in order to get a particular service, we must sign away those constitutional rights, and that is nothing short of extortion.

In some cases, you don’t even have the luxury of denying a service. Take for example, Red Light Photo Enforced intersections or Speed Cameras. In many jurisdictions, these are farmed out to private corporations to save taxpayer dollars (yeah, right. They nab you, keep most of the money, and send a cut to the local PD, who gets money for nothing). You receive a picture of your car running a red light in the mail, along with an order to pay the fine for the violation. You may contest this, it says, but you must still send in the fine first and then go before an arbitrator to plead your case.

Where is due process in that? You are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but apparently the opposite is true in the case of private law enforcement agencies and private courts. You also don’t have the option of not signing an agreement about the use of arbitrators either.

I have covers over my license tags that turn into a mirror from an angle. This prevents the photo radar and red light cameras from photographing my tag should I accidentally pass through a yellow light in the rain where it is too dangerous to slam on the brakes. Unfortunately, this happened to me twice while driving my father’s vehicle, which resulted in fines being mailed to the house. I live in NC, yet the photo enforcer is a private company located in Arizona! A local police officer signed his name to the photograph, swearing to the fact that I had run the red light, authorizing this private company to fine me!

This officer did not witness the event, yet he swore under oath that I committed the “crime.” Additionally, the camera company did not allow me to have a day in court. If I did not pay the fine (before judgment was passed [by a private court]), it would show on my license as a moving violation. That is extortion.

Where in the Constitution does it give law enforcement powers to private corporations?

As many of you are aware, the US Postal Service privatized over a decade ago, for efficiency purposes. As many of you are also aware, it is still a Federal crime to tamper with the (now private) mail. US Postal Inspectors are Federal agents, yet they are employed by a private corporation. The US Marshals Service is also a private corporation. Bail Enforcement Agents (bounty hunters) are sworn in by the US Marshals Service. That means that technically, bounty hunters are sworn in by a private corporation. This should not be legal, folks.

Postal Inspectors, US Marshals, and bounty hunters, are all private sector “cops” with Federal jurisdiction. There is something terribly wrong with that. Here in NC, we also have Special Officers. These are literally, private cops. They are sworn with the powers of arrest, yet they work for a private police agency; a company.

Last week, I received four postcards from a company in Texas, bearing the CMPD (Charlotte/Mecklenburg Police Dept.) shield. This company represented CMPD Animal Control, it advised, and the licenses for my cats were due. “Okay,” I thought, “they have a company keeping the books. That’s cool. I can still pay here.” I took the cats to the vet and got their annual vaccinations so I could renew the licenses. Today, I went to Animal Control with the vaccination paperwork, to pay for the licenses. I was advised by the officer on duty, that I must send the payment to the address on the postcards!

I said, “Wait a minute. I can’t pay you?”

“No,” she replied, “you have to send it to this company. They canned two of us to do it this way, too.”

I informed her that I really wished I had not withdrawn from the race (City Council controls CMPD’s budget), as I would not have voted for that.

Imagine, I was at Animal Control, and they could not take my money and issue my cats’ license renewals! It had to go through the private company. I now have to deposit the $40 in cash I was going to pay, into my checking account and waste a check on a payment there is no reason I should not have been able to pay in person. There is something seriously wrong with our country, when we allow municipalities to privatize law enforcement, simply to save money.

Not only is this wrong, it violates your Constitutional rights! When will the people of this country make a stand, and demand that our rights be restored? When our right to due process rests on private law enforcement and private courts, there is no more Constitution.

How soon before there is a knock on your door, and you open it to find a dozen black-BDU-clad, balaclava-wearing “agents” pointing guns at you and barking, “Power Company!” as they barge into your house?

What CAFTA really means for the future of America

America has lost her sovereignty. The Central American Free Trade Agreement, more commonly known as CAFTA, has been passed. In reality this should stand for, Countless American Freedoms Taken Away, for this is the first major step in the western version of the EU. This was a very controversial step, even for Democrats who mostly voted against it (albeit for the wrong reasons) and the repercussions will be terrifying.

First NAFTA, now CAFTA. These were very clever ways around our Constitution. You see, a Doctrine requires a 2/3 majority, whereas an Agreement only needs a single passing vote, and that is exactly how much CAFTA passed by; a single vote. The final tally was 217-215; a single additional “no” vote would have netted a tie – and a second chance.

None of this was by accident. In fact - in a scene reminiscent of hanging chads and recounts in the 2000 presidential election - when the voting time of fifteen minutes had passed, CAFTA actually appeared to have been defeated. Leadership in the House however, ignored the time cap and kept making promises and cutting deals until almost a full hour later when they had the last vote they needed for passage. In addition, it also appears that Charles Taylor’s (R-NC) voting card was deactivated so that it did not register his vote – a vote that he insists was “no” – with no one picking up on this until well after his departure. Is a pattern beginning to emerge here?

As the voting progressed, the numbers remained virtually tied. After the fifteen minute time limit had ended, CAFTA had been defeated! It did not end there, however. In fact, in traditional Liberal fashion, the Conservatives borrowed the time-proven tactic of ignoring the rules. The rule ignored here was the fifteen minute time limit, which was extended by almost an hour, while House leaders coaxed, bribed, and cut deals to achieve their victory. AS soon as they had the winning vote, they closed the session.

Deals, bribes, and coercion? Is this how we circumvent the Constitution and destroy America’s sovereignty? What happened to Jo Ann Davis (R-VA) who left around 5:00 PM for a previous engagement? It was well-known by 8:00 PM, that the vote would occur that evening, yet she did not return by midnight for the vote. Incidentally, her vote was most likely going to be “no.”

Robin Hayes (R-NC) changed his vote from “no” to “yes” in the final minutes, after a promise by House Speaker Dennis Hastert to protect textile industry-related jobs in the senator’s voting district. Hastert of course denies this, but Hayes’ account of the conversation follows: “We need this vote very badly. We have exhausted all our potential sources and we need your vote. In order for you to vote for us, we will do whatever we need to do in your district for people to keep their jobs.”

They must have needed it very badly indeed. In fact, Robin Hayes’ vote was the tiebreaker that changed from 216-216, to the 217-215 vote that squeaked it past by the narrowest of margins.

Twenty-five Republicans had the fortitude to vote “no.” The rest folded and succumbed to the pressure (read: deals, bribes, and coercion), and voted for it. All but fifteen Democrats voted against the bill, splitting the vote virtually down party lines.

CAFTA threatens US sovereignty

So what does this mean for the American people? Simply put, it sidesteps the United States Constitution by implementing Sustainable Development on a hemispheric scale, and nullifying existing US law! How did we get here?

In January of 1994, NAFTA passed and became “law.” Despite the ominous forewarnings of Ross Perot - whom everyone claimed was simply using the pending legislation to bolster his fading political career - NAFTA sailed into history and with it, so did a trade surplus with Mexico. We now have a trade deficit of $800 million, thousands of American manufacturers have closed or moved (here in NC, the textile industry has all but disappeared), and millions of job types have reversed (higher-paying jobs are gone, while low-paying jobs have replaced them). “Sorry you can’t work the assembly line anymore; we sent that division to Oaxaca. You can help Pedro clean the toilets or do lawn maintenance in our headquarters, though.”

CAFTA is merely an expansion of NAFTA, and we can expect further migration of our jobs to points even further south. This is still not the bigger picture, however. That award goes out to the FTAA, or Free Trade Area of the Americas. At that point, the system will extend from the Arctic Ocean to Cape Horn; the entire Western Hemisphere will be the European Union of the West, and make up the largest trading entity to ever exist.

CAFTA threatens US sovereignty by overstepping simple trade agreements. Not only does it expand the powers of NAFTA, it meshes with our membership in the WTO (World Trade Organization). This is quite evident in the preamble (didn’t our Constitution have one of those too?) if we examine that. In the first provision it states: “Strengthen the special bonds of friendship and cooperation among their nations and promote regional economic integration.” Doesn’t this wording sound a lot like the tone of language on the Georgia Guide Stones? Maybe they had the same author.

Promoting regional economic integration glosses over the fact that in reality, this means regional government integration. We don’t have one without the other. This means we can expect to see a common constitution that rewrites all the country’s laws involved. This is exactly how individual states lost their sovereignty to the Federal government. Power was simply stated, and those who argued were imprisoned (or worse).

Skipping all the other provisions in the preamble (are you beginning to see why it has a preamble now?), we see in the last provision: “Contribute to hemispheric integration and provide an impetus toward establishing the Free Trade Area of the Americas. The emphasis here is not mine, by the way. This is exactly how it appears in the original document. Are you beginning to see the bigger picture now? Do you see how this will turn two continents into one mega sized version of the EU? This goes beyond the boundaries of continents; with the exception of Cuba, this is the entire Western Hemisphere.

This is not merely about trade either. In fact Vicente Fox stated in Madrid in 2002: “Eventually our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union, with the goal of attending to future themes the future of prosperity of North America, and the movement of capital, goods, services, and persons.”

This statement clearly indicates that borders will effectively be dropped, and allow the unregulated flow of people, as well as diseases, into this country. It’s no wonder President Bush hasn’t felt the need to control our borders! He has known for a long time what was painted in the bigger picture; that there was no need to tighten our control of the borders when they would soon be removed anyway.

CAFTA is about regulation, not trade. Looking once again at the preamble: “Implement this agreement in a manner consistent with environmental protection and conservation, promote Sustainable Development, and strengthen cooperation on all environmental chapters.”

Sustainable Development is one half of Agenda 21. Here is proof that the two evils are tied together. This means that even if we are successful in defeating a One World Government run by the UN, we still face the same crisis on a hemispheric scale. Either way, we lose our property rights, middle class status, and for millions of us, our lives.

So once again, how did we get here? In 1994, when NAFTA had just come into implementation, those in places of high influence place a ten year calendar into which to incorporate the FTAA. 2005 was that targeted year. However, due to the linking of computers worldwide that Al Gore invented – AKA the Internet – information spread to those who should know; namely everyone else. This disrupted the plans and set them back. The FTAA was simply too much to swallow at once and therefore, an intermediate plan, or CAFTA was implemented.

This involved only six of the thirty-four countries targeted by the FTAA and would be much easier to pawn off to the public and Congress people. With CAFTA now in place, there is little to stop the government from steamrolling into South America and including them in a few years. We must let our Senators and Representatives know how we feel. Those that voted for this should be voted out of office! Perhaps we can then get a vote to repeal this unconstitutional piece of garbage. It passed by only one vote and by the breaking of rules. That is not how this country was founded, and it should not be how we fall. It is time to replace the politicians who do not represent us, with those that will.

I experienced this firsthand in my bid for public office. I was very outspoken on issues such as CAFTA, Agenda 21 and Smart Growth, and returning the power to the people. I also indicated my intention to move higher up in office. That posed a huge threat for these power mongers, who locally took actions to discredit me.

I may be out of politics, but I can still share what I learned with you. You see, politicians are coached to follow these rules and how to counter dissent. When it filters down to the local level, you know you have a problem. We must make our politicians understand this. They must be made to realize that you are the bigger threat to their power than the Bilderbergs, Rothschilds, Rockefellers, the Illuminati, and the Tri-Lateral Commission. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the FTAA are only the stepping stones to worldwide implementation. We are the test. We must fail this test and we must fail miserably, if we are to survive.

Remember, FTAA ultimately stands for “Freedoms Taken Away from Americans.” The United States is the last bastion of hope and freedom on this planet, and when we lose it, there will be no one left to stand for us. We must remain in solidarity to keep our borders closed. The wolf is at the door, and his name is FTAA. Thanks to the sellouts in Congress, we just gave him the key to open it, and that key goes by the name of CAFTA.

Agenda 21 (or not-so-Smart Growth) and what it really means

By D.A. Hänks

~This is intended to be an overview of the content of a series of articles to emerge over the next few months. Each of the subjects mentioned here, along with others, will be selected and focused on in greater detail, in individual articles in the upcoming weeks and months.~

Agenda 21, also referred to as Smart Growth or Sustainable Development by the politicians who attempt to pawn it off on an unsuspecting public, recently gained a tremendous stride toward implementation, with the ruling by the United States Supreme Court regarding property rights.

In a stunning example of contempt for personal rights, this ruling effectively gives private corporations the same gun to point at citizens’ heads, that up until now, only governmental agencies have enjoyed. Under Eminent Domain, a local, state, or federal entity may forcefully purchase your property at or below market value (sometimes even confiscated [stolen] outright), if the good of the people demands it. This might be for, say, a new interstate, railway project, or even a government installation. However, up until now a company that wanted your property for a new shopping mall or super-center had to buy it from you at your terms or go elsewhere. Not anymore! Under this ruling, Wal-Mart may now approach your local government and force you under Eminent Domain, to sell your property; the family farm that has been passed down for five generations. Home Depot can now legally put a gun to your head and say, “leave, or we will have you thrown in jail or killed if you resist.” How did we get this far? Well, let me tell you all about Agenda 21.

Known as Sustainable Development or Smart Growth in most communities, it is anything but smart! In fact, it reeks of Socialism, Marxism, even Communism, and is nothing short of the environmental hijacking of all private lands in this country by an elite few. Sustainable Development is made up of two subgroups: The Wildlands Project and Smart Growth.

Both of these subgroups can now be put into place with the unconstitutional passage of expanded Eminent Domain laws. Let me explain:

Under the Wildlands Project of Agenda 21, the United States will be categorized into five “zones” that dictate use. Wilderness Reserves and Corridors will be off limits to all human activity and will make up roughly fifty percent of the entire United States! Buffer Zones will encompass eighty percent of the remaining fifty percent of America not taken up as a reserve, and will heavily restrict human activity in these areas. The remaining 1/10 of America will be divided into Indian Reservations, Military Installations, and finally, Normal Use (cities, actually megalopolises where 300 million people will be crowded into dense housing and working areas. Does the movie Soylent Green come to mind)?

Under Smart Growth, private property will no longer exist, as people will live and work within walking distance of each other. This centralized control of everything from energy and water use, housing, population, health, and eating schedules, to education, mandatory recycling, waste management, transportation, and all economic activity. This will transform the country and planet into a network of huge feudal-like communities that serve no purpose but to fuel the Machine.

By allowing private entities to use the same gun-to-the-head tactics as the Government, this will exponentially speed up the process in the Smart Growth sector by seizing housing and other acreage for dense housing and business, and in the rural areas by declaring tracts of land to be used for commercial agricultural purposes.

Now, remember I stated earlier about energy and water regulation? Well according to the Global Water Supply and Assessment Report of 2000, reasonable access to water in urban areas is defines as “the availability of 20 litres (approximately ten gallons) per capita per day at a distance no longer than 1,000 metres.” Does this sound to you like a community well that allots ten gallons of water per day? It certainly does to me!

Sustainable Development was contrived by the United Nations as part of their one world government. For those of you still not convinced of the intentions of the UN, let me present three tables. The first is Lenin’s plan, the second, the Green Party plan of 1989, and finally the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (established by Executive Order 12852 in 1993, courtesy of Bill Clinton). Note how eerily similar they are; verbatim in most cases. Also remember this quote by Bill Clinton in a USA Today article from March 11^th, 1993: “We cannot be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans.”

Planned society                        Planned society                       Planned Society

Small communities                  Green communities                 Green communities

Cooperative societies               Cooperative communities       Cooperative communities

Local economic focus              Local economic focus             Sustainable local economy

Public, group decisions            Public, group decisions           Public, group decisions

Socially useful work                Meaningful work                     Meaningful work

Share wealth                             Share wealth                            Share wealth (social equity)

True democracy                       True democracy                       True participation

Free education                          Lifelong learning                     Lifelong learning

Progressive tax                         Progressive tax                        Progressive tax

Does the bigger picture begin to emerge? It has been implemented before, and we all remember the cost. Will the same ideas and goals produce the same results? I would imagine so. Let us look at the Georgia Guide Stones for further corroboration of the “bigger picture.” Erected in 1979 atop a small hill out Elberton, GA, these stones are inscribed with the Ten Precepts for a global community, with chilling consequences.

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Unite humanity with a living new language.

Rule Passion – Faith – Tradition – and all things with tempered reason.

Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.

Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a World Court.

Avoid petty laws and useless officials.

Balance personal rights with social duties.

Prize truth – beauty- love – seeking harmony with the infinite.

Be not a cancer on the earth – leave room for nature – leave room for nature.

Sound eerily familiar? Now we know how we will all fit into these feudal communes; almost five billion people will have to be removed from the Earth’s population. The last one also makes the Wilderness Reserves come into play, by “leaving room for nature.”

Now, nothing is ever done without a reason, so there should be some sort of reason for eliminating 9/10 of the world’s population and crowding them into nothing short of reservations. What has throughout history, fueled the economy, wars, and civilizations? Greed -- power and wealth. One must look to who has controlled the power and wealth of this planet in the past and still does today.

The global economy is mainly powered by two equally powerful forces; the Illuminati, and the Bilderberg Group; both Zionist-controlled mega powers. While it is still uncertain as to who really controls the New World Order, members of both groups routinely surface. Could this then be a collaboration between the largest and most powerful groups in the world - a unification of the Zionist “Mafia families” so to speak? One thing is certain; no matter where you look Zionism rears its ugly head and the inescapable truth is that the South African diamond fields are no longer enough. Complete control of the world’s oil, banking industry, and now private real estate, is the goal of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. No matter what name you call it, it amounts to the genocide and enslavement of the entire world, save the few that will control it all.