Called "Building a North American Community," plan calls for a "community" (rather than "union") of nations. It also mandates that national borders be replaced with "common perimeters".

Those who believe Americans would never agree to such a blantant abandon of national sovereignty will be surprised to know that conversative Republican George W. Bush has already agreed to plan. Along with Mexican president Vincent Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, Bush committed government to CFR plan on March 23, 2005. That, you will remember, is that date that Bush, Fox and Martin met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas.

What a plan!

In addition to effectively erasing national borders, plan calls for American taxpayers to provide following:

• "Long-term loans in pesos" to shore up Mexico's economy • A North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico. • A "permanent tribunal [ie, court] for North American dispute resolution." (And you thought Supreme Court's decisions were painful.) • "Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between United States and Mexico." That is, illegal immigrants living in United States and will benefit from Social Security system, a virtual guarantee of its collapse. • A fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.

The move in Australia to impose a national ID system on that nation's citizens will get little press attention in America, Europe or elsewhere. But once affected and proven effective, Australia's national ID program will be one more step toward internationalism, demise of national sovereignty and an end to personal liberty.

And it's all sold as an antidote for terrorism.

“America will not impose our style of government on unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, to attain their own freedom, make their own way” (Rice, in her same speech, quoting from President Bush’s second inaugural address, while prefacing his words with: “We are supporting democratic aspirations of all people.”).

Thus, in one-fell swoop, we witness cultural wiggle room at its height as Arab states commence their march toward freedom and Islamic-style democracy!

EGYPT MUST LEAD, AS SHE LED OF OLD

“The people of Egypt should be at forefront of this great journey, just as you have led this region through great journeys of past” (Again, excerpt from Rice speech.).

At this point, one must ponder: What Egyptian journey of past do we contemplate? How about slave-driven, pyramid-building, totalitarian civilizations of Pharaohs?

Of course we Americans intuitively know what President and Dr. Rice mean (at least we once did) . . . but driving this democratic square peg into black, moon-shaped hole of Islamic civilization may ultimately necessitate Alexander Great’s resolution of untying Gordian Knot he encountered at ancient city of Gordium (100 miles west of Ankara, Turkey).

An oracle of Zeus alleged that if anyone could untie this knot, that person would be conqueror of all Asia. Of course everyone knows, Alexander (champion of Ancient West) cheated on oracle by cutting knot with his sword instead of untying it—notwithstanding, avaricious behavior of god Zeus still gave Alexander Asia!

Even so, conclusion of matter (i.e., incorporating nigh 1,500 years of Islamic civilization into Western thinking and democratic idealism first proclaimed by Greeks) may ultimately necessitate a rather crude Greco-Roman application; simply put: CUT TO THE CHASE!

And, why might this be case? Consider utter futility of West approaching “Islamic Knot” of Asia—let’s just consider “lead” of Egypt toward democratic liberalization:

Nina Shea’s piece on Egyptian democratic ideals tells it bluntly—the Muslim Brotherhood would be swept to power if open elections were held in Egypt:

“Mubarak’s policies have created a situation in which pro-Western democrats like Ramy Lakah are silenced or driven abroad, leaving Muslim Brotherhood as only organized opposition within Egypt. If an open election were held this year, few doubt that Muslim Brotherhood would win. An Islamist group, Brotherhood has won hearts and minds through charitable work and exploited religion to thrive despite ruthless repression against it. It purportedly renounced violence in 1970s, but its motto continues to be: ‘Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in way of Allah is our highest hope.’”

And, what of Islamic Brotherhood?

“A social and political movement which started in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna for purpose of establishing a pan-Islamic state, transcending all current political and geographic divisions. Like those before him, al-Banna also regarded West as posing a fundamental threat to future of Islam. He felt that even worse than military campaigns were attempts to import Western culture and political ideals. The root of Muslim problems was that Shari’a (Islamic law) had not been implemented - once this was accomplished, everything would be better.” (Taken from: Islamic Extremism)

This is same Muslim Brotherhood that assassinated Anwar Sadat—in spite of Sadat’s attempts to assure them of his Islamic fidelity. Is it any wonder that Brotherhood continues to call for “a more open and democratic political system in Egypt.”

Tracing so-called hydra-headed monster of Islamic terrorist organizations is not intent of this discussion. One can deliberate for countless hours on this serpentine figure (Please see http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rpt/fto/2001/5258.htm). But, what is of peculiar note is where Secretary Rice delivered this sea-change in American foreign policy: In heart of Egypt, where Brotherhood and scores of Islamicists recruit insurgents against America’s War on Terror!

IRANIAN DEMOCRACY AT WORK

While U.S. attempts to light fires of Iraqi liberty and democracy—against backdrop of rabid Islamic insurgency, London bombings, and ominous threats upon homeland US targets (Including “soft targets in U.S. like movie theaters, restaurants and schools” etc.) (Please see: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/005364.php), Iranian people by millions decide it’s time to elect an even more radical regime to pilot their nation through incursions from West!

Of course, with election of hardliner and American hostage taker, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (though vehemently denied by Iranian authorities), at summer’s commencement (2005), how heartening are his initial exploits heard in West:

“Today, we can say that nuclear technology is our right!”

How comforting too, to know that a “Greater Persia”—which encompasses Southern Iraq’s Shiite majority—also awaits full development of democratic Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. Some, like Michael Rubin in Forward Magazine, conjecture that Bush Administration has no coherent policy on Iran regarding spread of “democracy.” Dear Michael—let me disabuse you of such folly! The West, led by Bush Administration, knows precisely how to “democratize” and, ipso facto, diffuse Islamic Bomb! If, on other hand, you consider this contrary to “democratic ideals” – live with it.

ISLAMIC MODERATES?

There is this Western fascination, perpetrated by certain strata of its intelligentsia and fomented by both progressive and entrenched liberal media, that vast majority of clear-thinking Moslem leadership, when push comes to shove, is tolerant and merciful; yes, caring souls who long to live in peace with all mankind, especially with folks in West.

Frankly, let’s quit pussy-footing around with discovering a Salman Rushdie here, a Dr. Khalid Duran there, or even a Tashbih Sayyed, President of Council for Democracy and Tolerance—these rare exceptions dwell in ethereal world of West’s civilization. What’s happening on Dr. Miller’s ground bespeaks antithesis of so-called moderate Moslem. (For entire article . . . please go to http://www.the-tribulation-network.com; includes graphics, links, etc.)