Guest Blog: Stratfor's "Thanksgiving and Puritan Geopolitics in the Americas"

Thanksgiving and Puritan Geopolitics in the Americas

Analysis

November 27, 2014 | 0330 

"Thanksgiving and Puritan Geopolitics in the Americas is republished with permission of Stratfor."

The painting "Desembarco de los Puritanos en America," or "The Arrival of the Pilgrims in America," by Antonio Gisbert shows Puritans landing in America in 1620. By Antonio Gisbert (1834-1902) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Summary

The first winter took many of the English at Plymouth. By fall 1621, only 53 remained of the 132 who had arrived on the Mayflower. But those who had survived brought in a harvest. And so, in keeping with tradition, the governor called the living 53 together for a three-day harvest feast, joined by more than 90 locals from the Wampanoag tribe. The meal was a moment to recognize the English plantation's small step toward stability and, hopefully, profit. This was no small thing. A first, deadly year was common. Getting through it was an accomplishment. England's successful colony of Virginia had had a massive death toll — of the 8,000 arrivals between 1607 and 1625, only 15 percent lived.

But still the English came to North America and still government and business leaders supported them. This was not without reason. In the 17th century, Europe was in upheaval and England's place in it unsure. Moreover, England was going through a period of internal instability that would culminate in the unthinkable — civil war in 1642 and regicide in 1649. England's colonies were born from this situation, and the colonies of Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay and the little-known colony of Providence Island in the Caribbean were part of a broader Puritan geopolitical strategy to solve England's problems.

Analysis

Throughout the first half of the 17th century, England was wracked by internal divisions that would lead to civil war in 1642. Religion was a huge part of this. The dispute was over the direction of the Church of England. Some factions favored "high" church practices that involved elaborate ritual. The Puritans, by contrast, wanted to clear the national religion of what they considered Catholic traces. This religious crisis compounded a political crisis at the highest levels of government, pitting Parliament against the monarchy.

By the beginning of the 17th century, England had undergone centralizing reforms that gave the king and his Parliament unrestricted power to make laws. Balance was needed. The king had the power to call Parliament into session and dismiss it. Parliament had the power to grant him vital funds needed for war or to pay down debt. However, Parliament had powerful Puritan factions that sought not only to advance their sectarian cause but also to advance the power of Parliament beyond its constraints. Kings James I and his son Charles I, for their part, sought to gain an unrestrained hold on power that would enable them to make decisive strategic choices abroad. They relied, internally and externally, on Catholics, crypto-Catholics and high church advocates — exacerbating the displeasure of Parliament.

Both kings continually fought with Parliament over funding for the monarchy's debt and for new ventures. Both dissolved Parliament several times; Charles ultimately did so for a full 11 years beginning in 1629.

Click to Enlarge

Spain was England's major strategic problem on the Continent. Protestant England saw itself as under constant threat from the Catholic powers in Europe. This led to problems when the people came to see their leaders, James I and his son Charles, as insufficiently hostile to Spain and insufficiently committed to the Protestant cause on the Continent. In order to stop mounting debt, shortly after taking power James made the unpopular move of ending a war with Spain that England had been waging alongside the Netherlands since 1585. In 1618, the Thirty Years' War broke out in the German states — a war that, in part, pitted Protestants against Catholics and spread throughout Central Europe. James did not wish to become involved in the war. In 1620, the Catholic Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II, a relative of Spain's King Philip III, pushed Frederick V, the Protestant son-in-law of England's King James, out of his lands in Bohemia, and Spain attacked Frederick in his other lands in the Rhineland. The English monarchy called for a defense of Frederick but was unwilling to commit to significant military action to aid him.

Puritan factions in Parliament, however, wanted England to strike at Spain directly by attacking Spanish shipments from the Americas, which could have paid for itself in captured goods. To make matters worse, from 1614 to 1623, James I pursued an unpopular plan to marry his son Charles to the Catholic daughter of Philip III of Spain — a plan called the "Spanish Match." Instead, Charles I ended up marrying the Catholic daughter of the king of France in 1625. This contributed to the impression that James and Charles were too friendly with Spain and Catholicism, or even were secret Catholics. Many Puritans and other zealous promoters of the Protestant cause began to feel that they had to look outside of the English government to further their cause.

Amid this complex constellation of Continental powers and England's own internal incoherence, a group of Puritan leaders in Parliament, who would later play a pivotal role in the English Civil War, focused on the geopolitical factors that were troubling England. Issues of finance and Spanish power were at the core. A group of them struck on the idea of establishing a set of Puritan colonial ventures in the Americas that would simultaneously serve to unseat Spain from her colonial empire and enrich England, tipping the geopolitical balance. In this they were continuing Elizabeth I's strategy of 1585, when she started a privateer war in the Atlantic and Caribbean to capture Spanish treasure ships bound from the Americas. Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay were part of this early vision, but they were both far too remote to challenge the Spanish, and the group believed that the area's climate precluded it from being a source of vast wealth from cash crops. New England, however, was safe from Spanish aggression and could serve as a suitable starting point for a colonial push into the heart of Spanish territory.

The Effects of Spanish Colonization

Spain's 1492 voyage to the Americas and subsequent colonization had changed Europe indelibly by the 17th century. It had complicated each nation's efforts to achieve a favorable balance of power. As the vanguard of settlement in the New World, Spain and Portugal were the clear winners. From their mines, especially the Spanish silver mine in Potosi, American precious metals began to flow into their government coffers in significant amounts beginning in 1520, with a major uptick after 1550. Traditionally a resource-poor and fragmented nation, Spain now had a reliable revenue source to pursue its global ambitions.

Click to Enlarge

This new economic power added to Spain's already advantageous position. At a time when England, France and the Netherlands were internally divided between opposing sectarian groups, Spain was solidly Catholic. As a result of its unity, Spain's elites generally pursued a more coherent foreign policy. Moreover, Spain had ties across the Continent. Charles V was both king of Spain and Holy Roman emperor, making him the most powerful man of his era. He abdicated in 1556, two years before his death, and divided his territories among his heirs. His son, Philip II of Spain, and Charles' brother, Ferdinand I, inherited the divided dominions and retained their ties to each other, giving them power throughout the Continent and territory surrounding France.

Despite having no successful colonies until the beginning of the 17th century, England did see some major benefits from the discovery of the Americas. The addition of the Western Atlantic to Europe's map and the influx of trade goods from that direction fundamentally altered trade routes in Europe, shifting them from their previous intense focus on the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean to encompass an ocean on which England held a unique strategic position. The nearby Netherlands — recently free from Spain — enjoyed a similar position and, along with England, took a major new role in shipping. By the middle of the 17th century, the Dutch had a merchant fleet as large as all others combined in Europe and were competing for lands in the New World. Sweden, another major European naval power, also held a few possessions in North America and the Caribbean. (This led to curious events such as "New Sweden," a colony located along the Delaware River, falling under Dutch control in the 1650s and becoming part of the "New Netherlands.")

England's Drive Into the New World

In spite of its gains in maritime commerce, England was still far behind Spain and Portugal in the Americas. The Iberian nations had established a strong hold on South America, Central America and the southern portions of North America, including the Caribbean. Much of North America, however, remained relatively untouched. It did not possess the proven mineral wealth of the south but it had a wealth of natural capital — fisheries, timber, furs and expanses of fertile soil.

However, much of the population of the Americas was in a band in central Mexico, meaning that the vast pools of labor available to the Spanish and Portuguese were not present elsewhere in North America. Instead, England and other colonial powers would need to bring their own labor. They were at a demographic advantage in this regard. Since the 16th century, the Continent's population had exploded. The British Isles and Northwest Europe grew the most, with England expanding from 2.6 million in 1500 to around 5.6 million by 1650. By contrast, the eastern woodlands of North America in 1600 had around 200,000 inhabitants — the population of London. Recent catastrophic epidemics brought by seasonal European fishermen and traders further decimated the population, especially that of New England. The disaster directly benefited Plymouth, which was built on the site of the deserted town of Patuxet and used native cleared and cultivated land.

After its founding in 1620, Plymouth was alone in New England for a decade and struggled to become profitable. It was the first foothold, however, for a great Puritan push into the region. In time, this push would subsume the tiny separatist colony within the larger sphere of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This new colony's numbers were much higher: The first wave in 1630 brought 700 English settlers to Salem, and by 1640 there were 11,000 living in the region.

Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay were different from nearby Virginia. Virginia was initially solely a business venture, and its colonists provided the manpower. New England, by contrast, was a settler society of families from the start. Both Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay were started by English Puritans — Christian sectarians critical of the state-run Church of England. Plymouth's settlers were Puritan separatists who wanted no connection to England. Massachusetts Bay's colonists were non-separatist Puritans who believed in reforming the church. For both, creating polities in North America furthered their sectarian political goals. The pilgrims wanted to establish a separate godly society to escape persecution; the Puritans of Salem wanted to establish a beacon that would serve to change England by example. Less known, however, is that the financial backers of the New England colonies had a more ambitious goal of which New England was only the initial phase.

In this plan, Massachusetts was to provide profit to its investors, but it was also to serve as a way station from which they could then send settlers to a small colony they simultaneously founded on Providence Island off the Miskito Coast of modern Nicaragua. This island, now part of Colombia, was in the heart of the Spanish Caribbean and was meant to alter the geopolitics of Central America and bring it under English control. It was in this way that they hoped to solve England's geostrategic problems on the Continent and advance their own political agenda.

Providence was an uninhabited island in an area where the Spanish had not established deep roots. The island was a natural fortress, with a coral reef that made approach difficult and high, craggy rocks that helped in defense. It also had sheltered harbors and pockets of fertile land that could be used for production of food and cash crops.

It would serve, in their mind, as the perfect first foothold for England in the lucrative tropical regions of the Americas, from which it could trade with nearby native polities. In the short run, Providence was a base of operations, but in the long run it was to be a launchpad for an ambitious project to unseat Spain in the Americas and take Central America for England. In keeping with Puritan ideals, Providence was to be the same sort of "godly" society as Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth, just a more profitable one. Providence Island would enable the English to harry Spanish ships, bring in profit to end disputes with the crown and bolster the Protestant position in the Thirty Years' War.

But while Massachusetts Bay would succeed, Providence would fail utterly. Both Massachusetts Bay and Providence Island received their first shipment of Puritan settlers in 1630. Providence was expected to yield immense profits, while Massachusetts was expected to be a tougher venture. Both were difficult, but Providence's constraints proved fatal. The island did not establish a cash crop economy and its attempts to trade with native groups on the mainland were not fruitful.

The island's geopolitical position in Spanish military territory meant that it needed to obsessively focus on security. This proved its downfall. After numerous attacks and several successful raids on Spanish trade on the coast, the investors decided in 1641 to initiate plans to move colonists down from Massachusetts Bay to Providence. Spanish forces received intelligence of this plan and took the island with a massive force, ending England's control.

Puritan Legacies

The 1641 invasion ended English settlement on the island, which subsequently became a Spanish military depot. The Puritans left little legacy there. New England, however, flourished. It became, in time, the nearest replica of English political life outside of the British Isles and a key regional component of the Thirteen Colonies and, later, the United States. It was the center of an agricultural order based on individual farmers and families and later of the United States' early manufacturing power. England sorted out its internal turmoil not by altering its geopolitical position externally — a project that faced serious resource and geographical constraints — but through massive internal upheaval during the English Civil War.

The celebration of the fruits of the Plymouth Colony's brutal first year is the byproduct of England's struggle against Spain on the Continent and in the New World. Thus, the most celebrated meal in America comes with a side of geopolitics.

"Thanksgiving and Puritan Geopolitics in the Americas is republished with permission of Stratfor."

Obama Slated To Release 76 More GITMO Prisoners To ISIS And battlefield. Request Syria Charge Illegal To Be President "Citizen Of The World" Obama In World Court For Genocide And War Crimes To Help Us Uphold Our Own Constitution

On Tuesday, June 24, 2013, The Washington Times posted the headline: 

 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/24/isil-terrorists-aim-to-attack-us-congressional-rep/?page=all#pagebreak

Be they called ISIL or ISIS, this group is AL Qaeda, and they are hell-bent on creating Islamic state to be launchpad for attacks on U.S.

Generally, ISIL is usually referred to in the news as ISIS.  The Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (ISIS), in which Sham is sometimes translated as the Levant (hence ISIL), sometimes as (Greater) Syria (ISIS as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria),  while having aspirations of greater Middle East conquests for Al Qaeda

http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/whos-next-in-isis-crosshairs/

because ISIS is Al Qaeda, headed within by those who fought us in Iraq with a few commanders who also fought against us in Afghanistan but matriculated back to the Levant.

Many ISIS / Al Qaeda members were trained by U.S. Special Forces in Jordan (circa February 2012 to early 2014) by order of Obama, received Chemical Weapons training

 http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/reports-rebels-trained-by-u-s-to-handle-chemical-weapons/

 as well as expertise in small arms, mortars, anti-aircraft, artillery, man-pads, and rocket propelled grenades.   And guess what Saddam Hussein Republican Army Chemical Weapons cache in a huge stockpile was recently found by them?  Sarin nerve gas.    Lots and lots of it.

 http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/isis-scores-big-with-iraqi-wmds/

When Obama traded 5 Taliban terrorists for an Army Deserter who committed battlefield Treason, and helped the enemy in Afghanistan kill members of his own unit he deserted
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bergdahl-release-arrangement-could-threaten-the-safety-of-americans-republicans-say/2014/05/31/35e47a2a-e8ff-11e3-afc6-a1dd9407abcf_story.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/five-most-dangerous-taliban-commanders-us-custody-released-pow-exchange_794017.html

the released terrorists went to Yemen, but are alleged now to be advisers within ISIS in regard to operations in Iraq and Syria.  And because Obama felt ISIS was not well supported enough with operational Commanders because certain of our Military and Intelligence units are doing their job in killing these ISIS Commanders in the field, even as ISIS still receives intentional U.S. military small arms and support by other compartments within (allegedly under C.I.A. John Brennan’s direction), Obama decided after the rebuke of his agenda by the U.S. Citizen voters to resupply and rat line more GITMO terrorists to ISIS to help support jihadi Islam. 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2556502

While a some Guantanamo Bay  (GITMO) held terrorists have been released as far away as Afghanistan, the recidivisms are generally worse than just 30 released in the last 2 plus years joining ISIS

https://web.archive.org/web/20141030143223/http:/www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/30/sources-former-guantanamo-detainees-suspected-joining-isis-other-groups-in/

whereas the Media tries to sugarcoat the notion that "of 620 GITMO detainees released, only 180 have returned to the battlefield" (or words to this effect)  bunk.  The return to battlefield recidivism (if I understand it correctly) was at (allegedly) 56% or above 2 years ago (likely far worse than that), and now is higher.

In the past 19 months, the actual recidivism,  if I understand the timeline and data correctly, is now where more than half  are going to ISIS upon their release, about 20% did go or went to Al Nusrah (now part of ISIS) and no info on the other 30%.  Even if 3 out of 10 were not going back into terrorism, you don’t release 10 guys, have 7 go on a mass terrorism and genocide spree, and then say you are in any way "successful" because there might be 3 of them who dropped so far off the radar, your wishful thinking is that “maybe, pretty please, I wish I wish I wish, they have gone straight” turns into reality with hardcore murderers for something they swore to keep doing (kill, kill, kill) and really are dedicated to fulfill until they are dead for.    

In the coming months, Obama intends to resupply ISIS / Al Qaeda with yet ANOTHER 76 more of these GITMO prisoners.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/21/us-announces-release-5-guantanamo-prisoners/

who have been slated for release to the battlefield by or for Obama jihadism, even if done so inadvertantly.

There is no doubt as to who the State Sponsor of Islamic Terrorism and War Criminal really is, who the genocided people of Syria and those being attacked in Iraq have cause to file a Criminal Complaint and Charge in the United Nations, one Barack Hussein Obama II, who is not even legally President of the United States, not being a United States Natural Born Citizen.

Obama cannot prove United States Birth Citizenship here, he cannot prove it in Brussels either.  All he will have is blowhard lawyers huffing and puffing, and NO Paternal and Maternal and NO BIRTH IDENTITY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE to show Constitutional Authority to exercise any power to be President of the United States. 

So in light of that, I say to the Government of Syria, don't you have enough evidence to charge Obama for War Crimes and Genocide in the United Nations and in open World Court in Brussels, and bring to trial  Mr, “I’m a Citizen of the World” (even if it must be where he is in hiding in the U.S. and "in absentia" there)?  Since Congress here doesn’t have the guts to act and file charges of Impeachment on an Indonesian and now once again Kenyan dual citizen (thanks to Joe Biden’s citizen forever by paternity clause in Kenya’s latest Constitution)  who is an illegal alien here, illegally running the country, you would actually be doing our nation and its Constitution, as well as your nation, a great service while helping us follow our Supreme Law of the Land, our own Constitution and sending our Government a message not to allow itself to be run by illegals and those who State Sponsor terrorism.  Thanks.

On November 21, 2014, Obama Issued 2 Memorandums Instead Of The Executive Orders On Immigration Amnesty, Contrary to The Amnesty Executive Orders The Media And Obama Administration Claimed He Issued, And Ignores The Law By Executive Action As He Writes One Thing And Does Another!

On November 19, 2014, Foxnews Megyn Kelly on "The Kelly File" ran a rundown of some 25 times where Obama himself acknowledged that if he took Executive Action on his own to effectually legislate from the Oval Office, it is most certainly illegal to do so.   

On November 20, 2014, Obama gave a speech on “Obey your FEELINGS, IGNORE -- Be Derisive and Dismissive on -- WHAT THE LAW IS!”

http://youtu.be/6Q_Xk66gsRU

The Usurper of the Presidency of the United States, Kenyan Natural Born Citizen Barack Hussein Obama, is playing legal shenanigans upon the American Public, while exercising felonious illegal and unConstitutional actions upon U.S. Law.  

More than 5 months ago, on July 8, 2014, Sarah Palin called for an Impeachment of Obama even as it regards this issue which she foresaw 5 months in advance.  She needs to be "all in, research all of the mounds of evidence that now exist against Obama,  and realize Obama is NOT legitimate for the Presidency, and never was.  

  http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/08/Exclusive-Sarah-Palin-Time-to-Impeach-President-Obama

At News with the Views  (in a highly recommended post to read in its entirety) 

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams294.htm

 and the same post at the North American Law Center, 

http://northamericanlawcenter.org/obama-immigration-illegal-unconstitutional/

JB Williams writes correctly that:

  

"...Executive Orders are presumed to have the binding force of law, if the Executive Order is within the constitutional authority of the Executive Branch; or if the order is under a legal purview granted the Executive Branch by way of Congressional statute; or if the order is subsequently affirmed by Congress within the time allowed.

An Executive Action is non-binding by its very nature. It has no presumed or other binding force of law at its foundation. (Legal Reference) 

The action taken by Barack Hussein Obama last week via Executive Action is an expansion of his 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, which is in and of itself, illegal and unconstitutional as explained above. It is therefore, an illegal act for anyone owing an oath of allegiance to the United States to act upon or adhere to the Executive Action. Following orders on the basis of this Executive Action may also rise to the level of misprision of treason, or at a very minimum, a breach of oath and public trust on the part of Federal Law Enforcement Agents.

The operational extent of this policy is stated as follows by Immigration Equality.

“Deferred action is a discretionary, limited immigration benefit by DHS. It can be granted to individuals who are in removal proceedings, who have final orders of removal, or who have never been in removal proceedings. Individuals who have deferred action status can apply for employment authorization and are in the U.S. under color of law. However, there is no direct path from deferred action to lawful permanent residence or to citizenship. And, it can be revoked at any time.”

The facts that this policy is not law and the fact that as stated above, it provides “no direct path from deferred action to lawful permanent residence or citizenship,” makes Obama’s claim that “it is not amnesty” true. 

Obama’s Executive Action as it currently exists, is not amnesty, as it provides no direct path to permanent residency or citizenship, and in fact, is not law.

However, what is does represent is an open refusal to faithfully execute the laws of our nation, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, to protect and defend national sovereignty and security, and it is a direct assault upon and usurpation of Constitutional Congressional authority.

Therefore, it is an overt act of usurping the U.S. Constitution, a direct violation of the Presidential Oath of Office, a direct assault on the American people and a direct threat to national sovereignty and security. It is an “impeachable offense” to say the very least and may very well constitute an overt act of treason. (18 U.S. Code § 2381)

“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

All members of the Obama Administration, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court, who are in any way complicit in these actions taken by Barack Hussein Obama, are according to U.S. laws, guilty of misprision of treason, as co-conspirators to the act. (18 U.S. Code § 2382)

“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.”

The final result of the action Barack Obama took last week on Immigration is he illegally ordered Federal agencies and agents to stand down on enforcing our nations’ Immigration and Naturalization laws, without any authority to do so, or any force or color of law supporting his order. He and his co-conspirators have ordered the Federal government to break the law, solely on his personal decree…"

 Let's look at what Obama signed and released, NOT as an Executive Order like we were told over and over and over, but 2 putative Presidential Memorandums released on November 21, 2014, instead:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-modernizing-and-streamlining-us-immigrant-visa-s

Home • Briefing Room • Presidential Actions • Presidential Memoranda

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

November 21, 2014

Presidential Memorandum -- Modernizing and Streamlining the U.S. Immigrant Visa System for the 21st Century

November 21, 2014

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Modernizing and Streamlining the U.S. Immigrant Visa System for the 21st Century

Throughout our Nation's history, immigrants have helped the United States build the world's strongest economy. Immigrants represent the majority of our PhDs in math, computer science, and engineering, and over one quarter of all U.S.-based Nobel laureates over the past 50 years were foreign-born. Immigrants are also more than twice as likely as native-born Americans to start a business in the United States. They have started one of every four American small businesses and high-tech startups, and more than 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children.

But despite the overwhelming contributions of immigrants to our Nation's prosperity, our immigration system is broken and has not kept pace with changing times. To address this issue, my Administration has made commonsense immigration reform a priority, and has consistently urged the Congress to act to fix the broken system. Such action would not only continue our proud tradition of welcoming immigrants to this country, but also reduce Federal deficits, increase productivity, and raise wages for all Americans. Immigration reform is an economic, national security, and moral imperative.

Even as we continue to seek meaningful legislative reforms, my Administration has pursued administrative reforms to streamline and modernize the legal immigration system. We have worked to simplify an overly complex visa system, one that is confusing to travelers and immigrants, burdensome to businesses, and results in long wait times that negatively impact millions of families and workers. But we can and must do more to improve this system. Executive departments and agencies must continue to focus on streamlining and reforming the legal immigration system, while safeguarding the interest of American workers.

Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to modernize and streamline the U.S. immigration system, I hereby direct as follows:

Section 1. Recommendations to Improve the Immigration System. (a) Within 120 days of the date of this memorandum, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security (Secretaries), in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Director of the National Economic Council, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, the Director of the Domestic Policy Council, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Attorney General, and the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, and Education, shall develop:

(i) in consultation with private and nonfederal public actors, including business people, labor leaders, universities, and other stakeholders, recommendations to streamline and improve the legal immigration system -- including immigrant and non-immigrant visa processing -- with a focus on reforms that reduce Government costs, improve services for applicants, reduce burdens on employers, and combat waste, fraud, and abuse in the system;

(ii) in consultation with stakeholders with relevant expertise in immigration law, recommendations to ensure that administrative policies, practices, and systems use all of the immigrant visa numbers that the Congress provides for and intends to be issued, consistent with demand; and

(iii) in consultation with technology experts inside and outside the Government, recommendations for modernizing the information technology infrastructure underlying the visa processing system, with a goal of reducing redundant systems, improving the experience of applicants, and enabling better public and congressional oversight of the system.

(b) In developing the recommendations as set forth in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries shall establish metrics for measuring progress in implementing the recommendations and in achieving service-level improvements, taking into account the Federal Government's responsibility to protect the integrity of U.S. borders and promote economic opportunity for all workers.

Sec. 2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/21/presidential-memorandum-creating-welcoming-communities-and-fully-integra

Home • Briefing Room • Presidential Actions • Presidential Memoranda

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

November 21, 2014 

Presidential Memorandum -- Creating Welcoming Communities and Fully Integrating Immigrants and Refugees

November 21, 2014

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Creating Welcoming Communities and Fully Integrating Immigrants and Refugees

Our country has long been a beacon of hope and opportunity for people from around the world. Nearly 40 million foreign-born residents nationwide contribute to their communities every day, including 3 million refugees who have resettled here since 1975. These new Americans significantly improve our economy. They make up 13 percent of the population, but are over 16 percent of the labor force and start 28 percent of all new businesses. Moreover, immigrants or their children have founded more than 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies, which collectively employ over 10 million people worldwide and generate annual revenues of $4.2 trillion.

By focusing on the civic, economic, and linguistic integration of new Americans, we can help immigrants and refugees in the United States contribute fully to our economy and their communities. Civic integration provides new Americans with security in their rights and liberties. Economic integration empowers immigrants to be self-sufficient and allows them to give back to their communities and contribute to economic growth. English language acquisition allows new Americans to attain employment or career advancement and be more active civic participants.

Our success as a Nation of immigrants is rooted in our ongoing commitment to welcoming and integrating newcomers into the fabric of our country. It is important that we develop a Federal immigrant integration strategy that is innovative and competitive with those of other industrialized nations and supports mechanisms to ensure that our Nation's diverse people are contributing to society to their fullest potential.

Therefore, I am establishing a White House Task Force on New Americans, an interagency effort to identify and support State and local efforts at integration that are working and to consider how to expand and replicate successful models. The Task Force, which will engage with community, business, and faith leaders, as well as State and local elected officials, will help determine additional steps the Federal Government can take to ensure its programs and policies are serving diverse communities that include new Americans.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order as follows:

Section 1. White House Task Force on New Americans. (a) There is established a White House Task Force on New Americans (Task Force) to develop a coordinated Federal strategy to better integrate new Americans into communities and support State and local efforts to do the same. It shall be co-chaired by the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and Secretary of Homeland Security, or their designees. In addition to the Co-Chairs, the Task Force shall consist of the following members:

(i) the Secretary of State;

(ii) the Attorney General;

(iii) the Secretary of Agriculture;

(iv) the Secretary of Commerce;

(v) the Secretary of Labor;

(vi) the Secretary of Health and Human Services;

(vii) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development;

(viii) the Secretary of Transportation;

(ix) the Secretary of Education;

(x) the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service;

(xi) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget;

(xii) the Administrator of the Small Business Administration;

(xiii) the Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement;

(xiv) the Director of the National Economic Council;

(xv) the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; and

(xvi) the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

(b) A member of the Task Force may designate a senior-level official who is from the member's department, agency, or office, and is a full-time officer or employee of the Federal Government, to perform day-to-day Task Force functions of the member. At the direction of the Co-Chairs, the Task Force may establish subgroups consisting exclusively of Task Force members or their designees under this subsection, as appropriate.

(c) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall appoint an Executive Director who will determine the Task Force's agenda, convene regular meetings of the Task Force, and supervise work under the direction of the Co-Chairs. The Department of Homeland Security shall provide funding and administrative support for the Task Force to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations. Each executive department or agency shall bear its own expenses for participating in the Task Force.

Sec. 2. Mission and Function of the Task Force. (a) The Task Force shall, consistent with applicable law, work across executive departments and agencies to:

(i) review the policies and programs of all relevant executive departments and agencies to ensure they are responsive to the needs of new Americans and the receiving communities in which they reside, and identify ways in which such programs can be used to increase meaningful engagement between new Americans and the receiving community;

(ii) identify and disseminate best practices at the State and local level;

(iii) provide technical assistance, training, or other support to existing Federal grantees to increase their coordination and capacity to improve long-term integration and foster welcoming community climates;

(iv) collect and disseminate immigrant integration data, policies, and programs that affect numerous executive departments and agencies, as well as State and local governments and nongovernmental actors;

(v) conduct outreach to representatives of nonprofit organizations, State and local government agencies, elected officials, and other interested persons that can assist with the Task Force's development of recommendations;

(vi) work with Federal, State, and local entities to measure and strengthen equitable access to services and programs for new Americans, consistent with applicable law; and

(vii) share information with and communicate to the American public regarding the benefits that result from integrating new Americans into communities.

(b) Within 120 days of the date of this memorandum, the Task Force shall develop and submit to the President an Integration Plan with recommendations for agency actions to further the integration of new Americans. The Integration Plan shall include:

(i) an assessment by each Task Force member of the status and scope of the efforts by the member's department, agency, or office to further the civic, economic, and linguistic integration of new Americans, including a report on the status of any offices or programs that have been created to develop, implement, or monitor targeted initiatives concerning immigrant integration; and

(ii) recommendations for issues, programs, or initiatives that should be further evaluated, studied, and implemented, as appropriate.

(c) The Task Force shall provide, within 1 year of the date of this memorandum, a status report to the President regarding the implementation of this memorandum. The Task Force shall review and update the Integration Plan periodically, as appropriate, and shall present to the President any updated recommendations or findings.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d) The Secretary of Homeland Security is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

There is the assumption that Obama issued Executive Orders, but as with his claim of Issuing Executive Orders to bypass the Second Amendment that he and putative Vice-President Joe Biden said he would do, all we get is the same say one thing, and do another routine.  Where what was announced and believed to be Executive Orders to violate the Second Amendment as Joe Biden stated they would as an alleged response to a lone massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School  in which Obama and Biden malevolently used as emotional Public Relations props as they puffed their mouths and pretended to hold back tears while blowing the skin below their lower lip out closed mouthed, attempting to evoke sympathy, on January 16, 2013, were announced by various media as being Executive Orders as Biden stated they would be as such, 

 http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/16/here-are-the-23-executive-orders-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/

 http://therightscoop.com/the-23-executive-orders-obama-will-sign-to-stop-massacres-or-something/

which when they were NOT posted as Executive Orders on the White House Executive Orders location, became newspeak amended without accrediting the later editing, and were relabeled afterwards  as something else, be they Executive Actions, Suggestions, or Memoranda.  

The U.S. Constitution clearly states that : 
“No Person except a Natural Born Citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of President….” US Constitution: Article 2, section 1, Clause 5

What does that mean? Under U.S. Constitutional Law, at bare minimum, 
“…the term ‘natural born citizen’ is used and excludes all persons owing
allegiance by birth to foreign states.” The New Englander and Yale Law Review,
Volume 3 (1845), p.414

Obama FAILS even this bare minimum legal bar. Barack Hussein Obama II was born as a United Kingdom and Colonies Natural Born Citizen, a British subject AT BIRTH through Obama senior, and what is worse, is this present Barack cannot prove or introduce in any U.S. Court of law that he was born anywhere in the U.S. with non-fraudulent (i.e. non-post 1995 manufactured) documents, which is why when Judge Malihi in Georgia ordered the Obama defense team to produce, they walked out, refused to provide any birth documentation, and sent Valerie Jarrett to talk to her fellow Iranian Ethnic Muslim and get him to throw the case on a decision that was based on "I don't feel that" or "feelings".

Obama’s 1995 confession of legal identity facts as of 1995 is the following that while his half-brother Mark has a birth certificate, Barack has none and there are none on file in any hospital in the United States to prove he, Barack II, was ever born in the USA:
-- “You know, as soon as the Old Man died, the lawyers contacted all those who might have a claim to the inheritance.
Unlike my mum, Ruth
has all the documents needed to prove who Mark’s father was.”
-- Dreams from My Father, p. 345 Barack Obama (confessing there
is NO Birth Certificate of any kind for him in Hawaii as of 1995)
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&;pageId=280073

In May of 2009, Barack Obama and the Government of the United
States of America -- AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA via the U.S. Department of State and its foreign ambassador to Kenya -- officially recognized NOT Hawaii, nor any United States location, but Kogelo, Kenya, as the TRUE and ONLY birth place of the putative President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama II.

The official function and dedication and recognition was attended by U.S. Ambassador Michael Ranneberger.
The official Kenyan Government memo, Compiled by: Agwanda, J.O., ASDD and Comissioned by: Machage, T. N . , SDD states very clearly and absolutely unmistakably that: 
-- “This was to honour 

the birthplace of President Barack Obama
and re-dedicate the tomb of Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.,

 the president’s late father.” 

http://www.wnd.com/files/110525nsisbulletin.pdf

The Government of Kenya then re-iterated and officially recognized in its own legislative proceedings that same fact yet again less than a year later: 
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT
Thursday, 25th March, 2010
The House met at 2.30 p.m. p. 31 …2nd paragraph
[Mr. Orengo, Minister of Lands of the nation of Kenya, speaking]:
“…how could a young man born here in Kenya,
who is not even a native American,
become the President of America?

It is because they did away with exclusion.”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29758466/RDRAFT25

That is, we magically did away with the United States Natural Born Citizen
clause of the Constitution by merely ignoring it....not by amending the
Constitution, not by having any legal justification to be President when he clearly WAS and IS legally excluded by our Constitution, it was merely ignored.

Obama's identity was by birth to an alien nation, 

so says Kenya's Media    www.scribd.com/doc/22046837/Kenya-The-Standard-Online-Edition-2004-06-27-issue-Kenyan-born-Obama       ,

so says Obama's own step-grandmother  www.scribd.com/doc/52209399/step-grandmother-sarah-obama-says-us-president-obama-passed-through-her-hands-sunday-nation-newspaper-in-kenya-4         ,

so said Obama himself  through his own publisher for 16 years  www.westernjournalism.com/obama-literary-agent-obama-born-in-kenya/     

   www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii     

and shaped in another separate alien nation of Indonesia as a child, in which he visited Hawaii and was placed in Hawaiian schools during that time for short durations (while registered as a Muslim and primarily attending school in Indonesia as a legal Indonesian citizen for life there) as Ann Dunham-Soetoro came back to visit her parents. 

Further, Obama attended Occidental University and perhaps both Columbia and Harvard as a foreign exchange student, receiving the Fulbright scholarship at Occidental, and himself declaring he was born in Kenya the entire time while he was at Harvard.     

He considers himself only an American on faith, not by birth or by blood or by law.  He is registered to vote as an Indonesian Citizen, under the name of Barry Soetoro at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and in the 2012 Presidential Election, voted for as Barry Soetoro for himself as Barack Obama for President.

The Constitution NEVER GRANTS a foreign Natural Born Citizen any rights to be President of the United States, NOR the legal authority to sign legislation into law, NOR to implement any laws of the United States of America.  Barack Hussein Obama II has NO LEGAL AUTHORITY in the Presidency of the United States, and NEVER has had any.  The entire time he spent in office, was to administrate and implement illegal laws and voidable legislation and regulations in the same way he conducts his implementation of Amnesty, WITHOUT LEGAL AUTHORITY BY THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  

Under Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) @ 180 the entire time Obama spends in usurpation is voidable, because each and every law he has signed, each and every executive order he pretends is supported by the Constitution, all are VOIDABLE in and of themselves. 

“a law repugnant to the constitution IS VOID. . . .” and

“in declaring what shall be the SUPREME law of the land, the CONSTITUTION itself is first mentioned;

and not the laws of the United States generally,

but those only which shall be made in PURSUANCE of the constitution, have that rank.”

You would think a member of Congress would be upset enough to follow the  Impeachment process over violations of Obama over at least

Article 1 – Section 1 – “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

and

Article 1 – Section 8 – Only CONGRESS is allowed to Legislate and  “establish a uniform rule of naturalization…”

But we are told that Speaker of the House John Boehner has feloniously conspired with Obama to shut down and by intimidation "shut up" any Republican members in the House  who dare speak up on the issue (says Representative Michele Bachmann). 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/22/Michelle%20Bachmann-GOP-Will-Not-Resist-Obama-Executive-Amnesty

Since Representative Bachmann is on her way out, I personally believe she has NO excuse to hold off filing a formal charge of Impeachment against Barack Obama, even if simply dropping an Impeachment Resolution in the hopper to be merely referred to an appropriate Committee in the House.  No Excuse.  None.  Instead, for the sake of perhaps charging greater speaking fees after she leaves office, she instead would rather grandstand for Media cameras on December 3, 2014,

 http://www.westernjournalism.com/michele-bachmann-melt-phone-lines/

 without making any commitment to at least START the Impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama II, registered to vote as Barry Soetoro at the White House address.

http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2013/07/question-what-are-legal-ramifications.html 

The location the District of Columbia  Board of Elections lists that he is supposed to vote as of the last Presidential Election, as Barry Soetoro (putative President, citizen of Indonesia, and voter?), NOT putative President Barack Obama,  is listed as:   

Polling Place Locator

Polling Place Details
Ward Number	2
Precinct Number	2
School District	2
ANC/SMD	2A01

Polling Place Name, Address, and Accessibility Information
Polling Place Name	THE SCHOOL WITHOUT WALLS
Address	2130 G ST NW Washington DC

[Hat Tip to: 

Expose Obama

 http://www.exposeobama.com/2013/07/20/obama-alias-barry-soetoro-registered-to-vote-at-white-house-address/

and J. Christian Adams

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/07/19/barry-soetoro-has-registered-to-vote-at-white-house-address/

 ]

 Above, I cited where the Parliament in Kenya stated that the United States has done away (by neglect) the provision of exclusion of someone born in Kenya (their words) from being President of the United States, doing away with the clause in the U.S. Constitution requiring a U.S. President to be a United States (and no other) Natural Born Citizen.  

Perhaps Representative Bachmann and other Representatives of the House, by a neglect of their duties and responsibilities also wish or simply do not have the integrity needed to DO THEIR JOB AND IMPEACH OBAMA as they now relinquish their Legislative Powers to the illegal occupant of the Presidency as well? 

Obama is all about dividing this nation, and intensifying racial divisions while hurting the very minorities he claims he wants to help.  He has more than doubled black unemployment in the United States and incited racial division as justified anger of black against all whites wherever they find them in Law Enforcement or in Communities at large, and is responsible for the now over 10,000 physical attacks called the "knock-out game" in which people have died, as the Eric Holder Injustice Department, per Obama, demands to excuse race hate crimes on the part of blacks against whites as no crime at all, even when the death of a white person occurs in the blindside sucker punch and beat down.  No, 99.99% it is always to be viewed as if it were "no crime" to Obama or Attorney General Holder, it is merely a "local matter".  No civil rights violations here.  

On November 24 and November 25, 2014, there were Obama Administration staged race riots conducted in Ferguson, Missouri.  These were riots where the entire situation was staged as a hold-over of a verdict and a Federal anarchist infiltration from the White House itself was staged, in order that should there be a call for Obama's Impeachment after the November 2014 election, this distraction would help save his ass by disjointing grassroots uprisings against him, and give them a distraction away from that mission and purpose.  

Again, while Obama sanctions the anarchists and sends them in to arson and fire off handguns and commit malicious mischief at his instructions on November 5, 2014 as he met with various leaders of these inciters at the Oval Office,

after that he has incited them, he pretentiously plays the other side of the fence, says their anger is justified, but that the protesters should burn cars and buildings down.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/11/25/Obama-Lectures-America-About-The-Justified-Anger-Towards-Law-Enforcement-In-Minority-Communities

But it was NOT the peaceful and loud speaking protesters who burned anything down, reporters on the scene on live stream reporting verified repeatedly that the peaceful protesters LEFT as the anarchists, arsonists, and various criminal opportunists came in and then dominated the groups who remained.  

On November 25, 2014, The Washington Post reported

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ferguson-decision-and-its-aftermath-more-a-media-event-than-organic-moment/2014/11/25/b506ff72-7256-11e4-ad12-3734c461eab6_story.html

"Even as …[Obama], live from the White House, said “there is inevitably going to be some negative reaction, and it will make for good TV,” the news channels split their screens to show police shooting tear-gas canisters at protesters in Ferguson, Mo."

Why was Obama so gleefully looking for riots as "good TV"?  In part, because he knew what he sent there to break, burn, shoot, and destroy, on the one hand; and because he ordered a stand-down of the National Guard on Day 1 (November 24, 2014) on the other hand.  The National Guard was told to make sure they pulled or held all 700 troops back, regardless of calls for help from firefighters being shot at or anybody else (kinda like Ben Ghazi, as it were).   

On November 5, 2014, before trying to smooth over what was let loose by race riot agitator (and who should have been charged with felonious manslaughter charges for the fake Tawana Brawley rape he verbally incited the black communities in New York City into riots and murders of Whites and Jews), Al Sharpton told the New York Times what Obama told those who advocated violence in Ferguson -- which included representation in that meeting for those who were militant new black panther racists, militant communists, and militant Muslims --

http://www.infowars.com/doj-communists-new-black-panthers-hijack-ferguson-protests/

http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/communists-descend-on-ferguson/

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/10/communists_continue_to_agitate_on_ferguson.html

http://noisyroom.net/blog/2014/11/19/cair-others-join-with-communist-groups-to-organize-in-ferguson-and-beyond/

to "stay on course".    Obviously, this was in regard to what violence and riot plans were being advocated.  

"According to the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has appeared frequently in St. Louis with the Brown family and delivered a speech at Mr. Brown’s funeral, Mr. Obama “was concerned about Ferguson staying on course in terms of pursuing what it was that he knew we were advocating. "  (paragraph 21)  Page A12  November 17, 2014 New York Times In Ferguson, Tactics Are Set for Grand Jury Decision in Brown Case. 

As stated in a previous post,  The North American Law Center has rightly called for Obama's Impeachment, http://northamericanlawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Articles-of-Impeachment-of-Barack-Hussein-Obama-3.2-41.pdf

and have laid out a list of charges that Representative Bachmann or any Congressman or Congresswoman can file for formal charges if they wish. 

A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935) @ 495, 528

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/295/495/case.html

@ 495  “Extraordinary conditions, such as an economic crisis, may call for extraordinary remedies, but they cannot create or enlarge constitutional power.”

@528    “Extraordinary conditions may call for extraordinary remedies. But the argument necessarily stops short of an attempt to justify action which lies outside the sphere of constitutional authority. Extraordinary conditions do not create or enlarge constitutional power.

Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 270 (1885)  @ 290

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/114/270/case.html

"...the maxim that the King can do no wrong has no place in our system of government, yet it is also true, in respect to the state itself, that whatever wrong is attempted in its name is imputable to its government, and not to the state, for, as it can speak and act only by law, whatever it does say and do must be lawful. That which therefore is unlawful because made so by the supreme law, the Constitution of the United States, is not the word or deed of the state, but is the mere wrong and trespass of those individual persons who falsely speak and act in its name. "  

Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266 (1973) @ 272

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/413/266/

"It is clear, of course, that no Act of Congress can authorize a violation of the Constitution."

Ex Parte Milligan , 71 U. S. 2 (1866) @121

http://supreme.justia.com/us/71/2/case.html

“…the President…is controlled by law, and has his appropriate sphere of duty, which is to execute, not to make, the laws;

and there is "no unwritten criminal code to which resort can be had as a source of jurisdiction."

Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1925) @177 (dissent)

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/272/52/case.html

“…MR. JUSTICE HOLMES, dissenting.

"… The duty of the President to see that the laws be executed is a duty that does not go beyond the laws  or require him to achieve more than Congress sees fit to leave within his power.”

Obama somehow sees it as his duty to stay in office as long as he can, and create as much internal destruction to the United States that he believes he and those who co-conspire can get away with.    He  has no regard for America's Constitution or its laws, because he is not, nor has he ever been one of us...whether legally or psychologically, and both are his own problems and faults on his part, not ours.  He and the Communist-Socialists are destroying the Presidency by both active and passive actions, establishing legal precedent that one need not be a citizen of the United States in order to govern it, and run it into a political and economic shambles.  Impeachment and voiding out his entire illegal occupation, regardless of whatever pseudo-charges of racism and rioting that might ensue, is an absolute necessity, if we are to remain a free Republic in any true sense of those words.