Every immigration bill over the last two years has contained wording that directs the development of a “common security perimeter” around North America. The wording and placement in the legislation has changed with each new bill in order to hide it from those opposed to open borders and a full integration of North America, following in the path of the European Union.
George Bush and company, after declaring a “crackdown” on illegal immigration, asked Congress to make one more try at a comprehensive immigration bill. So now we have H.R. 1645, the STRIVE ACT, which has been gathering dust since March of this year. (See documentation at end of article.)
This nearly 700 page bill, if passed by Congress, would be the Trojan horse which allows the interior borders between Mexico and the United States and between Canada and the United States to be relaxed (but regulated) and eventually opened to the flow of commerce and people (cheap labor) within the perimeter surrounding North America. There would be a continuing line of Mexican trucks hauling goods from China, off-loaded and “cleared” from Mexican ports. They would travel north, without stopping at the U.S. border for inspection.
The source for a “common security perimeter” is the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force plan for Building a North American Community. It is the blueprint for the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, agreed to by George Bush and the leaders of Mexico and Canada on March 23, 2005 in Waco, Texas. (Financial support for this deconstruction of the United States was provided by the Archer Daniels Midland Company and Merrill Lynch & Co.) 
“The Task Force’s CENTRAL recommendation is establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an OUTER SECURITY PERIMETER.” 
According to the plan: “Like free trade (NAFTA) a decade ago, a common security perimeter for North America is an ambitious but achievable goal that will require specific policy, STATUTORY, and procedural changes in all three nations.” 
In order to acquire that legalizing legislation, Bush and his accomplices, Richard Lugar and CFR member John McCain, for example, have included appropriate wording in previous bills before the Senate. The majority have been immigration bills, like H.R. 1645, the STRIVE ACT, which is currently being considered by the House.
This is what the common security perimeter would make possible if implemented:
WHAT WE SHOULD DO BY 2010 (CFR plan)
- “Lay the goundwork for the FREER FLOW of people within North America. The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America.
- A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.” 
- Move to full labor mobility between Canada and the United States
- “To make companies based in North America as competitive as possible in the global economy (lots of cheap labor), Canada and the United States should consider eliminating all remaining barriers to the ability of their citizens to LIVE AND WORK in the other country. This FREE FLOW of people would offer an important advantage to employers in both countries by giving them access to a larger pool of skilled labor…In the long term, the two countries should work to extend this policy to Mexico as well, though doing so will not be practical until wage differentials between Mexico and its two North American neighbors have diminished considerably.” 
- Of course that means the wages of American and Canadian workers will be diminished considerably, a process fully underway, in case you haven’t noticed.
H.R. 1645, with its common security perimeter, is not just designed to “secure” our border with Mexico (with a ‘virtual fence’). It is the necessary step in order for the corporate/government alliance to continue implementing their plan for the integration of North America. When complete, there would also be a government exercising sovereignty over the three member nations.
If H.R. 1645 is implemented, the immigration problem would be eliminated because every person legally living within the common security perimeter of North America would be a North American.
For those who would like to check the documentation in H.R. 1645, read SEC. 111, 112, 113, and 121. 
Examples from H.R. 1645:
- SEC. 111,(a) “The Secretary (Homeland Security) shall develop a comprehensive plan for the systematic surveillance of the international and maritime borders of the United States.
- SEC. 112, (a) “The Secretary (Homeland Security), in consultation with the heads of Federal agencies, shall develop a National Strategy for Border Security that describes actions to be carried out to achieve operational control over all ports of entry into the United States and the international land and maritime borders of the United States.
- SEC 113, (3), (E) A report will be made to Congress by the Secretary of State and the Secretary (Homeland Security) on progress made “in developing and implementing an immigration security strategy for North America that works toward the development of a common security perimeter by enhancing technical assistance for programs and systems to support advanced automated reporting and risk targeting of international passengers.”
- SEC. 121 Improving the Security of Mexico’s Southern Border
This describes efforts to be made by the United States and Canada to aid Mexico in securing its southern border with Central America (Belize and Guatemala, see S. 853 for original wording). All three nations will be coordinating their efforts on the construction of the common security perimeter for North America. 
Building a North American Community, pp.3,8, xx
- ibid, p. xviii
- ibid, p. 3
- ibid, p. 10
- ibid, pp. 27, 28
- http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-853 Sec. 3, (a)/Sec. 3, (7), (E)/ Sec. 5