Goals
The goal of the American Fifth Column is to bring about broad based permanent change in America. The effort is seldom focused upon speed of change, tending to seek incremental victories over huge sweeping changes more likely to be opposed, though like all well organized movements, it will seek to exploit any opportunity for safe swift advancement of the agenda. In the case of the American Fifth Column, its agents see the America of the past as being no longer viable for the future and therefore, seek change not only in direction, but in fundamental belief systems in order to make room for more so-called progressive ideas. At the base, the American Fifth Column is not happy with the results of capitalism, otherwise known as economic freedom. While “fair,” the results of economic freedom are not “equal” for all. Like those they represent and support, and those whose ideas they adopted to replace Americas founding principles, they do not see people as individuals with individual dreams and desires, or individual talents, aspirations and abilities, all of which naturally result in varied individual outcomes. The American Fifth Column seeks to subvert fundamental American principles and values, which they see as out-dated and unfair, in order to usher in a new era of broader progressive “equality” whereby the fruits of ones own labor are not his own, but to be used for a greater common good. This greater good is not limited to the American people. It encompasses a global greater good, paid for by Americas most productive individuals, ultimately at the expense of true freedom and liberty itself.

Citizenship
There is an issue, rarely discussed in the news, which has critical implications for our national security and political sovereignty. The United States is one of the most permissive countries in the world with regard to dual citizenship. Our government recognizes dual citizenship and tolerates multiple citizenships. How did it come to this? According to the U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8, it is the job of the legislative branch to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization. Most people are familiar with, in one form or another, the oath of citizenship which must be taken by all immigrants who wish to become United States citizens. Following a pattern set in 1795, our naturalization law, spells out the oath to which a new citizen must swear: "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God." So how can an immigrant take such a citizenship oath and still maintain citizenship in a foreign country?
Sources: Conflict of Interest: The Issue of Dual Citizenship in the United States by Nancy Salvato

Cloward-Piven Strategy
First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse. Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles, Cloward and Piven published an article titled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when "the rest of society is afraid of them," Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands.
Sources: Discover the Networks, Wikipedia, Answers.com