Posted on 05/30/2006 10:01:14 AM PDT by NapkinUser
In March 2005 at their summit meeting in Waco, Tex., President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin issued a joint statement announced the creation of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The creation of this new agreement was never submitted to Congress for debate and decision. Instead, the U.S. Department of Commerce merely created a new division under the same title to implement working groups to advance a North American Union working agenda in a wide range of areas, including: manufactured goods, movement of goods, energy, environment, e-commerce, financial services, business facilitation, food and agriculture, transportation, and health.
SPP is headed by three top cabinet level officers of each country. Representing the United States are Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Representing Mexico are Secretario de Econom�Fernando Canales, Secretario de Gobernaciarlos Abascal, and Secretario de Relaciones Exteriores, Luis Ernesto Derbéz. Representing Canada are Minister of Industry David L. Emerson, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety, Anne McLellan, and Minister of Foreign Affairs Pierre Stewart Pettigrew.
Reporting in June 2005 to the heads of state of the three countries, the trilateral SPP emphasized the extensive working group structure that had been established to pursue an ambitious agenda:
In carrying out your instructions, we established working groups under both agendas of the Partnership – Security and Prosperity. We held roundtables with stakeholders, meetings with business groups and briefing sessions with Legislatures, as well as with other relevant political jurisdictions. The result is a detailed series of actions and recommendations designed to increase the competitiveness of North America and the security of our people.
This is not a theoretical exercise being prepared so it can be submitted for review. Instead, SPP is producing an action agreement to be implemented directly by regulations, without any envisioned direct Congressional oversight.
Upon your review and approval, we will once again meet with stakeholders and work with them to implement the workplans that we have developed.
And again, the June 2005 SPP report stresses:
The success of our efforts will be defined less by the contents of the work plans than by the actual implementation of initiatives and strategies that will make North America more prosperous and more secure.
Reviewing the specific working agenda initiatives, the goal to implement directly is apparent. Nearly every work plan is characterized by action steps described variously as “our three countries signed a Framework of Common Principles …” or “we have signed a Memorandum of Understanding …,” or “we have signed a declaration of intent …” etc. Once again, none of the 30 or so working agendas makes any mention of submitting decisions to the U.S. Congress for review and approval. No new U.S. laws are contemplated for the Bush administration to submit to Congress. Instead, the plan is obviously to knit together the North American Union completely under the radar, through a process of regulations and directives issued by various U.S. government agencies.
What we have here is an executive branch plan being implemented by the Bush administration to construct a new super-regional structure completely by fiat. Yet, we can find no single speech in which President Bush has ever openly expressed to the American people his intention to create a North American Union by evolving NAFTA into this NAFTA-Plus as a first, implementing step.
Anyone who has wondered why President Bush has not bothered to secure our borders is advised to spend some time examining the SPP working groups’ agenda. In every area of activity, the SPP agenda stresses free and open movement of people, trade, and capital within the North American Union. Once the SPP agenda is implemented with appropriate departmental regulations, there will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations, capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas countries that the U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting with some appropriate North American Union regulatory body. At best, our border with Mexico will become a speed bump, largely erased, with little remaining to restrict the essentially free movement of people, trade, and capital.
Canada has established an SPP working group within their Foreign Affairs department. Mexico has placed the SPP within the office of the Secretaria de Economia and created and extensive website for the Alianza Para La Securidad y La Prosperidad de Améica del Norte (ASPAN). On this Mexican website, ASPAN is described as “a permanent, tri-lateral process to create a major integration of North America.”
The extensive working group activity being implemented right now by the government of Mexico, Canada, and the United States is consistent with the blueprint laid out in the May 2005 report of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), titled “Building a North American Community.”
The Task Force’s central recommendation is the 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. (page xvii)
The only borders or tariffs which would remain would be those around the continent, not those between the countries within:
Its (the North American Community’s) boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America. (page 3)
What will happen to the sovereignty of the United States? The model is the European Community. While the United States would supposedly remain as a country, many of our nation-state prerogatives would ultimately be superseded by the authority of a North American court and parliamentary body, just as the U.S. dollar would have to be surrendered for the “Amero,” the envisioned surviving currency of the North American Union. The CFR report left no doubt that the North American Union was intended to evolve through a series of regulatory decisions:
While each country must retain its right to impose and maintain unique regulations consonant with its national priorities and income level, the three countries should make a concerted effort to encourage regulatory convergence.
The three leaders highlighted the importance of addressing this issue at their March 2005 summit in Texas. The Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America they signed recognizes the need for a stronger focus on building the economic strength of the continent in addition to ensuring its security. To this end, it emphasizes regulatory issues. Officials in all three countries have formed a series of working groups under designated lead cabinet ministers. These working groups have been ordered to produce an action plan for approval by the leaders within ninety days, by late June 2005, and to report regularly thereafter. (pages 23-24)
Again, the CFR report says nothing about reporting to Congress or to the American people. What we have underway here with the SPP could arguably be termed a bureaucratic coup d’etat. If that is not the intent, then President Bush should rein in the bureaucracy until the American people have been fully informed of the true nature of our government’s desire to create a North American Union. Otherwise, the North American Union will become a reality in 2010 as planned. Right now, the only check or balance being exercised is arguably Congressional oversight of the executive bureaucracy, even though Congress itself might not fully appreciate what is happening.
Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." He is a frequent guest on the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. He will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project.
Hitler was a Moonbat and crazy but he wasn't stupid.. Bush is not either crazy or stupid.. Hes a Globalist.. serveing a globalist agenda.. Activily watering down Americas Nationalistic Bent.. toward the coming(projected) World Socialist Republic.. which would be morphed into a World Socialist Democracy.. The world's socialists have ALWAYS been for that to happen.. no secret, they have openly said it..(China, Russia, URP, Cuba and increasingly countrys in South America)
Hitler was mad as a hatter.. Bush is not.. unless you think activly IMPORTING (some say) 100+ million insurgents into America is NUTZ.. America is the ONLY HOLDOUT today to that happening on this planet.. maybe it will not be called the World Socialist Republic but then, whats in a name.. "Arbeit macht frei"..
I would turn your argument back on you. Anyone gullible enough to not see collusion among CFR/Trilateralists who hold political office has their eyes wide shut. Those who want to dismiss "conspiracy theorists" as being irrational also dismiss the compelling evidence that these New World Order elites openly seek to undermine national sovereignty, weaken the Constitution, and bring the US into a transnational federal system.
For crying out loud, CFR position papers, speeches by its members, etc. are publicly available. Just read what they seek to achieve. It's what they openly profess. Check out Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton's mentor. This movement is not new, it is influential, and if people don't take it seriously, it will destroy the Republic. Those who deride "conspiracy theories" are simply "whistling past the graveyard."
Some are awake.. I think.. Its true the soverignty of America is leaking away thru cracks in the pot.. Free Republican crackpots better start mending their pots.. What did the republican intelligentsia come up with to answer Bill Clinton's first term?.. BOB "welfare pimp" Dole.. which elected him(BUBBA) to a second term..
A RINO running in 2008 will surely elect Hillary and Bill again.. 20 plus million brand new democrats will only ensure that happening.. Looks like Amnesty is a done deal either openly by law or if no law(if blocked) by de-facto neglect as it is now.. Obviously the democrats are now registering illegals and legals to vote.. in 2006 and 2008.. as they probably already have done in some previous elections.. the insurgent problem is not new... Not hard in most places to get registered.. you don't NEED a FAKE birth certificate.. only an address and maybe a fake drivers license.. or real one.. OR LESS in some places.. Not that your ID.. would be checked anyways..
AMAZING that federal republican officials could CARE LESS about democrat voter fraud.. that in itself stinks to high heaven.. EVERYONE (both parties) knows democrat voter fraud is quite common..
Seems to me that I remember many SCI-FI novels of 50 years ago which adopted a concept of huge geographical areas in conflict??? Unfortunately, I see little of value for U.S. citizens in such a future!
Dilution of individual rights and reduction of economic standards is the inevitable outcome! No wonder that SCI-FI writers always had scenarios where freedom existed on far-flung planetary frontiers while decadence and all manner of societal decay reigned on "Mother Earth"!
Rather prophetic in retrospect.......
The majority of the Republican and Democrat parties are in bed with each other. It's a big shill game.
The political INCEST is very DEEP... and the republican party is PREGNANT..
Each post of raving lunancy reduces the chances any rational person will take you seriously. Just as it appears no one is taking this thread seriously except others demented or deluded.
Almost ever term from your mouth comes straight from the DU lexicon. "Shrub" is only used by Leftists. When will we be hearing of "Bushco" or "the BFCS" or "LIHOP" or "MIHOP" don't forget the Fascist ties either and the rest of the brilliance from the Leftist Loons?
No answer yet. Stop dodging and answer it.
Your idiotic comparison comparing me to Germans under Hitler has NO meaning without the Hitler part. Did you have to practice to get so dumb or did it come naturally?
Are you another DUmmie trying to sneak into FR in order to whip the Loons up and slander the President? We spot them rather quickly and liquidate them.
You don't even know what a Globalist is. It is a stupid term invented to attack people you don't agree with. And the ONLY people concerned about "Globalism" are the anti-capitalist Left and the Anarchists protesting the WTO and various economic summits.
Any conservative would feel dirty after crawling around with such slime attempting to slander one of our finest Presidents.
Only ignorant fools believe any of that 100 million crap.
Conspiracy theories generally are the refuge of those who do not understand what is happening and are attempts by them to explain things they are incapable of grasping. Those involving the CFR, the Federal Reserve merely prove the ignorance of those proposing them. This belief is the equivalent of blaming sickness on "Evil Spirits".
Practical politics will never be found among those believing such fraudulent theories. We have NOTHING to fear from such phony sources of power. We have EVERTHING to fear from an electorate so ignorant that they elect hundreds of RATS in every election. Who needs a conspiracy when the electorate is half blind/deaf/dumb?
What is even funnier is the paranoia about socialism when it is on its last legs worldwide having lost its strongest support, the USSR. We certainly have nothing to fear from a backwater like Cuba. China is backpedalling away from Marxism as fast as it can and still save "face".
"Tragedy and Hope" is essentially out of circulation and too expensive for me to purchase used but does not claim that Globalists are out to run the world. Quigley argued that there is a Anglo-American alliance to do so which requires nothing secret.
It is YOU who should read the widely available publications of the CFR since they in NO way propose what you claim they propose. Most of these are position papers and are not even consistent within the same volume. Often there are several viewpoints argued by the different authors. There is NO "official" CFR line of thought.
Since you seem to know so much about CFR, are you a member, justshutup?
No but I regularly receive inventations to join. It always arrives in a bag carried by a mysterious guy in blue with USPS lettering. TOP SECRET stuff no doubt.
BTW did you ask those raving about its vast powers how THEY "know" so much about it? Hmmmmmmm
Who knows what that string of words is meant to mean?
However, there is no doubt who are the ones clamoring in the streets about "Globalists" and they are NOT conservatives or even pretend conservatives.
Geez!
Hmmm, interesting conversations going on!
I first heard of this last year and did not believe the lady that told we about it. She was fighting mad and ready to leave the GOP over it.
What can be done to stop this if anything? Guess its best never to trust anyone that runs for any office.
To me this is the last straw.
Those at the Heritage foundation are all "ignorant fools"?
Senate Immigration Bill Would Allow 100 Million New Legal Immigrants over the Next Twenty Years
Heritage Foundation ^ | May 15, 2006 | Robert Rector
Posted on 05/20/2006 10:59:16 AM PDT by strategofr
I'll invite you to challenge. If you want to start a thread where we post ACTUAL, REFERENCED, SOURCED documentation on the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, it's published statements, and quotes from it's members, I'll gladly provide support for my position.
So far in your statements, you simply denigrate my position without offering any substantive evidence that it is incorrect. I can easily support my opinion with sourced quotations and facts. Let me know when you want that discussion to begin.
It is usually the case that elitists and party-liners are unwilling to entertain such a discussion, for fear of lending "credibility" to the position of conspiracy theorists. They never confront fact with fact. If you choose to accept this proposal, let's agree to only post sourced information and not express an opinion of our own. Care to enter the battle with facts in hand rather than dismissive personal comments?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.