Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with her counterparts, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay and Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa at February meeting
Posted on 07/24/2007 3:03:17 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
PREMEDITATED MERGER
Secret memo: One-world agenda dominates SPP summit
Document reveals plan for meeting of U.S., Mexico, Canada leaders
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with her counterparts, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay and Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa at February meeting |
A multinational business agenda is driving the upcoming summit meeting of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, according to a document obtained through an Access to Information Act request in Canada.
The memo shows a secondary focus of the leaders' meeting in Montebello, Quebec, Aug. 20-21, will be to prepare for a continental avian flu or human pandemic and establish a permanent continental emergency management coordinating body to deal not only with health emergencies but other unspecified emergencies as well.
As WND has reported, President Bush, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexico's President Felipe Calderon will attend the third SPP summit.
The document, obtained by Canadian private citizen Chris Harder, is a two-page heavily redacted summary of the ministerial meeting in Ottawa, held Feb. 23 between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her counterparts, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay and Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa.
The purpose of the Feb. 23 meeting in Ottawa was to set the agenda for the August summit.
The Access to Information Act-obtained memo noted the nation's leaders intend next month to pursue the five priorities set at their second summit meeting in Cancun in March 2005:
Of the five issues, the memo clearly states recommendations by the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, regarding competitiveness "took centerpiece" at the Feb. 23 meeting. Almost immediately, the memo says, governments "will need to begin assessing the potential impact of adopting recommendations made by the NACC and coordinating their response to the authors of the report."
The memo states "the most dynamic element on the plenary agenda was a meeting with the NACC, the body created by the Leaders in 2006 to give the private sector a formal role in providing advice on how to enhance competitiveness in North America."
The NACC consists of 30 multinational business corporations that advise SPP and set the action agenda for its 20 trilateral bureaucratic working groups.
The memo notes the NACC was created by the leaders in 2006 "to give the private sector a formal role in providing advice on how to enhance competitiveness in North America."
According to the memo, the NACC made recommendations in three areas: border-crossing facilitation, standards and regulatory cooperation, and energy integration.
The memo suggested NACC members were getting impatient, charging the speed of SPP regulatory change was too slow. The members complained of "the private sector's seeming inability to influence the pace of regulatory change 'from the bottom up.'"
"Some NACC representatives," the memo comments, "felt that direct signals from ministers were required if work was to advance at a pace rapid enough to address challenges from more dynamic international competitors – particularly China. The subtext was clear: In the absence of ministerial endorsement, bureaucracies are unlikely to act on the more challenging recommendations."
The memo noted the ministers agreed at their Feb. 23 meeting to finalize by June a plan to create a coordinating body to prepare for the "North American response to an outbreak of avian or pandemic influenza." The leaders are expected to finalize the plan at the August summit.
The memo also reported ministers agreed to create a coordinating body on emergency management similar to that set up for avian or pandemic flu. The governance structure of coordinating body was also scheduled for completion in June, so it could be presented to the leaders for final approval at the August summit.
A comment at the end of the memo said the ministers at their Feb. 23 meeting "acknowledged that the SPP was largely unknown or misunderstood and needed to be better communicated beyond the officials and the business groups involved."
WND has reported that as many as 10,000 protesters plan to assemble in Quebec to show opposition to the summit.
The Corbett Report, a Canadian blog that first reported on the memo obtained by Harder, noted the term "Security and Prosperity" was first used by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, or CCOCE, in a Jan. 23, 2003, report entitled, "Security and Prosperity: Toward a New Canada-United States Partnership in North America."
CCOCE's membership consists of 150 of Canada's leading businesses. In the U.S., the Chamber of Commerce would be considered a counterpart.
WND previously reported on National Security Presidential Directive No. 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive No. 20, which allocate to the office of the president the authority to direct all levels of government in the event he declares a national emergency.
WND also has previously reported that under SPP, the military of the U.S. and Canada are turning USNORTHCOM into a domestic military command structure, with authority extending to Mexico, even though Mexico has not formally joined with the current U.S.-Canadian USNORTHCOM command structure.
That is possible. But another thought occurs to me. How much of this is all an elaborate ruse, or pretext for the globalists? The NACC may be more a collection of extortion victims, rather than the villains here.
I.e., How much of the NACC is the result of coercion directed against these supposed "titans" of the "private sector" who may in fact merely be stooges themselves?
My suspcion was aroused after seeing the list, I suspect some of these "leaders" who are ostensibly "impatient" and "demanding" are in fact schills for the governments themselves. Lockheed, for example, is so extremely dependent on DOD contracts, that it wouldn't DARE cross President Bush... He probably says, "Jump!" and their CEO says, "How high?" Or "I need a "constituency" for this lil 'ol NAU project I got going, you are volunteered." To be sure, that may not be the case for all these...but where were all these folks in this deal BEFORE W came along...
U.S. Representatives:
Canadian Representatives:
Mexican Representatives:
“What the heck do I know about “immoral” capitalism?”
How about the willingness to sell out you fellow citizenry for profit. You think that’s a good thing?
We are talking about the formation of the NAU......Right?
That’s ridiculous. Sure, it keeps peasants busy all over the world but, all you end up with is trash.
Why not make the whole damn thing where ever, pay $200 or $300 and have it last the for the better part of a lifetime.
Not only is that poor money management, it’s bad for the environment too.
Help me out here: are the Chinese more “moral” than Americans because they do a better job of limiting economic freedom?
I don’t know where you got that. The Chinese have subverted capitalism to the detriment of the American people (and sold us poison).
What is our trade and monetary deficit with them now?
And how the hell did we start talking about China anyhow? Oh yeah, they’re financing this whole NAU thing just like the war in Iraq. LOL!
I’m just fascinated by the whole “capitalism as immoral” argument. As if economic transactions between individuals free of coercion or other external force is somehow less “moral” than the alternative, having the government stepping-in and regulating those transactions.
The prez is not bending on the border agents? You are either for us or against us. IMO, the drug smugglers are as much the enemy as Al Qaeda.
David, the north american union is not the direction I want to go. I am appalled. Please mention your Duncan Hunter ping list here. Duncan Hunter is not for www.spp.gov.
And don’t forget the new provision for Marshal law. There may come a time where we are not permitted to protest or object to a north american union. We aren’t getting to vote on it which means this is tyranny 101.
I read back through my comments to see where we got off track.
I said, “To teach them an immoral and unprincipled form of capitalism known as Globalism.”
I don’t believe capitalism is bad nor, do I believe the Gov ever made anything better. However, when one makes a business deal only to have the other party/parties manipulate the terms of the agreement (using slave labor, hidden fees or tariffs, manipulating one’s monetary structure, etc.) That’s where the unethical, immoral, unprincipled parts come into play not, the way you interpreted what I wrote.
Bottom line: Don’t make agreements with tyrants, dictators or communists and expect it to be fair and balanced for all concerned.
The concept of "immoral capitalism" gets bandied-about quite a bit here, and I've never gotten the opportunity to see it developed. Suffice it to say I'm of the opinion that when someone uses the term, he or she means to write "immoral capitalist." No need to respond, I'm just navel-gazing.
Well, using the U.S. Army to keep people with honest inquiries out of the Quebec summit area in August is not going to help.
In fact, that safeguard against 'intruders' at the summit is all the information I need to draw a conclusion about the hidden agenda of the NAU plan.
Two thumbs down!
Exactly right, and in the process, they hope to distract from the message. It's a shame that half of these people have likely not even read the very documents about which Corsi writes and upon which we base our alarm and real concerns.
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.