Posted on 02/18/2005 5:36:56 PM PST by average american student
The United States and six members of the Organization of American States have signed new agreements on trade and the environment.
The agreements are aimed at strengthening environmental protection and creating a Secretariat for Environmental Matters to help implement the environmental provisions of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA).
The accords were signed in Washington D.C. Friday by senior representatives of the governments of Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the United States.
That's a liberal thing to say. Don't say it. They haven't given up their powers.
It was clear from the initial Summit of the Americas in Miami in 1994 that the FTAA would be completely an instrument to advance the world government agenda of the United Nations on the hemispheric level. The summit produced two documents, a Declaration of Principles and a Plan of Action. The declaration proclaims: “We reiterate our firm adherence to the principles of international law and the purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter....” It also pledges to “advance and implement the commitments made at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development” (the radical Earth Summit), which launched a host of dangerous frauds, including Agenda 21, the incredible scheme to micromanage the entire planet and all human activity). The Miami Plan of Action promises that FTAA governments will “cooperate fully with all United Nations” agreements...
This pattern has been followed at all subsequent FTAA summits, with pledges to ratify and implement virtually every UN treaty and convention, as well as the UN’s Millennium Development Goals and other socialist programs and wealth redistribution schemes. But the UN-FTAA connection goes far beyond mere pledges and rhetoric.
Crucial to understanding the UN’s role in the entire FTAA process is an awareness of the Tripartite Committee. This body that has been in charge of organizing, guiding, and overseeing the Summits of the Americas since 1998. It will serve as the executive brain of the FTAA should the FTAA be adopted.
The Tripartite Committee also provides financial and technical assistance to the summits and the many Ministerial Meetings and Negotiating Group Meetings that prepare national delegations and leaders for the summits. It also guides, and is virtually the only source of funding for, the FTAA Administrative Secretariat. But the FTAA is not supposed to be a functioning entity; how can it already have an Administrative Secretariat? This is a UN operation, remember. The UN has no constitutional restrictions or accountability. And it can use our money to lobby us for a new bureaucracy that they’re already treating as a fait accompli. The Administrative Secretariat was established first in Panama City, then Puebla, Mexico. Miami, Florida is campaigning to be the permanent home for the planned FTAA bureaucracy.
The Tripartite Committee is composed of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, the Organization of American States, and the Inter-American Development Bank. ECLAC was created by the UN’s Economic and Social Council in 1948 and is an official agency of the UN. On its own website, ECLAC refers to itself as “one of the five regional commissions of the United Nations.”
This is just not true. The OAS is a subsidary organization of the UN, just like the WTO and the World Bank.
The use of international law and the courts to dilute Constitutional protection of citizens' rights was cleary that document's most egregious flaw.
These two statements of yours are contradictory. Care to clarify?
They gave up their authority to regulate trade when the WTO was created through GATT. The US never had a trade minister negotiating trade deals until the WTO was formed through GATT, before that it was entirely the purview of Congress to regulate trade. They also gave up the rest of their authority when they granted the president fast track authority on trade. By doing this they have set up a system where congress is completely bypassed in most trade related issues, and the trade minister and the President have an unconstitutional concentration of power in the area of trade. See Carry_Okie's post earlier on how trade agreements are being used to amend the Constitution in a very stealthy and corrupt way.
APPLAUSE!!!!!!
We owe this to our steady allies in the War on Terror in Central America, countries with brave, respected and steadfast troops like El Salvador! Welcome, friendss!!!!
Well, I'd say that 99.9% of my fellow FReepers voted for him, so you get what you deserve. There WERE other candidates out there back last November, those who would take US sovereignty & respecting our Constitution just as seriously as they neocons insist upon globalism & special interests:
Peroutka (Constitution Party, who I voted for) & Badnarik (Libertarian Party).
But NOOOOOOO!!! Those who call themselves "conservatives" had to vote for the biggest spending President in American history, who, in many ways, is just as much of a big government guy as Kerry ever thought he was...& a fellow Skull & Bones member to boot! You reap what you sow.
President Bush was NEVER an "America First" supporter. Back in the 1990's, we could have voted HARRY BROWNE, HOWARD PHILLIPS, or PAT BUCHANAN into the White House, but were left w/ Bob Dole (he may be a good guy, but what a joke!).
ROFLMAO. As if...
Excellent information. Thanks for posting.
But NOOOOOOO!!! Those who call themselves "conservatives" had to vote for the biggest spending President in American history, who, in many ways, is just as much of a big government guy as Kerry ever thought he was...& a fellow Skull & Bones member to boot! You reap what you sow.
I considered voting for Peroutka, but there was NO possibility of him winning the election. Even if a miracle did happen and he did win, he would have had zero support in Congress. He couldn't have got ANYTHING passed that he promised to do. I'm NOT saying this to disrespect him, it's just the way politics work. That only left Bush. Kerry was out of the question. President Bush has done some good things for America that Kerry would NEVER have done, but he is NOT a conservative.
Instead of everyone leaving the Republican Party, we need to take it away from the RINO'S. It's OUR party; a conservative party. The RINO'S need to start their own party. Even if EVERYONE on FR would have voted for Peroutka, he still would have lost by millions of votes. That's life, and we've been dealt a crappy hand. We have to stick together and work hard to rebuild the Republican Party. The only other thing we can do is raise so much Hell with the RINO'S that they are afraid of us.
If you had only known the # of times I've heard other folks say just what you said: "I like Peroutka, but I can't vote for him, 'cuz it's a wasted vote"...or "he can't win, so I gotta vote for President Bush". AAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!! Speak about a self-fulfilling prophecy!
The reason he couldn't win the election was 'cuz nobody would stand up for principle & vote for him. Quit using excuses, &, like the commercial once said, JUST DO IT. (I mean no disrespect in saying that, ok?).
Whenever you come across a liberal, act as if you are voting for Nader or whoever else would take away votes from the Dims (they don't hafta know), learn the socialist talking points, & get THEM to to move even further Left.
Under these agreements, Castro will have as much say as our government, if he's smart enough to join. The sad thing is, very few people understand this.
Under CAFTA, NAFTA, TRASHTA et al, all nations have the same amount of representatives. The U.S. gets one vote amoung all the nations in the agreement. The agreements are binding.
What these trade agreements accomplish, is to place our nation's self-determination in abeyance, while international commttees make the decisions that affect us.
You can see a problem with that, right?
One more dot.
REAL ID BILL PASSES (Sensenbrenner's illegal alien bill passes, will be attached to Iraq bill)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1340612/posts
NYC:New York Hits Online Sellers of Cigarettes
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1341931/posts
McDonald's to pay $8.5 million in trans fat lawsuit (Here we go)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1341733/posts
States Mull Taxing Drivers By Mile
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1343737/posts
Not to far off?
Ordering a pizza
http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf
There is nothing in this story to justify your remarks. We have great environmental standards in the US and the Central American countries have crappy environmental standards. Who is to saying any of the US standards will change? You are freaking out over the word environmental and I'm positive you no nothing about this agreement or what it calls for.
Unbelievable!!!
Yeah.
Good Lord! 6 computers!!! We could be talking about thousands of dollars just all for the pipe dream of billions of dollars in trade. It's insidious.
You guys are a riot.
That's because there is a contradiction, although the second sentence is less than precise. It probably should have read, 'The opportunity to use of international law and the courts to dilute Constitutional protection of citizens' rights was cleary that document's most egregious flaw.'
The point is that there is a difference between what was the common understanding and intent of those who ratified the Constitution and the way its few loopholes have been used. The former is the real Constitution: the common understanding of enumerated powers granted to the Federal government by the people when they ratified the document. The latter, a set of words to re-interpret by legal ruse, with the intent of using the police power of government in a manner not originally alotted by the people.
The two aren't the same, althogh they both pertain to the Constitution.
Consider that phrase, "two thirds of Senators present." Two thirds of a bare quorum is still less than a majority. Why not require two thirds of the whole Senate when altering the supreme law of the land? Worse, note that the section bears no mention of requiring a quorum.
Think it doesn't happen? I know of one treaty which committed the entire land mass of the United States and all its financial resources to preventing ANY species from going extinct, effectively mandating a complete halt to natural selection, The Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere. According to the Congressional Record, there was no recorded vote, no record of a quorum, no debate, nor were there any committee hearings. Worse, the cover letter from the Secretary of State, describing the scope of the treaty, conveniently omitted discussing the language that gave the treaty such massive scope!
There was NO ACTION on that treaty (there was no law attached to it), until forty years later.
Why not stipulate that terms of any treaty which exceed Constitutionally enumerated powers are void? I am told by those who should know that because the fledgling United States could not borrow money successfully from European powers as a loose confederation, and that certain requirements were stipulated (IIRC by the French) for a national government before they would loan the money.
Then there is the commerce clause...
It is my opinion, having read Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention debate, the Federalist, the anti-Federalist papers, Hume, some Hobbs, and Locke, etc., that those loopholes were intentional, else Hamilton would have not made such an effort to gloss them over. The argument made in Federalist 75 on the manner of the ratification of treaties is laughable.
Thanks for finding this and posting. Whew! I was starting to think from the isolationist rhetoric being posted that the US was DOOMED to communism instead of more capitalism.
Unfortunately, I see none have replied so I guess they didn't think they had to read anything factual that might conflict with their knee-jerk hand-wringing.
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.