Posted on 06/15/2006 3:25:23 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
THE SPP: ANOTHER SUMMIT SELLOUT
Phyllis Spivey
April 19, 2005
"Border Talks Called Disturbing." So read the headline over the report of a meeting of trinational leaders considering "a raft of bold proposals for an integrated North America." According to a "confidential internal summary," the group discussed ways to merge key policies of the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
The article might have been describing the March meeting in Texas of the leaders of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, but it wasn’t. The border story ran February 17 in the Toronto Star, dateline Ottawa. The meeting participants were academics, trade experts, former politicians and diplomats from Canada, the United States and Mexico, all sponsored by the New York- based Council on Foreign Relations.
"What they envisage is a new North American reality with one passport, one immigration and refugee policy, one security regime, one foreign policy, one common set of environmental, health and safety standards ... " said Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians.
Barlow’s group is described in the article as fearing that "business leaders and the politically connected are concocting plans to cede important areas of sovereignty at the behest of American business interests."
"Totally wrong," scoffed Thomas d’Aquino head of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and one of the task force’s vice chairs. Barlow, however, said the discussions had added weight because the group included such political heavyweights as former federal finance minister John Manley.
It’s not hard to guess what Barlow thought a month later upon reading accounts of the Texas summit. There they were, all those "important areas of sovereignty," sacrificed on the altar of a new North American union, just as the confidential summary had indicated. And there was John Manley, describing the cozy confab as "an opportunity to be architects of the future."
When President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin emerged from their March 23 summit, they announced the establishment of the Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America, the SPP. Their joint press conference oozed sugary expressions about close relationships, sharing, integration, cooperation, working together, a common this and a joint that.
The key word, however, was "partnership" and in one form or another was used at least 28 times to describe a new, trilateral union intended to set an example for other hemispheric countries, they said, and advance the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Bush stressed that he had asked Congress to approve CAFTA this year.
President Bush was effusive, describing Canada and Mexico as "the neighborhood." "I will continue to push for reasonable, common-sense immigration policy with the United States Congress . . . We need a compassionate policy . . . (workers) will be able to come and work from Mexico in the United States, and be able to go home – back and forth across the border in a legal fashion."
Canadian Prime Minister Martin was big on sharing and working together, but meager with details. Nevertheless, he was firm that the new security partnership did not mean Canada would be "working together" on missile defense. Reporters didn’t question, nor did he mention, the report that Canada will soon be announcing retaliatory trade measures against certain U.S. products.
President Fox, in his comments, seemed fixated on partnerships, "a partnership for security and a partnership for prosperity, a partnership that is based on human capital (that’s you!)." The ever- petulant and meddling Mr. Fox is a litigious partner, having sued the U.S. in the world court . He’s also on the way out.
Uruguay just elected the sixth left-leaning leader in the region, which puts a majority of the region’s people under leftist, i.e., socialist governments. When asked by a reporter about the possibility of Mexicans choosing a leftist leader to replace Fox, which has been predicted, President Bush made the startling statement that every country in the hemisphere is a democracy except Cuba.
"The choice as to who will lead Mexico . . . is the choice of the Mexican people," Bush said.
Right, but must we be partners? And would someone please ask Mr. Bush for his definition of democracy?
All three leaders expressed their determination to insure a speedy flow of goods, services, and people across secure (sic) borders, but when a reporter asked President Bush about keeping a national security policy in place with a border terrorists breach at will, President Bush simply reiterated his plans to push for his temporary worker (amnesty) plan.
But if the objectives were described at the joint press conference in general terms, the implementation will be specific and sweeping. Each nation will establish 12 working groups that will take the general objectives set by the trilateral "partnership" and turn them into concrete ideas, configured and consolidated within 90 days because, according to Fox, "all of us have a sense of urgency."
The idea is to implement common strategies on virtually all public policies: business, financial services, energy, technology, infrastructure, transportation, aviation and maritime security, education, public health, water, the environment, border security, border facilitation, agriculture, trade, national security, intelligence, the food supply, and manufactured goods.
U.S. policies, merged with Canadian and Mexican policies, will become North American policies. If the U.S.Congress has any part in this sovereignty-killing North American agenda, except to play dead, White House, State Department, and GOP fact sheets on the summit omitted all mention of it.
Instead, the working groups will "set specific, measurable, and achievable goals and implementation dates," reporting back to the three heads of government with their initial report in June 2005, providing semi-annual progress reports thereafter.
U.S. working groups will be headed up by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez. But one week after the conference, the new U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales – darling of La Raza, the nation’s largest Hispanic un-civil rights group – beat it to Mexico to discuss law enforcement policies with Fox.
Unquestionably, the SPP constitutes a declaration of interdependence. Building on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), it puts the U.S. closer to openly-open borders and a European-style Western Hemispheric union. And make no mistake: the end of the nation state means the end of individual liberty in America.
© 2005 Phyllis Spivey - All Rights Reserved
Some other links for further info:
http://my.opera.com/prosperingbear/blog/show.dml/282691
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/index.php?topic=sovereignty
Do you guys have a 'link extravaganza' for this topic? It will be a significant one in the days to come...
Here's an overview of how our new country is going to work. You are now an official Mexi-Cana-merican.
I haven't composed a standalone post on this yet, however, if you goto the "last" here and work backwards, you will find links to what I have found so far:
DUBOB 11-- even *more* tales from the Dark Underbelly of the Beast.....
Okay. There's not much on this yet- the WH been extremely stealthy in handling this. Congress has been pretty much oblivious, or silently granting their approval.
I just think it will blow up as big as the border issue. Free people are not ready to give up sovereignty to any Super-government. Can you imagine a non-American official saying something about firearm control? That will go over real good- sure.
ping
no steenkin' border ping...
I dug up this old article- seems a few folks were on the ball some time ago.
Many impugned Corsi and suggested that if Tancredo had bought into this "theory," then he was toast as far as advancing politically. I kept my peace as the replies had degenerated into a morass of illogical sarcasm.
Having read enough about this subject and witnessed the intent and objectives of the Globalist and One-World advocates, this prospect of a North American Union is not as far-fetched as many portend it [not] to be. While becoming a fait accompli has a ways to go, what is obvious is that the Trans National Highway is not a myth and is a big part of this entire concept.
Just imagine a super toll road, financed by a company from Spain, which is restricted in its use from us commoners, in order to advance the flow of goods from (primarily) Mexico thru the US to Canada?
While I'll reserve judgment for now as it becoming a reality, I am nevertheless, somewhat concerned and not convinced that there are many who would welcome this model coming to fruition.
Super toll road?
News to me. All I know is the SPP has been agreed to, well over a year ago. It's a fact. http://www.spp.gov/
As far as the political/ economic/ security implications, that depends on how far We The People allow it to go.
It's also an obvious historical fact that humanity has been trying to reunite since Babel. To understand that is to understand human nature.
And I'm sure it's the same ostrich-in-the-sand group that always surfaces to excuse anything the globalists try, just because there's a Republican in charge right now. They're boneheads, and so predictable.
"While I'll reserve judgment for now as it becoming a reality, I am nevertheless, somewhat concerned and not convinced that there are many who would welcome this model coming to fruition."
There must be a word to describe how it is that those who protest the most about the topic (including illegal immigration) are the very same who welcome it coming to fruition.
Are they simply having fits because the discussion is not on 'their terms' or is it because, in some respects and unaccustomed to being so, they are now, uncomfortably, in the minority on the subject?
Thanks for posting. Thanks for your work.
Alex Jones lol!! I remember him... is he still around? There was this little patriot radio station in the middle of FL that carried a lot of his stuff.
Yeah, they are. Keep 'em fat and happy, distracted by American Idol, and they'll give it up. Hell, they probably won't even notice its gone.
heh- they're not free. Enslaved to Hollywood and sports distractions. Like you said, they serve their bellies and their selves.
ping
A lot of folks sluffed this guy off, but it's turned out he's been more accurate predicting the treachery of our FEDGOV than anyone else.
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.