Posted on 09/11/2007 5:33:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
It's now leaking out that there was more going on than met the eye at the Security and Prosperity Partnership Summit in Montebello, Canada, in August. The three amigos - President George W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon - finalized and released the "North American Plan for Avian & Pandemic Influenza."
The "Plan" - that's what they call it, with a capital P - is to use the excuse of a major flu epidemic to shift powers from U.S. legislatures to unelected, unaccountable "North American" bureaucrats.
This idea was launched on Sept. 14, 2005, when Bush announced the "International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza." He was then speaking to the United Nations General Assembly.
We might have thought that idea had some merit because the influenza partnership called for "transparency in reporting of influenza cases in humans and in animals" and the "sharing of epidemiological data and samples." That's very different from the Security and Prosperity Summit, where transparency has always been conspicuously avoided like the plague.
This year's Security and Prosperity Summit in Canada morphed the Influenza Partnership into the North American Plan. Now we discover that the Plan is not only about combating a flu epidemic but is far-reaching in seeking control over U.S. citizens and public policy during an epidemic.
The Plan repeatedly features the favorite Bush word "comprehensive" - it calls for a "comprehensive, coordinated North American approach." The Plan would give authority to international bureaucrats "beyond the health sector to include a coordinated approach to critical infrastructure protection," including "border and transportation issues."
The Plan is a wordy 44-page document, much of which sounds innocuous. It is helpful to exchange information about disease and take precautions against letting foreign diseases enter the United States.
However, self-government and sovereignty are at risk when control over these matters is turned over to a newly created North American body headed by the representative of another country. It's an additional problem when the entire Plan is a spin-off of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, an arrangement created in secret solely by White House press releases, without Congressional approval or even oversight.
The 2007 Plan acknowledges that it is based not only on the Influenza Partnership, but also on the guidelines, standards and rules of the World Health Organization, the World Organization for Animal Health, the World Trade Organization, and the North American Free Trade Agreement.
The Plan sets up a "senior level coordinating body to facilitate the effective planning and preparedness within North America for a possible outbreak of avian and/or human pandemic influenza under the Security and Prosperity Partnership." The Plan identifies this Security and Prosperity Partnership coordinating body as "decision-makers."
The Plan then (ungrammatically) states: "The chair of the Security and Prosperity Partnership coordinating body will rotate between each national authority on a yearly basis." Thus, a foreigner will be the "decision maker" for Americans in two out of every three years.
What powers will this foreign-headed coordinating body exercise? The Plan suggests that these include "the use of antivirals and vaccines; ... social distancing measures, including school closures and the prohibition of community gatherings; ... isolation and quarantine."
Will this foreign-headed coordinating body respect the First Amendment "right of the people peaceably to assemble"? Or will the rules of the Plan, Security and Prosperity Partnership, World Health Organization, World Organization for Animal Health, World Trade Organization and NAFTA take precedence?
In evaluating the Plan, it is instructive to recall the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, an anti-epidemic plan launched by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Oct. 23, 2001. Designed to be passed by all state legislatures, the model bill was primarily written by Lawrence O. Gostin, a former member of U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's discredited Task Force on Health Care Reform, and was promoted by the Bush administration during its first year.
The proposed Emergency Health Powers Act would have given each governor sole discretion to declare a public health emergency and grant himself extraordinary powers. He would have been able to restrict or prohibit firearms, seize private property and destroy it in many circumstances, and impose price controls and rationing.
Governors would have been given the power to order people out of their homes and into dangerous quarantines. Children could have been taken from their parents and put into public quarantines.
Governors could even have demanded that physicians administer certain drugs despite individuals' religious or other objections. The Emergency Health Powers Act was based on the concept that decision-making by authoritarian bosses and unelected bureaucrats is the way to go in a time of crisis.
The proposed Emergency Health Powers Act roused a nationwide storm of protest because it was an unprecedented assault on the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens, as well as on the principle of limited government, and so it never passed anywhere in its original text. Will similar totalitarian notions now bypass legislatures and be forced upon us by Security and Prosperity Partnership press releases?
Phyllis Schlafly is a national leader of the pro-family movement, a nationally syndicated columnist and author of Feminist Fantasies.
Lol, those guys are IMPRINTED in my memory!!
At least Charlie B isn’t hiding under there.... snicker
Please be so kind as to give me a link to the actual SPP text, which you read. (The actual SPP text doesn’t appear to be on the anti-NAU site that you quoted and linked to.)
I sure don’t want an EU style structure (NAU) over our current government, but I don’t see that the SPP, as currently existing, as setting up a NAU for us. Kindly show me the text and you may recruit another person to your cause.
I’ve given specific examples of where Schlafly, much as I respect her for opposing the ERA among other things, is wrong. You’ve not yet given any specific examples of how the text of the SPP vindicates the specific Schlafly statements that I’ve questioned.
I’m a pro-American conservative as numerous FReepers, who’ve met me in person since I attended the FR March for Justice in Oct 1998 (prior to my current FR membership date) and numerous stands against ANSWER, Code Pinkos, et al since then, can attest to.
Don’t put me in the NUA crowd where I sure don’t belong, just be so kind as to point me to the specific SPP text so I can be illuminated.
Please be so kind as to give me a link to the actual SPP text, which you read. (The actual SPP text doesn’t appear to be on the anti-NAU site that you quoted and linked to.)
I sure don’t want an EU style structure (NAU) over our current government, but I don’t see that the SPP, as currently existing, as setting up a NAU for us. Kindly show me the text and you may recruit another person to your cause. http://www.spp.gov/pdf/nap_flu07.pdf
Go to page 11 of 53, the last paragraph which starts with "Although influenza will not physically damage critical infrastructure......
I’ve given specific examples of where Schlafly, much as I respect her for opposing the ERA among other things, is wrong. You’ve not yet given any specific examples of how the text of the SPP vindicates the specific Schlafly statements that I’ve questioned.
You have not quoted or given any direct links, only your opinions. Certainly since you have been here since 1999 you don't need to be spoon fed. But I'll give you one more link then go to the article and get the links for yourself.
http://www.state.gov/g/avianflu/91271.htm
Annex 2: Terms of Reference for the Coordinating Body on Avian and Pandemic Influenza
Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs August 2007
Overview`
Canada, the United States and Mexico have established a senior level Coordinating Body to facilitate the effective planning and preparedness within North America for a possible outbreak of avian and/or human pandemic influenza under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). This Coordinating Body will serve as the senior level contact group in the event of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza or a novel strain of human influenza outbreak and, as such, could be used as a model for regional collaboration.
Mandate
The Coordinating Body will support and facilitate the coordination of SPP-related activities in North America with a bearing on planning and preparedness for avian and pandemic influenza, much of which will be incorporated into the North American Plan for Avian and Pandemic Influenza including:
Ensuring the development and implementation of a comprehensive, coordinated and science-based North American approach to plan for and manage the threat of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza and/or human pandemic influenza;
Ensuring the development and implementation of standard operating procedures (SOPs) to strengthen North America’s ability to prevent and mitigate, prepare for, respond to and recover from an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza or a human pandemic influenza;
Ensuring that previous tasks related to avian influenza and human pandemic influenza, SOPs, policies, protocols and any subsequent actions reflect the principles outlined in the North American Cooperation on Avian and Pandemic Influenza agreement and the principles agreed to by the leaders in the March 2006 Cancun Summit;
Ensuring the completion in a timely manner of all tasks agreed to by leaders in Cancun and any subsequent tasks; Identifying and prioritizing additional activities, gaps or areas of collaboration required to ensure North American preparedness;
Promoting cross-sectoral integration of preparedness activities (e.g. human health, animal health, transportation, borders, communications, surveillance, emergency response, etc.);
Encouraging the exchange of information on each government’s avian and pandemic influenza plans and intentions; and
Encouraging the development of comprehensive, multi-sectoral business continuity plans that address North American considerations.
Chairs
The chair of the SPP Coordinating Body will rotate between each national authority on a yearly basis.
Membership
Membership will include senior officials from the following departments and agencies: Canada:
Public Safety Canada Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Public Health Agency of Canada Canadian Food Inspection Agency United States:
U.S. Department of State U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Department of Agriculture Mexico:
Ministry of Agriculture Ministry of Health Ministry of Foreign Affairs Representatives from other agencies/departments can join future discussions in accordance with the agenda. Working Groups
Where possible, existing SPP working groups, governmental structures or trilateral/bilateral mechanisms will conduct the analysis and develop policies and procedures that inform all levels of government in their ability to deal with the North American, cross-sectoral impacts of avian and pandemic influenza, avoiding where possible duplicating efforts Administrative Support
Administrative and logistical support for the SPP Coordinating Body is the responsibility of each national authority.
Frequency of Meetings Quarterly or as called by the chairs; in person or by teleconference.
If you go to the second link you will note it is from the State Department.
Tinfoil is contagious. Fortunately I live within the protective shield of HAARP.
No truer words have eer been spoken. We have lost a certain amount of sovereignty since the republicans took over and are in danger of losing it all with these yahoos in charge. Still hard to believe.
If you will read down into the 2007 you will rellize this is but another UN boondoggle. It is sickening to let these 2 bit thugs have any authority over an American.
http://www.spp.gov/pdf/nap_flu07.pdf
The big blunder of the Bushies was the use of the word comprehensive instead of interdependency. I have already seen here on FR where some "conservatives" free traitors think that we can't live without Mexico and their oil. What cowards! When 9/11 happened we didn't need Mexico, when the anthrax scare happened, we didn't need Mexico, when Katrina happened, we didn't need Mexico. Now some free traitor thinks we need Mexican 18 wheelers on our over crowded highways or the pavement will just roll up and shrink away without a Mexican.
You have given some excellent links. Thanks!
Cipro is one of the drugs of choice in the treatment of anthrax. Probably the best. The U.S. didn’t want a run on the drug by people who didn’t have and symptoms of anthrax poisoning but would have to wait until some doctor decided and then even he couldn’t get the drug. They were keeping t he drugs for the la-de-dahs.
[They were keeping t he drugs for the la-de-dahs.]
I think there’s a big ‘pay off’ involved somehow. It just doesn’t make sense to ban Cipro when many ‘controlled’ drugs can be brought back with a ‘Mexican prescription’.
This is the logical end-game of the welfare state...
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants;it is the creed of slaves”.
William Pitt, 1783
bump
The Flu Plan is not the original SPP text, but is a plan to cooperate dealing with Flu. And there are 3 other such plans for dealing with 3 additional areas.
Both you and nicmarlo have read quite a lot on this, and it should be easy to site the actual SPP itself unless there is no SPP itself other than something along the lines of "let's get together every so often, taking turns being chair, and adopt cooperative plans to deal with our problems?" Absent anyone citing the actual SPP text, I'll just deal with the Flu Plan.
The paragraph cited by you, and following text, is as follows:
Although influenza will not physically damage critical infrastructure, systems may be weakened by the absence of essential personnel in the workplace or the diversion of resources. This Plan, therefore, extends beyond the health and medical sectors to include provisions in relation to critical infrastructure and the movement of goods and services across our borders. The North American Plan for Avian and Pandemic Influenza provides a framework for:
• The basic structure and mechanisms for trilateral emergency coordination and communication;
• Collaboration on the prevention, control and eradication of highly pathogenic strains of avian influenza;
• Collaboration on a North American approach to pandemic influenza preparedness and response, including border monitoring and control measures to stop or slow the spread of a novel human influenza virus; and
• Collaboration on a North American approach to keeping critical infrastructure and essential systems functioning properly in the event of an influenza pandemic.
Thus, the 3 countries will establish coordination, communication, and collaboration to deal with flu. Is that a bad thing that our HHS and/or USDA officials meet with corresponding Canadian and Mexican officials to discuss how to handle a human or avian flu? Nothing in the language delegates legislative powers.
Nothing in that serves "to shift powers from U.S. legislatures to unelected, unaccountable 'North American' bureaucrats" as Schlafly wrongly said. A committee that includes a foreigner, let alone a foreigner by himself, is NOT given legislative power.
You have not quoted or given any direct links, only your opinions.
Actually, I quoted Schlafly several times before and have again above. I have now also quoted the language of the Flu Plan and showed that it doesn't give Congress' legislative powers to a committee that, among other things, meets to coordinate how countries respond to sick birds.
Again, Schlafly also wrongly writes that "a foreigner will be THE decision maker for Americans" [emphasis added] because the chair rotates between the 3 countries. The committee, i.e., the decision-makers of the countries, meet and try to adopt a crisis response such that one country's response doesn't increase problems for other countries.
Indeed, the language that you quoted from the State Dept annex confirmed what I said about the chair. That annex language said: "Frequency of Meetings Quarterly or as called by the chairs; in person or by teleconference." It, and the Flu Plan itself, clearly do NOT give the chair the unilateral power to make decisions, proving that Schlafly's claim that the decision maker is a foreigner is just plain wrong, except I suppose that the chair gets to decide when & where to meet.
Uh, the very first PAGE states the following:
North American PlanHow can you continue to state that the "flu" plan is independent and separate from the SPP plan?
For Avian & Pandemic Influenza
Developed as Part of the
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
August 2 0 0 7
Yes, they probably will.
PREMEDITATED MERGER
U.S. under U.N. law in health emergency
Bush's SPP power grab sets stage for military to manage flu threats
Jerome Corsi | August 28, 2007
the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, has created a webpage dedicated to avian flu and has been running exercises in preparation for the possible use of U.S. military forces in a continental domestic emergency involving avian flu or pandemic influenza.With virtually no media attention, in 2005 President Bush shifted U.S. policy on avian flu and pandemic influenza, placing the country under international guidelines not specifically determined by domestic agencies.
The policy shift was formalized Sept. 14, 2005, when Bush announced a new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza to a High-Level Plenary Meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, in New York.
ty & yw, tt. : )
good post, tt; ty for the ping *will read thoroughly later*
I never posted any such statement.
My last post started by calling it the "SPP Flu Plan." I just used "Flu Plan" as shorthand to refer to it later in that same post. I never said that it was independent and separate from the SPP plan. I sure wouldn't have called it the "SPP Flu Plan" initially if I was stating that it was independent and separate from the SPP plan.
I said that neither you or texastoo are citing the actual SPP text. Therefore, I showed how specific statements of Schlafly are inaccurate characterizations of the SPP Flu Plan.
You claimed to have read the SPP documents, but the only official SPP documents that you reference are not the basic, initial, original SPP itself. They are agreements or frameworks adopted under the SPP (there are four such subordinate documents on the official site). Where is the actual SPP agreement? Are you bluffing or have you read it? Where?
You claim that Schlafly's over-hyped claims are true, but won't name one legislative power delegated to any foreign official.
If her outlandish claims were true, it would be simple enough to give an example. If you could say truthfully that "this Mexican official decided to outlaw feeding chickens a particular food and this was legally binding on U.S. chicken farmers, without any U.S. official(s) taking regulatory or legislative action," it would show that Schlafly's outlandish claim of foreign officials getting U.S. powers would be justified. There is nothing in the SPP Flu Plan that authorizes the delegation of such power to a foreign official.
Yeah, I’m bluffing.
I routinely post on threads about which I have no information or knowledge, and claim I know what’s in the documents I’ve claimed to have read.
I don’t have time to spoon feed you. I have little time to post right now as it is, and what little time I do have, is certainly not going to be expended on trying to educate or spoon feed you....not when you could easily do so yourself. Google can be a great friend. I’ve already posted enough information on this thread, links to documents, and other websites. You, OTOH, continue to post only your opinions, sans nothing else, in an attempt to discredit the conservative, well-read, and informed, Phyllis Schlafly.
As I said earlier, as well, you seem only to posting on this thread to cast aspersions against her. Had I time to post, that would be yet another reason I wouldn’t expend it on you. I’ve crossed paths too often with those who are like you: throwing mud at people who are against what Bush is doing with the NAU rather than accept that what these folks are saying has greater credibility than the Bush & Co. propaganda.
Thanks for confirming, albeit indirectly through your sarcasm, that you can NOT link or cite the actual text of the original 2005 SPP (even though you claim to have read it) and that you can't cite one example of a legislative power delegated to a foreign official. You have thus proven my point that Schlafly's claim of such a delegation of U.S. legislative powers to a foreigner is wrong.
If she was right, a well-read person like you, could have easily supported her claim by naming the legislative power, without resort to personally disparaging me as part of some group that hurt your feelings in the past.
lol.
I refuse to ‘debate’ with people like you who are pro-NAU/globalism/Bush SPP; and I also refuse to post document after document, link after link, website after website.
That I refuse to do so confirms nothing......EXCEPT I don’t PLAY YOUR GAMES.
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.