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.
Your links to prove that we are wrong are where. Please post your links proving we are wrong. Don't use this 2007 plan http://www.spp.gov/pdf/nap_flu07.pdf My suggestion to you is to look up and do your own research. I could care less what you believe.