North American Union to Replace USA? ("is this the plan?" alert!)

HumanEventsOnline.com ^ | 5/19/2006 | Jerome R. Corsi

[Dark Skies]

President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA to include Canada, setting the stage for North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:

At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.

What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:

In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.

The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:

The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.

Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?

[Rokke]

"It was your criterion not mine."

Then tell me EXACTLY what you had in mind when you asked me to "Name one"?

[TigersEye]

Not only that but my laughter wasn't phony. I really was doubled up and having trouble typing. First time for everything.

[hedgetrimmer]

But an affiliation means membership. Many US government politicians and bureaucrats are members. They ARE affiliated.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks! DUH! I had looked at the prior link that said it was $15.00
http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=8102

I just now clicked on it and you can also download that version for free, as well.
The text appears the same as your link, although the one above is a signed version and adds 11 pages due to spacing.

[William Terrell]

It would appear I am one of the few people on this thread who isn't afraid of the likes of the CFR.

Then you would have ignored my posts as harmless becaue you would have known the lack of truth improverishes ideas, some sooner, some later. Yet you fight hard agaisnt it.

I am disgusted by your willingness to smear good men you don't even know because you think they might be doing something you really aren't sure about. And since you're not certain your suspicions aren't true, they must be true and those men must be guilty of something. You're just not sure what. But my disgust with you is my problem. And I'm sure you care as much about my impressions of you as the men you smear care about your impressions of them.

I know no man as good until I see their works and know their hearts. Do you put your faith, property and liberty in any man you may meet and not know?

Please write me an essay about how that is safe, or wise.

[hedgetrimmer]

If you pay for the copy you can get it without them putting a cookie on your machine. Thats certainly worth $15 now, isn't it? :-)

[TigersEye]

Then tell me EXACTLY what you had in mind when you asked me to "Name one"?

You really are bugged about this now aren't you? Heh heh. You have your challenges on CFR after sniping for a night and a half for someone to debate with you. You ought to see to that. Straightening out your train of though is not my bailywick.

[hedgetrimmer]

This article is a bunch of crap

This?

[Rokke]

Could you reference where your cites come from. Where did the paragraph you copy and pasted in post 550 come from?

"Who is changing the international order?"

That is a natural progression that hasn't stopped evolving since the beginning of time. Any number of influences change the international order. People like Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Ronald Reagan and George Bush have all changed the "international order". So have Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussain.

"Why is it 'evolving' from nation-states?"

Who says it is?

[Pukin Dog]

Instead of commentary on how you think the thread is going, I will remind you once to stay on the subject matter.

[calcowgirl]

Don't limit your thoughts to just federal government officials.
Schwarzenegger has appointed quite a few CFR members to high posts (Alan Bersin, for one).

[Rokke]

"This "task force paper" obviously required a lot of meetings."

Oh yeah. Those were some really secret meetings. Say the words Seventy. Page. Document. Detailing. the. results. of. the. meetings.

"I guess the question is, did President Bush meet with Canada and Mexico the first time before or after the papers was actually written. It was published in 2005."

What in the world are you talking about. Because a council publishes a paper, it must be assumed that when the President of the United States meets with the only other two nations on this continent that he is doing so as a result of the paper. You really are a crackpot.

"How many meetings do you think it took to develop the concept?"

Read the thing. All the "secrets" are spelled right out in its opening pages.

"Let me ask, do you think the Balkanization we see going on around us"

Most people aren't wearing your funny colored glasses. Your unsupported, weak assumptions are not worth discussing. Throw some evidence on the table and it might be a little more than delusional ramblings.

[hedgetrimmer]

Ah ha!

[texastoo]

"Ministry" is just the name other countgries use to describe what we call secretaries. We have a secretary of defense, other countries have a defense minister. That's all that means.

Since we are talking about NAFTA, which of the three countries use "secretariats" (not secretaries) or "ministers"? These are UN words and unAmerican.

NAFTA was definitely sold as a way to stop illegal immigration. Are you too young to remember?

Mexico has pushed its citizens across the border. Sad, that a country stoops so low. Mexico is too corrupt to make any kind of deal with.

[Rokke]

"here"

I didn't see the paragraph you cited at that link. Were you sending me to post #149 of this thread?

[Rokke]

"So why are you casting personal insults? They are not necessary in a fact based discussion."

I repeatedly answer a series of questions with exactly what tigerseye asks for, and he laughs and accuses me of being unable to answer his questions. And you chastise me for insulting him? I stand by my comments to him.

[hedgetrimmer]

Where did the paragraph you copy and pasted in post 550 come from?

here

[Coleus]

The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. >>>

tin foil? go to our borders in the south this is right on the money. Had he cared, the fence and walls would have been up and he would have kept his promise to hire 2,000 border patrol agents.

[hedgetrimmer]

And you chastise me for insulting him?

I'm afraid so.

[Rokke]

"then we really have a lot of work to do."

Ever hear of Sisyphus? It really fits here.