Skip to comments.North American Union to Replace USA? ("is this the plan?" alert!)
Posted on 05/19/2006 6:56:03 AM PDT by 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 doesnt 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?
I was reading your post and, with minor exceptions, was largely in agreement, until...
>>"Now, you may not like President Bush ...My point is that complaining about ..."
You know, this kind of stuff gets really old. I posted nothing about Bush and was not complaining. The broad brush insults against everyone only diminishes any meaningful, intelligent conversation.
I wasn't implying that you didn't like President Bush--- or at least I didn't mean to. I was just trying to say to whoever might be reading who didn't, Ted Rall is still over the edge in this stuff. I didn't mean to tar you or anyone else with a broad bush, I just meant to find a point of agreement with people who might not like President Bush. I guess since I was posting in reply to you and Quix I shouldn't have put that in. I was actually trying to be inclusive, not put my foot in my mouth. Sorry!
No harm, permanent anyway. Apology excepted.
Just wanted to ping you to post #21 on here--there's a link to an article I'd read from Phyllis Schaffly which contains a link to the CFR plans in PDF format. does that help? :)
Thanks. Will look at the link later today, I hope.
All the left institutions and organizations may have different window dressing. They may rank the priorities toward the global government slightly differently.
But they will keep to the party line on the essentials with virtually a mob or military or mind-controlled mentality when any serious issue or goal is sought or pointed to by the social/political stars amongst them. For such a rebellious group, they can be remarkably quick to agree and fall in line to further tyranny.
If CFR is a symptom, then one could say all the political/social etc. groups and institutions are FRONT GROUPS for the real puppet masters behind the scenes. The Republic is not safe from any of them. And if all but any one of them were miraculously depopulated of members, the one that remained would quickly consume all the remaining constituents and power strings and still rush full steam ahead.
And, actually, I think most people of their ilk--RINO or blatant Marxist--having bought into the line of no right or wrong; certainly no satan or God--would believe that they COULD rush pell mell toward the global government because they are so smart, with-it, powerful, know better, etc. without any accountability to anyone or any thing.
And, I think even far too many conservatives underestimate the literal demonic forces driving the Marxist left; assisting the Marxist left etc.
Such can easily be countered by PRAYER on the part of good hearted more or less righteous Believers in the Body of Christ. But, sadly, too many assume it's not necessary and/or are too lazy about DOING THE CRITICAL WORK OF PRAYER on behalf of the USA. They hardly even pray much for their own families or themselves. And the demonic forces know that and take full advantage of it for all they are worth.
So, the normal DIMRAT/ MARXISTS/ MACHIAVELLIANS/ et al and their normal ruthless, massive political and social power
all the demonic power behind them abroad in our land and the world
a relatively weak-kneed, far too UNpraying Church
muddle headed 3rd party voting and refraining from voting on the part of the patriotic Christian right
if it happens, WILL SPELL UNPRECEDENTED DISASTER for our country and the world.
I wish it were not true. I would love to be wrong about that. All the evidence I look at and consider leaves me feeling that my description could be too optimistic, if anything.
BTW, regardless of a lot of things,
I love Condi and Bush a lot and pray that they do the right thing vs whatever pressures they may receive from the elite. But I'm not too impressed with their treatment of Israel in too many cases.
As I understand it, President Bush has been told in unmistakable terms the hazards and dangers from God Almighty if he treats Israel shabbily. And I liked his recent affirmation that we will attack anyone who attacks Israel.
But the whole scene is a multi-dimensional mine field for them and for our Republic EVEN WITH THE GOP IN POWER.
Given that communism was, as Whittaker Chambers said, a vision of life without God, that idea that it was and is demonically inspired seems very reasonable to me. Still, what is and isn't demonically inspired I think is hard to conclusively say. Certainly Job had no chance of guessing Satan's interest in his life, nor God's interest in teaching Satan a lesson (if that in fact was what His interest was).
If you read Christianity Today,what you generally see is a theologically orthodox magazine that goes as far left politically as the editors think it can get away with. During the 2004 election, it tried to get its readers to see that Kerry's opposition to abortion, for instance. This seems to be following a movement of evangelical leaders the press has designated (and, to be fair, are actually very popular) such as Rick Warren, who, whether it's joining in Bono's One campaign or global warming, seems to me to be pretty far down the Jim Wallis road-- i.e. the belief that socialism (what he calls "social justice" is orthodox and conservatism is heretical.
This isn't new--- remember, it wasn't so long ago that Jimmy Carter slithered into office in large part based upon his Evangelical support.
One thing is clear--- those promoting the "One" and Global Warming campaigns are what I would call one-worlders.
But are Warren and the rest not Christians? I wouldn't go in that direction, although many of them (not Warren himself) seem to be going to that length in their judgement of President Bush. I do know they are on the wrong side and the atheist Orianna Fallaci, as she has spent more time being on the right side, has seemed to me to inexorably grow closer and closer to God.
A truth some don't like. It is bad when potential victims don't have imagination and potential tyrants do.
So in other words, the Pastor bonehead wants us to subsidize Mexico's crummy economy, reducing the incentive for their government and people to improve it themselves. Is that what he/it is saying?
These are the final words of his book
Toward A North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New
by Robert A. Pastor
August 2001 224 pp. ISBN paper 0-88132-328-4 $28.00
Chapter 8. From A North American to an American Community: The 21st Century of Integration
US President Bush has a unique opportunity to structure a relationship that will have a profound effect not just on Canada and Mexico but also on the United States. It will require resources, new organizations, difficult negotiations, and most of all, a new perspective on the region. A commentator for the Toronto Star posed the issue concisely: So the challenge is to create a North American Community whose vision goes far beyond trade and investment but without sacrificing cultural identity and core national institutions and values.19
The North American Community has much to learn from the European Unionabout both what it should adapt and what it should avoid. But the New World does not want to replicate the bureaucracy of the Old or the many instruments the Union uses to reduce disparities between rich and poor countries. What distinguishes the North American approach from the European is the respect for the market. This market orientation has permitted North American efficiencies and the economies of scale that have helped fuel the regions restructuring and development. And indeed, the European Union is trying to replicate the US markets policies on labor flexibility and uniform standards.20
What Canada, Mexico, and the United States need is a North American perspective and a few lean organizations that can help coordinate the three countries multiple levels of governance and can accelerate integration without harming laggard regions. One option is to wait and let the market do its work, as the US South did for nearly 100 years. Or one can hasten the process by making targeted investments in infrastructure and education. What North America could learn most of all from the European Union is commitment. From its 1999 budget of $120 billion, the Union used about a third$40 billionfor Structural and Cohesion Funds to reduce the disparities between rich and poor countries. Europes gross product is smaller than North Americas, and yet the Union spends about six times more on aid for its poor members as the United States spends on assisting its poor states. And the Union has programmed that annual aid to grow to about $70 billion by 2006.
If Canada and the United States contributed just 10 percent of what the European Union spends on aid, and if Mexico invested it wisely in infrastructure and education, Mexico could start to grow at a rate twice that of its northern neighbors. The psychology of North America would change quickly, and the problems of immigration, corruption, and drugs would look different. North America would have found the magic formula to lift developing countries to the industrial world, and that would be the 21st-century equivalent of the shot heard round the world.
It seems to me like they are looking for the US, and Canada, to be their savior, to pour billions more dollars into Mexico and to tie us together through various dependencies 'til kingdom come. With billions for investments in new infrastructure, combined with increasing wages (at the expense of declining US wages), Mexico can flourish. As Pastor said, "North America would have found the magic formula to lift developing countries to the industrial world."
It's Utopia, doncha know?
The idea that the CFR folks are a bunch of lazy rich has-beens--sitting around and pontificating to hear the wind blow with no goal or expectation of anyone paying much attention to them is the furthest thing from the truth. Oh, they might like many ignorant masses to THINK that's true. But it's FAR from true.
Yeah, it was clear that Arnie was likely to be in the puppet master ranks--at least manipulated by them if not sold out to their goals and values. He's still better than the other option by far but not to be trusted to protect the Constitution.
Warren may be muddle headed on socialism. I hope not.
THERE IS in Christianity the Christ-like standard to give those--particularly in the Body of Christ--who are without--what you can. We have failed to come even close to that.
If we had done even half of what God called us to do, there wouldn't be a welfare problem. And the government wouldn't be wasting generations of people and $trillions on it.
And that would be coupled with the Christian standard that if you don't work, you don't eat.
Christian Compassion is Biblical and Christlike. But it's NOT atheist, secular humanism counterfeiting Christian compassion by a greedy bloated bureaucracy.
I suspect that if Warren was sat down and shown the stark truth about the NWO--he would come around.
The head of World Vision in Taipei was a friend of mine. He was a former UN official. World government to the hilt though would not talk that way too overtly. I stopped in on his family in Hawaii on the way back. He said during that visit that he wasn't even sure--how did it go--something about he wasn't sure the Bible was true or Christ was God. I was flabbergasted. He was on the board of his church! He died this past year or so and I heard he made a viable confession of faith before he did. But it's amazing the people who are clueless and Christian.
I have long liked CHRISTIANITY TODAY and am glad Graham founded it. But I suspect you are right, that it's at least partially been co-opted to serve the puppet masters at least somewhat, if obliquely.
I like CHARISMA magazine.
Thanks for your kind post.
She likes to be 100% accurate and deal in THE TRUTH.
A truth some don't like. It is bad when potential victims don't have imagination and potential tyrants do.
- - - -
For sure. This willful, cowardly, lazy, wishful thinking blindness is going to get millions of people killed before their time.
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.