A North American United Nations? (Ron Paul)

House.gov ^ | August 28, 2006 | Ron Paul

[stainlessbanner]

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States. The most recent attempt comes in the form of the misnamed "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP)." In reality, this new "partnership" will likely make us far less secure and certainly less prosperous.

According to the US government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, it is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005.

What is a "dialogue"? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union.

According to the SPP website, this "dialogue" will create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA- and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade.

Critics of NAFTA and CAFTA warned at the time that the agreements were actually a move toward more government control over international trade and an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area. Proponents of these agreements dismissed this as preposterous and conspiratorial. Now we see that the criticisms appear to be justified.

Let's examine just a couple of the many troubling statements on the SPP's US government website:

"We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation...and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007"

Though the US administration insists that the SPP does not undermine US sovereignty, how else can one take statements like this? How can establishing a "trilateral regulatory cooperation" not undermine our national sovereignty?

The website also states SPP's goal to "[i]mprove the health of our indigenous people through targeted bilateral and/or trilateral activities, including in health promotion, health education, disease prevention, and research." Who can read this and not see massive foreign aid transferred from the US taxpayer to foreign governments and well-connected private companies?

Also alarming are SPP pledges to "work towards the identification and adoption of best practices relating to the registration of medicinal products." That sounds like the much-criticized Codex Alimentarius, which seeks to radically limit Americans' health freedom.

Even more troubling are reports that under this new "partnership," a massive highway is being planned to stretch from Canada into Mexico, through the state of Texas. This is likely to cost the US taxpayer untold billions of dollars, will require eminent domain takings on an almost unimaginable scale, and will make the US more vulnerable to those who seek to enter our country to do us harm.

This all adds up to not only more and bigger government, but to the establishment of an unelected mega-government. As the SPP website itself admits, "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." I hope my colleagues in Congress and American citizens will join me in opposing any "broad and ambitious" effort to undermine the security and sovereignty of the United States.

[Lunatic Fringe]

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

[EagleUSA]

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States.
-----
Yeah, just visit the White House and the Senate -- they will agree.

[EagleUSA]

Critics of NAFTA and CAFTA warned at the time that the agreements were actually a move toward more government control over international trade and an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area. Proponents of these agreements dismissed this as preposterous and conspiratorial. Now we see that the criticisms appear to be justified.
------
Without any doubt. Let all the free-trade fools wallow in their own excrement --- that little guy who ran for President and talked about the "giant sucking sound"...was right. And so many blind fools called him an idiot.

[peyton randolph]

"We make the point that it is important for all three governments to commit themselves to security within that zone, thereby alleviating some of the need to try to build barriers at our mutual borders. That implies a great many things. It implies greater cooperation between our security and intelligence agencies, exchange of information, assistance in keeping track of persons" - Building a North American Community: Report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America

Plus: Creating a North American Community

 

[Blake#1]

Thank You LF for putting the future in perspective. If the SPP doesn't work out, then Chavez and Castro (and others) will create their own SPP and it will work against the USofA.

[Marius3188]

I checked their site and saw this:

Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

-Man, thats a relief. So nothing was signed and I guess that means there's nothing legal about. Interesting.

[upchuck]

Read my tag, follow the link and begin reading on page 23 of the .pdf file which is page one of the report.

President Bush is bound and determined to let the illegals overrun our country. Go read the report.

You might also be interested in this article by Phyllis Schlafly named CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

[DoughtyOne]

Either your are ignorant as a newborn child, or you are covering up one of the sleaziest operations to come down the pike.

No Congressional oversight. No chance for U.S. citizens to vote this f'n trash down. A relaxation of our borders while the exterior borders of three nations are supposedly strengthened.

We don't even have the will to get our own borders under control, but are being told to trust that the government of Mexcio will contribute to making our nation safer.

God, where do they find folks like you?

[DoughtyOne]

Ever heard of plausible deniability? That's what this is in spades. It now appears this is going to be run 'off the books' so the American public hasn't a clue what is actually taking place.

[stainlessbanner]

Thanks for the links upchuck.
A little tinfoil won't make CFR/SPP go away.

[Marius3188]

Your correct. It does not set in, until it's too late.

[lawdog]

FYI

...his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Pastor, the Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, stated clearly the view that the North American Union would need a super-regional governance board to make sure the United States does not dominate the proposed North American Union once it is formed...

Uh oh !

Pastor is also is pushing for a " new common currency"

[lawdog]

Here's what the ruling class elite really think ...and to believe this guy took an oath to the U.S. Constitution

Here is one optimist's reason for believing unity will prevail over disunity, integration over disintegration. In fact, I'll bet that within the next hundred years (I'm giving the world time for setbacks and myself time to be out of the betting game, just in case I lose this one), nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. A phrase briefly fashionable in the mid-20th century--"citizen of the world"--will have assumed real meaning by the end of the 21st century...

Stobe Talbot U.S. State Department 1992

[texastoo]

It now appears this is going to be run 'off the books' so the American public hasn't a clue what is actually taking place.

The American public has beeen reduced to "google" to find out what is going on. No more transparency in government.

[Ben Ficklin]

Yes, economic development and political co-operation is pure evil.

If anything, this is an infringement on the sovereignty of Mexico and Canada since it allows the US to control the process by which people and product enter those countries. This is generally referred to as "pushing out our borders".

As for the congressional oversight, Ron Paul knows very well that Luger has a bill in the Senate that was also introduced into the House by Katherine Harris. In 2005.

[Lunatic Fringe]

Either your are ignorant as a newborn child

If you attempt to insult a person's intelligence, try to get your grammar and homonyms in order.

No Congressional oversight. No chance for U.S. citizens to vote this f'n trash down.

Since when do U.S. citizens EVER have a chance to vote something down? We don't live in a democracy, buddy... we live in a Republic. Come out of your Idaho Compund once in a while.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, if that's the best you can do, give up. Oh, that's right, you already did. Nevermind.

[DoughtyOne]

Ben, you'd have to be blind as a bat not to understand that this is merely the start of a process that will usher in the FTAA. There will be oversight alright. It will consist of two representatives from each participating nation. That's right, Venezuela will have as much power on that board (or whatever you want to call it) as we do. Please explain how such a scenario will be the United States dominating. And please explain how this will be good for a nation trying to control it's own security, when other nations will be voting against us on border, trade and a whole host of other issues that will be intertwined.

As for trade, I don't consider it god. It is merely one aspect of a thriving nation, not the be all end all.

[stainlessbanner]

Hey DoughtyOne - have you ever heard the statistics about how many regulations, legislation, etc occur without the approval of the American citizen?

I read an interesting article about how the FedGov really manages stuff by committe and agency rather than taking proposals through Congress. Wish I could find that article again.