...The footage on Lou Dobbs (CNN):
C-Span Captured this brief exchange of advice on elect official hopeful Stan Jones:
...the story from: http://www.infowars.com/articles/nwo/us_me...intensifies.htm
U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies
Joseph Farah / World Net Daily | July 10 2006
WASHINGTON – Are secret meetings being held between the corporate and political elites of the U.S., Mexico and Canada to push North America into a European Union-style merger?
Is President Bush's reluctance to control the border and enforce laws requiring deportation of foreigners who enter the country illegally part of a master plan to all but eliminate borders between the U.S., Canada and Mexico?
Does the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America include a common currency that would scrap the dollar in favor of what some are calling the "amero"?
It may be the biggest story of the 21st century, but few press outlets are telling it. In fact, until very recently, few in the U.S. were aware of the plans and even fewer denouncing what appears to be the implementation of an effort some have characterized as "NAFTA on steroids."
But opposition is mounting.
Perhaps the most blistering criticism has come from Lou Dobbs of CNN – a frequent critic of Bush's immigration policies.
"A regional prosperity and security program?" he asked rhetorically in a recent cablecast. "This is absolute ignorance. And the fact that we are -- we reported this, we should point out, when it was signed. But, as we watch this thing progress, these working groups are continuing. They're intensifying. What in the world are these people thinking about? You know, I was asked the other day about whether or not I really thought the American people had the stomach to stand up and stop this nonsense, this direction from a group of elites, an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value. And I hope, I pray that I'm right when I said yes. But this is -- I mean, this is beyond belief."
What has Dobbs and a few other vocal critics bugged began in earnest March 31, 2005, when the elected leaders of the U.S., Mexico and Canada agreed to advance the agenda of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
No one seems quite certain what that agenda is because of the vagueness of the official declarations. But among the things the leaders of the three countries agreed to work toward were borders that would allow for easier and faster moving of goods and people between the countries.
Coming as the announcement did in the midst of a raging national debate in the U.S. over borders seen as far to open already, more than a few jaws dropped.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. and the chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus as well as author of the new book, "In Mortal Danger," may be the only elected official to challenge openly the plans for the new superstate.
Responding to a WorldNetDaily report, Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of the government office implementing the trilateral agreement that has no authorization from Congress.
Tancredo wants to know the membership of the Security and Prosperity Partnership groups along with their various trilateral memoranda of understanding and other agreements reached with counterparts in Mexico and Canada.
Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minutemen, welcomed Tancredo's efforts.
"It's time for the Bush administration to come clean," Gilchrist said. "If President Bush's agenda is to establish a new North American union government to supersede the sovereignty of the United States, then the president has an obligation to tell this to the American people directly. The American public has a right to know."
Geri Word, who heads the SPP office, told WND the work had not been disclosed because, "We did not want to get the contact people of the working groups distracted by calls from the public."
WND can find no specific congressional legislation authorizing the SPP working groups nor any congressional committees taking charge of oversight.
Many SPP working groups appear to be working toward achieving specific objectives as defined by a May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report, which presented a blueprint for expanding the SPP agreement into a North American union that would merge the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a new governmental form.
Phyllis Schlafly, the woman best known for nearly single-handedly leading the opposition that killed the Equal Rights Amendment, sees a sinister and sweeping agenda behind the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
"Is the real push behind guest-worker proposals the Bush goal to expand NAFTA into the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, which he signed at Waco, Texas, last year and reaffirmed at Cancun, Mexico, this year?" she asks. "Bush is a globalist at heart and wants to carry out his father's oft-repeated ambition of a 'new world order.'"
She accuses the president and others behind the effort of wanting to obliterate U.S. borders in an effort to increase the Mexican population transfer and lower wages for the benefit of U.S. corporate interests.
"Bush meant what he said, at Waco, Texas, in March 2005, when he announced his plan to convert the United States into a 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' by erasing our borders with Canada and Mexico," she said. "Bush's guest-worker proposal would turn the United States into a boardinghouse for the world's poor, enable employers to import an unlimited number of 'willing workers' at foreign wage levels, and wipe out what's left of the U.S. middle class. Bush lives in a house well protected by a fence and security guards and he associates with rich people who live in gated communities. Yet, for five years, he has refused to protect the property and children of ordinary Arizona citizens from trespassers and criminals."
That's unusually harsh criticism of a Republican president from one of Ronald Reagan's most loyal supporters.
At least one of the nation's daily newspapers has officially weighed in in opposition to the mysterious plans for closer cooperation in security, commerce and immigration between the three North American nations.
Recently, the Pittsburgh Tribune Review questioned the unchallenged momentum toward merger.
"Will Americans trade their dead presidents for Ameros?" the newspaper asked in an editorial last month.
The paper chided efforts at replacing the U.S. and Canadian dollars and Mexican peso with "the amero" – a knockoff of the euro – along with the building of "a looming NAFTA-like superstate." Citing the meeting between the three national leaders at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, in March 2005, the editorial warned: "Canadians, Mexicans and Americans who value the sovereignty of their respective countries should be concerned."
The Tribune Review editorial saw synergy between the plans of the national leaders and the ambitious agenda of the Council on Foreign Relations – seen by many as a kind of secretive, shadow government of the elite. The CFR issued a bold report in the spring of 2005, shortly after the joint announcements in Waco by Bush and his counterparts.
"The Council on Foreign Relations published a report in May -- "Building a North American Community" -- calling for, among other things, redefining the borders of the three nations, creating a super-regional governance board and the North American Paramilitary Group to ensure that Congress does not interfere with whatever the trilateral union feels like doing," said the paper. "Must the Bush administration happily sacrifice every shred of American sovereignty for the greater good of the New World Order?"
In fact, the CFR report is a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."
Some see it as the blueprint for merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico. It calls for "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital and people flow freely."
The CFR's strategy calls specifically for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people." It calls for laying "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." It calls for efforts to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations." It calls for efforts to "harmonize entry screening."
In "Building a North American Community," the report states that Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal March 23, 2005, at that meeting in Waco, Texas.
Alan Burkhart, who describes himself as a free-lance political writer, cross-country trucker "and proud citizen of one of the reddest of the Red States – Mississippi," is another critic seething over these plans that seem to have a life of their own – with little or no real public debate.
"As time passes, American corporations will find it unnecessary to move their facilities out of the country," writes Burkhart. "Our already stagnant wages will be just as low as those of Mexico. The cultures of three great nations will be diluted. Our currency will be replaced with the 'Amero.' And, we'll be one giant step closer to the U.N.'s perverse dream of a one-world government."
The Amero is not a new concept. It was first proposed by the Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank, in a monogram titled "The Case for the Amero" in 1999.
Last month, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America made one of its most visible and public moves since it was first announced last year. In Washington, on June 15, U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Mexican Economy Minister Sergio Garcia de Alba and Canadian Minister of Industry Maxime Bernier joined North American business leaders to launch the North American Competitiveness Council. It was a major development that showed the March 2005 meeting was no fluke – and that the plans announced by the three national leaders then were continuing to take shape. The NACC was first announced by Bush, Harper and Fox.
Made up of 10 high-level business leaders from each country, the NACC will meet annually with senior North American government officials "to provide recommendations and help set priorities for promoting regional competitiveness in the global economy."
Officially, the council has the mandate to advise the governments on improving trade in key sectors such as automobiles, transportation, manufacturing and services. The three countries do more than $800 billion in trilateral trade.
Gutierrez said the Bush administration is determined to develop a "border pass" on schedule despite worries about its implementation. The new land pass is to be in effect for Canadians, Americans and Mexicans by Jan. 1, 2008.
The U.S. executives involved in the NACC include: United Parcel Service Inc. Chairman Michael Eskew; Frederick Smith, chairman of FedEx Corp.; Lou Schorsh, chief executive of Mittal Steel USA; Joseph Gilmour, president of New York Life Insurance Co.; William Clay Ford, chairman of Ford Motor Co.; Rick Wagoner, chairman of General Motors Corp.; Raymond Gilmartin, CEO of Merck & Co. Inc.; David O'Reilly, chief executive of Chevron Corp.; Jeffrey Immelt, chairman of General Electric Co.; Lee Scott, president of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.; Robert Stevens, chairman of Lockheed Martin Corp.; Michael Haverty, chairman of Kansas City Southern; Douglas Conant, president of Campbell's Soup Co. and James Kilt, vice-chairman of Gillette Inc.
The concerns about the direction such powerful men could lead Americans without their knowledge is only heightened when interlocking networks are discovered. For instance, one of the components envisioned for this future "North American Union" is a superhighway running from Mexico, through the U.S. and into Canada. It is being promoted by the North American SuperCorridor Coalition, or NASCO, a non-profit group "dedicated to developing the world's first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America."
The president of NASCO is George Blackwood, who earlier launched the North American International Trade Corridor Partnership. In fact, NAITCP later morphed into NASCO. A NAIPC summit meeting in 2004, attended by senior Mexican government officials, heard from Robert Pastor, an American University professor who wrote "Toward a North American Community," a book promoting the development of a North American union as a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso.
Pastor also was vice chairman of the May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force entitled "Building a North American Community" that presents itself as a blueprint for using bureaucratic action within the executive branches of Mexico, the U.S. and Canada to transform the current trilateral Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America into a North American union regional government.
more info: http://spp.gov/
more videos on this:
...links I found on the implemencation of a national ID card and the super highway from Mexico to Canada:
...An informative series of videos of Ryan Sullivan from NC on this topic:
part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQxUtdYe74c
part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Alg_ZaqKs4U
part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg0ydAd4Jus
...What i have found through what I consider solid and reliable documentation is that the United States has started a tri-lateral trade agreement with Canada and Mexico through what is called the Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP).Started by the document which President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and President Fox signed in March of 2005 which states a tri-lateral common border that encompasses the external borders of all three nations (North America).By the way,this agreement was never submitted to the Senate for ratification.
...The plan states that people and goods will be screened by use of new biometric technologies which include face recognition technologies,finger scanners,retina scanners,and RFID (radio frequency identification) technologies.It says further that coordination between all databases of information including, but not limited to, transportation, energy, and telecommunications will be made.It goes on to state that there will be a common ground in training of military and police so to make a unified military and police presence.
...Basicly all these actions and the many more listed on the SPP page on the White House website (a link of which is on post #9) outline an integration between the three countries to make them one nation economically,militarily,and on a security basis.
...The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) is putting a plan in the works under the approval of the SPP which states that in order to enter North America one has to have a North American ID card which has the RFID chip in it,but they say that since the North American drivers license will also have the RFID technology either one would be valid.
...My opinion on all this is that it is a bad thing for the United States because in the process of making all these changes there is no guarantee we will still have the institutions that are supposed to make this a free society and that protect the rights granted to us under the constitution.I see this as benefiting large corporations but not benefiting the rest of us so much.I fear that we will be worse off then ever before in terms of being anything other then mindless consumers led by marketing ploys and institutional oppression.The vision of Aldous Huxleys book "A Brave New World" could become a reality under these actions,but possibly under worse conditions such as in "1984".Of course this could be like some of you claim,my pessimistic paranoia,but the way i see things,it's better to prevent the worst case scenario then to be optimistic and wake up in the worst case scenario.Might I add that I hope my speculation is wrong,but is it a risk anyone should be willing to take?I believe it warrents some thought.
from the SPP (whitehouse) website: http://spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp
...Ok,here we go,I will quote what they claim is myth and show you how the way they word things on the fact responses as example to the wit and craftyness of these people.I will number and quote directly what is off the site sloth posted,and the triple stars (***) are my response to their responses.
...1:) 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.
***I grant you this one as I got the information (or misunderstood it) as a fact off the Lou Dobbs video on the very first post in this thread.
...2:) 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.
***This information i obtained about the currancy was from an article published by the World Net Daily released on July 10 2006 written by Joseph Farah.Their statment does not mean that we will not be issued a new currancy,just that the SPP will not be the ones to move on the issue of it.
...3:)Myth: The SPP is being undertaken without the knowledge of the U.S. Congress.
Fact: U.S. agencies involved with SPP regularly update and consult with members of Congress on our efforts and plans.
***What i said was that this agreement was never submitted to the Senate for ratification,not that congress had no knowledge of it,and their statment does not imply any congressional approval,just awarness of the action by the way.
...4:)Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.
Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.
***The definition of sovereignty is a territory existing as an independent state.Granted that they claim legal and cultural sovereignty but they make an obvious omision of economic sovereignty which their latter statment of "In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States."it does economically in fact without debate.
...5:)Myth: The SPP is illegal and violates the Constitution.
Fact: The SPP is legal and in no way violates the Constitution or affects the legal authorities of the participating executive agencies. Indeed, the SPP is an opportunity for the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to discuss common goals and identify ways to enhance each nation's security and prosperity. If an action is identified, U.S. federal agencies can only operate within U.S. law to address these issues. The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security coordinate the efforts of the agencies responsible for the various initiatives under the prosperity and security pillars of the SPP. If an agency were to decide a regulatory change is desirable through the cooperative efforts of SPP, that agency is required to conform to all existing U.S. laws and administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.
***This one is tricky due to the fact that it says it won't affect legal authorities of the participating executive agencies when in fact,they being citizens,will have their lives affected by these changes on a personal level.Furthermore,I site that it states that any action can only operate within U.S. law to address issues.Yet as in the case of the illegal torturing of prisoners (as example) Bush states "he didn't authorize the illegal interrogations of prisoners based on an advisory opinion from the Department of Justice" which explained that when "detaining al Qaeda and Taliban members, the United States was not bound by prohibitions against torture in the Geneva Conventions."
...In other words, the Justice Department advised the Bush Administration that the torture of detained al Qaeda and Taliban members by US personnel was legal. Bush stating that he "never authorized illegal interrogations" does not exclude torture as a technique, because according to the Justice Department, torture was legal.
...Is this the same song and dance that can be used time and time again?This information was taken from an article at: http://www.cnnexposed.com/story.php?story=17
...6:)Myth: The SPP will cost U.S. taxpayers money.
Fact: The SPP is being implemented with existing budget resources. Over the long-term, it will save U.S. taxpayers money by cutting through costly red tape and reducing redundant paperwork. This initiative will benefit the taxpayers through economic gain and increased security, thereby enhancing the competitiveness and quality of life in our countries.
***The fact that the SPP itself is being payed for with existing budget resources doesn't mean that the plans it makes will be as well.In fact the "super highway" of the North Americas SuperCorridor Coalition Inc. (NASCO) that will be used to ship goods around North America will be payed for with our tax dollars.
...7:)Myth: The working groups and SPP documents are a secret and not available to the public.
Fact: The SPP's initiatives and milestones with timelines can be found by clicking the Report to Leaders link at www.spp.gov. The Web site contains a section to enable interested persons to provide input directly to the various working groups.
***This "myth" is due to the fact that (being as important a change as it is) it doesn't get the media coverage it warrents,and it has not been approved by our congress or senate.(even though as you point out that they are aware of it)
...8:)Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework.
Fact: The framework will support and enhance cooperation and encourage the compatibility of regulations among the three partners while maintaining high standards of health and safety. Enhanced cooperation in this area will provide consumers with more affordable, safer, and more diversified and innovative products. Any regulatory changes will require agencies to conform to all U.S. administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.
*** "Health and saftey" what about everything else?It sounds good if you're a corporation with the healthcare issues of today and the responsibilities companies have to provide some sort of health care program.Saftey as in disaster relief sounds good as well,but this hardley covers all the issues of US standards of living.
...9:)Myth: The SPP is meant to deal with immigration reform and trade disputes.
Fact: Immigration reform is a legislative matter currently being debated in Congress and is not being dealt with in the SPP. Likewise, trade disputes between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are resolved in the NAFTA and WTO mechanisms and not the SPP.
***What they are stating here is that they are commited to re-arranging our borders,not policing them afterwords.Likewise the same goes for trade disputes,that will be handled by a government group that won't be under the name of SPP.Not that the government group wont be a North American,tri-latteral group.
...10:)Myth: The SPP will result in the loss of American jobs.
Fact: The SPP seeks to create jobs by reducing transaction costs and unnecessary burdens for U.S. companies, which will bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally. These efforts will help U.S. manufacturers, spur job creation, and benefit consumers.
***This does not debunk the "myth" at all.It claims to make more jobs but it does not say for America,it acctually says it will "bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally" which hints to more corporate outsourcing of jobs just like what has been happening for decades with corporations that go overseas to find cheaper labor.
...11:)Myth: The SPP will harm our quality of life.
Fact: The SPP improves the safety and well-being of Americans. It builds on efforts to protect our environment, improves our ability to combat infectious diseases, such as avian influenza, and ensures our food supply is safe through the exchange of information and cooperation ─ improving the quality of life for U.S. citizens. Americans enjoy world class living standards because we are engaged with the world.
***Protecting our enviroment,regulating information of food,and having an overall plan in case of an epidemic might be a step in "improving our lives" but there are alot more things involved in quality of life that they make no mention of.Are we to believe these efforts as our biggest issues defining what makes life "world class"?
...12:)Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.
Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.
***What the SPP does is set the stage for NAFTA by making information more free flowing,NAFTA follows through and defines the rules for the actual trading.
All of these "Myth vs. Fact" stuff is an obvious play on words,but it doesn't take much work to read between the lines.