Friday, September 29, 2006

SPP Destroying Evidence?

In a previous post, I criticized the attempt to debunk criticisms of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) made by the official government website of the SPP (spp.gov).

That webpage purports to answer a "Myth" with a government "Fact."
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.
One problem with this government "fact" is the claim by then Prime Minister Paul Martin that "[O]n March 23, President Bush, President Fox and I signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality of life." [my emphasis] So whom should we believe: former Prime Minister Paul Martin, or the college intern who put together the SPP website?

Earlier today I sent a note to the SPP webmaster asking this very question, citing the URL found in this webpage from Vive le Canada, which has this URL:

http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/cip-pic/ips/ips-overview2-en.asp

That webpage, as I write this, is now missing, and a patriot in California is huffing mad, accusing me of tipping off the SPP to a website that contradicts the SPP claim that nothing was "signed."

I think the webpage will be back online in the morning, after whatever late-night repairs on the server are completed. In case I'm wrong, I encourage readers to copy the print version of the page found here.

I don't believe that anything was "signed" back on March 23, 2005, despite the use of the word by Prime Minister Paul Martin. Signing something might require Senate confirmation (Art. II, §2 cl. 2). The modern trend of the New World Order is called "soft law" -- unsigned and even unwritten laws that advance the agenda of hemispheric integration without allowing Congress to exercise congressional oversight. Here are five articles explaining this legal revolution: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Americans trust their incumbent Congressmen, and trust their government. This is unAmerican. We are not to trust government, but DIStrust it, and remain cynical and vigilant of government's claims. Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1799:
Confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism. Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy, and not confidence, which prescribes limited constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power.… In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.
As you are reading this, a new government is being created which will overrule all laws and constitutions in the United States. The progress being made in this "soft revolution" will continue unabated regardless of whether or not anything was signed on March 23, 2005. We need representatives in Congress who will work to stop it.

Unfortunately, this issue is not on the political radar of most voters in 2006, and many important milestones in the creation of the North American Union are scheduled for completion in 2007, which will create political and legal inertia that will make it even more difficult to stop in 2008.

In the long run, humanity must reject Jefferson's claim that "we are obliged to trust [ANYONE] with power." The whole concept of political power must be repudiated if the human race is to survive.

3 comments:

Kevin Craig said...

Bernie,
Why do you say the flow of goods, capital and labor does not seem to be increased? Certainly labor flow has been increased (call it "immigration"), and I see more imported products in stores all the time. Capital is definitely flowing -- OUT. This is the purpose of SPP-style integration, and the documents at SPP.gov claim great success. This may be one area where I don't doubt the government claims.

Kevin Craig said...

The SPP is being implemented without any Congressional vote one way or the other. They don't really know what's going on. Their building a fence won't stop SPP. In fact, I'm sure SPP-ites don't mind having "full mobility of labor" but having labor cross the border only where the government authorizes transit.

Alternatively, Congress might allocate funds for a fence that will never be built.

This is all U.S -- I don't know what's going on in Canada. Mexico has never been fond of fences.

Kevin Craig said...

Although "full mobility of labor" is a goal of the "North American Union," so also in control. Hence the "Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative," RFID passports, national ID cards, etc. I have said elsewhere, if you want "free trade," eliminate laws which form barriers to trade. Don't create an entirely new government. The Bush Administration does not want "free" anything.