Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
A North American United Nations?
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htmTx Rep Ron PaulAugust 28, 2006 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.
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
G
Green Mtn
(view)
A North American United Nations?
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htmTx Rep Ron PaulAugust 28, 2006 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.
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
