Search This Blog

Monday, June 13, 2011

A Single North America?

"I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure that it will cost to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States." — John Adams

Talk of efforts to create a North American Union has been derided by the elite — politicians, talking heads and the mainstream media — as conspiracy-theory nuttery. But a leaked United States diplomatic cable proves the leaders of the U.S., Canada and Mexico have been working to create a borderless North America, similar to the European Union, since at least 2005.

The cable, leaked by WikiLeaks and reported on by the Canadian National Post, said: “An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers. The economic payoff of the prospective North American initiative … is available, but its size and timing are unpredictable, so it should not be oversold.”

In the cable, U.S. diplomats focused on a number of key areas to move forward with continental integration, including a possible common currency, labor markets, international trade and the borders of the three countries, according to the article.

Diplomats were negotiating how to handle professional-licensing laws and work-permit systems between the three countries, which would make it easier for people to move from one country to the other.

The Administration of President Barack Obama is currently in discussions with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper about creating the first step of the process by laying the groundwork for a stronger perimeter-security arrangement, intelligence sharing and trade deals, the paper reported.

Globalists pushing for a one-world government are taking an incremental approach to achieve their goal by combining countries into larger entities. They believe this will make it easier to combine larger regions into a single whole later on.

Questions about the possibility of a union of the countries have been met with disdain and denials by Administrations past and present. But these cables prove they were lying while trying to cover up the fact that they were negotiating away America in secret.

The National Post article states:

The details are currently being hashed out by officials from both countries. The proposed deal aims to improve the flow of cross-border traffic and increase security against terrorist threats.

Opposition parties have expressed a certain wariness over the lack of transparency of the talks and say they worry Harper will be too willing to make concessions to the U.S. over security issues, in order to gain an advantage in cross-border trade.

In the cable, U.S. diplomats focused on a number of key areas to move forward with continental integration, including a possible common currency, labour markets, international trade and the borders of the three countries.

The cable said Canadian economists were split on whether a fixed exchange rate, or a move to adopt the U.S. greenback, would benefit this country.

The document states Canadian economists point to labour markets as one of the areas which could have the greatest benefit for all three countries.

“They advocate freeing up professional licensing laws, and developing a quick, simple, low-cost work permit system, at least for U.S. and Canadian citizens,” the cable said.

It goes on to say North America would be well served by implementing a single, continent wide, tariff or a customs union arrangement.

The proposed customs union would eliminate the North American Free Trade Agreement’s “restrictive” rules of origin.

“NAFTA’s (rules of origin) are so restrictive that importers often prefer to pay the tariff rather than try to prove North American origin,” the cable said.

The cable concludes with a caveat: “There is little basis on which to estimate the size of the ‘upside’ gains from an integration initiative concentrating on non-tariff barriers of the kind contained in NAI. For this reason we cannot make the claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale.”

On February 8, 2011 the Toronto Star reported in an article entitled, Canada kept U.S. border talks under wraps:

“The federal government deliberately kept negotiations on a border deal with Washington secret while it planned ways to massage public opinion in favour of the pact, according to a confidential communications strategy.

The 14-page public relations document recommended that talks keep a “low public profile” in the months leading up to the announcement by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama. At the same time, the government would secretly engage “stakeholders” — interested parties such as big business groups and others — in a way that respected “the confidentiality of the announcement.”

In advance, the government departments involved — including industry, foreign affairs, international trade and citizenship and immigration — were to “align supportive stakeholders to speak positively about the announcement,” according to the strategy prepared by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’ officials.

On Friday, Harper and Obama signed off on a plan that for the first time envisions throwing up a single security ring around the perimeter of Canada and the U.S. The wide-ranging blueprint calls for increased cooperation between the two countries’ police, border and intelligence agencies; an integrated Canada-U.S. exit-entry system using high-tech identification techniques and more sharing of information about Canadians with U.S. authorities.

At least three major business organizations — the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Canadian Trucking Alliance — quickly issued statements praising the framework agreement Friday.”

"To preserve and extend the benefits our close relationship has helped bring to Americans and Canadians alike, we intend to pursue a perimeter approach to security, working together within, at, and away from the borders of our two countries to enhance our security and accelerate the legitimate flow of people, goods, and services between our two countries," the declaration announced in the preamble.

The decision to declare a continental perimeter for the United States and Canada, designed to effectively combine the two nations in mutual national security and economic efforts, affirms the Obama administration's intent to implement the key objectives of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North American in a way that avoids the type of public scrutiny and criticism that dogged President George W. Bush after he openly declared his plans with the SPP.

Way back in June 2006 World Net Daily reported:

“Despite having no authorization from Congress, the Bush administration has launched extensive working-group activity to implement a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada.

The membership of the working groups has not been published, nor has their work product been disclosed, despite two years of massive effort within the executive branches of the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

The groups, working under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) office in the Department of Commerce, are to implement the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP, signed by President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005.

The trilateral agreement, signed as a joint declaration not submitted to Congress for review, led to the creation of the SPP office within the Department of Commerce.

The SPP report to the heads of state of the U.S., Mexico and Canada, -- released June 27, 2005, -- lists some 20 different working groups spanning a wide variety of issues ranging from e-commerce, to aviation policy, to borders and immigration, involving the activity of multiple U.S. government agencies.

The working groups have produced a number of memorandums of understanding and trilateral declarations of agreement.

The Canadian government and the Mexican government each have SPP offices comparable to the U.S. office.

Geri Word, who heads the SPP office within the NAFTA office of the U.S. Department of Commerce affirmed to WND last Friday in a telephone interview that the membership of the working groups, as well as their work products, have not been published anywhere, including on the Internet.”

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.

I have posted two video clips from Lou Dobbs when he was with CNN. What is interesting are the comments by Democrat politicians criticizing the SPP agreement and George Bush. Now that Obama has expanded on Bush’s initial agreement by signing a new and expanded agreement with Prime Minister Stephen Harper there seems to be no criticism from the left.

Lou Dobbs on the NAU
More on he NAU by Lou Dobbs

The additional three videos I posted detail some of the goals of the NAU and the people behind it. They are worth watching.

NAU: Fact or Fiction–Part 1
NAU: Fact or Fiction–Part 2
NAU: Fact or Fiction–Part 3

While trade agreements are worthy things like all international agreements and treaties they should be debated and approved by the people through their elected representatives — the Congress.

The European Union began as the European Economic Union with the goal of stabilizing trade and tariffs between the parties of the agreement. As Margaret Thatcher once said it would allow a citizen of the UK to buy a bottle of wine in France and bring it home without paying a tariff.

Over the years the EEC morphed into the EU which now regulates every aspect of life within the member states. They regulates everything from he size and shape of a banana to the size of a tractor seat. With the exception of the UK they have their own currency, the Euro, and they have their own courts that can overrule decisions of national courts. They have a parliament seated in Strasbourg France and a giant bureaucracy headquartered in Luxembourg. All of this came about with the Europeans desire to take a vacation in another country and bring back a bottle of wine or a slice of cheese.

In a July 26, 2010 opinion piece by Phil Boehmke in American Thinker he states:

“This morning our friends in Great Britain awoke to this frightening headline in the UK Daily Mail, "European police to spy on Britons: Now ministers hand over Big Brother powers to foreign officers." The European Union which has been so wildly successful in economic matters is implementing two new law enforcement policies which will further weaken the sacred and time honored protections of national sovereignty.

The new powers are known as the European Investigation Order (EIO), which is intended as a partner to the highly controversial European Arrest Warrant (EAW).

One of the major concerns about the EAW, to which Britain is signed up, is that it has been used to investigate the most minor misdemeanors, such as "theft of a dessert" in a Polish restaurant.

Now member states want to make it easier to gather evidence on another's soil. The proposal requires an ‘opt in', which means Britain could sit back and play no part in the new regime.”

While we debate our economy, the three wars we are fighting and Weiner’s Weiner there are forces within our government combining with the Canadians and Mexicans to bring the NAU to fruition and make it something much more than an agreement for truckers. Agreements like this have a history of morphing into something far different than their original intent. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and Independents should be very cautious in their support for the NAU.

This is just another attempt by the “one-worlders” like George Soros and his Open Society Institute and Open Borders Society to force into a global society. The NAU will eventually impact every aspect of lives and national economy. It will control the way we do business, our court decisions, our laws, our environmental policies, our immigration policies, and just about everything we do. It will absolutely destroy the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution by the power of treaties.

No comments:

Post a Comment