Bush Authorizes Full Access to U.S. Roads for Even More Mexico-Based NAFTA Trucks

Statement of Joan Claybrook, President of Public Citizen

In a stealthy maneuver, the Bush administration has boosted the threat to the public by increasing the number of Mexico-based trucking firms allowed access to all U.S. roads as part of the reckless North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) trucking "pilot program." The Department of Transportation recently revealed an increase in the number of NAFTA trucks permitted to all U.S. highways – now 10 carriers, sending as many as 55 trucks throughout the country.

The last time the Bush administration made a public announcement about the number of Mexico-based carriers allowed to participate in the NAFTA trucks pilot program, there were only three carriers.

It has long been the tradition by this administration to bury bad news like this by sending out press releases on Friday afternoon, but in this case, the Department of Transportation (DOT) reached a new low: not sending any press release at all, but simply updating a Web page.

Both houses of Congress have passed versions of the DOT spending bill that includes provisions to shut down this dangerous folly. Unfortunately for all members of the public who must travel every day on the nation's roads, the White House has threatened to veto the final bill. It is high time for President Bush to get out of the way and let the Senate vote on the final bill before any more lives are put at risk.

In 2001, a NAFTA tribunal ordered the U.S. to permit access to all U.S. roads for Mexico-domiciled trucking companies. The Clinton administration refused to comply with the NAFTA tribunal, citing serious safety and environmental concerns with Mexico's trucking fleet. The Bush administration has tried since 2002 to enforce the NAFTA order to open U.S. highways to unsafe trucks. Congress has intervened repeatedly to stop the Bush administration. In September, the Bush administration tried to meet NAFTA's dictates by launching a pilot program to allow up to 100 motor carriers from Mexico full access to U.S. highways. However, the project violates a 2001 congressional mandate that Mexico-domiciled trucking companies meet U.S. safety standards regarding hours of service, driver training and licensing, and vehicle safety before being allowed access to the nation's roadways.

A lawsuit filed by several groups, including Public Citizen, alleging that the pilot program doesn't meet congressional requirements is still pending in the Ninth Circuit.

Source

Denying the North American Union

Now that Alex Jones, Jerome Corsi, and others have exposed the plot to establish a "North American community," that is to say eradicate the national sovereignty of the United States, Canada, and Mexico in favor of a "United Nations of America" based on the European Union, the corporate media and globalist apologists have kicked into over-drive with a propaganda effort to deny reality.

"Nobody is proposing a North American Union," declared Robert Pastor, correctly identified as the father of the NAU and author of "Towards a North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New," a book published by the Council on Foreign Relations Press in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales. Pastor may insist the elite of the three countries, at the behest of transnational corporations, are not interested in a merged superstate, but his argument betrays the fact the former national security advisor dreams of an American version of the European Union.

Pastor is an advocate of NAFTA on steroids, or "NAFTA Plus." According to Miguel Pickard, in "the early 1990s, when NAFTA negotiators were still wrangling over arcane language, Pastor was proposing ways to 'improve' the treaty. According to Pastor, NAFTA was off to a bad start, since negotiators were mostly seeking to dismantle trade tariffs. For Pastor it was crucial to find ways of integrating the three countries, similarly (but with important differences) to what the Europeans had done since the 50s. Years later, Pastor would bemoan that NAFTA's promise had gone unfulfilled, since it lacked a 'grand vision' for the three countries, i.e., a much richer perspective than the emphasis put on trade." In other words, NAFTA was simply a trade treaty minus the "grand vision" of global integration.

But there is a problem with Pastor's "grand vision," namely the people of the United States, Canada, and Mexico are reluctant to give up their national sovereignty.

Pastor, in a conversation with Jerome R. Corsi, "was careful to distinguish that his proposals were designed to create a North American Community and that he never has proposed to create a North American Union as an EU-style regional government," thus Pastor's insistence "nobody is "proposing a North American Union."

But this is, to say the least, deceptive. "The idea seems to be to put new structures in place that change the look of the landscape," writes Corsi. "[WorldNetDaily] pointed out to Pastor that this step-by-step approach is the same approach taken to create the European Union. The memoirs of Jean Monnet, regarded as the architect of European unity, finally disclosed he had used a strategy of deceit, knowing his plan to form a European Union would never succeed if it were openly disclosed."

"Pastor in an article entitled 'NAFTA is Not Enough,' argued for an incremental process that could head toward the creation of the NAU, all the while providing cover for participating politicians and governments to deny that creating the NAU was their goal," Corsi argues in a News with Views editorial. In the article, Pastor provides key details on how this stealth process works:

While the three governments of North America are unlikely to step into the debate on long-term goals at the current time, nongovernmental organizations, research institutes, and universities should fill the void with new ideas and old-fashioned cross-border dialogue.

Short of this sort of shadowy incrementalism, the NAU project may be dropped on the fast track by other means, according to Corsi. "Dr. Pastor seems to prescribe that a fear formula is all that is needed for the American people need to begin begging SPP to produce the NAU right now. Pastor openly writes as if the next 9/11 terrorist attack or a future outbreak of some health epidemic such as the avian flu could be just what the NAU doctor ordered as the prescription for the American people to abandon sovereignty in favor of super-regional government control, all in the interest of 'security' leading to 'prosperity.' Or, is it 'prosperity' which necessitates more 'security' via surrender to Big Brother government?"

In predictable fashion, the corporate media is tasked with characterizing those who document the emerging NAU as tinfoil hatters, nut cases, mental patients, conspiracy theorists, etc.

For instance, neocon Charles Krauthammer told Fox News: "I love this stuff because if you ever doubt your own sanity, all you have to do is read this stuff and realize that you're okay" (see video), while "conservative" Michael Medved lamented what he calls the "paranoid and groundless frenzy… fomented and promoted by a shameless collection of lunatics and losers; crooks, cranks, demagogues and opportunists, who claim the existence of a top secret master plan to join the U.S., Canada and Mexico in one big super-state," never mind the above, well-documented. "I'm sorry to sound cynical and intolerant about this stupidity, but I'm furious, actually – ashamed to be part of a proud medium (conservative talk radio) that increasingly encourages this paralyzing, puerile paranoia," apparently a reference to Alex Jones and others who continue to flesh out the "incremental" conspiracy Medved refuses to acknowledge.

Drake Bennett writes for the Boston Globe:

Government officials say a continental union is out of the question, and economists and political analysts overwhelmingly agree that there will not be a North American Union in our lifetimes. But belief in the NAU — that the plans are very real, and that the nation is poised to lose its independence — has been spreading from its origins in the conservative fringe, coloring political press conferences and candidate question-and-answer sessions, and reaching a kind of critical mass on the campaign trail. Republican presidential candidate and Texas congressman Ron Paul has made the North American Union one of his central issues.

Government officials of the sort, no doubt, that told us Saddam Hussein was about use weapons of mass destruction against the United States or that the air at Ground Zero in New York was safe to breathe.

Finally, it is no mistake the Boston Globe has rolled Ron Paul into its diatribe of transparent denial, as Paul must be roundly discredited and characterized as a kook, primarily because a Paul presidency would most certainly put an end to Robert Pastor's dream of an American version of the European Union once and for all.

Source

Vicente Fox Admits Plan For Single NAFTA Currency

Former Mexican president wants North American Union based on EU

RELATED: Ex-Mexican prez: Yes, there will be an amero

Mexico's former president, Vicente Fox, made an astounding admission last night on CNN's Larry King Live when he acknowledged the plan for a NAFTA single currency, a "euro-dollar" as King labeled it.

Fox also vowed to help unite the Americas beyond a trade agreement, following what he described as "a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA".

The comments follow Fox's appearance on The Daily Show in which he advocated the creation of a North American Union based on the model of the European Union.

Watch the video.

TRANSCRIPT FROM CNN.com.

KING: E-mail from Mrs. Gonzalez in Elizabeth, New Jersey. "Mr. Fox, I would like to know how you feel about the possibility of having a Latin America united with one currency?"

FOX: Long term, very long term. What we propose together, President Bush and myself, it's ALCA, which is a trade union for all of the Americas. And everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came. He decided to isolate himself. He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea...

KING: It's going to be like the euro dollar, you mean?

FOX: Well, that would be long, long term. I think the processes to go, first step into is trading agreement. And then further on, a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA.

In a recent appearance on The Daily Show With John Stewart, Fox also expressed his desire for a North American Union based on the model of the European Union.

Source

Scholars explain president’s plan for a North American Union

Those who seek to understand what's behind the chatter about President George W. Bush's Security and Prosperity Partnership as a possible prelude to a North American Union, similar to the European Union, should read the 35-page White Paper published recently by the Hudson Institute called "Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership."

The Washington, D.C., think tank is blunt and detailed in describing where the Security and Prosperity Partnership is heading.

Here's how Hudson defines the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goal: "The SPP process is the vehicle for the discussion of future arrangements for economic integration to create a single market for goods and services in North America."

The key words are "economic integration," a phrase used again and again, into a North American "single market," another phrase used repeatedly.

"Integration" with Mexico and Canada is exactly what North American union means, but there's a big problem with this goal. "We the people" of the United States were never asked if we want to be "integrated" with Mexico and Canada, two countries of enormously different laws, culture, concept of government's role, economic system and standard of living.

Here's how Hudson explains the Security and Prosperity Partnership's process: "The most important feature of the SPP design is that it is neither intended to produce a treaty nor an executive agreement like the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) that would require congressional ratification or the passage of implementing legislation in the United States. The SPP was designed to function within existing administrative authority of the executive branch."

Hudson explains further: "The design of the SPP is innovative, eschewing the more traditional diplomatic and trade negotiation models in favor of talks among civil service professionals and subject matter experts with each government. This design places the negotiation fully within the authority of the executive branch in the United States."

Indeed, the Security and Prosperity Partnership is very "innovative." The arrogance of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's "design" to give the executive branch full "authority" to "enforce and execute" whatever is decided by a three-nation agreement of "civil service professionals," as though it were "law," is exceeded only by its unconstitutionality.

The Hudson White Paper admits the problem that the Security and Prosperity Partnership completely lacks "transparency and accountability." Hudson freely admits "the exclusion of Congress from the process"; constituents who contact their Congressmen discover that members know practically nothing about the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Hudson states that, under the Security and Prosperity Partnership, one of the U.S. challenges is "managing Congress." Is Congress now to be "managed," either by executive-branch "authority" or by "dozens of regulators, rule makers, and officials working with their counterparts" from Mexico and Canada?

The Hudson White Paper reminds us that the 2005 Council on Foreign Relations document called "Building a North American Community" bragged that its recommendations are "explicitly linked" to SPP. The Council on Foreign Relations document called for establishing a "common perimeter" around North America by 2010.

Hudson praises the Council on Foreign Relations document for "raising public expectations" about what the Security and Prosperity Partnership can accomplish. Hudson explains that, while immigration is not an explicit Security and Prosperity Partnership agenda item, "mobility across the border is central to the idea of an integrated North American economic space."

"Harmonization" with other countries is another frequently used word. One of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's signature initiatives is "Liberalizing Rules of Origin."

The Hudson Paper reveals the Security and Prosperity Partnership's cozy collaboration with "some interest groups and not others." Translated, that means collaboration with multinational corporations, but not with small business or citizen groups.

After the heads of state of the United States, Mexico and Canada met in Waco, Texas, in March 2005 and announced the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership by press release, the North American Competitiveness Council emerged as "a private sector forum for business input" to Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups. But, according to Hudson, it wasn't merely "private" because it was "given official sanction."

After the three amigos met in Cancun, Mexico, in 2006, President Bush provided taxpayer funding for a think tank called the Center for Strategic and International Studies to meet secretly and produce a report called "The Future of North America." That document's favorite catchword is "North American labor mobility," which is a euphemism for admitting unlimited cheap labor from Mexico.

The Hudson White Paper states that "SPP combines an agenda with a political commitment." That's exactly why those who want to protect American sovereignty don't like the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Among the people who take the Security and Prosperity Partnership seriously are Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., who introduced a House resolution opposing a North American Union and a NAFTA Superhighway, similar resolutions introduced into the state legislatures of 14 states, and California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter's amendment to prohibit the use of federal funds for Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups, which passed in the House by a vote of 362-63 on July 24.

The Hudson white paper suggests that it might be "necessary" for the Security and Prosperity Partnership to change its name and acronym. It is unlikely that a change of name will silence the American people who are outraged by the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goals and process.

Source

 

Amero coming within decade

BankIntroductions.com, a Canadian company that specializes in global banking strategies and currency consulting, is advising clients that the amero may be the currency of North America within the next 10 years.

"The amero would compete against other regional currency blocks," BankIntroductions.com says. "At present, with the Canadian dollar approaching par, more talk for an amero currency unit will become popular in Canada."

The company says that with the successful implementation of NAFTA, "the one dragging component for the amero will be Mexico, but in time this will change."

"Implementation of the amero currency may actually give Mexico an economic boost, thus helping to alleviate Mexican immigration pressures into the United States for those Mexicans seeking financial gain," BankIntroductions.com advises.

"The amero one day may well be circulating throughout North America."

Matt Bell, president of BankIntroductions.com, told WND in an e-mail to "feel free to quote our currency research on Canada. Our general opinion on the amero stands as stated."

As WND reported, coin designer Daniel Carr has issued for sale a series of private-issue fantasy pattern amero coins that have drawn attention on the Internet.

WND also reported the African Union is moving down the path of regional economic integration, with the African Central Bank planning to create the "Gold Mandela" as a single African continental currency by 2010.

The Council on Foreign Relations also has supported regional and global currencies designed to replace nationally issued currencies.

In an article in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, entitled "The End of National Currency," CFR economist Benn Steil asserted the dollar is a temporary currency.

Steil concluded "countries should abandon monetary nationalism," moving to adopt regional currencies, on the road to a global "one world currency."

WND previously reported Steve Previs, a vice president at Jeffries International Ltd. in London, said the amero "is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico."

A video clip of the CNBC interview in November with Jeffries is now available at YouTube.com.

WND also has reported a continued slide in the value of the dollar on world currency markets could set up conditions in which the adoption of the amero as a North American currency gains momentum.

Source

 

150,000 Costa Ricans March against CAFTA

In a country of less than 5 million citizens, 150,000 turned out to protest against CAFTA. The trade pact, which passed the US Congress by a single vote after midnight in July 2005, has still not been approved by the second largest participant in the scheme.

COMMENTARY:
More than 150,000 Costa Rican citizens flooded downtown San Jose, Costa Rica on Sunday to protest the much delayed CAFTA trade pact. Costa Rica is the second largest economic party to the deal. Along with the economic implications, Costa Ricans are concerned about the impact to their national sovereignty created by the trade deal.

Costa Rica's current president and UN/Rockefeller pretty boy Oscar Arias is trying to push the hotly contested deal through on a national referendum vote. The outcome remains in doubt as well-informed Costa Ricans realize their ability to govern themselves without outside interference is at stake.

Ignacio Trejos, emeritus bishop of San Isidro de El General in Costa Rica summed up the mood for many of the protestors, "God is with the people and the people must follow God. We are a small country but we have the moral and spiritual force to resist outside interference."

More than 150,000 Costa Rican citizens flooded downtown San Jose, Costa Rica on Sunday to protest the much delayed CAFTA trade pact. Costa Rica is the second largest economic party to the deal. Along with the economic implications, Costa Ricans are concerned about the impact to their national sovereignty created by the trade deal.

Costa Rica's current president and globalist pretty boy Oscar Arias is trying to push the hotly contested deal through on a national referendum vote. The outcome remains in doubt as well-informed Costa Ricans realize their ability to govern themselves without outside interference is at stake.

Ignacio Trejos, emeritus bishop of San Isidro de El General in Costa Rica summed up the mood for many of the protestors,

"God is with the people and the people must follow God. We are a small country but we have the moral and spiritual force to resist outside interference."

Of course America's premier corporate newsletter and shill central for all US trade deals, the Wall Street Journal wants you to know that America's only socialist senator, Bernie Sanders has been providing Costa Rica with the wrong kind of outside interference.

Costa Rica's front and center resistance to CAFTA comes at a bad time for trade pact wheeler-dealers in the US who are currently putting the push on in Congress to approve new trade contracts with Peru and Panama.

Putting things in perspective, Sunday's 150,000 Costa Ricans protesting against CAFTA is the equivalent of 3 million US citizens taking to the streets to defend our country's sovereignty and well-being.

Please take a moment to at least call or write your Congressman today on stopping the Peru and Panama trade deals. For an extra kick, ask them to sign on to HCR 22 - Representative Virgil Goode's resolution calling for the repeal of NAFTA.

Source

 

’NAFTA Superhighway stops here,’ says Okla. senator

"The NAFTA Superhighway stops here, at the border with Oklahoma," Randy Brogdon, a Republican state senator who has championed the fight to keep the Trans-Texas Corridor out of Oklahoma, told a packed 300-person audience at the first public meeting of OK-SAFE in Tulsa on Saturday.

Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise, Inc. is a non-profit, Oklahoma corporation set up to oppose a NAFTA Superhighway and North American Union as threats to the sovereignty of the U.S.

Brogdon objected to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, arguing President Bush had entered the agreement after secret discussions with Mexico's then-president Vicente Fox and Canada's then-prime minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005.

"President Bush has proven that he is more than willing to over-step his executive authority when it came to trade policy," Brogdon told the group.

"Ariticle 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says, 'Congress shall have the Power to Regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,' not the president," Brogdon pointed out. "Yet President Bush has entered into an agreement with Mexico and Canada called SPP that seeks to eliminate our trade and security borders and he has failed to get the explicit approval of Congress."

The SPP website, in a section entitled "Myths vs. Facts," supports Brogdon's argument, openly admitting that SPP is neither a law nor a treaty.

"Texas highways are famous for 'Texas turnaround' U-turns," Brogdon quipped. "Maybe it's time we tell Governor Perry to do a Texas turnaround at the border with Oklahoma."

"We don't need a new superhighway four-football-fields-wide coming through the heart of our state just so Mexican trucks can carry Chinese containers from Mexican ports to Kansas City," he said.

Brogdon objected that the Bush administration's below-the-radar push for a new continental NAFTA Superhighway will risk the supremacy of U.S. laws on U.S. highways.

"Anyone driving on an international highway system running through the United States would be subjected not to U.S. law, but to international law," Brogdon argued. "We would be subject to an international tribunal in case of a dispute, including accidents or other lawsuits."

Brogdon objected to the Department of Transportation's push to allow 100 Mexican trucking companies to have free access on U.S. roads for their long-haul rigs.

"The Bush administration is pushing the Trans-Texas Corridor under the cause of better roads and economic development," Brogdon stressed. "I'm sure we all want good roads and bridges, but not at the expense of our nation's sovereignty."

As WND previously reported, Brogdon has opposed legislation that would have pre-authorized the extension north into Oklahoma, as a deceptive piece of legislation (HB 1917) that would have put Oklahoma in a highway "pilot project" that was unlimited in scope and required Oklahoma to waive its 11th Amendment rights.

"The 11th Amendment gives protection to Oklahoma from being sued in federal court by a foreign nation," Brogdon explained. "So for us to be a part of this project we had to waive our 11th Amendment rights. This benign piece of legislation that started out as a simple re-surface project in Southeast Oklahoma was in fact the first step to create the NAFTA Superhighway through Oklahoma."

The bill was strongly supported by the North America's SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc., a Dallas-based trade organization of which the State of Oklahoma is a member.

Brogdon has championed legislation demanding Oklahoma withdraw from NASCO, saving the state a $25,000 annual membership fee.

"NASCO's mission statement says their goal is 'to create the world's first 'international, intermodal superhighway' system," Brogdon pointed out. "NASCO lobbied the Oklahoma state legislature to pass HB 1917 and they found many of my colleagues sympathetic to their cause. In the state senate, we were able to kill the bill during debate. We won a battle, but the war is not over."

Brogdon predicted that the battle to extend the Trans-Texas Corridor north into Oklahoma would be pressed once again by NASCO in the Oklahoma legislature's next session.

"NASCO will probably work with legislators favorable to their cause to package the next bill with a catchy name," Brogdon warned. "The bill will come down as something like, 'Economic Development and Transportation for the Next Generation and Our Kids.' It will be disguised, but I assure you, the outcome will still be the same. Our sovereignty will be under attack."

Still, Brogdon expressed his confidence in winning the battle against the NAFTA Superhighway in Oklahoma.

"I'm encouraged at what lies ahead for this state and for the nation," Brogdon told the group. "History reveals that Americans always rise to the occasion to protect this country. We are in a battle for this nation's sovereignty. But I see American patriots here today, in this assembled group, men and women still dedicated to the Constitutional cause so eloquently laid out by our founding fathers."

"Ladies and gentlemen, know this – our future will not be determined by the politicians," Brogdon concluded. "Our future lies solely in our hands because 'We the People,' and not some bureaucrats in Washington or a trade group in Dallas, are the government of the United States."

WND reported NASCO changed its name from the original name, North America's Superhighway Coalition.

NASCO also has repeatedly redesigned its webpage so as to de-emphasize the continental nature of the "super corridor" NASCO supports.

Source

The North American Union: Conspiracy Theory or Conspiracy Fact?

"Professional Blogger" John Hawkins says "there is nothing to the NAU conspiracy theory." We invite him to abandon his delusion and face facts: The architects of the NAU plainly admit that they seek to build regional and global government.

Follow this link to the original source: "The Non-Existent North American Union"

COMMENTARY:

Those who question the motives, activities, and goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) are belittled as "conspiracy theorists" or worse. But if there is nothing to worry about, then why are the SPP meetings so secretive, staged in remote venues, and isolated from the media? It should be intuitively obvious that it's because the people who plan and attend SPP meetings don't want the rest of us to know what they are up to.

Five years ago, former Mexican President Vicente Fox gave a speech in Madrid, Spain, in which he stated the following:

Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union, with the goal of attending to future themes as important as the future prosperity of North America, and the freedom of movement of capital, goods, services and persons.

The new framework we wish to construct is inspired in the example of the European Union.

After reading that, the only conclusion that one can come to is that those who, like John Hawkins, deny that the SPP is working toward a North American Union are either ignorant or deceitful. If Hawkins is ignorant, then he would be what Lenin described as a "useful idiot." If he is being deceitful, then he is effectively working as a shill for those who want to scrap our Constitution and take away our sovereignty.

Hawkins claims that it would take a constitutional amendment to establish a regional currency, for example, because Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, gives Congress the power "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measure." He says that the chances of that happening 'are as close to zero as it gets."

But it didn't take a constitutional amendment to create the Federal Reserve. The Fed, not Congress, now has the power to create money out of thin air. Our money used to be gold and silver coins, or paper certificates backed by gold and silver. Now our money is backed by nothing. The Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court have been ignoring the Constitution for decades, because the voters have not held them accountable. And it's not just on the issue of money that Constitutional role of Congress is being ignored. Think, for instance, of the wars this nation has been involved with since World War II. How many times since then has the Congress issued a Constitutionally mandated declaration of war? The answer, of course, is not once since 1941.

One of the heavy hitters in the movement toward regional and global governance is David Rockefeller, former head of the Chase Manhattan Bank and founder of the Trilateral Commission. He recently had his memoirs published, in which he stated the following:

For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents, such as my encounter with Castro, to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

There you have it, straight from the horse's mouth. Conspiracy theory? No, conspiracy fact!

The sovereignty of the United States, as defined in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, is our most precious asset. Our sovereignty is part of the formula that has made our nation the greatest and most successful political, economic, and cultural experiment in the history of the human race. In order to protect it, it is imperative that we contact our representatives in Congress and demand that they oppose anything to do with a North American Union.

Source

SPP Protest: UC Cops Incite Violence

SPP Agent Provocateur Cops Caught Red Handed Attempting To Incite Violence

[Boots give away undercover cops as real protesters expose criminality]

Peaceful protestors at the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit in Montebello have captured sensational video of hired agent provocateurs attempting to incite rioting and turn the protest violent, only to encounter brave resistance from real protest leaders.

A video, posted on YouTube, shows three young men, their faces masked by bandannas, mingling Monday with protesters in front of a line of police in riot gear. At least one of the masked men is holding a rock in his hand, reports the Canadian Press .

The three are confronted by protest organizer Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. Coles makes it clear the masked men are not welcome among his group of protesters, whom he describes as mainly grandparents. He urges them to leave and find their own protest location.

Watch the video:

Notice how the "anarchists" begin to become uncomfortable when Coles and others accuse them of really being cops, while pulling at their face masks. They are seen to edge closer to the uniformed police and engage in some form of discussion. The police then let them pass through their line with very little resistance and "arrest" them in what is plainly a total charade.

More damning proof that the radicals were in fact cops was revealed with the release of photographs of the incident which show that the anarchists have exactly the same footwear on as the cops.

On the soles of their boots are yellow triangles, exactly the same as on the boots of a police officer kneeling beside the men.

While some have said the marks could represent Canadian Safety Industry seals, it seems very coincidental when placed in context with the way the rioters were "subdued".

To compound the evidence, police have stated that only 4 protestors in total have been arrested and charged, two of them being women. Veteran protest organizers have confirmed the identity of the four as genuine protesters.

So what happened to the rock wielding anarchists?

The few radical protestors at the summit have provided police with the pretext to use rubber bullets, tear gas and pepper spray on peaceful protestors.

Neither the RCMP nor the Surete du Quebec would comment on the video or even discuss generally whether they ever use the tactic of employing agents provocateurs, however it has been common practice at previous protests for authorities to employ police or special forces to intentionally infiltrate peaceful protests and cause violence.

In Seattle in 1999 at the World Trade Organisation meeting, the authorities declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews and resorted to nothing short of police state tactics in response to a small minority of hostile black bloc hooligans. In his film Police State 2 , Alex Jones covered the fact that the police allowed the black bloc to run riot in downtown Seattle while they concentrated on preventing the movement of peaceful protestors. The film presents evidence that the left-wing anarchist groups are actually controlled by the state and used to demonize peaceful protesters.

At WTO protests in Genoa 2001 a protestor was killed after being shot in the head and run over twice by a police vehicle. The Italian Carabinere also later beat on peaceful protestors as they slept, and even tortured some, at the Diaz School. It later emerged that the police fabricated evidence against the protesters, claiming they were anarchist rioters, to justify their actions. Some Carabiniere officials have since come forward to say they knew of infiltration of the so called Black Bloc anarchists, that fellow officers acted as agent provocateurs.

At the Free Trade Area of Americas protests in Miami in late November 2003, more provocateuring was evident. The United Steelworkers of America calling for a congressional investigation, stating that the police intentionally caused violence and arrested and charged hundreds of peaceful protestors. The USWA suggested that billions of dollars supposedly slated for Iraq reconstruction funds are actually being used to subsidize 'homeland repression' in America.

Canadian Prime Minister Harper's description of protestors at the SPP summit as "sad" along with President Bush's latest comments that critics of the SPP are peddling conspiracy theories, in spite of the the fact that heads of unions, law experts and House Representatives are deeply concerned over the program's agenda, are indications of how much of a threat they see peaceful protesters and outspoken critics to be.

The globalist elite have demonstratively used provocateuring to demonize all demonstrators attempting to expose their criminality, the SPP summit is the latest in a long list of examples.

Source

SPP Protest: UC Cops Incite Violence (UPDATE)

Quebec provincial authorities have admitted that three rock-wielding mask-wearing "anarchists" were in fact police infiltrators used to gather information on protesters at this week's SPP summit, but authorities are still ludicrously denying the fact that the provocateurs were intent on causing a riot in order to justify a heavy-handed response.

Yesterday, debunkers attempted to claim that identical yellow marks on the boots of the "anarchists" and the police were simply Canadian Safety Industry seals and dismissed allegations that the three "anarchists" were undercover cops. Those same trolls and apologists for the authorities have egg on their face today after the police were forced to admit their role in using disguised cops to infiltrate the protesters before staging their arrests when they were exposed as agent provocateurs.

"Police came under fire Tuesday, when a video surfaced on YouTube that appeared to show three plainclothes police officers at the protest with bandanas across their faces. One of the men was carrying a rock," reports CBC.

"In the video, protest organizers in suits order the men to put the rock down, call them police instigators and try unsuccessfully to unmask them."

"Quebec provincial police admitted Thursday that three of their officers disguised themselves as demonstrators during the protest at the North American leaders summit in Montebello, Que. However, the police force denied allegations its undercover officers were there on Monday to provoke the crowd and instigate violence."

Protest organizers confirmed that four arrests had been made in total during the summit, all of legitimate demonstrators, meaning that the arrests of the "anarchists" was a staged event purely for public and media consumption to create the myth that the police were responding to the fact that one of the anarchists was wielding a rock and attempting to break through a police line.

Watching the video, it is clearly evident that as soon as the trio are exposed as police, they try to casually drift back into police ranks before cops are forced to stage their arrests.

Firstly, why should we accept the notion that it's legitimate for police officers to engage in tactics more familiar to rogue intelligence agencies by disguising themselves as anarchists in order to spy on completely non-violent protesters who are merely exercising their right to peaceably assemble?

Secondly, if the police had to go to the lengths of staging arrests to perpetuate the myth that the "anarchists" were real protesters then why should we believe for a second that they weren't intent on causing violence, since they had armed themselves with projectiles?

The so-called "black bloc" anarchists are completely infiltrated and controlled by the security services and are routinely employed at major protest events to cause riots and demonize legitimate peaceful protesters.

Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, confronts the undercover cops and attempts to remove their face masks before the cops try to skulk back behind the police line.

In Seattle in 1999 at the World Trade Organization meeting, the authorities declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews and resorted to nothing short of police state tactics in response to a small minority of hostile black bloc hooligans. In his film Police State 2, Alex Jones covered the fact that the police allowed the black bloc to run riot in downtown Seattle while they concentrated on preventing the movement of peaceful protestors. The film presents clear evidence that the left-wing anarchist groups are actually controlled by the state and used to demonize peaceful protesters.

At the WTO protests in Genoa 2001 a protestor was killed after being shot in the head and run over twice by a police vehicle. The Italian Carabinere also later beat on peaceful protestors as they slept, and even tortured some, at the Diaz School. It later emerged that the police fabricated evidence against the protesters, claiming they were anarchist rioters, to justify their actions. Some Carabiniere officials have since come forward to say they knew of infiltration of the so called black bloc anarchists, and that fellow officers acted as agent provocateurs.

At the Free Trade Area of Americas protests in Miami in late November 2003, more provocateuring was evident. The United Steelworkers of America calling for a congressional investigation, stated that the police intentionally caused violence and arrested and charged hundreds of peaceful protestors. The USWA suggested that billions of dollars supposedly slated for Iraq reconstruction funds are actually being used to subsidize "homeland repression" in America.

The leadership of the black bloc has been completely usurped by the authorities and anyone who still professes to be a member of the group is either supremely naive or completely stupid. To dress up like terrorists, all in black with ski masks and bandanas (like the police) immediately sends out a negative message to the watching public and demonizes legitimate protesters.

The black bloc should be immediately disbanded and anyone that dresses in their garb and threatens to engage in violence at a protest should be exposed to the media for what they are - dirty cowboy cops who think their job is to spy on and abuse peaceful protesters, scum who prey on the weak and give good police a bad name while ensuring the right to protest is chilled.

Source

Globalists To Formally Propose Merger Of U.S., Canada, Mexico

Globalist political heavyweights are preparing to formally propose to Congress the merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a North American Union at the end of summer after they held secret meetings to devise a plan that will be presented to representatives of all three governments.

"A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc," reports World Net Daily.

"The data collected for the report is based on seven secret roundtable sessions involving between 21 and 45 people and conducted by CSIS. The participants are politicians, business people, labor leaders and academics from all three countries with equal representation."

The report is entitled "North American Future 2025 Project" and was prepared in collaboration with the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), who were previously instrumental in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994.

The plan outlines an agenda to unify the three countries into a European Union style power bloc.

Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) documents released under the FOIA show that a wide range of US administrative law is being re-written in stealth under this program to "integrate" and "harmonize" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada, just as has become commonplace within the EU.

The documents contain references to upwards of 13 working groups within an entire organized infrastructure that has drawn from officials within most areas of administrative government including U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

The United States and the European Union have signed up to a new transatlantic economic partnership that will see regulatory standards "harmonized" and will lay the basis for a merging of the US and EU into one single market.

18 states have introduced resolutions calling on their federal representatives to halt work on the North American Union (they include Virginia and South Carolina). Three of these states (Idaho, Montana and Oklahoma) have passed their resolutions.

22 U.S. Congressmen, including NC's Virginia Foxx and Walter Jones, along with all three Republican Congressmen running for President, have signed on as co-sponsors of HCR40, which calls on the executive branch to end all work on the North American Union and NAFTA superhighway.

Source