| The Security
and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) -- whose U.S. operation
conducts its business in secrecy in the bowels of the U.S.
Department of Commerce -- is plunging ahead with a program
that may end America as we know it. |
| |
| We can argue all day
over to whether this is another case of "unintended
consequences." (This column does not buy that.)
The SPP appears to lead ultimately to
a North American Union (NAU) or "community." Under that
scenario, the borders of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico would
be (de facto, if not formally) erased. |
| |
| It will not happen
overnight. This column has documented that the powers behind
the plan (multinational corporations, politicians, and
academic one-worlders) envision "evolution by stealth" --
i.e., do the job in steps patterned after the manner in
which the European Union was established. (For details, see
our previous offerings Illegal aliens and Monster Highway,
10/9/06; North American Union -- Evolution by Stealth?,
3/26/07; and America's Borders: Going, Going Gone, AIM
Report linked by RenewAmerica 12/25/06.) |
| |
|
Compounding the threat to our
sovereignty and security is the fact that Communist China
figures into some of the transportation plans right in the
heart of the USA. Details on that are upcoming. |
| |
|
First, the end-run around Congress |
| |
| There was an
interesting debate here in Washington on June 20 dealing
with this issue. Sponsored by Judicial Watch -- whose
president, Tom Fitton, uncovered secret documents related to
the issue of the NAU -- the
confrontation at the National Press Club included Phyllis
Schlafly of Eagle Forum and Rosemary Jenks of Numbers USA.
They were arguing for full disclosure of plans the North
American community backers have in store for us. |
| |
| Arguing that there is
nothing to be concerned about in all this were Dr. Robert
Pastor -- Vice President of International affairs at
American University, and guru of the entire North American
"community" movement -- and David Bohigian, Assistant
Secretary of Commerce in the Bush administration. |
| |
|
Nobody here but us quality-of-lifers |
| |
| Bohigian
argued that the plan for "cooperation" among the three
countries of North America is (1) not a loss of our
sovereignty; (2) not a proposal to unite Canada and Mexico;
(3) not building a NAFTA superhighway; (4) not creating a
single currency; and (5) not creating a separate legal or
judicial system. All that's at stake here, he said, is
"quality of life" on the continent. (Ironically, sitting
right next to him was Dr. Pastor, who has argued for the
Amero.) [Amero = new money unit for
us]. |
| |
|
As Dr. Jerome Corsi clearly shows in
his new book The Late Great USA all the actions undertaken
by those pushing for more linkage or coordination on this
continent are eerily reminiscent of how the European Union (EU)
came into being. Many governments of the
European countries are shadows of their previous selves,
having ceded responsibilities to a super-government -- not
all at once, but step by step over forty years. |
| |
|
America Firsters skeptical |
| |
| Dr. Pastor and
Assistant Secretary Bohigian said there is nothing in their
plans that would justify a treaty. Bohigian even went so far
as to say, "I don't see anything frankly in this SPP that
would even rise to the level of legislation -- let alone a
treaty." Ergo, no need to get the OK of a Congress elected
by the people. How convenient. |
| |
| I'm not a
lawyer. But Phyllis Schlafly is. She put it this way: "There
isn't anything in that entity-document-treaty [or whatever
one prefers to call or not to call it] that is called
Security and Prosperity Partnership. It's just these people
getting together somewhere in Mr. Bohigian's offices and
working on and changing our administrative law. And we don't
think it should be done that way. Any changes in our
regulation should be posted in the federal register so we
can comment on it and pass on it. It should not be passed on
by some Canadians and Mexicans." |
| |
| And BTW, they're
still not through with immigration |
| |
|
A giant step toward a North American
"community" indicates the political class has not learned
its lesson from the crushing defeat it suffered in its war
against the American people on the immigration issue (which,
by the way, is part and parcel of the plan to "integrate"
the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Dr. Pastor himself has said as
much in Senate testimony cited previously in this space). |
| |
| Author and
scholar Jerome Corsi says the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) -- a powerful think tank in
this town (Kissinger, et al) -- plans to submit a report to
the White House and Congress by September 30 on the supposed
benefits of the three-nation "integration." |
| |
| The study, according
to CSIS itself, deals with "labor mobility, energy, the
environment, security, competitiveness, and border
infrastructure and logistics." |
| |
| One would
imagine if the report goes to the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, it will be cordially received by Chairman Joe
Biden (D-Del.) and Ranking Member Richard Lugar (R-Ind.),
neither of whom ever saw a sovereignty-threatening proposal
they didn't like. So if there's no legislation and
no treaty, how does the CSIS report fit in with the plan to
avoid congressional input? |
| |
| In an e-mail to this
column, Dr. Corsi says, "The plan is to present [as] fait
accompli to Congress -- an admitted 12 million illegals to
cross the border -- about 3/4 of them under [George W. Bush]
-- and then tell us there's nothing we can do but to pass a
law that legitimates their effort to stay -- even though the
Mexicans remain citizens of Mexico. Same with [Homeland
Security Secretary Michael] Chertoff saying he can't enforce
the laws unless he gets new ones. Pastor also gave them a
hint that the next 9/11 may be used as the impetus to
advance the North American Union further along." |
| |
|
Publicity? |
| |
|
Both Phyllis Schlafly and Rosemary
Jenks made the point that if SPP were doing something to be
proud of, why has there been no publicity about its
workings? Bohigian shrugged his
shoulders, in effect saying that's out of his hands. |
| |
| Having been a
journalist for decades, I was not about to let that one
stand. In the Q&A period, this reporter challenged the Bush
administration to gin up the publicity. The government is
loaded with well-paid flaks whose sole responsibility is to
see to it that word gets to the media. Furthermore, the
administration could persuade its allies on Capitol Hill to
issue press releases and hold news conferences -- or the
White House can hold its own press conference -- shouting to
the world about the great things they are supporting under
the rubric of North American "integration." |
| |
|
The Red China angle |
| |
| It's bad
enough we're to open the borders and surrender our
sovereignty to a trilateral entity that at the very least
seriously compromises our economic interests and at worse is
a sell-out on the issue of our security. Now we learn
Communist China, that kindly benefactor of sprayed bullets
at Tiananmen Square, is also to be involved. |
| |
|
One very illuminating chapter in
Corsi's fact-filled tome is that "China stands to gain most
from the widening of American markets that would result from
the formation of a North American community." |
| |
| That much we
surmised, given (1) that the Chinese have invested in huge
deep-water ports on Mexico's west coast (circumventing
unionized American jobs at U.S. west coast ports) to take
goods to heartland America and (2) that through the
Chinese-controlled firm Hutchison-Whampoa (which in turn
controls both entrances to the Panama Canal), the Chicoms
will benefit from the planned development of a new deeper
and wider Panama Canal. This "will permit megaships with
goods from the Far East and China to sail directly to Gulf
ports and East Coast ports such as Miami." It would
facilitate easier Chinese access to ports along the
Mississippi River which reaches 30 states "without touching
dry land," notes an official of the Port of New Orleans. |
| |
|
As Corsi explains: "Even goods
produced by cheap Red Chinese slave and near slave labor
would not be competitive in the United States if
transportation costs from Asia could not be reduced
dramatically," which this arrangement facilitates. |
| |
|
But that's not all |
| |
| To enable faster
processing of goods from China, developers are working on a
system of sensors to track the shipments of containers once
they are within North America. Lockheed Martin is working
with NASCO (North American Corridor Coalition, Inc.) to
track cargo remotely along a super corridor stretching
across the U.S. from Mexico to Canada. |
| |
| So what? Here's what.
The Chinese-controlled Hutchison interests -- referenced
above -- own 49 percent of the Lockheed-Martin subsidiary
that worked on the technology project with NASCO |
| |
|
Can China be trusted? |
| |
|
The late Constantine Menges, PHD --
with national security experience at the White House and the
CIA -- warned that China (a) can launch nuclear weapons that
in 30 minutes could kill 100-million Americans; (b) defines
the U.S. as its main enemy; (c) through espionage, has
stolen designs for nearly all U.S. nuclear warheads and many
other military secrets; (d) buys weapons systems from Russia
designed to sink U.S. aircraft carriers; (e) has threatened
to destroy American cities if the U.S. helps democratic
Taiwan; (f) is a leading supplier of weapons of mass
destruction to rogue and/or terrorist states such as North
Korea and Iran.... And all this is outlined in Menges's
China, The Gathering Threat. |
| |
| Is this a nation we
can trust for further involvement in our commerce right
within the U.S.? |
| |
|
An American agenda |
| |
| We would get
results from Congress in a hurry if Americans were as
focused on this issue as they were on the immigration
debate. That requires publicity. In the mainstream
media, Lou Dobbs of CNN is doing an excellent job of
spreading the word. But he can't do it alone. |