A North American United Nations?

[Guest guest]

A North American United Nations?

August 28, 2006

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htm

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 " 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.