Subscribe below to the FREE August Review e-newsletter and receive a FREE e-book Trilaterals Over Washington. This classic work on the Trilateral Commission was authored by Patrick Wood and Antony Sutton in 1978. This book clarifies the origin of today's global economic upheaval by those who created a "New International Economic Order" starting in 1973.
Link this article to these popular Social Bookmark Sites
North American Union - A Top Goal of Secretary of Commerce
The North American Union (aka Security and Prosperity Partnership) is being administered and championed by the Secretary of Commerce, with help from other cabinet position posts. This article answers the SPP's new defense, SPP Myths vs. Facts.
Is
SPP an Executive Branch Coup d'Etat?
Secretary
of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez has declared advancing the Security and Prosperity
Partnership of North America to one of his top goals, writing
in a letter archived on the Department of Commerce website that I
have made the SPP one of my top priorities and will utilize the talents
and expertise of the people across the Department of Commerce to ensure
the SPP is a success.
Secretary
Gutierrez began his letter with obvious enthusiasm:
I would like
to bring your attention to an exciting new initiative that is a high
priority for President Bush, me, and the entire Bush Administration:
the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). This
initiative was announced on March 23, 2005, by President Bush, President
Fox of Mexico, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. It establishes
the framework under which the three countries will seek to create a
safer and more prosperous North America over the coming years.
Secretary
Gutierrez next laid out an explanation of how security and prosperity
fit together, using language that carefully replaced reference to the
United States of America to language embracing the concept of North America
as an economic and political reality.
First,
Secretary Gutierrez addressed security.
The SPP is built
around the two, complementary objectives of greater security and prosperity.
In the security sphere, we will aim toward a common security strategy
focusing on:
Securing North
America from external threats;
Preventing
and responding to threats within North America; and
Streamlining
the secure and efficient movement of legitimate and low-risk traffic
across our shared borders.
Then, Secretary
Gutierrez logically moved to prosperity.
In the prosperity
sphere, the countries will focus on: Improving
productivity;
Reducing the costs of trade; and
Enhancing the joint stewardship of our environment, facilitating
agricultural trade while creating a safer and more reliable food
supply, and protecting our people from disease.
This
tautological language was designed to present objectives that looked obviously
reasonable and important, almost Orwellian in their crafting. It takes
attention to detail to note that the security and prosperity definitions
virtually demand our borders with Mexico and Canada be erased, all in
the interest of streamlining, shared borders, and reducing the costs
of trade, all the while protecting our environment, our food, and our
health.
The
critical part of Secretary Gutierrezs letter came next, however, when
the Secretary of Commerce explained how tri-lateral cabinet-level working
groups would be created in the three governments with a mission to rewrite
a broad array of administrative laws all to be accomplished strictly within
the executive branches of Mexico, Canada, and the United States.
Secretary
Gutierrez enters the discussion by bragging about the importance of the
role he is assigned to play:
Organizationally,
I am jointly responsible for the economic, or prosperity, component
of the SPP, with my Canadian counterpart, Minister of Industry David
Emerson, and my Mexican counterpart, Secretary of Economy Fernando Canales.
Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, jointly with his Canadian
and Mexican counterparts, is responsible for the security component.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, jointly with her Canadian and Mexican
counterparts, will ensure that the two components are integrated and
that the SPP advances our strong relations with Mexico and Canada.
This
explanation of how the working groups were to be organized and managed
proved to be more detailed even than the explanation given on SPP.gov,
the website Secretary Gutierrez created within the Department of Commerce
to manage this new tri-lateral initiative.
Nowhere
in the letter does Secretary Gutierrez make any reference to the U.S.
Congress. Instead, he invites inquiries to Geri Word who works within
the International Trade Administration (ITA) office of the Department
of Commerce, giving out her phone number as 202-482-1545 and her email
as
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
.
A new
Myths vs. Facts
addendum has been added to the SPP.gov website, representing an attempt
to deflect criticism. Here the Department of Commerce attempts to discredit
the myth that The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and
his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.
In the Fact response, SPP.gov openly admits that the SPP declared in
Waco on that date was little more than a press release:
The SPP is a
dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three
countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact,
no agreement was ever signed.
The
goal of the Myth vs. Facts seems to be to reposition the entire SPP
process as a mere dialogue. If the Department of Commerce were to openly
admit that SPP.gov is rewriting U.S. administrative law, Secretary Gutierrez
would need some the Constitutional justification to underpin his enthusiasm
for combining with Mexico and Canada. Are we to seriously believe that
pure dialogue, an exchange of intellectually challenging tri-lateral ideas
is the reason Secretary Gutierrez has boasted that advancing SPP is one
of the most important objectives of his office?
Working
groups rewriting U.S. administrative laws in areas ranging from e-commerce,
to steel policy, to energy policy, to aviation control, to border crossing
policy, to environment (to mention just a few) are arguably creating the
legal infrastructure for a regional government to emerge by administrative
fiat.
Yet,
there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that justifies the executive
branch to rewrite U.S. administrative law without formulating a treaty
that must be submitted to the Senate for ratification by a two-thirds
vote. These are the cold realities Secretary Gutierrez and SPP.gov seek
to side-step with their reassuring security and prosperity platitudes.
Robert
Pastor, the American University professor who is the leading contender
for the title Father of the North American Union has provided much of
the intellectual arguments for the logic underlying SPP. Pastor has argued
for an incremental process of creating a North American Union, beginning
with a dialogue that sounds uncomfortably like the politically correct
definition of its mission as presented by SPP.gov itself.
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. In this essay, Pastor wrote:
Europe has struggled
with these questions for nearly fifty years, and its members still have
not clearly decided on their destination. NAFTA is only eight years
old, and its project from the beginning was much more modest than the
EUs. 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.
Pastor
begins the next paragraph by advising the likely path the three governments
are to take is the status quo with modest adjustments. He concludes the
paragraph by commenting: All three governments could surprise themselves
by taking a great leap forward, but this seems possible only if there
is a dramatic crisis of some kind.
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?
Disinformation
and deniability are the two key concepts of the SPP modus operandi.
We have to look no further than the Myth vs. Facts debunking document
recently posted on the SPP.gov website to see the anticipated denial:
The SPP in no
way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure
or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty
or currency or change the American system of government designed by
our Founding Fathers.
If SPP.gov
is not aimed at a massive re-write of U.S. administrative law in a tri-lateral
harmonized and integrated format, than why not just shut SPP.gov down?
As Robert Pastor pointed out, dialogue can occur within universities.
Reading the SPP.gov attempt at denial, we are reminded of Réné Magrittes
famous painting entitled Ceci nest pas un pipe.
When
the dialogue begins to take place in Cabinet-level tri-lateral executive
branch committees, patriots are well advised to be concerned that an executive
branch coup detat may be underway, all in the name of a North
American tri-lateral partnership devoted to nothing more than security
and prosperity. Or, as Aldous Huxley might ask, would someone please
pass the soma?
In
1981, he received a Top Secret clearance from the Agency for International
Development, where he assisted in providing anti-terrorism training to
embassy personnel.
Dr.
Corsi's columns currently appear on HumanEvents.com.
He lives with his family in New Jersey, where he is a full-time writer.
Link this article to these popular Social Bookmark Sites