North American Union to Replace USA

 

Human Events | May 19, 2006

by Jerome R. Corsi

 

President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

 

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

 

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

 

The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:

 

At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.

 

What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:

 

In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.

 

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

 

The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.

 

The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:

 

The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.

 

Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.

 

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?

 

 

RELATED: Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway

 

 

EDIT - Everyone who has said "never gonna happen" should have learnt a very important lesson by now.....you are constantly being lied to by your government.

Hey Glos, good article. However I dont think we'll see it happen anytime soon. Canadians are meek, mild and quiet, but were not stupid. Economically Canada has gained alot of momentum lately with the CDN dollar catching the US dollar, and the fact that the US is growing more and more dependant upon us for oil. I think we are doing fine with the relationship we now have with the United States, and I for one am not willing to give up my sovernty for US economic benefit; which is what a greater alliance would most certainly be all about.

^I can't see Canadians being very happy about this!!:stunned:

We can use the EU as an example, I suppose. They aren't really 1 big country yet, though.

No. No. This can NOT happen. I am NOT going to put up with a one-world government. And if this passes, we all know it's only a matter of time before it happens.

No. No. This can NOT happen. I am NOT going to put up with a one-world government. And if this passes' date=' we all know it's only a matter of time before it happens.[/quote']

 

It will NEVER happen, Its hard enough getting countries to stay united, let alone the whole world, then you have the different religions, and when people of the same effign religion cant even get along....it not going to happen.

we'll see.

This is the sort of thing you should be worried about....

 

I found this site when reading through other government documents

 

http://www.spp.gov/

There's alot to read.

 

It's the 'beginning' of the merger between the whole of Northern America and their governments.

 

The 'Security and Prosperity Partnership' title is suggestive of how wonderful it will all be.....but it's far from wonderful.

 

The American Union is already in it's early stages everybody.

 

"Reviewing the specific working agenda initiatives, the goal to implement directly is apparent. Nearly every work plan is characterized by action steps described variously as “our three countries signed a Framework of Common Principles …” or “we have signed a Memorandum of Understanding …,” or “we have signed a declaration of intent …” etc. Once again, none of the 30 or so working agendas makes any mention of submitting decisions to the U.S. Congress for review and approval"

 

No suprise there then.

 

The Article here: http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=15233

Not gonna happen. like i said we cant even get people of the same religion to be peaceful, let alone different races. one world goverment would NEVER work. their is too much difference between everyone and people fight too much for stupid reasons.

Oh brother... these "America is going to annex Canada" rumors have been going around for over a century. Nothing has happened. It's more just what the cultural elite bat around to try to scare us into caring about Canadian culture and values, justifying Canadian content laws.

 

Our countries may be friends, but idealogically, there's enough of a difference to create serious problems if put under one political system. Not to mention that ever since Bush came to power there has been alot of alienation and fear mongering and the US is actually trying to CRACK DOWN on the border not erase it. If Bush's cronies get their way, crossborder shopping trips may be a thing of the past, as in we can't get down there that easily. Same thing is happening to the Mexican border from what I understand, because everyone is afraid that illegal immigrants are going to take their jobs.

 

Oh yeah, and come election time, all the cantidates up here run a platform that includes who can stand up to the US the most. People seem to like it when politicians get into some serious American bashing.

 

I think I speak for most Canadians when I say over my dead body. :P

 

I suggest anyone who doesn't understand this mentality watch some of Rick Mercer's "talking to Americans".

Oh brother... these "America is going to annex Canada" rumors have been going around for over a century. Nothing has happened. It's more just what the cultural elite bat around to try to scare us into caring about Canadian culture and values, justifying Canadian content laws.

 

Our countries may be friends, but idealogically, there's enough of a difference to create serious problems if put under one political system. Not to mention that ever since Bush came to power there has been alot of alienation and fear mongering and the US is actually trying to CRACK DOWN on the border not erase it. If Bush's cronies get their way, crossborder shopping trips may be a thing of the past, as in we can't get down there that easily. Same thing is happening to the Mexican border from what I understand, because everyone is afraid that illegal immigrants are going to take their jobs.

 

Oh yeah, and come election time, all the cantidates up here run a platform that includes who can stand up to the US the most. People seem to like it when politicians get into some serious American bashing.

 

I think I speak for most Canadians when I say over my dead body. :P

 

I suggest anyone who doesn't understand this mentality watch some of Rick Mercer's "talking to Americans".

 

Well said.

whaaaaaaaat!?!?! one gov't? merging w/ canada and mexico? ummm i don't think any of those leaders would ever, ever agree with that. it just...wouldn't work. mexico, caada, and the US work very well independently, the EU works well for europe, but something like that just wouldn't work in north america. it just...wouldn't. yeah, bush isn't my fav. president but dude, he's not trying to take over the world! dissolving the borders bt mexico, the US and canada would not do aything but boost crime and illegal actions. certain things are legal ain mexico and canada that aren't legal in the states, and that's the decision of each entity's gov'ts. they work differently than each other, so merging them would be impossible.

 

i;m pretty sure the people of all 3 nations would NOT let that happen...we've a democracy so i'm pretty sure that the people would do something to hinder that. bush has only got 2 more years, you can't accomplish a 3 country union that quickly.

It would be next to impossible for such a thing to occur.

Not to mention Canadians would have a fit if you threatened to take away their free healthcare, and Americans would have a fit if you tried to impose it on them.

Hey, listen...this isn't going to be an overnight thing like some people seem to think I think.

Reasons like "oh, you'll never be able to get everyone to get along" or "canadians would be mad if they threatened to take away their free healthcare" are mearly small surface details....they are currently non-issues in this sort of matter.

 

I'm not just posting this stuff because I believe it's going to happen next week or something, I really DO NOT want it to happen.....BUT I have noticed slight actions which now suggest the process accelerating at a much faster pace under Bush and he minions.

Just read about the subjuct in depth because these topics aren't areas which lend themsleves well to any sort of quick, obvious and rash replies like the ones I mention above.

 

I really hope you Canadians really fight on this and look into how certain laws and bills are being passed illegally through the US system - The Bush regime are almost now at the stage where they consider themsleves above the law in any respects.

Canada: A Galloping Police State?

 

Canada: A Galloping Police State?

 

Marjaleena Repo | June 19 2006

 

After five years of what can only be described as intense “terrorism envy” by our security establishment —with their repeated predictions of terrorist acts in Canada — the country has moved up a notch, to terrorism frenzy. The discovery of an alleged conspiracy by 17 Muslim men to attack facilities in Toronto and kidnap parliamentarians (as well as beheading the prime minister) — ostensibly to get Canada to withdraw from Afghanistan— came just in time before parliament debates the renewal of our post-2001 anti-terrorism legislation, and when support for Canada’s all out military involvement in Afghanistan is softening by the day.

 

The June 2 arrests were done with massive police involvement. Snipers on rooftops, in full glare of the notified-in-advance media, guaranteed 24-hour TV coverage and screaming headlines, topped off by a full court press conference by the CSIS and the RCMP. A full-fledged national crisis was born, fueled by rumours and fear. Our whole national security was at stake, and Islam, and to a lesser degree, multiculturalism, was to blame, for enabling such individuals to function underneath our very noses. A new term, “home-grown terrorists,” was slammed into our vocabulary overnight.

 

While the frightening picture of religion-driven extremists was bombarding our senses, the lawyers of the accused complained that they could not find out what the evidence against their clients was, could not even talk to them without armed police presence. Two weeks after the arrest, the accused and their lawyers are still in the dark about what led to the extreme charges. The accused are kept in solitary confinement, forced to sleep with lights on and woken every half-an-hour during the night.

 

A media ban has been imposed, preventing the press and the lawyers from exposing the exact nature of the information or discussing the court proceedings. The initial horrific rumours are left standing, fueling more fears of all things Muslim (now interchangeable with “extremist”). Some of the Muslim community were also pulled into this vortex of hysteria, trying to do the impossible: disassociating themselves from “bad” Muslims and pledging to do “house cleaning,” to rid their mosques and communities of such individuals. For this they have received many pats on the back (and head) from the amen-corner in the media and security establishment.

 

Two weeks after the spectacular arrests, Canadians still know next to nothing of the doings and utterances of the 17: they were on chat lines (watched by the police), they played paint ball and did target practice in the woods (watched by their neigbours), they wore camouflage and military style boots, they had ordered a large amount of ammonium nitrate, a potential component of bombs, some of it delivered to their door by a police agent. We don’t know how many were involved in any of the above. Five pairs of boots were displayed for the cameras, six flashlights, one walkie-talkie set, one voltmeter, eight D-cell batteries, a cell phone, a circuit board, a computer hard drive, one barbecue grill, a set of barbecue tongs, a wooden door with 21 bullet marks and a 9 mm hand gun. That should do it —clear proof that they were up to no good!

 

But wait a minute, is this scenario not deja vu from August 2003, when 24 Muslim men were taken down in an similar early-dawn police action, apprehended for planned terrorist acts such as bombing the CN tower and nuclear facilities in Ontario, their names and faces plastered on the media, far and wide? Much mutual congratulation among the intelligence community, the police and security forces ensued. Project Thread, as it was called, however, turned soon into Project Threadbare: nothing was found on the men, no evidence, no plans, no conspiracy, no tools to accomplish their dastardly deeds, and no membership in an “Al Quada sleeper cell,” as was initially claimed. They were cleared but not before being incarcerated, some for months. In the end, a couple of the men were found guilty of minor immigration infractions and deported. Others left the country, disgraced, their lives in tatters, only to find their “terrorist“ reputations following them to Pakistan, where some ended up being interrogated and jailed before being released. They have received neither an apology nor a penny of compensation from Canada.

 

Is it possible that the CSIS and the RCMP have learned their lessons, that they have worked harder to make the charges stick this time? Having watched the 17 men and boys for several years, with no terrorist acts having occurred, they appear to have helped the suspects along by entrapping them, including delivering an order of ammonia nitrate to one of the suspects (although with contents substituted). Perhaps we will find out that the purchaser was reluctant but the agent was ardent in his determination to make the terrorist charges hold, at last.

 

With the defence of the current accused already thwarted, we can expect a show trial and a kangaroo court to justify the terrorism hysteria that is so aggressively being cultivated, day in and out, by authorities and much of the media. With several other Muslims being held for years on dubious “security certificates” — challenged now in the Supreme Court of Canada — we will likely see more Muslim men end up in the no-man’s-land of Canadian justice, without trial and due process. A galloping police state is emerging, in a fashion, familiar to those who know their history, of 1930’s Germany.

 

It is time for Canadians, living blindfolded and silenced in a fool’s paradise, to remember Pastor Martin Niemoller’s famous warning to his fellow Germans, here freely paraphrased: “When they came for the Muslims/I remained silent/I was not a Muslim. //When they locked up the Aboriginals/defending their ancient lands/I remained silent/I was not an Aboriginal// When they came for the brown-skinned immigrants/ I did not speak up /I was not one of them// When they came for the critics, the dissidents, and the protesters/I did not speak out/I was not one of them// When they came for me/There was no one left to speak out.”

NO way this would ever work. if america tried there would be a war. canada and america wouldnt stand for it.

you make America sound like we're a bunch of evil cronies trying to screw over the whole world.

NO way this would ever work. if america tried there would be a war. canada and america wouldnt stand for it.

 

A war? that's right, there would be. A civil war.

 

 

And for 'psychosaiqa' who said "you make America sound like we're a bunch of evil cronies trying to screw over the whole world." - I never said YOU were doing any of this....did I? This is nothing against "Americans" or "Canadians".....I thought this would be obvious...??

A war? that's right, there would be. A civil war.

 

 

And for 'psychosaiqa' who said "you make America sound like we're a bunch of evil cronies trying to screw over the whole world." - I never said YOU were doing any of this....did I? This is nothing against "Americans" or "Canadians".....I thought this would be obvious...??

 

 

But you are attacking americans. elected our leaders and you are attacking every american.

But you are attacking americans. elected our leaders and you are attacking every american.

 

What sort of thinking is that. I am attacking your government so in turn I am disrespecting every American citizen?

 

Haha.

What sort of thinking is that. I am attacking your government so in turn I am disrespecting every American citizen?

 

Haha.

 

americans elected this goverment. so you are attacking americans.

americans elected this goverment. so you are attacking americans.

 

I am not attacking Americans, for gods sake....lol...:laugh1:

 

More Americans didn't vote for this government - so at least by your logic I am 'attacking' the minority...

 

 

I'm sure this so-called "attacking" I am doing is called as "Terrorism" under The Patriot Act.....thank god I'm not in the US when I say such things huh??

 

 

Anymore Americans feel "Attacked" by me??

 

 

HAHA...

I am not attacking Americans, for gods sake....lol...:laugh1:

 

More Americans didn't vote for this government - so at least by your logic I am 'attacking' the minority...

 

 

I'm sure this so-called "attacking" I am doing is called as "Terrorism" under The Patriot Act.....thank god I'm not in the US when I say such things huh??

 

 

Anymore Americans feel "Attacked" by me??

 

 

HAHA...

 

 

I welcome you with open arms my friend.... :kiss: I don't feel attacked... enlightened, yes... attacked, no.

I welcome you with open arms my friend.... :kiss: I don't feel attacked... enlightened' date=' yes... attacked, no.[/quote']

 

Yes, exactly....thankyou :)

 

You see the type of people we are dealing with....

 

He was actually trying to say that if I said bad words about politicians then I was attacking the whole of the countries public.....haha....I mean...what!?!?

 

LOL.