AWCheney’s Forum On Immigration

The North American Union, Part 2

In Part 1 we examined the possibility that the North American Union could, perhaps, be the ultimate goal in a series of events that began with the creation of NAFTA (implemented on January 1, 1994) during the Clinton Administration and subsequently led to the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, which has led to a piecemeal plan for the socio-economic convergence of the three North American nations, one element of which is transportation (the NASCO superhighway). The party line regarding this theory, from BOTH political parties, is that the NAU is merely a creation of Conservative paranoia:

The fact is, we know that the SPP DOES exist, and I spent some time navigating its rather anemic website:

http://www.spp.gov/

They definitely have not made it easy to get a lot of information there about this very serious attempt to integrate the three nations of North America…the United States, Canada, and Mexico. There is no search function and at least two links were disabled at the time I tried to access them, although they magically reappeared later. Perhaps they were being updated. The information that you find on the site is very definitely PR oriented, much of it in press release form, and you really have to dig and Google to go deeper…which is what I did.

The first document on the site that I examined was the 2006 Report to Leaders:

http://www.spp.gov/2006_report_to_leaders/index.asp?dName=2006_report_to_leaders

From that report comes the following quote:

At the one-year anniversary meeting of the SPP in Cancun, you asked us to examine ways to strengthen the SPP to ensure its continuity and success. To that end, we are pleased to inform you that on June 15, Ministers officially launched the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) that you announced in Cancun. Our three governments recognize that private sector involvement is key to enhancing North America’s competitive position in global markets and is the driving force behind innovation and growth. As such, the creation of the NACC provides a voice and a formal role for the private sector. The regular meetings between Ministers, senior officials, and the NACC, complemented by ongoing consultations with other interested stakeholders, will help ensure that the SPP remains a cornerstone of North American cooperation.

Now, what exactly IS this North American Competitiveness Council, you may ask, and what is its actual role in the SPP? That’s exactly what I asked myself, and immediately proceeded to try to answer that question…easier said than done. Without a search function on the SPP website, it was necessary for me to scan through the various links to find mention of this organization, and the ONLY place I found it was on the “SPP Documents and Useful Link” page…at the very bottom. You could check it out yourself, but don’t bother…there’s nothing (and I MEAN nothing) at the other end of it. Then I tried “Old Reliable,” Google, which proved only slightly more helpful. Fair warning, a Google search is more likely to bring up such results as the National Association of Catholic Chaplains or Northeast Alabama Community College, with a suggestion that you might, in fact, mean NCAA. Amongst all these, I eventually found a Wikipedia listing for the National American Competitiveness Council:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Competitiveness_Council

This is how Wikipedia describes the NACC:

The North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) is an official tri-national working group of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). It was created at the second summit of the SPP in Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico, in March 2006. The SPP is an agreement between the leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico to work towards a more integrated North American economy and security region. Composed of 30 corporate representatives from some of North America’s largest companies, the North American Competitiveness Council has been mandated to set priorities for the SPP and to act as a stable driver of the integration process through changes in government in all three countries.

I would call that rather substantial functions for an organization for which you can’t find any information on the parent website…and doesn’t even have its own website. Not only that, but it gives me pause that a group of multi-national corporations have been mandated to facilitate the “integration process through changes in government in all three countries.” NO WONDER THEY’RE SO PISSED OFF IN CONGRESS! It certainly bothers ME that a group of, for all I know, “Enron-type” executives could be wielding THAT much power…and we didn’t elect them. It gets better:

If you check out the “Media Coverage” at that link, you’ll find this fascinating quote:

Ron Covais of Lockheed Martin told Savage that, “The guidance from the ministers was, ‘tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen,'” and that rather than going through the legislative process in any country, the Security and Prosperity Partnership must be implemented in incremental changes by executive agencies, bureaucrats and regulators. “We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes,” Covais tells Savage, “because we won’t get anywhere.”

I don’t know how you might interpret that, but I see it as having my government supplanted by bureaucrats and big business…what a combination. I suppose one victim of this “tri-national” integration is going to be Representative Democracy. I always wanted to live in a society run by business monopolies dictating how well I was going to live (I doubt that small business and businesses not in the club would survive for very long) and bureaucrats keeping us constantly befuddled…and serving THEM.

Well, there we have it…the “conspiracy theory” created by Conservative paranoia. We all know that our government would NEVER consider conspiring to cover something up or keep anything from the American people. I mean, President Bush told us so:


Advertisements

July 2, 2008 9:23 am - Posted by | North American Union | , , ,

6 Comments »

  1. I agree AW. The historical evidence shows that “factions” that destroy “democracies” were typically “funded” by greed and avarice.

    One problem with business monoliths geting larger and more massive than national governments, is that they see themselves as above the enforcement of any nation’s laws, and operate typically outside of any one nation’s political control. This means a massive global entity called “business” that will take over the politcal course of all nations opposed to their ultimate goal of “growth” and “wealth”. One thing that people have not defined well is what does “growth” and “wealth” give you?

    1. Less freedom
    2. More Malls, social encapsulation, more concrete, hotter pavement, less water, less land, and un-natural isolation from the rest of the World
    3. Less Social Interaction and “personal” time
    4. More work and labor misery
    5. More poverty for the imporveished “groups”
    6. Less poverty for the “wealthy factions” controlling government
    7. Less peace, and human values of serenity, leisure and pleasure in nature.
    8. More medical disease, higher death rates, more pollution, more hazardous waste, less species survival, including our own.

    A NAU and “un-controlled growth” a result of NAU, will only increase the rate of failure of modern society to have any meaningful leisure, natural comfort, integrated local community and society, slower pace of life and less death due to occupational hazards and toxins.

    Comment by michael | July 6, 2008 5:30 pm | Reply

  2. At some point our “society” and “humanity” needs to decide what we want most “wealth with accompanying misery and death caused by growth and possibly massive species extinction including our own”, or “social peace and stability” created by local and regional economic “villages”. The Europeans chose “villages”. The US has not.

    Comment by michael | July 6, 2008 5:36 pm | Reply

  3. I have at least four more posts mentally sketched out on the various elements of the North American Union, Michael, although it may wind up being more than a 6-part series over the course of the next several months. A great many things tie into the evolution of the NAU, and I’m trying to research it VERY carefully and accurately. I think that you’ll find it interesting.

    Comment by AWCheney | July 6, 2008 8:47 pm | Reply

  4. AW,

    About 3 years ago I began reading things about this NAU (North American Union) ‘concept’ going around out there. I, too was skeptical and began immediately to uncover what facts were available, if any. I ran a few searches under North American Union and found 10 pages of sources and began researching through them all. Whether is was a news release from The Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/publications/8104/, an update from http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/print/20060331.html “The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: Progress, or the Council of the Americas, http://www.americas-society.org/coa/NACC/indexNACC.html, I was coming to the solid conclusion that something was really going on around us or under us that would emerge before us and take us by surprise. I have even researched as far as learning who the NACC members are. Bottom line is, there is a plan that is well underway to create this “new community” by 2010.

    Comment by linda | July 6, 2008 11:39 pm | Reply

  5. My research concurs with yours, Linda, although I believe that the 2010 date either refers to one element of the plan (perhaps the “superhighway”), or it’s premature on their part (there has got to be some element of Congressional or Judicial oversight involved in its final stages).

    There is no doubt, however, that they are very definitely trying to take us by surprise. My research has determined that the Canadians know a great deal more about it than we do here. There are demonstrations all over Canada and “anti” organizations springing up (I’ll be doing a post on that in one of my NAU segments). The Canadians are VERY angry with their leadership.

    By the way, thanks for posting those links. I have checked out the whitehouse.gov link, but I believe that I may have missed the others. They are definitely on my research list now!

    Comment by AWCheney | July 7, 2008 1:23 am | Reply

  6. Anke,

    Have not been on you sight for a few weeks now and just rereading some of the beginning posts. And I missed your comment to my post. My source of info came from Jerome Corsi’s book “The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada, chpt,1 pg.21-22.

    “The CFR(Council on Foreign Relations)Task Force on the Future of North America repeated the earlier statement of the CFR Chairman’s Statement that 2010 was an important date:

    The Task Force’s central recommendation
    is the establishment by 2010 of a North
    American economic and security community,
    the boundaries of which would be defined
    by a common external tariff and an outer
    security perimeter. 24

    So, by 2010 the only borders or tariffs remaining in
    North America would be those around the continent, not
    those between the countries within:

    Its [the North American Community’s] 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. 25

    Comment by linda | July 16, 2008 11:11 pm | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s