August 28, 2007

Here’s Another Development I Consider An Enabler Of…

…the North American Union agenda.

Remember, the “consultants” privileged to attend the closed door SPP (Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America) meetings represent corporate interests by virtue of being the corporate interests (the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC).

Of late, in my own industry, there has been much activity in certain places: Basically, government law enforcement has been responding to budgetary and manpower considerations by assigning exceedingly more investigative and enforcement responsibility to corporate security departments. In North Carolina, they’re providing police training to private security officers and issuing them full police arrest authority.

In my own “era” of hands-on security work and, later, security supervision, the best we could do was a citizen’s arrest. We would fill out all the police paperwork and when they arrived, we would hand them the entire package, right down to witness statements, polaroids or videotape. They would call in for a case number, swap handcuffs and transport the prisoner. As a casino security shift supervisor, I had open door access to the city attorney and other prosecutors (we had as many professional dealings with the local criminal community as the PD, and the same insights), and often during short conferences I briefed a city, state or federal prosecutor on the details not coverable in a report that is a legal document — conclusions, recommendations, gut feelings, etc. Sometimes, we would discuss the penalties the prosecution would ask for, and my opinion counted.

But we were not cops, we were private sector employees charged with protecting the assets and interests of the company we worked for.

Before and since going into the consulting biz, I’ve attended armloads of classes, courses, seminars and workshops across the security spectrum and read scores of books and reports as they came out, keeping abreast of my industry. Networking has brought me into friendships and exchanges of information with dozens of fellow security professionals.

A British colleague, one of a few colleagues who spent the past Christmas and New Year’s as my house guests, told me back then about the trend in Britain of granting police responsibilities to private security departments and firms, and more recently, in Protection Industry reports, I’ve read about the same trend beginning to take hold here, in parts of the U.S.A.

There are even private contractors building and running prisons!


Almost. If you have lots of time to read a highly informative report re just how big outsourced military and security assets have become on the world stage, read this report.

What will happen over the next few, short years is that both proprietary and contract security forces will evolve into better trained concerns that possess police authority, and we will see commensurate downsizing in public law enforcement agencies.

Basically, the government will largely be saying to businesses and gated community type venues, “police yourselves”, and gradually, law enforcement will become the purview of corporate security people, as will incarceration become a province of the private sector.

When I worked in the casino, we had an instant communications network established between the surveillance departments of all the casinos in town, and all security supervisors shared a radio frequency connected to the network. It was a natural progression as ever-advancing technology afforded us those options, and it was profoundly useful.

Who’s to think that the same sort of arrangement won’t be implemented among the security departments of the various corporations involved? Or the larger contract firms? This would place a hell of a lot of power in the hands of those business concerns.

While I’m a strong advocate of limited government, I think we ought to leave things like law enforcement and incarceration right where they belong — under taxpayer supervision. Putting them in the hands of “corporate interests” just ain’t gonna cut it.

But mark my words, it will happen soon. We will outsource our protective venues.

We will suffer for it, but it will become part & parcel of our existence should we permit the NAU agenda to reach fruition.

Credit where credit is due:

I actually had a bit of trouble composing this post, and it spent considerable time in “save” mode, but then I read a post over at Shoprat’s place that provided insight I needed to better define my point of view.

by @ 6:27 am. Filed under Just Editorializing, North American Union (NAU), Security

August 21, 2007

Meanwhile, in Quebec…

…the Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) conference is underway, as reported here by World Net Daily.

Leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico have begun their discussions of the Security and Prosperity Partnership behind closed doors here at the five-star Fairmont Le Chateau resort in Montebello, Quebec.

For me, the three words that jump right out of that opening paragraph are behind closed doors, this because:

The only “civilians” actually scheduled to attend the SPP closed-door sessions were representatives of the 30 multi-national corporations appointed by the Chambers of Commerce of the three nations to constitute the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC.

Today’s confidential sessions are scheduled to involve top-level trilateral working group bureaucrats meeting with NACC business members.

The NACC’s representation consists not of congressional or parliamentary officials who are answerable to the citizens of their respective countries, but of, solely, financial/business elites who stand to gain the most from a unionized continent, in terms of both expanded fortunes and power under an umbrella of corporate say-so in how the people of The United States, Mexico and Canada are governed…

The U.S. Department of Commerce has set up the NACC to serve as the chief policy adviser to the 20 SPP trilateral working groups that have been “integrating” and “harmonizing” North American administrative laws and regulations across a wide spectrum of public policy issues.

…and the authority vested in them as a group places them in the position to tailor the North American Union agenda to their specifications under the approving eyes of the leaders of the three countries involved.

It would seem that our very sovereignty as an independent republic is being “integrated” and “harmonized” away by a bunch of individuals who hold their policy making sessions in private, out of earshot of the media, the people and those the people have elected to fulfill responsibilities that the NACC, as part of the SPP organization, has now usurped.

As WND previously reported, the NACC is expected to dominate the SPP agenda.
“The SPP is pursuing an agenda to integrate Mexico and Canada in closed doors sessions that are getting underway today in Montebello,” Howard Phillips, the chairman of the Coalition to Block the North American Union, told a press conference in Ottawa.

“We are here to register our protest,” Phillips added, “along with the protests of thousands of Americans who agree with us that the SPP is a globalist agenda driven by the multi-national corporate interests and intellectual elite who together have launched an attack upon the national sovereignty of the United States, Canada and Mexico.”

Connie Fogel, head of the Canadian Action Party, agreed with Phillips.

“Canadians are complaining that the SPP process lacks transparency,” Fogel told the press conference. “Transparency is a major issue, but even if the SPP working groups were open to the public, we would still object to their goal to advance the North American integration agenda at the expense of Canadian sovereignty.”

SPP = NAU (North American Union). The term “Security and Prosperity” is nothing more than sugar coating.

As I’ve written before, while some fellow conservatives whose opinions I respect and mostly agree with have said that We, the People would never let an NAU happen, what we are looking at here defies every concept upon which our own government, that of the United States of America, is based. Here we have two presidents and a prime minister presiding over a board staffed by heads of corporations from their three countries, whose intention is to create policies for all three that should rightfully be created by the elected policy makers of these countries for application in their respective countries only.

This is unprecedented on this continent, and we have already seen the results of a unionized Europe, so…

Where are the strong, concerted, bilateral protests from the Senate and the House of Representatives, whose members are not even included in these SPP conferences?

Sure, only a relative handful of citizens here and in Canada (I haven’t read anywhere of any Mexicans protesting, but why should they? Inclusion in a continental union would merely be another form of welfare, at the expense of U.S. taxpayers and Americans’ jobs, for Mexico) seem to see the SPP agenda for what it really is, while the rest can one day soon read “While America Slept II”.

MORE FROM CNS, and Washington Times Editor-in-Chief Wesley Pruden weighs in.

by @ 9:52 am. Filed under North American Union (NAU)

Mexico And The SPP/NAU

These “states of affairs” are both elements of or pathways to Bush’s trilateral agenda for a North American Union (NAU) that is being “stealthed” behind the guise of the Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), micro-components of “the big picture”. The first shows how liberals, wittingly or unwittingly, are supporting that agenda.

Mexico’s biggest export to the United States is illegal immigrants. According to statistical research by Ken over at The Liberal Lie, The Conservative Truth, American military casualties in both Vietnam and Iraq are dwarfed by American civilian deaths, on both a daily and annual basis, right here in the United States, these figures ignored by both our government and the liberal media.

That said, Gayle of The Dragon Lady’s My Republican Blog fame details the menace we face from NAFTA’s (North American Free Trade Agreement, a precurser to the NAU agenda) inclusion of Mexico’s trucking industry enjoying uninhibited access to U.S. highways (this is a one way street, American truckers can’t drive into Mexico).

Gayle lives in the right part of Texas to have a first-hand view of the Mexican segment of the NAU in its formative stages, and her linked post is right on the money. The same Mexican politicians that allow what she describes are the ones who will have a vote in U.S. affairs should we permit the North American Union to become a reality.

If it was me, I’d read her post and watch the included video very carefully…

by @ 3:06 am. Filed under North American Union (NAU)

August 10, 2007

Please Pardon My Skepticism, But…

this looks too much like a hundred eighty degree turn to me, abouuuuut face!

The Bush administration plans to step up immigration enforcement by raising fines on employers who hire undocumented workers, overhauling temporary worker programs and speeding up deployment of border agents, according to a summary of the plans.

More precisely,

An outline of the announcement, obtained by The Associated Press from a congressional aide, said the administration plans to expand the list of international gangs whose members are automatically denied admission to the U.S., reduce processing times for immigrant background checks and install by the end of the year an exit system so the departure of foreigners from the country can be recorded at airports and seaports.

In addition, employers will face possible criminal sanctions if they don’t fire employees unable to clear up problems with their Social Security numbers.

Also, the Homeland Security Department will ask states to voluntarily share their driver’s license photos and records with the agency for use in an employment verification system. The sharing is meant to help employers detect fraudulent licenses, according to the summary.

I’m sorry, but I can’t see a President who has so aggressively pursued amnesty and so failed to support the Border Patrol adopting this abrupt tooth & nail immigration policy unless he’s trying a new approach, some sort of stealth implementation policy. While I remain a supporter of the President on Iraq and the rest of the War On Terror, I take umbrage with his performance on immigration enforcement issues and the policies he wishes to engender granting amnesty to potentially millions of people whose very presence on our soil constitutes federal crimes.

Therefore, this is particularly ludicrous:

Chertoff alluded to the new enforcement tactics in a speech in Boston on Wednesday, calling to it “tool sharpening.”

“We shouldn’t have a patchwork of laws. We should be doing a comprehensive federal solution, but we haven’t got that thing done,” Chertoff said. “What I can tell you is we will certainly use every enforcement tool that we have, and every resource that we have available, to tackle the problem.

Considering that a Republican President might have a stealth agenda is a fairly new concept for me, that is usually a Democrat phenomenon, and it applies not only to their POTUSes, but to pretty much all of their politicians — dubiously in their defense, they have little choice; telling the American People their true intentions would lose them more votes than they’d like to contemplate, for unbeknownst to them, most Americans are both patriotic and smart, certainly more intelligent than today’s mainstream media and Democrat politicians apparently believe us to be.

However, since learning about George W. Bush’s leadership role in the very stealthy trilateral North American Union (NAU) agenda, promoted for obvious reasons as the Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), I have paid a lot of attention to his unrealistic and anti-Republican stance on illegal immigration.

In the event of the United States, Canada and Mexico becoming a three-country version of the EU, we would inevitably have to sacrifice nearly every aspect of our sovereignty to a higher Congress that includes decision making equality for politicians from two other countries, one with a predominantly socialist government, the other a grossly corrupt one that presides over millions of citizens who feel the need to flee their country in order to feed themselves and their families, or simply struggle unendingly in environments of squalor and disease.

The U.S. Constitution would become moot, as would the Supreme Court.

But back on track, the defeat of the latest immigration bill was a major setback for the Bush/ NAU amnesty aspirations (to say nothing of those of the Democrat persuation), and (Curses, foiled again!) — why spend billions of dollars securing our borders when they’ll be nothing more than turnstiles by 2010?

Let’s take another step here…it’s inevitable that as continental unions come together, for better or, more likely, for worse, they will fall under auspices united under a U.N. umbrella (the United States shouldn’t even belong to an organization represented most by dictatorships and socialist governments, in fact dominated by the latter) — it doesn’t speak very healthily for a world whose majority of nations seek, in a most avid manner, to bring down the one country among them that most supports their economies and is most willing to risk every kind of military assets, including the lives of our young warriors, to protect their rights.

The true decision-makers at the U.N. are like members of the Khaki Mafia were in Vietnam.

Uncle Sam (We, The People are supposed to tell him what to do) tends to surrender all too often to anti-America rhetoric at the U.N., wherein nations that support Islamic terrorist organizations, far-leftist regimes and brutal despots are considered credible global policy debate participants.

The MSM forever neglects to explain the non-military power we command throughout the globe, and our membership in the U.N. diminishes whatever the media misses. Today, using a shamefully distorted series of “reporting”, omission fraught accounts and outright fabrications on Iraq, they are suffering significant decreases in circulation, yet they perservere in carrying on the propaganda debate that glorifies the abandonment of the American way of life, a school of thought that’s been becoming increasingly unpopular among Americans.

Do I digress, or what?

Yeah, yeah, I know…

…but I’m not operating on the Conspiracy Theory plane, I’m looking at political “action and reaction”.

One piece of information that has sent up a flag in my “domain” is that while the Administration is suddenly going “great guns” on enforcing immigration laws, the President is going to meet, in Ottawa, with his counterparts from Mexico and Canada later this month. “What a coincidence!”

June 20, 2007

Better Late Than Never?

Given all the attention Canadians have been giving the stealth agenda of the SPP/NAU (Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America/North American Union), it’s about time we heard something about it from the U.S. media.

Shamefully, President Bush is a part of this plan that will, as I have reported in numerous previous posts, if allowed to reach fruition as expected in the fast approaching year 2010, diminish our nation’s sovereignty, undermine the Constitution in the face of a continental version and replace SCOTUS with a continental supreme court. In the meantime, Mr. Bush is doing his part in the agenda, pushing Congress to flood the United States with legalized criminal aliens on a “come one, come all” basis. With the witting and unwitting help of the Democrats, amnesty for illegals would include multiculturalism rather than assimilation, saturating our country with people whose sheer numbers would erode the American traditions our own liberals have already weakened considerably, playing right into the hands of the principals (POTUS, his counterparts in Mexico and Canada and some megabucks corporate interests) behind these plans whose details haven’t been presented to our three respective governing bodies, of the NAU agenda.

The videos and the article featured in the above-linked post are well worth reading and viewing to any Americans interested in doing whatever they can to help our nation, as we know it, to survive.

Major tip of the hat and many thanks to Always On Watch.

by @ 9:53 am. Filed under North American Union (NAU)

June 12, 2007

Canada And The SPP/NAU

In the fairly recent past, I posted that Canadians were beginning to become aware of evidence pointing to the North American Union (NAU) agenda that has been concealed behind the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

As it turns out, awareness of the agenda has been increasing in Canada for some time, apparently more so than the same has happened here in the United States.

Even when our Republican President fights to make criminal aliens legal, most Americans see nothing more than an attempt to help fellow Texas businessmen with cheap labor. We observe (at least the more aware among us) that Mr. Bush says nothing to dispel that image while pounding away at his amnesty (err, excuse me, “immigration reform”) agenda.

After all, why should he?

From his point of view, it’s better if folks believe that than consider how much more smoothly the adoption of the NAU would go in some three years if amnesty was already a done deal and there had been sufficient time for We, The People to have adjusted to it.

This just goes to show how out-of-touch people who have spent too much time in politics or at the pinnacle of the corporate world are with the American people – we’re not likely to “adjust” to such a compromise of our nation’s sovereignty without making trouble of one kind and another.

Or perhaps that’s the true purpose of the administration’s having brought all of our various federal security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies under the umbrella of one central authority – the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Under the conditions of the NAU, I entertain no illusions that DHS will fulfill any other role than that of federal security, intelligence and law enforcement command for the entire continent, and that the parameters of their responsibilities and authorized procedures will expand a little more than we’d like.

There are a few obvious comparisons I could make here, such as referencing a past similar blanket agency whose control was consummated from a Dzerzhinsky Square address, but I will not presume to make such predictions as they would be rejected out of hand by approximately 99.9999% of all Americans, including myself (hopefully).

But all digression aside, let’s return to the Canadian end of things which is, after all, the purpose of this post.

Vancouver author and journalist Murray Dobbin comes across with a spot-on perspective, based on a lengthy list of evidence, that should serve as a strong warning to his fellow Canadians, and to us here in the United States, as to what we can expect in the all too near future if we allow it to happen.

Mr. Dobbin’s article is here.

Here are 10 developments in the plan to disappear Canada.

1) Pesticides ‘harmonized.’ The most thoroughly reported story (though even this did not go much beyond the CanWest chain) was the revelation that Canada was about to “harmonize” its regulations, setting limits for pesticide residue on fruits and vegetables. In 40 per cent of the cases, the U.S. allows for higher levels. Richard Aucoin, chief registrar of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, which sets Canada’s pesticide levels, said that Canada’s higher levels were a “trade irritant.”

The downgrading of health protection had been a NAFTA initiative, but is being “fast-tracked” as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Some 300 regulatory regimes are currently going through the same process.

2) Tory tirade. The next story that broke through the wall of media silence reported on the paranoid reaction of the Harper Conservatives to any criticism of the SPP. The occasion was hearings of the Commons International Trade Committee into the SPP, forced by the NDP.

Gordon Laxer, head of Alberta’s Parkland Institute, was testifying on the energy implications of the SPP, warning that eastern Canada could end up “freezing in the dark.” He had barely started when the chair of the committee, Conservative MP Leon Benoit, demanded that Laxer halt his “irrelevant” testimony. The Committee members overruled Benoit — who promptly (and illegally) adjourned the meeting and stomped out. The NDP and Liberal members nonetheless continued without him.

3) Council of corporate power. The SPP initiative began in earnest back in 2002 with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (formerly the BCNI), the most powerful corporate body in the country. It continues it leadership role, but does not promote the scheme just in its own name. It instead has helped create several supportive bodies that now help drive the agenda. Included in these are the North American Competitive Council (NACC), which includes CEOs of the largest North American corporations, and which institutionalizes the exclusively corporate nature of the agreement. The NACC is the only advisory group to the three NAFTA/SPP governments.

4) Secretive summit. The NACC at least is public. But much of what happens in building the elite consensus for deep integration is done in absolute secrecy or very privately, away from the prying eyes of the media. The most secretive of these was held last year from Sept. 12 to 14, in Banff Springs. As The Tyee reported, the gathering was sponsored by something called the North American Forum* and it was attended by some of the most powerful members of the North American ruling elite.

Attendees, according to a leaked list that could not be confirmed, included Donald Rumsfeld, George Schultz (former U.S. Secretary of State), General Rick Hillier, Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor and Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day. The media was not informed of the meeting and it was first revealed by the weekly Banff Crag & Canyon.

Stockwell Day refused to even confirm he was there, but said that even if he was, it was a “private” meeting that he would not comment on. There is no better indication that these meetings, and the SPP itself, constitute a parallel governing structure — unaccountable to any democratic institution or the public.

5) ‘No fly’ coordination. Canada will have its own “no-fly” list just like our U.S. “partner.”

As the Council of Canadians pointed out: “The no-fly list is very much a Security and Prosperity Partnership initiative. ‘The SPP Report to Leaders, August 2006′ outlines 105 SPP initiatives. Initiative #93 states, ‘Develop, test, evaluate and implement a plan to establish comparable aviation passenger screening, and the screening of baggage and air cargo (for North America).’”

Canada’s privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has raised a number of concerns about the plan including the fact that the list will be shared with the U.S., that “false positives” are a virtual certainty, and that there is no evidence put forward by the government that the list will improve airline security.

6) Bye, bye Canadian dollar? David Dodge, the head of the Bank of Canada, told a Chicago audience that a single currency for North America “is possible.” That would see a big chunk of Canadian Sovereignty and the ability to guide the economy through monetary policy go out the window. It’s not the first time Dodge has mused about abandoning the Canadian dollar - or deep integration.

7) Water and oil giveaways. The deep integrationists clearly see Canadian water as a North American resource, not a Canadian resource. At yet another very private meeting, held in Calgary on April 27th under the auspices of yet another forum, it was made clear that water is on the table for negotiation.

Discussion of bulk “water transfers” and diversions took place at a Calgary meeting of the North American Future 2025 Project (partly funded by the U.S. government). The meeting based its deliberations on the false notion that Canada has 20 per cent of the world’s fresh water. Actual available supply amounts to only around six per cent — about the same as has the U.S.

The water (and environment) meeting was preceded by another on April 26th talking about “North American” energy. The beneficiary of these discussions is pretty clear when you realize Canada has no national energy policy. We are the only energy exporting country in the world without a one.

Gordon Laxer told the Parliamentary committee: “The National Energy Board wrote me on April 12: ‘Unfortunately, the NEB has not undertaken any studies on security of supply.’” He was also told by the NEB that Canada does not maintain a 90 day energy reserve as other developed nations do. As Laxer points out, “Canada may be a net exporter, but it still imports 40 per cent of its oil — 850,000 barrels per day — to meet 90 per cent of Atlantic Canada’s and Quebec’s needs, and 40 per cent of Ontario’s.”

Canada exports 63 per cent of its oil production and 56 per cent of its natural gas, percentages that can never decrease under NAFTA.

8) NAFTA Superhighway. State governments in the U.S. are becoming increasingly alarmed at the prospects of deep integration. Earlier this year, Idaho became the first state to pass a legislative resolution directing the U.S. Congress to drop out of the SPP, which is referred to as the North American Union amongst U.S. opponents. Thirteen states in addition to Idaho are calling on Congress to abandon the SPP: Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, Montana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Virginia.

Part of the opposition is focused on plans for a so-called NAFTA Superhighway: actually a corridor several hundred metres wide including rail lines, freeways and pipelines from Mexico to the Canadian border. There is a growing grass roots movement against the SPP in the U.S., but led by the right over the issue of compromising American sovereignty.

9) Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). While U.S. states, concerned about state rights under an unaccountable “North American Union,” are organizing against the scheme, Canadian provinces are either blithely unaware or knowingly complicit in the deal. More Canadians may be aware of TILMA — the investors’ rights agreement between B.C. and Albert — than they are about the SPP, but in reality they are one and the same.

TILMA is major piece of the deep integration, deregulation imperative and fits hand in glove with the SPP. There is a similar, though more informal, process evolving in the Atlantic provinces, called “Atlantica.” And B.C. is now pushing the so-called Gateway Initiative, a kind of regional superhighway project that will see huge and environmentally disastrous expansion of ports, highways and pipelines to further supply the U.S.’s insatiable demand for resources and cheap Asian goods.

10) The next SPP summit. The third leaders summit on the SPP will take place this August 21-22nd in Montebello, Quebec, not far from Ottawa. By the time it does many more Canadian will be aware of it.

Part of the reason that news of the SPP/deep integration issue is finally seeing the light of day is that opposition is growing and groups fighting the SPP are having an impact. The Council of Canadians, the CLC and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives held an SPP teach-in in Ottawa last month and many civil society groups are now taking deep integration to their members. Demonstrations are planned for the summit. The NDP continues to press the government on SPP secrecy and the Green Party’s Elizabeth May has said deep integration will be a focus of the party’s election platform.

Mexican perspective here would be graphically moot: Of the three countries involved, they would be the least significant (by far) on the contribution end of the deal (except in the export of two legged parasites), yet they would receive a full share of the “spoils” and a full partnership in continental government.


Mega H/T to Cubed.

by @ 12:45 pm. Filed under North American Union (NAU)

May 18, 2007

Well, That Eliminates Rudy…

I lived in New York for a time when Rudy Giuliani was the mayor, and as far as I’m concerned, he did a great job not only on crime, but also on quality of life and other issues that made the city not only safer, but more pleasant to live in. His handling of the 9/11 aftermath was masterful.

He was the perfect mayor during the years he served New Yorkers in that office.

He is, however, not my choice for the Presidency (I support Tom Tancredo).

His two greatest weaknesses among conservative voters are his anti-gun and pro-abortion stances, but there is one other reason, whose very magnitude dwarfs the first two, why I would not consider him as a viable candidate for the Oval Office, and though I hesitate in some ways to use the T word, that at the very least borders on treason.

GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani has extensive and deep ties to the NAFTA Superhighway and the construction of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). Giuliani’s law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, is the exclusive legal council for Cintra, the Spanish firm chosen to operate the I-35 toll road in the TTC.

Okay, I know that’s a profoundly harsh word to use, the above quoted paragraph notwithstanding, but an August Review article by Cliff Kincaid more than adequately explains my choice of words here.

Evidence shows that NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement involving the U.S., Canada and Mexico, is being expanded without congressional approval or oversight as part of a plan to create an economic and political entity known as the North American Union.

Brit Hume said on the Fox News Sunday program that it is possible that Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani could overcome his convoluted posturing on abortion and secure the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. But Giuliani has some other major problems. These include foreign clients, one of whom is constructing part of the “NAFTA Superhighway” project that has people in Texas and around the nation up in arms.

Hume, the moderator of Tuesday night’s Republican presidential debate in South Carolina, will be in a position to ask Giuliani about it. Questions will also be posed by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace and White House correspondent Wendell Goler.

Evidence shows that NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement involving the U.S., Canada and Mexico, is being expanded without congressional approval or oversight as part of a plan to create an economic and political entity known as the North American Union ( NAU). Federal documents uncovered by Judicial Watch quote participants in the scheme as saying that an “evolution by stealth” strategy is being used to put the pieces into place. Documents also speak of developing a common security perimeter and a common identification card for citizens of the three countries.

With the exception of Lou Dobbs of CNN, our national media have ignored not only the process that is well underway but the growing outcry over what is happening. Resolutions against the NAU have been introduced in 14 state legislatures-and have passed in two-and thousands of people have turned out in Texas to protest a Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) highway system, which will link the U.S., Mexico and Canada. Critics say the project is being funded by foreign interests, could run roughshod over private property rights, and could facilitate illegal activities, such as the trafficking of people and drugs, from Mexico.

I’ve been posting about the NAU, on and off, for some time, and readers here know that I take all evidence of this behind-the-scenes manipulation quite seriously, rather than as the nutjob conspiracy skeptics brand it as. It is an early and rudimentary element of the covert process that is intended to consummate in full globalization; We would no longer be Americans. We would be citizens of the world.

I was born and raised in America, cherish America and don’t particularly feel the need to spend my golden years in a non-sovereign, micromanaged, shadow-of-its-former-self America.

Read Cliff Kincaid’s entire article.

The target year for the NAU to assume its official position is 2010. Do we really want to see one of its major players and profiteers, a man who, despite his great public stature and his claims of patriotism, is willing to sell out his country as a sovereign entity, serve a term as POTUS that both includes and surrounds that year?

I don’t think so….

Hat Tip and considerably more to Cubed.