Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Wednesday, July 18. 2007

What is the SPP?

You need to know, if you do not. Alan Caruba's piece at Intell. Conservative begins thus:

In a month, August 20 and 21, the leaders of the United States, Canada, and Mexico will sit down together in Montebello, Quebec to discuss making the borders between these three nations disappear. They will discuss progress on a vast highway project passing through America to link Mexico with Canada.

So far, no one has asked the citizens of these three nations whether they want to do this. It is not up for a vote in Congress and, indeed, Congress has no supervision over the gnomes in the U.S. Department of Commerce who are busily “harmonizing” the laws under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).

Read the whole thing.

Posted by The Barrister in Politics at 12:46 | Comments (19) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

habu gave us the head's up on some aspects of this topic in his posts a month ago, on the NAU (North American Union) and the NAFTA super-highway..."16 lanes wide"??


yikes.


the "harmonization" language is straight from the EU.
#1 gumshoe on 2007-07-18 13:04 (Reply)
Habu has been talking about this for quite a while.
#1.1 BD on 2007-07-18 13:11 (Reply)
Ask yourself how far under the radar this has been to get this far and be such a huge undertaking. An undertaking that will change our entire way of life, and I do not believe that is an understatement.

Well I finally figured out why the President, the Democrats and the Republicans were working so hard on this amnesty thing.

The immigration/amnesty is but one cog in the wheel. Here's what's unfolding. The North American Union and the protocols of that and the SSP were signed a few years ago. That really set the course for our loss of national sovereignty.

The 12-20 million "new" citizen fit in this way. The Democrats will get 80% of their votes and retain Congress and the WH. The 2010 census will trigger the reapportionment of the nation. The Democrats will push through an expansion of the House from 435 members to 535 or 600, whatever. They will benefit immensely from this and it should keep them in power for 100 years. It should also make a republican president impossible to elect. The Senate will likewise be expanded as the states will be redrawn to reflect various "cultural" demographics. Naturally the Supreme Court will be expanded from 9 to 15 or 23, whatever. They'll be Marxist certified.

The Republicans are going along because for them it's all about just being a member of an "elite" ruling body and them moving onto corporate boards and beltway careers, continuing to use taxpayer dollars . The Republicans have long since proved they do not have the fire in the belly to lead the nation. They just want the membership and the contracts. It also means cheap labor for their corporations where cheap labor is in short supply.

The President is a committed New World Order guy. In his mind a North American Union of Canada,Mexico, and the USA is as natural as misunderestimation.

Hillary loves it because it provides he with the Canadian model of health care to immediately graft on to and "improve"

If you read the information on the North American Union and the SSP it begins to all make sense. The irony is that this particular bill isn't even necessary for the achievement of the NAU. However it will facilitate it's implementation.

Basically we're screwed, the middle class that is. It will definitely be the haves and the have not's and you'll see a redistribution of income happen faster than ever before.
#2 Habu on 2007-07-18 13:36 (Reply)
If you really want to get spooked about this I have from a very reliable source that the recent Bilderberg Group meeting discussed the NAU and SPP as part of their agenda.

Just Google that group to see who is running what.


O/T Thought:
While crusing the interstate earlier today the thought came to me that the USA has far more competent mililitary leadership than it does civilian leadership. This has been the case before in our history but there is no limn to the contrast right now.
I do not count the President, but Congress as the weak link.
If anything Geo. Bush has done what Lincoln did in the darkest days of the Civil War. He made leadership adjustments BUT he stayed the course under enormous pressure and came out the victor. I will forever damn John Wilkes Booth.
#3 Habu on 2007-07-18 13:49 (Reply)
Sovereign governments that are not under undue outside pressures and interference from other nations, along with property rights and the right to trade freely, make the base that hold a healthy and prosperous nation and I think any nation, large or small, that maintains that base can enjoy good results.

I have done a lot of lumber and steel purchases and sales that involved shipping and importing and exporting. When importing or exporting these materials one quickly realizes that the use of the term 'free trade' is a bit of a misnomer. By the time the paper is processed and all the agencies collect all the fees there is nothing free about it. It is complicated and expensive.

At one time, just before the Free Trade Act, lumber was duty free and everything else was taxed. The FTA came in and reversed that, with taxes taken off almost everything except softwood lumber. Pres. Reagan and PM Mulroney left softwood out of the FTA. The softwood lumber issue has been a very useful political 2x4 for Canadian left wing politicians to win votes with ever since. The duties are now collected and held in such a way as to provide piles of money for lawyers and politicians and various lobby groups to dip into, so I do not forecast any solution ever. Loggers, mill workers, builders and homeowners can pretty well go twist, like a 16 foot 2x4 left out in the hot sun. (How is that for a metaphor?)

In Canada the Liberal Party and the NDP i.e., the left, have been especially good at effectively dividing and conquering the electorate with trade and job issues and they have been known to work pretty closely with the US Dems to do it. When Canadian Conservatives work with Republicans they are called lapdogs. To me it looks more than likely the Dems will use these immigration and trade debates to divide the American electorate in this very same way in '08.

Canadians and Americans have been close partners and allies for the last 150 years. Highway or no highway, new pipeline or no new pipeline, the amount of trade is increasing and important. Goods and commodities like pork bellies and orange juice are important but there are the strategic commodities like oil, aluminium and natural gas involved too.
#4 Patina on 2007-07-18 15:21 (Reply)
habu -
it's not a simple task to reconcile these two comments of yours in this thread:

"The President is a committed New World Order guy. In his mind a North American Union of Canada,Mexico, and the USA is as natural as misunderestimation."

"Ask yourself how far under the radar this has been to get this far and be such a huge undertaking. An undertaking that will change our entire way of life, and I do not believe that is an understatement.

Well I finally figured out why the President, the Democrats and the Republicans were working so hard on this amnesty thing.

The immigration/amnesty is but one cog in the wheel. Here's what's unfolding. The North American Union and the protocols of that and the SSP were signed a few years ago. That really set the course for our loss of national sovereignty."



versus...


"I do not count the President,
but Congress as the weak link.

If anything Geo. Bush has done what Lincoln did in the darkest days of the Civil War. He made leadership adjustments BUT he stayed the course under enormous pressure and came out the victor. I will forever damn John Wilkes Booth."


granted people are complex and contradictory,
but your approval and questioning of Pres. Bush in these comments beg for some clarification.
#5 gumshoe on 2007-07-18 15:32 (Reply)
Not you too......
I'll be back after a while when this has run it's course. We should be getting skull and bones or illuminati posts soon.
When links to WND and Newsmax start showing up it should be near it's end.....usually.
#6 TBinSTL on 2007-07-18 15:34 (Reply)
hey TBinSTL -

you can be cryptic and dismissive,
or you can contribute to the discussion.

if you have something to add besides cynicism,
speak up.
#7 gumshoe on 2007-07-18 16:47 (Reply)
Gumshoe,
One comment was with regard to the SPP, NAU, and New World Order mindset.

The comment of not holding the President as a weak link in our current bereft state of leadership was O/T ,off topic, of the SPP,NAU. He is as committed to that as anything on his agenda save the war.

I know of no bar to politicians ,particularly politicians, holding condradictory positions.
In this case my observation of the president is that he would relish an NAU and he is fighting for it, albeit somewhat sub rosa.
On the position of terrorism and it's threat to order in the world he has been steadfast....I believe he's a stout fellow with marginal communication skills.

I'm not sure this aids in clarification however i hope it helps.
#8 Habu on 2007-07-18 17:16 (Reply)
"One comment was with regard to the SPP, NAU, and New World Order mindset.
...He is as committed to that as anything on his agenda save the war.

...In this case my observation of the president is that he would relish an NAU and he is fighting for it, albeit somewhat sub rosa."

the sub rosa aspect of Bush's promotion of the NAU
makes many of the rantings (noted
by TBin STL re:"We should be getting skull and bones or illuminati posts soon.") seem not only credible,but a potentially accurate assessment of unpublicized events
and agreements.

it is presently difficult to see the NAU
as "upholding the Constitution of the United States".

'On the position of terrorism, and its threat to order in the world he has been steadfast....I believe he's a stout fellow with marginal communication skills.'

well. the issue of 'order in the world' is clearly under contention in both topics:

terror on the one hand, and non-representative, non-democratic,gov't actions(NAU,EU,harmonization,etc.)
the rants of the "prison planet" crowd aren't to hard to reconcile in such a scenario.

'I'm not sure this aids in clarification however i hope it helps.'

appreciated,habu.
it's not a simple set of topics.
#9 gumshoe on 2007-07-18 18:07 (Reply)
Since anyone presenting evidence disproving conspiracies automatically part of the conspiracy, I'll let somebody else take the bullet on that one.
http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2006_07_16.PHP#006080

http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2007_01_07.PHP#007134

If you think I'm being dismissive, you're right!

I also don't believe that Col Sanders put addictive substances in his chicken to make you crave it fortnightly.

I only came back because I respect the authors here and don't like seeing them bite the hook.
#10 TBinSTL on 2007-07-18 18:34 (Reply)
TB, I can appreciate your skepticism on conspiracies. They tend to smack of the "tin foil "hat crowd.

But you see, I spent a decade in the CIA, involved all over the world in conspiracies, aided by the likes of Howard Hughes and Bob Maheu ...see "Glomar Explorer".

My callow youth lasted to the third page of the first TS/Codeword briefing book I read after training, and training wasn't a picnic. I helped bait many hooks and always enjoyed reeling in the catch.

However as I stated hoi polloi never having the opportunity to see what really goes on in the power games of the world are usually dismissive of anything that smacks of a conspiracy.

But then Brutus was an honorable man and Cassius had that lean and hungry look because he was a runner and watched his diet.
#10.1 Habu on 2007-07-18 19:44 (Reply)
"Our own view is that a philosophy of 'free markets and free people' includes flexible labor markets. At a fundamental level, this is a matter of freedom and human dignity. These migrants are freely contracting their labor, which is a basic human right."

And where did that come from?

Think of what that means as a concept for those espousing it: contracts are solely determined between individuals and companies - no Nations need apply. It is, at heart, anti-thetical to the Nation State concept, putting forward that National outlook need be liquidated for this 'right to contract'. No laws, in fact, are necessary for this view of the world, and such contracts can only be enforced by the parties involved. And as those that are doing the contracting are in a position to decide how, where, when and why they contract labor, it can be done with a view towards anything they like. No need for any oversight on this 'freedom of contract' concept.

That view is from the Wall Street Journal. My thanks to John Fonte's latest on the Transnational Right and Left ( http://www.phillysoc.org/fonte2007.htm ) for this, and for his previous work on the ideological war within the West ( http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2002_04-06/fonte_ideological/fonte_ideological.html ).

The Transnationalist Right is a problem just as much as the Transnationalist Left. It adheres to removal of barriers to trade for the benefit of... those doing the trading... so selling things to a People in a fascistic or other authoritarian or totalitarian State that has their rights determined and handed out by government is not 'making them more free' - it is mollifying people under despotic or tyrannical regimes to enrich those doing the selling. While those doing the purchasing can have their rights to property, speech and life removed at any time, for any reason of their government.

It is not the overt organizations that the Transnationalists put together that are worrying. It is the undermining of basic concept of All men being created equal to come together as a society and determine Just governance of themselves. Trade is not to be bothered by that, on the Transnationalist Right - make human liberty a commodity to sell... or not... just so long as the trade is free, who cares about the situation of those doing the buying? No need to attach trade to such outmoded concepts of 'Nation State' or even having to adhere to the people of a 'Nation'.

That mind-set is Elitist, authoritarian and anti-liberal in the extreme and seeks to put commerce above human liberty. The motto is 'free trade frees people' and its lie has been around for a couple of decades and has yet to account for the first place it got tried. Its been 90 years... when trade was put before fighting.

When 'international institutions' were going to solve 'the scourge of warfare'.

If you put trade before human liberty then you have just inverted why the US was formed. Most folks can remember that motto, as it is very clear what the precedence is: 'No taxation without representation.' The actions of trade are accountable to society as a whole, not the other way around.

Again, it is not the NAU, SPP, or their equivalents on the Left that bother me. It is the mindset that goes unchallenged, parroted, time and again without thinking about it. The old liberals have succumbed to it from their socialist wing and refuse to think in the terms of human liberty and accountability of the actions of man to society as a whole. I find it very, very troubling that conservatives, who are supposed to have a 'robust interchange of ideas' do not do that to the Left nor the Right.

I look at what a Nation of Free People can have... then scope out these Transnational Right problems and why they are pernicious and dovetail with their counterparts on the Left ( http://thejacksonianparty.blogspot.com/2007/05/modern-jacksonian-chapter-6-limits-of.html ). It does not take a conspiracy to have convergent world-views that grab the podium and set all questions in context of Transnationalism... without even giving a nod to these other views of why Nations are formed among men to safeguard their societies. You don't need a conspiracy for that... just silence.
#11 ajacksonian (Link) on 2007-07-18 20:05 (Reply)
THAT is a New York Times Op-Ed piece.
#11.1 BD on 2007-07-18 20:30 (Reply)
...life ,liberty , and the pursuit of happiness was damn near...life ,liberty, and property ... it was neck and neck for quite a while.
#12 Habu on 2007-07-18 20:28 (Reply)
The size of nations is basically a function of the size, and efficiency of the various armies employed by those nations.
#13 Rufus on 2007-07-18 21:26 (Reply)
I really shouldn't interject, being out of my league. But Rufus, I can't let that stand without rebuttal. Size and efficiency have little too do with armies. Simplistically, I submit, Heart, is the stronger portion. Semper Fi say I, and f*** the rest.
#14 Luther McLeod on 2007-07-18 22:27 (Reply)
OKAY,

Size, efficiency, and HEART.

There.

Semper Fi
#15 Rufus on 2007-07-19 01:07 (Reply)
I do not know if the article is correct or not about these issues but I do think that it splits the Repubs and could help to put a Dem in the WH in '08, as these issues are wedges. The media will be the sledge hammer that works the fractures. (How is that for a metaphor?) I watch Pat Buchanan because IMO, his positions have caused big trouble for the right on previous election nights. One post opined, it could be 28 years of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton.
#16 Patina on 2007-07-19 15:42 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.