A Message From Ron Paul

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Messages
3,213
Location
Amerikan Twilight Zone
One can only ask how this security partnership will impact our 2A rights when
US citizens are brought to a level on parity with those of Mexico and Canada.
Remember the press conference from Mexico's AG complaining about US guns
coming into Mexico. The stage is set, the actors are in costume, the curtain
(border) has opened --let the play begin.

A North American United Nations?

by Ron Paul

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States. The most recent attempt comes in the form of the misnamed "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP)." In reality, this new "partnership" will likely make us far less secure and certainly less prosperous.

According to the US government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, it is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005.

What is a "dialogue"? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union.

According to the SPP website, this "dialogue" will create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA- and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade.

Critics of NAFTA and CAFTA warned at the time that the agreements were actually a move toward more government control over international trade and an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area. Proponents of these agreements dismissed this as preposterous and conspiratorial. Now we see that the criticisms appear to be justified.

Let's examine just a couple of the many troubling statements on the SPP's US government website:

"We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation...and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007"

Though the US administration insists that the SPP does not undermine US sovereignty, how else can one take statements like this? How can establishing a "trilateral regulatory cooperation" not undermine our national sovereignty?

The website also states SPP's goal to "mprove the health of our indigenous people through targeted bilateral and/or trilateral activities, including in health promotion, health education, disease prevention, and research." Who can read this and not see massive foreign aid transferred from the US taxpayer to foreign governments and well-connected private companies?

Also alarming are SPP pledges to "work towards the identification and adoption of best practices relating to the registration of medicinal products." That sounds like the much-criticized Codex Alimentarius, which seeks to radically limit Americans' health freedom.

Even more troubling are reports that under this new "partnership," a massive highway is being planned to stretch from Canada into Mexico, through the state of Texas. This is likely to cost the US taxpayer untold billions of dollars, will require eminent domain takings on an almost unimaginable scale, and will make the US more vulnerable to those who seek to enter our country to do us harm.

This all adds up to not only more and bigger government, but to the establishment of an unelected mega-government. As the SPP website itself admits, "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." I hope my colleagues in Congress and American citizens will join me in opposing any "broad and ambitious" effort to undermine the security and sovereignty of the United States.

August 30, 2006

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
 
hmm, I would be willing to let taxes fund a super highway starting in Mexico and ending in Canada, so long as there were 12 foot high, three foot thick walls and NO off ramps in the portion that is inside the U.S.
 
hmm, I would be willing to let taxes fund a super highway starting in Mexico and ending in Canada, so long as there were 12 foot high, three foot thick walls and NO off ramps in the portion that is inside the U.S.
I wouldn't want any US citizens to lose their land to eminent domain for such a road.
 
A discussion of the sovereignty issue is on-topic. A discussion of the secrecy issue is on-topic.

Complaining about the highway/rail corridor merely means that for the next fifty years you don't believe the populations of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico won't grow, and that there will not be an increase in trade.

And also that you havent driven on I-35. :)

Art
 
Wish that boy would run for POTUS.

Biker


The government would never, ever allow R. Paul to become president.



The more and more this continent becomes a single nation, the greater our Rights are threatened (2A). No offense Canada and Mexico, but your systems suck.
 
Careful AFS, discussing a possible Mexican Civil War will get this thread
locked because a civil war south of the border would have absolutely no
impact on gun/ammunition sales and subsequent domestic firearm legislation
in the USA......
 
Art Eatman said:
Complaining about the highway/rail corridor merely means that for the next fifty years you don't believe the populations of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico won't grow, and that there will not be an increase in trade.

And also that you havent driven on I-35. :)

Unfortunately, census stats are showing that the only population growth is coming from Mexico...and heading due north.... :rolleyes:

Trade will increase....esp. when China & other nations can bypass US ports (and the Americans who work there) and ship their goods to Mexico to be taken by unsafe Mexican trucks driven by underpaid Mexican drivers (or fanatical Islamic terrorist-types that can fake Spanish) not bound by the regs that bind US truckers through Texas until their first customs & security inspection in Missouri and get their goods to Wal-Mart quicker so that the illegals can buy them from the cashier that can barely speak English and count money while on the way to the Health & Human Services building to pick up the next welfare check for the sixteenth child that was just born on this side of the border.... :banghead:

And yes, Art, I DO drive I-35....and I don't want that SSP mess there, either... :cuss:

Terlingua may have surrendered to Mexico, but the rest of Texas is still fighting this. And so is Ron Paul.... :cool:
 
Man, if we could get Paul and Tancredo on the same ticket? Hold me back now...

Biker
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top