More on ‘merger’: Three nations under God?

Articles

By FRANK MIELE, Daily Inter Lake, July 1, 2006

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/articles/2006/07/02/columns/columns01.txt

One of the good things about writing an opinion column is that you hear back from readers with their opinions, too....

Such was the case in recent weeks after I wrote several columns on the topic of illegal immigration. In one of those columns I referred to the McCain-Kennedy-Bush “reform” plan as a proposed “merger” with Mexico, and lamented that the “shareholders” of the United States had not been consulted about the merger.

I chose the language intentionally to dramatize the point that U.S. sovereignty was on the verge of being given away, but I thought the idea of a merger was a colorful exaggeration that would be useful to make my point. Now I find out, thanks to the help of several readers, that it was no exaggeration at all, and that the McCain-Kennedy reform plan is not the starting point for the merger, but just one more steppingstone in a path being built for several years.

It has the sound of a global thriller, right? People in high places plotting to advance their own self-interest while the little people go about their business oblivious to the great forces at work all around them. But of course that is not just the stuff of Tom Clancy novels; it’s the way the world really works.

In this case, we have the presidents of the United States and Mexico and the former prime minister of Canada meeting at the president’s ranch at Crawford, Texas, on March 23, 2005. On that day, President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and Mexican President Vicente Fox announced the establishment of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.”

It has all the makings of a treaty. It is in fact an agreement between three countries to regulate trade, health care, emergency management and the environment. Yet it has not been presented to the Senate for ratification, nor have the people of the Unites States been consulted. Instead, the “partnership” was born full-grown out of that Texas summit like Athena springing from the head of Zeus in battle gear.

The name itself, Security and Prosperity Partnership of

North America, sounds suspiciously like the announcement of a merger, doesn’t it? But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can visit the official Web site at (http://www.spp.gov) or read about it by doing a Google search for “North American Union.”

You won’t find any explicit acknowledgment that the ultimate goal is to combine these three nations into a sort of North American version of the European Union, but the signs are all there. And if you need any proof that the U.S. government would be willing to cede part of its powers to a foreign government, you just need to look closely at the Senate/Bush amnesty plan for illegal immigrants, which is basically a federally funded bailout plan for the Mexican economy.

So what’s the problem with helping Mexico and Canada? Probably nothing in itself. The United States has been helping other countries for the past hundred years, but this goes beyond helping a neighbor.

We need to recognize the impulse to globalization that has taken hold in the past 20 years, and understand who that helps and hurts. It was the first President Bush who announced the coming of the “New World Order” after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and it wasn’t long afterwards that the European Union started to come into shape, forcing the ancient states of Europe to give up their monetary independence and inevitably enmeshing them into one superstate.

Such growth toward globalization may be a healthy instinct in some respects. If it works, it could lessen the chance of war and increase cooperation among all peoples. But the downside is that it results in a hybridization and flattening of all human experience. Eventually it could lead to a world where there is no room left for freedom such as the world of “1984.” If the American experiment in liberty is considered expendable in the interests of helping to feed hungry mouths elsewhere in the world, then we are all in trouble.

No one can prove such a plan exists, but there is plenty of evidence that there is a government-sponsored effort under way to change forever the relationship between Mexico, the United States and Canada. It is spelled out in detail on the federal government’s own Web sites. In addition, there is the 2005 report of the quasi-private Council on Foreign Relations, which proposes “the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity.” (Download it here)

To me, that idea of a “North American community” sounds like a European Union for North America. In fact, it sounds like a new country. As the Council on Foreign Relations task force wrote: “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.”

Forget about amnesty for illegal immigrants. That is the least of our problems. This plan calls for the legal and orderly “movement of people” across our former borders as a matter of economic necessity. It says that by 2010 the three nations should “lay the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America.”

If and when that happens, it will be hard to recognize where the United States ends and Mexico begins, but one thing is sure: It will be the beginning of the end for the United States of America as we know it.

Read the complete article.