SPP End Of USA. Oh, By The Way, Happy "4th Of July," Formerly Known As "Independence Day."

By Doug Wrenn, Magic City Morning Star, July 3, 2006

http://magic-city-news.com/article_6198.shtml

Disclaimer: The following material is solely intended for independent thinking, liberty loving American patriots only. Some material may be deemed unsuitable for Bush apologists, GOP lemmings, "free traders" and one-world-order globalists. Reader discretion is advised.

I almost gagged the other day, when I heard the tail end of a radio broadcast, in which President Bush was addressing our troops, and making a connection between their sacrifice and our nationís upcoming "Independence Day, " now relinquished to simply "The 4th Of July." My near gastric disruption was not because of President Bushís war policies regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Those policies are among the few in his agenda of which I actually concur and support. As for our troops, I support them very much, and more so than our so-called "mainstream" press and media, although that probably isnít saying much. The crux of my agitation was that this President, of all people, had the unmitigated gall to invoke the birth of our nationís founding and hard-fought independence after his betrayal to our nation and to our independence, a betrayal that took place on March 23, 2005 in Waco, Texas.

I am referring to the "SPP," or "Security and Prosperity Partnership," colloquially referred to as "the North American Union." Globally speaking, does any variation of that otherwise innocuously sounding phrase sound at all familiar? It should. Socialism, via the globalist agenda, much like what now exists in Europe, has reared itís ugly head, and has officially found itís way to a continent near you.

President Bush entered into the SPP agreement with Canada and Mexico in his 2005 Waco summit. This was also the time he dubbed the Minutemen "vigilantes." His recent trip to Cancun was a follow-up to the 2005 summit, which in effect, creates an expanded free enterprise zone with the US, Canada, and Mexico, provides for military defense for our two continental neighbors, and waters down, if not eliminates our once sovereign Constitution as we know it. Maybe "red, white, and blue" symbolizes American patriotism, but "seeing red, feeling blue, and looking white as a sheet" is not what I had in mind, and to any patriotic American, those feelings are exactly what this outright and outrageous sedition should cause.

The sage adage reminds us that you can attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. Keep that in mind as you read the soft, warm, fuzzy "fact sheet," our government has provided us at (http://www.spp.gov/factsheet.asp.) While the US has entered a "partnership," in reading between the lines, it seems more likely that the "security and prosperity" will be primarily enjoyed by Mexico and Canada, and at the expense of the US. What the "fact," or more appropriately, "propaganda" sheet does not reveal is that our borders, as we once knew them, are to be erased in 2010, and in recent speeches, the President has occasionally blended in "migration" with "immigration."... There are also slated perks for business that support the SPP agenda, thus giving those businesses an edge over their competitors, and limiting competition in the marketplace, and allowing less choice for the consumer, hardly an accepted staple of the theory of capitalism, which has so long been an integral part of our countryís economic prosperity, quality of life, and sustained liberty. One of the SPP proposals includes a "North American Bank," which will undoubtedly act as a funnel to control commerce as desired by those sitting at the pulling end of the strings. The SPP also intended to have a trilateral say in our food safety. As the US will be outnumbered in this partnership by a 2 to 1 margin, this idea offers me little solace, as we now get sick cows from Canada and tainted fruit from Mexico. Whatís next, diseased chickens from China?...

To our south, we have Mexico, with little to know middle class, just the poor and the few rich. The rich have little to no reason to want to migrate here, and the oppressed, uneducated, diseased and unskilled poor will offer more of a strain on our country (even more so than now) than an asset.... The North American Union will supposedly, and undoubtedly raise the quality of life for Mexico, and possibly even Canada, but it will certainly ruin ours. Overall, the SPP is a good deal, but only for Canada and Mexico. It will be a "give and take" relationship; they will both take, and we will give.

By observing what is happening in the EU, and what goes on with our southern and northern neighbors, we can easily predict our "nationís" future, without the need for resurrecting Nostradamus, or breaking out the crystal ball and the tea leaves. Remember, that as a member of a three-nation pact, there is great potential for the US to be frequently outvoted, just like in the United Nations (UN), but on a smaller scale, and with similar anti-American sentiment. Just tick off the potential losses we could take as a hit in our possibly soon to be doomed Bill Of Rights:

1st Amendment- Less free speech...

2nd Amendment- Kiss your guns good bye. The globalists have previously tried this move in the UN already. Canada has already disarmed it people, and in Great Britain, not only has the government confiscated all guns, but it is now illegal, and under penalty of law, for a robbery victim to use any kind of physical force to defend himself. Meanwhile, the rate of "hot" burglaries (or in other words, "home invasions," burglaries or robberies occurring in homes while occupied) is skyrocketing in Great Britain, to the peril of its now sitting duck citizens. Furthermore, Great Britain is now considering what sadly, some of us have previously joked about, but has now come to fruition, "knife control." Yes, I am quite serious; first the British government wanted the guns, now itís the knives. What is next? Plumbing fixtures, tree branches, rocks, cars, hands, feet? Where does this insanity end? That joke is now no longer funny. By the way, read any AAA (American Automobile Association) guide about traveling to Mexico. The mere possession of a bullet, even without a gun, can land you in jail, and without the same rights granted in US courts and jails.

3rd Amendment- No quartering of troops in homes.... That principle does not exist in Mexico, however, as the Mexican Army guards Mexicoís border with Guatemala. So in a future SPP era, what is to stop the trilateral government from quartering troops in your now unarmed home (See "2nd Amendment" above.)?

4th Amendment- Unlawful search and seizure. Now see "3rd Amendment" above. If the new ruling continental government "The United States of Canxico" (my own phrase) is going to quarter troops in your home, do you really think a warrant will be a consideration, or any kind of consideration to a search or seizure?...

The 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments- All deal with various components of your judicial rights. While it is rightfully said that our judicial system is far from perfect, it is still the best in the world. Canadaís comes close. Mexicoís is abhorrent...

9th Amendment- "The enumeration in the (big "C") Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." That will be a fond memory some day, once our "Constitution" (big "C" again) will be either officially ignored, or simply abolished....

10th Amendment- Guarantees rights of the states, or the people. Another fond memory. In a trilateral continental government, no country, no states, no problem. As for the people, we will be well under the governmentís control by then.

As we are (hopefully) with tearful eyes, heavy hearts, and minds filled with angst, reviewing this magnificent, glorious and precious document, called our Constitution, before it is stabbed through the heart to death by willfully manufactured extinction, I would be remiss if I did not cite yet another noteworthy codicil, specifically, Article 2, Section 2, paragraph 2: "He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..." I have never heard of President Bush seeking advice and consent of the Senate regarding a proposed SPP, or of the Senate concurring with the signed SPP agreement of 2005.... this treaty was never apparently agreed upon by the Senate, as so stipulated in the Constitution?

There has been a story circulating the Internet since last December, which reveals that allegedly, President Bush, in some sort of cabinet or administrative meeting was challenged by a subordinate regarding a possible suggestion discussed that might have been a violation of the Constitution. As the story goes, President Bush replied in anger, words to the effect that "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! Itís just a G__ D___ piece of paper!" I have deliberately refrained from ever mentioning this story until now, because I have never seen any conclusive proof that convinced me that this alleged event ever really took place. I still donít know if the President really ever made that statement, but I do know this, actions speak louder than words.

We have seen this President overexert his Constitutional authority time and again.... He secretly and aggressively tried to force through the Dubai Ports World deal, which would have turned our ports over to the United Arab Emirates, even after a widespread backlash by almost all of Congress within both parties, and a vociferous, and vast mass, if not majority, of the enraged American people. When signing the Campaign Finance reform bill into law, the President actually had the audacity to state that he believed the bill to be unconstitutional, and then he signed it into law. President Bush also has also pushed "fast-track " status for previously coveted international trade agreements, in effect, by-passing much of the Congressional process with a wink and a nod. This is a President who has pushed the power of the Executive office to the brink, and then some on more than one occasion. Our country was freed over 200 years ago by secession from one tyrant named George an ocean away. In 2005, we lost our freedom to another tyrant, also named George, present among us and elected by us....

Supposedly, there are many globalists, of like mind with the President, currently, but stealthily roaming the halls of Congress, and from both sides of the partisan aisle. If for no other reason, this is the political Apocalypse that indicates the desperate need for the stronger presence of one or more so-called "third" parties, yet at the same time, I wonder if such a change were to occur, if it wouldnít be too little, too late. Is this damage irreparable?... could such a treaty, as the now signed SPP agreement be legally broken? I donít see why not, after all, it wasnít legally signed in the first place. Meanwhile, for President Bush, an impeachment should be begun for this abominable constitutional atrocity, but I wouldnít hold my breath for that prospect....

Ironically, I am writing this column on July 2nd. I say ironically, because some historians say that the Declaration of Independence was actually written on July 2nd, not July 4th, as the date on which we currently celebrate the documentís signing. I would like to say that our beloved country, for whom countless have made the supreme sacrifice to create and preserve, is 230 years old today, but thanks to President Bush, our country actually is 228 years old, as it was killed roughly four months before itís 229th birthday....

Please, my fellow Americans, oops, excuse me, my fellow "Union" (big "U") members, donít let me at all disturb your usual pattern of otherwise harmonious daily life. By all means, keep playing your video games, fanatically obsessing over absolutely meaningless sporting competitions by which you vicariously live your otherwise empty lives, or ponder what kind of novel and astounding depravity you will see on the next episode of your even more meaningless, but favorite reality TV program. My sarcasm is not intended to be offensive, despite the fact that for those of you to whom it applies, I couldnít care less if it offends you, because while you were not the planted seed that caused this disaster, certainly you have been the fertile ground that nurtured itís growth, but instead, consider my tongue in cheek statements as an answer to the question you might already be asking, or will soon ask, as your chin drops, your lower lip drools, and your befuddled and gazed eyes sport that deer-in-the-headlights look, with utter astonishment, "How could this have ever happened?" Thatís how. Now you know....

As for me, when will I give up the fight?... Do you remember the old cigarette ads that used to say, "Iíd rather fight than switch"? My fellow Americans, we are now discussing a matter far more significant than choosing a brand of cigarettes, but given that same question, which will you do, fight, or switch?...

Read the complete article.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html.
In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.