Milkhouse Mouse

Memo to all Members of Parliament , to all Canadian Senators, and to all media:

"Oh ye of timid heart who aspire to Chicken Little fame, I beseech thee-
read, learn, and quash your shame. Speak out. Redeem your name !!!!"

Connie Fogal, B.A.,B.Ed., M.A. LLB., Leader, Canadian Action Party/ Parti
action canadienne


Dear Connie, with your unique awareness of the real issues & your
position with the C.A.P. party; who could best bring the treasonous
behind our backs [Canadian] working groups mentioned in this article to
light?

[Note: DeWeese's article, linked above, follows below.--Moose]

Myths, Facts - Truth?

By Tom DeWeese
[]


“Conspiracy theories.” “Fringe nuts.” “Lies.” “Myths.” These are the words
being used by officials of the Bush Administration and others to brand
those who have reported on the activities of the Security and Prosperity
Partnership of North America (SPP), currently operating out of the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Opponents have charged the SPP will result in the
establishment of a North American Union, much on the same lines as the
European Union.

In response to its critics, the SPP has added a “SPP Myths Vs Facts”
section to its website at www.SPP.gov. According to the
“Myths Vs Facts” document the SPP is simply a “dialog” among the three
countries to “enhance prosperity.” It goes on to say the SPP is not an
agreement, nor is it a treaty. It says “no agreement was ever signed.”

The truth is, on March 23, 2005, President Bush met at his ranch in
Crawford, Texas with Vicente Fox and Paul Martin (then PM of Canada) in
what they called a Summit. The three heads of state then drove to Baylor
University in Waco, where they issued a press release announcing their
signing of an agreement to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership of
North America (SPP).

This year, on March 31, 2006, Bush. Fox and new Canadian PM, Stephen Harper
met in Cancun, Mexico. This time their press release celebrated what they
called the first anniversary of the SPP.

The use of the word “dialog” is a carefully selected euphemism designed to
make the SPP sound like an innocent discussion among friends. To admit that
it is anything more would force the government to provide Constitutional
justification for its actions.

Moreover, the SPP says it won’t change our court system or legislative
process and that it respects the sovereignty of each nation. And, says the
SPP Myths and Facts document, it strongly rejects the idea that it is
creating a European Union-like structure.

That defense is almost laughable in light of the massive activity-taking
place in the SPP office located in the Commerce Department.

First one must know that the European Union was also originally sold to the
nations on the European continent as simply a trade and security framework.
The idea, said proponents, was to create an economic structure to allow a
combined European economy to compete with the United States and other
economic powerhouses. Only a few years later nations were told they needed
a common currency to provide seamless trade. At the same time, the working
groups organizing the EU policy began to morph into what today has become a
European Union parliament, which now is working to create a means of
taxation, regulation of commerce and a court system.

Now, in offices buried in the bureaucratic structures of the United States,
Canada and Mexico, twenty “working groups” are hard at work writing policy
initiatives for the SPP, covering a wide range of issues including, the
manufacture and movement of goods across the borders of the three North
American nations: creating a common energy policy and common environmental
regulations over the three nations; regulating E-commerce and information
communications and technologies; establishing financial services, including
loan policy and foreign aid policy; overseeing business facilitation,
creating the rules under which businesses will operate in the three
nations; establishing food and agriculture policy; and overseeing
transportation and health policy.

These policy directives will infringe on every aspect of our lives. Can
anyone seriously accept the Administration’s explanation that nothing
really important is going on here? That this is only a friendly discussion
taking place? That nothing will change in the way our government operates?
If that were so, then why are we doing it? Why are so much time, money and
energy being taken up in an effort that means nothing? The answer, of
course, is that a lot is going on.

It’s no accident that the SPP is working out of the NAFTA office of the
Department of Commerce. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was
the precursor to the Security and Prosperity Partnership. According to
investigative journalist, Jerome Corsi, a key part of the SPP plan is to
expand the NAFTA tribunals into a North American Union court system.

Under Chapter 11 of the NAFTA Agreement, a tribunal conducts a behind
closed-doors “trial” to decide the cases dealing with how state and federal
laws may damage NAFTA business. If NAFTA investors believe state or federal
laws damage their NAFTA businesses, under the tribunal the investor may sue
the government and taxpayers will foot the bill. The NAFTA tribunal
decision trumps the U.S. courts, all the way to the Supreme Court. Yet, the
Bush Administration insists the SPP will have no effect on our court system.

The SPP says it is a myth that Congress is not involved or supportive of
its actions. The truth is, to date, there has been no legislation passed by
Congress to permit its actions. No taxpayer funds have been appropriated.
One “hearing” was held in Senator Richard Lugar’s Senate Foreign Relations
Committee. It was a friendly affair with friendly “dialog.” No tough
questions were asked. No one was held accountable for their actions.

Meanwhile, members of Congress are beginning to become aware of the SPP
activities at the Commerce Department. Representative Tom Tancredo
(R-Colo.) is demanding the Bush Administration fully disclose the
activities of the SPP, which he says, has no authorization from Congress.

Specifically, Tancredo wants to know the membership of the SPP working
groups. To date, no one knows who is involved, or is performing the work to
create the policies of the SPP. Geri Word, who heads the SPP office told
World Net Daily that the work has not been disclosed because “We did not
want to get the contact people of the working groups distracted by calls
from the public.” Yet the SPP denies it is working in secret.

Additional congressional reaction has come from Senator John Cornyn (R-TX).
He had introduced a bill, “The North American Investment Act” (S.3622).
Incredibly the bill contains near exact language from the book by Robert
Pastor entitled “Toward a North American Community.” Pastor’s book is
largely considered to be the blue print for the creation of the North
American Union. Much of the contents of the book later appeared in a report
from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) entitled “Building a North
American Community.” That report was issued just a week before the Summit
in Waco.

However, once these facts were demonstrated to Senator Cornyn, he
immediately took efforts to assure S.3622 would not be voted on in the
Senate. His spokesman stated that Senator Cornyn “is adamantly opposed to
any ‘North American Union’ being formed like the EU had been formed in
Europe.” Regardless of how the Administration spins it, there is no
congressional authorization for SPP actions or spending.

The SPP denies that it is planning to create a unique currency some have
called the “Amero.” However, on April 6, 2006, the SPP announced the
formation of the Financial Services Working Group. According to its own
news release, the Financial Group will focus on “enhancing processes for
addressing banking, securities, and insurance issues.” It goes on to say,
“U.S. financial regulatory agencies will play a critical role in the SPP.”

In truth, the SPP is being put into place incrementally. It will take years
before everything is in place. It took the European Union several years to
create the Euro. However, the guiding documents from Dr. Pastor’s book and
the CFR report both call for the creation of a North American currency. It
is obvious, if one dissects the double speak of the bureaucratic language
of the SPP, in order for it to reach its goal to “reduce the cost of
trade,” “combat counterfeiting,” and “facilitate trade” among three nations
trying to act as one, the drive for a single currency will not be questioned.

And finally, there is the issue of the NAFTA super highway. NAFTA was the
first step in creating a North American Union. It was sold as a means to
enhance trade among the North American nations. All were promised greater
exports, better jobs and better wages. In truth, NAFTA is an unmitigated
failure for all but a very few. The U.S. trade deficit has soared to almost
$1 trillion per year; The U.S. has lost some 1.5 million jobs and real
wages in both the U.S. and Mexico have fallen significantly. Yet, the
agenda is set and so our government presses on.

The latest objective is the NAFTA super highway on which construction is
planned to begin next year. It would bisect Texas from its border with
Mexico to Oklahoma. It will travel on to Kansas City where an “inland port”
is now in the final planning stages.

Plans call for a ten lane, limited access highway to parallel I-35 It would
have three lanes each way for passenger cars, two express lanes each way
for trucks, rail lines both ways for people and freight, plus a utility
corridor for oil and natural gas pipelines, electric towers, cables for
communications and telephone lines. The highway will require the taking of
more than 500,000 acres of private land and is estimated to displace a
million Americans from their property. Eminent Domain will be the tool of
choice for the massive land grab – now made easier by last year’s Supreme
Court ruling in the Kelo case.

The Kansas City Smart Port will be literally the first checkpoint on a
highway that will run all the way from Columbia through the Hartland of the
United States. Mexico will have a facility on the KC Smart Port site that
it now insists will be Mexican sovereign land.

To make the NAFTA super highway reality, the borders of the three nations
must disappear. Immigration will simply become “migration.” Border laws
cannot exist. “Harmonizing” of our societies is becoming the catch phrase.

The SPP says its purpose is to guarantee security and prosperity for the
three nations. The NAFTA model has already proven there will be no
prosperity. The NAFTA super highway is proof there can be no security as we
pave the way for more illegals to flood the nation, as truckloads of
illegal drugs fly up the highway and terrorists just hitch a ride.

The United States is the most unique nation on earth. We were created out
of a radical idea that free people, with their freedoms protected by the
government would be happy and prosper beyond imagination. The idea worked.
Now, the Bush Administration is ignoring this historic fact to “harmonize”
us with Canada and especially Mexico, which is not a free country; has no
property and has just proved its unworthiness of conducting free and fair
elections. At risk are our culture, our wealth, and the once proud American
way of life.

Americans must now understand that the battle to stop the North American
Union is the last stand for a free and independent United States. That’s
not a “Myth” it’s the truth.

© Tom DeWeese, 2006

American Policy Center
50-A South Third St., Suite 2
Warrenton, VA 20186
(540) 341-8911

# posted by Moose Kateer : 4:31 AM

Sieg Heil, ya'll:

Ah, yes; more academic censorship coming out of Utah, I see. Someday I'll have to tell you of my fatal brushes with academic "freedom" in that right-to-work state.

Nazi Germany's goose-stepping brown shirts were ronown for their suppression of professors, too.

All of which reminds me of a famous film quote: "I love the smell of fascism in the morning."

Well, that's actually a paraphrase of the infamous war-mongering lament of the US Army Colonel "Air Cav" character played by Robert Duval in the film Apocalypse Now. Duval said "napalm" instead of "fascism. We’re talking about the same thing, really.

The bright side of this sad affair is that the American Association of University Professors (www.aaup.org) is challenging Jones's sanction by Brigham Young University for out-of-the-classroom statements about 9/11. If the disciplinary ruling stands, similar censure in higher education is inevitable.

Kudos to the brave AAUP souls in Washington, D.C. for backing the tenured physics professor.

Read details below about Jones's censure provided by Salt Lake City's CBS affiliate KUTV. Below that, I also provide a link to a related story from the Deseret News, the unofficial newspaper of choice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints members. What's interesting about that article is its headline calling Jones a "'9/11 truth' professor."

Hmmm......What does D'News staff writer Tad Walch and his editor know the White House doesn't want you to know? Utah's Republican majority will have to run those commie-loving journalists out of the state for coddling a “liberal” who obscenely debates in public with logic, reason and the scientific method.

Also a devout LDS church-goer, Dr Jones has produced research--as have other members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (www.st911.org)-- documenting the World Trade Center collapsed from “preset explosives.” So he and other ST9/11 scholars are creating some serious credibility issues for the White House and 9/11 Commission's Official 9/11 Story.

An August 2 Scripps-Howard/Ohio University poll, for one, found 36% of Americans believe it was 'very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop" them to justify a war in Iraq.

Ivy Tower Arm-Twisting

Of course, American news TV, the primary news source for two of every three Americans, did not devote much air time to that rather impressive figure. Nor did you hear Fox News network's Bill O'Reilly provide his unique blend of Peabody Award-winning commentary.

Jones’s sanction is the second time BYU, the conservative LDS Church's flagship university based in the most solid Republican state in America, has yielded to White House pressure to force Jones to hold his tongue.

Having spent some time at federally-funded Level I research institutions and closely watched the Bush White House operate for over five years, I wager that significant funding is contingent on university administrators silencing the radical critic.

You don't think that would happen, 'eh? Well, it’s happened before. Here's where Van D. Romero enters the story.

Dr. Romero (left, 2001) is a professor and vice-president of research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, which "assists in forensic investigations into terrorist attacks, often by setting off similar explosions and studying the effects." Romero himself "studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures." An undisclosed amount of Pentagon funding keeps NMIMT faculty and administrators very happy.

On 11 September 2001, Romero just happened to be on a DC subway headed to a meeting at the Pentagon to discuss more funding for his school when a plane hit the World Trade Center.

According to the Albuquerque Journal's 9/11/01 interview with Romero after the attacks, the professor, "reported that he had studied the videos of the WTC collapse and concluded that the towers were most likely destroyed by carefully placed demolition charges. He told the 'Journal': 'It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that'."

Mailing Address:
Dr. Van D. Romero
R&ED Office - Brown Hall
New Mexico Tech
801 Leroy Place
Socorro, NM 87801

E-mail: vromero@admin.nmt.edu
Phone: 505-835-5646
Fax: 505-835-6934

==

Source: Salt Lake City's CBS affiliate KUTV

Association Of Professors Defending BYU's Jones

PROVO A national organization is coming out in support of a BYU professor placed on paid leave for his controversial theories about the September 11th attacks.

The American Association of University Professors says the school should not have placed the physics professor on leave for statements made outside of the classroom.

Steven Jones has published a paper suggesting the World Trade Center towers fell because of pre-set demolition charges -- not just because they were struck by planes.

General secretary for the AAUP Roger Bowen says academic freedom also protects statements professors make outside the classroom.

Jones says he only discussed his theory in class after students asked him questions about it.

A spokeswoman for Brigham Young University says what Jones said in the classroom and how careful he was about disclaimers are subjects of the university review.

===

Related story for my Utah posse: "BYU places '9/11 truth' professor on paid leave"

# posted by Moose Kateer : 9:02 PM