THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Indicate U.S. far advanced in constructing
bureaucracy united with Mexico, Canada
Posted: September 26, 2006
1:00 p.m. Eastern
� 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Government documents released by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal the Bush administration is running a "shadow government" with Mexico and Canada in which the U.S. is crafting a broad range of policy in conjunction with its neighbors to the north and south, asserts WND columnist and author Jerome R. Corsi.
The documents, a total of about 1,000 pages, are among the first to be released to Corsi through his FOIA request to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, which describes itself as an initiative "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation."
"The documents clearly reveal that SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure," Corsi said.
<Where there seems to be adequate intellectual capacity, I am endeavoring to nudge them into both consciousness and reality.
I know and wish you great success. I do hate that word you
in both singular and plural so don't take it personal. I tend to use the plural all the time as in you can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink.
I understand that, sir. Unfortunately there are still way too many that do not. Where there seems to be adequate intellectual capacity, I am endeavoring to nudge them into both consciousness and reality.
I meant to write earlier that I noticed that you've again decided not to address the question I posed to you.
By the way, the definition I posted for the word "sedition" came from Merriam-Webster. Perhaps that is a sign that I'm not the one operating under a false assumption.
Whether or not our constitution is "self-contained" or not is hardly the issue here either. We ought rather to be discussing how we can get it adhered to instead. If the government does not operate under our Constitution, being bound by each nuance, it then operates illegally, a matter of fraud plainly. And I'd offer to you again that fraud vitiates everything. There is no "contract" in existence any longer and those that lead us are more accurately labeled: TYRANTS.
You know we still agree on many things. In fact so many that we ought to be more like allies and less like adversaries. As your understanding of things, particularly that of who really was behind the murders of those THREE THOUSAND AMERICANS on 11 September, we will draw yet closer ranks.
You must learn the difficult lesson that those that steal from you and abuse your rights otherwise have absolutely no compunction whatsoever about murdering you, too, if it suits their needs.
In order to swallow that story about arabs with box cutters one must also be willing to suspend the basic laws of physics and believe some other utterly remarkable, fairy tale like cases of happenstance for it to work. Fewer and fewer Americans still rely upon the false reality being offered by the manipulators. One day you will have the scales fall from your eyes as well.
If you really have designs on knowing the truth and with an open mind are willing to examine all that you can in order to arrive at it, then might I suggest that you invest but a little time in watching the video below. Once you do, you'll further understand why in my mind I feel certain that those that actually are behind these events must be opposed and removed.
Your advice is predicated upon some incorrect and likely false assumptions.
First and foremost, the entire legal system has become corrupted and any thought of justice, true justice has become absurd. This is not just based on observations but watching matters unfold in several venues where good men and women have tried to get justice and the system functions instead to maintain its fraudulent existence.
I also lack any faith in that which presents itself as Congress today for many of the same reasons cited above, but as you've already pointed out on several occasions there are simply too many men and women that have already violated their oaths to us, the American people, to uphold and defend our Constitution; the USA Patriot Acts, the Department of Homeland Security Act and a wide range of other measures proves that your suggestion in that regard is unworkable.
I've stated time and again that I love my country and in particular the idea that it was supposed to be as well as the end result we'd have today were our constitution to still be effectual. But, like a growing number of Americans are beginning to appreciate, the fraud is getting to be quite evident. And since fraud vitiates everything that it comes into contact with, the actions of this body are seemingly null and void under the present circumstances.
If rebellion is an implicit right as clearly stipulated in the notice of divorce prepared for King George III entitled the Declaration of Independence, why do you, one that has promoted themself as a staunch patriot, fear that possibility and fret over it as much as you do? One would begin to suspect that your feelings might be more that of a statist than you'd feel comfortable admitting. I'd call to your recollection that Jefferson said, "...God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion" [referring to Shay's rebellion in Massachusetts]. Or perhaps another quote from old Thomas that may be more appropriate, "The tree of liberty must from time to time be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots."
Moreover, if a sufficient number of Americans harbored similar thoughts why would their communications and contacts constitute some sort of crime in a truly free country? I ask that of you again because you've neglected to address my previous inquiry and have chosen instead to begin a diatribe of conflict as though the intelligent discussion of things and ideas without the abrasive rhetoric and comfort seeking labeling may be something that you find distasteful.