THE INGLORIOUS REVOLUTION OF 2010

For The Tribune Papers

By Mike Scruggs

Part 3 of a Series

Few Americans are familiar with the “Glorious Revolution” of 1688-9 in England. Some may recall that it resulted in replacing Catholic King James II and the Stewart dynasty with the Dutch Protestant monarchs William and Mary of Orange. The profound historical significance of the Glorious Revolution and its impact on the later American Revolution is about much more than the religious denomination of monarchs and dynasties or the merits of James II, William III, or Mary II as rulers. It was about the triumph of representative government and the “Rights of Englishmen” over absolutism. Before the English would allow William and Mary to be crowned on April 11, 1689, they bound them to a Declaration of Rights that established a list of powers reserved to Parliament and laws protecting British subjects from arbitrary rule.

The principles of the Glorious Revolution later found their way into the American Declaration of Independence in 1776, the U.S. Constitution in 1789, and especially the Bill of Rights in 1791. Many people are surprised to find that the U.S. Second Amendment, guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms, was foreshadowed by one of the Parliamentary Grievances against James II that they forbade William III to continue. Americans like to think of our Bill of Rights as original, but all of them are to various degrees descendents of the Declaration of Rights that limited the powers of British monarchs. In many respects the 1689 Declaration of Rights re-established or extended principles of the Magna Carta Libertatum (Great Charter of Freedoms) of 1215, by which the leading English barons forced a limitation to the powers of King John.

The Fathers of the American Revolution felt that both King George III and the British Parliament were denying the American Colonists the rights given to all British subjects in the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights resulting from the Glorious Revolution. We know the rest of the story. Or do we?

The enemies of representative government, the constitutional rights of its citizens, and the self-determination of free peoples are not limited to despotic monarchs and socialist ideologues. Freedom is as often lost by subterfuge as by armed invasion or overthrow by violent mobs and terrorists. It is as often lost slowly by degrees as by sudden revolutionary events. It is as often lost by indifference and complacency as by outright surrender. It is as often usurped by paternalistic elites as by militarists. It is often lost by a failure to discern the ultimate consequences of political actions and policies. It is often lost by not speaking up or not acting in time against “change” which would destroy essential liberties and shatter great republics.

On March 23, 2005, after a summit meeting at the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas, President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin held a press conference in Waco announcing the signing of an agreement to create a common economic and security domain in North America. This was called the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). This agreement did not appear out of the blue. A number of significant events preceded it. Fox had proposed a common North American market in 2000. This was followed in November of 2000 by the publication of Robert Pastor’s book Toward a North American Community. In November 2004, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) formed The Independent Task Force on the Future of North America. This task force was charged with developing a “road map” to advance North American security and the economic well-being of the citizens of all three countries.

On May 17, 2005, the CFR appointed Task Force on the Future of North America released its report, entitled “Creating a North American Community.” This 59-page document outlines a five-year plan for the “establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community” with a common “outer security perimeter” to achieve “the freer flow of people within North America.” So far at least 20 “working groups” of corporate and government officials have been formed to accomplish CFR/SPP goals. In June 2005, then Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Richard Lugar held a friendly committee hearing featuring a presentation by CFR Task Force member and celebrated North American unity advocate, Robert Pastor. This included a briefing on plans for a “continental perimeter,” an integrated continental plan for transportation and infrastructure including new North American super highways and high speed rail corridors. Also in June, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff attended an SPP meeting in Canada to facilitate the flow of traffic across U.S. borders. President Bush praised the meeting as “an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership.”

It is important to note that Congress has never passed any legislation authorizing the activities of the SPP or providing any funding for it. Alarmingly, Congress has no oversight of what the SPP is doing. Many members of Congress deny knowing anything about it, although some have begun to raise some protests. Congressman Tom Tancredo (R, CO) demanded that the Bush Administration fully disclose the activities of the SPP working groups and the names of its members. After more than a year, no response has been received. Yet the SPP continues to move forward and even has an office in the Commerce Department. Geri Word, head of that office, denied that the SPP was working in secrecy, but told World Net Daily reporters 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.”

In July 2005, the White House announced its backing of a coalition called Americans for Border and Economic Security, organized by former Republican National Chairman Ed Gillespie. The purpose of this coalition was to conduct a political public relations campaign to sell a guest-worker program and massive amnesties wrapped in a few border security promises to the American people. Each corporate coalition member put up $50,000 to $250,000 to support this propaganda effort. This coincided with Bush’s demand that Congress pass the McCain-Kennedy amnesty-guest-worker bill introduced in the Senate as “immigration reform.” McCain has been a member of CFR since 1987.

One of the most alarming aspects of the CFR/SPP blue print for the future of North America is that to facilitate the free flow of goods and people within the continental limits there will be no effective border between the U.S. and Mexico or the U.S. and Canada. There will be no such thing as an “illegal” immigrant from Mexico. Any Mexican or Canadian will be free to live, work, and travel wherever he pleases. Doubtless, this is the reason why Bush has not enforced our immigration laws and has consistently resisted any effective border security between the U.S. and Mexico. McCain effectively blocked Senate passage of any border security legislation unless it was part of a “comprehensive” bill that included huge amnesty-guest-worker provisions.

The NAFTA super highway plan for a ten lane, limited access, toll highway from Mexican ports into the U.S. and parallel to I-35 to Kansas City will speed giant sealed containers of cheap goods from China into the consumer heartland of America. Only electronic inspection of the containers will be made. Efforts are already underway to take 584,000 acres of private land by Eminent Domain. The toll rights will be owned by a Spanish company. The Kansas City Customs Port will be Mexican soil. The Kansas City Council has already voted a $2.5 million loan to build the Mexican customs facility.

The European Union was created in gradual steps by “dialogue groups” operating outside public view. Step by step stealth was necessary not to alarm its member states that their sovereignty was at risk. Yet the European Union now operates as a supra-government in Europe even though French and Dutch voters soundly rejected its constitution. European Union Courts now regularly overrule the laws and courts of its member countries. This is apparently the same plan the SPP will use to create a North American Union replacing the former United States, Mexico, and Canada. But it is not necessary for a full-fledged North American Union to emerge. The progress of the SPP promises a considerable reduction of our liberties, national sovereignty, and identity.

By 2010 the SPP hopes to introduce the new North American currency, the Amero. The value of the dollar has been so badly eroded in value by our trade policies and treaties like NAFTA and CAFTA that the Amero may seem like a monetary rescue.

Of course, there is also a plan for SPP Courts. Whether or not we freely call the SPP the North American Union by then, supra-national courts which override U.S. courts, State Courts, and even the U.S. Constitution will mean the new and Inglorious Revolution is well on its way to destroying the last vestiges of a once great Republic.

The Bush Administration has established a “Myths and Facts” section on its SPP website in an attempt to counter or discredit the arguments of those now exposing the SPP. The site states:

“The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.”

This statement is, however, contradicted by former Canadian Prime Minister Martin, who stated that all three heads of states did sign the SPP agreement on March 23, 2005. Bush also denies any connection to the CFR report, but the language of the CFR reports, SPP documents, and sections of Robert Parson’s book are almost identical.

Considerable information on the SPP can be found on the websites of the American Policy Center, World Net Daily (Jerome Corsi reports), Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, and Human Events.

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”—Thomas Jefferson

Word count 1659