Idaho Lawmakers Want Out Of SPP

Posted on Monday, March 26 at 10:57 by jensonj
The "memorial," which is similar to a resolution, was written and adopted "to send the message to the Congress of the United States … that the First Regular Session of the Fifty-ninth Idaho Legislature … that the Congress of the United States, and particularly the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho, are hereby urged and petitioned to use all of their efforts to withdraw the United States from any further participation in the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and any other bilateral or multilateral activity which seeks to advance, authorize, fund or in any way promote the creation of any structure to accomplish any form of North American Union." The SPP, according to its own description, "was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing." While federal officials, up to and including the White House, say that the plan doesn't and won't infringe on U.S. sovereignty, because it is just a dialogue among the nations, documents uncovered by WND show otherwise. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez A State Department cable released to WND shows Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez has been pressing to implement major trilateral initiatives to help "capture the vision of North American integration." http://worldnetdaily.com:80/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54859

Note: http://worldnetdaily.co...

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by avatar Jacob
    Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:36 pm
    "Officials report that Idaho was one of 14 state legislatures where such resolutions have been introduced to oppose the SPP and North American Union. Only Idaho has completed the approval process, and in one other state, Utah, the Senate failed to vote on that state's encouragement to have the U.S. withdraw from the SPP.

    Other states where proposals are pending are Arizona (S.C.M. 1002), Illinois (H.J.R. 29), Georgia (S.R. 124), Missouri (S.C.R. 15 and H.C.R. 33), Montana (H.J.R. 25), Oklahoma (S.C.R. 10), Oregon (S.J.M. 5), South Carolina (S. 416 and H. 3185), South Dakota (S.C.R. 7), Tennessee (S.J.R. 88), Virginia (S.J.R. 442 and S.J.R. 387), and Washington (H.J.M. 4018 and S.J.M. 8004)."

    My questions:
    (1) Could Canadian provinces and territories also pass legislation to this affect?
    (2) If they could, would they?

  2. Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:21 pm
    I'm sure they could if they wanted to. Problem is you have that scumbag Stockwell Day fully involved in promoting the SPP/NAU agenda.

    Most of the MPs and their helpers that I have emailed about this still think it's some sort of a conspiracy and claim not to have heard about it. Local newspaper journalists who are supposed to be covering this as part of federal news are also in denial.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news