Saturday, June 30, 2007



The false prophet is mentioned as such, 3 times in the book of Revelation.

Rev 16:13 (KJV) "And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet."

Rev 19:20 (KJV) "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone."

Rev 20:10 (KJV) "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

The beast, as I have shown previously, is the Papacy or Roman Catholic Church. Revelation 19:20 is the key to identifying who the false prophet is. Here it associates the false prophet with miracles performed for the beast. This is a link to Rev 13:11-14 where the same miracles are performed by a second beast with two horns like a lamb, that speaks like a dragon. So this second lamb-like beast is also the false prophet.

Now to identify just who the false prophet is, we need to look at Rev 13:10, which will give us a time hack-

Rev 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

This is a reference to Pope Pius VI being held captive in jail by Napoleon in 1798 where he died as a prisoner. The Roman Catholic Church was broken as a political power at that time. This is the head wound to the first beast or Papacy spoken of in Rev 13:3-

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

This head wound to the political power of the Papacy was healed in 1929 when Italy's Benito Mussolini signed the Lateran Treaty with the Pope, establishing the Vatican as a City State with full diplomatic rights. Newspapers at the time proclaimed the "wound" to the Vatican and the papacy to be healed.

It is immediately following the time hack of Rev 13:10, which we have established as 1798, that a second beast, lamb-like in appearence, comes to power on the world scene-

Rev 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
Rev 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

The second beast comes up as a lamb (a nation that professes to be Christian) from the land. Note the first beast came from the sea. The sea represents a multitude of people (Rev 17:15). So the first beast arises from a densely populated area, Europe. The second beast, however arises from a sparsely populated area, since it arises from the land and not the sea.

The beast from the sea had crowns on it's horns, a symbol of kingly absolute authority, but the second lamb-like beast has no crowns- it is a democracy!

This exactly describes the United States arriving on the world scene as a world power to reckon with in the early 1800's. It began as a democratic Christian nation, and rose to power on the world scene immediately following the apparent demise of Roman Catholic Church in 1798.

Rev 13:12 And he (the lamb-like beast) exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
Rev 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

Verse 12 is saying that the United States will combine Church and State and strictly enforce apostate Catholic religious doctrine, just like the Roman Catholic church did in the middle ages! Yes! The current effort on the part of evangelical Christians to "take back America" will succeed!

In Verse 13 it shows us that this revival of Church and State in the U.S. will be accompanied by great wonders (miracles). The fire coming down from heaven is a deceiving miracle, a false wonder, that may well refer to a counterfeit outpouring of the Holy Spirit! Already today a false manifestation of tongues, holy laughter etc. is sweeping churches in North America!

In verse 14 the lamb-like beast (the United States) promotes an image to the first beast (the Roman Catholic Church). When it says "an image to the (first) beast", it means that the apostate Protestant movement in the United States will encourage the establishment of Church/State power, and legislate it's religious agenda on everyone. It will be the mirror "image" of the satanic practices, policies and persecutions of the Roman Catholic Church of the Middle Ages.

So using false miracles as proof of it's authority, the apostate Protestant church in the United States will take control of the government and pass religious legislation to enforce it's agenda, and it will promote false Catholic doctrines. What false doctrines, you might ask?

1. When you are dead, you are not dead. Your conscious self or spirit waits at some bus stop (purgatory) between here and heaven. Here you are free to listen to the prayers of the living and forward these petitions for grace to Mary or Jesus.
- They cannot accept that the wages of sin is death. Death includes the loss of any consciousness of the mind. Those who are dead hear nothing and can do nothing, for themselves or anyone else.

2. Salvation is obtained through ministers or priests of the church. They have a bank account with Jesus and can dispense grace or forgiveness to those they favor. Conversely, they can cut off your source of forgiveness if you do not accept their unscriptural traditions.
- No church can dispense or withhold forgiveness, forgiveness is yours from God through faith.

3. They worship on a day chosen by a pagan emperor of Rome, Sunday, although there is absolutely NO scriptural evidence that Jesus commanded such a change in the Ten Commandments.
- The Sabbath is Saturday without question. It is a memorial to Jesus the Creator, who worked six days and rested on the seventh. To worship on any other day is to reject the Creator, reject God, reject Jesus. Whom do you worship if you reject the 10 commandments of God?

4. We are saved by good works. God is keeping track of everything we do and the sum total of our good works better add up to a bigger number than our sins. Even "good" people who have rejected Jesus, will by this logic, have a chance so long as their good works total is high enough.
- Your works amount to nothing without faith. By the same token, faith without works is a dead faith.

So the False Prophet is in fact, apostate Protestantism based in the United States. How do you recognize apostate religion? Try the following additional indicators, note that they are accompanied by a serious lack of meaningful scriptural study.

A. Theology that preaches that God is a loving God and most people will be saved if only they will just be good people. You will see a lot of country and western style gospel singers, a lot of praising Jesus and binding Satan, collecting the tithe, but precious little scripture study, and what little there is, is very shallow.

B. The happy Christian, it is O.K. to be rich, send us your seed money today and you will get it back 1000 fold, kind of religion. A primary focus on God rewarding his followers with earthly riches. If only you will send in your love gift, God will reward you financially. And by the way, we have some neat things to send you if you contribute today- (mostly tapes, books, plaques, glasses, sculptures, lifetime memberships, get your name engraved on the churches top givers plaque, etc.) You could almost call it the Christian Shopping Network. Did Jesus sell *anything* during His ministry? No- what He offered was not for sale, it was FREE!

C. A focus on miracle healing of the sick, prayer requests and again endless pleas for donations, just to stay on the air.

D. A mission of building a TV or Radio station empire, from which there is little or no bible study, just more pleas for cash during long telethons, and praising Jesus. Usually broadcast from multi-million dollar lavish studios with lots of expensive decorations.

E. A primary reliance on speaking in tongues or other manifestations of the Holy Spirit to prove just how blessed of God they are. The fact that there is complete chaos and/or absolutely no interpreting of what is said in tongues, so that it can be checked against scripture, should be a warning sign-

1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

F. Study of early Christian documents that "shed light" on what you should really know about Christianity. The Didache and the books of the Apocrypha, are examples. Limit yourself to the Bible for what you should believe. Everything you need for salvation is in it. Nothing needs to be added.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

G. Strong political activism to enforce "Christian standards" on the ungodly. I would remind you that Jesus did not endorse political candidates, protest government policy, run for office, or advocate political force. Jesus does not force anyone to do anything. We all have free choice to make our own decisions. The battle of evangelism will not be won from public office or the courtroom, but with the true word of God, scripture.

Some would consider such criticism to be hurtful, divisive, and lacking in Christian spirit. I would remind you I am describing the False Prophet to you. Following him and his superficial form of religion will result in the lake of fire! Many will fall into this enticing trap. Here is proof:

Mat 7:21 (KJV) "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."
Mat 7:22 (KJV) "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?"

Mat 25:11 (KJV) "Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us."

Luke 6:46 (KJV) "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"

Luke 13:25 (KJV) "When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:"

These verses say that many, at the time of judgment, will call on Jesus name. They will claim to know him, claim to have performed miracles in his name, claim to have prophesied his coming, claim to have done many wonderful things in his name, and Jesus will reject them! Why? Because they were false prophets who did not know the truths of the Bible and did not follow his commandments. They led people astray and taught only what suited them and their pursuit of earthly gain and riches. God rejects them and their followers. Their numbers are many as Mat 7:22 states. Many think they are saved and are deceived!

1 John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1 John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

Read all the verses quoted in their full context. Study them. The Bible has what you need to know. If you seek only the truth, and admit that there is nothing you can do to save yourself, and are willing to follow the truth anywhere it leads, you will open yourself to the Holy Spirit. He will guide you to know the truth, the way, and the light from scripture.



The I.R.S. and The Church

1) Now the I.R.S. was more subtil than any organization which the Lord God allowed to be established. And it said unto the Church, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not receive subsidies from every thing which God allowed to be established.
2) And the Church said unto the I.R.S., We may receive the tithes and offerings of every member of the Church to Meet our needs:
3) But of the 501(c)3 tax exempt status which is from the I.R.S., God hath said, Ye shall not receive subsidies from it, neither shall ye incorporate, lest ye die:
4) And the I.R.S. said unto the Church, Ye shall not surely die:
5) For God doth know that in the day ye receive your Corporate status, that artificial life shall be breathed into your Church by the State, and your Pastors shall be as smart as God knowing “Public Policy” better than the Word of God.
6) And when the Church saw that the I.R.S. was able to subsidize it’s pet projects, and that it was the politically correct thing to do, and that it gained a certain amount of respectability from the world, the Church took the subsidies, and gave the benefits also to her Pastor with her; and he did compromise.
7) And the eyes of them both were opened, and they realized that they were powerless spiritually, and they made excuses, and covered up their sin:
8) And they heard the Word of the Lord God convicting them in a real Church: And they tried to hide themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the real Churches and men of God in the world.
9) And the Lord God called unto the Pastor, and said unto him, Where art thou?
10) And he said, I heard your Word preached in a real Church, and I was afraid, because I was powerless spiritually; and I hid myself.
11) And he said, Who told thee that thou was powerless spiritually? Hast thou received subsidies from the I.R.S., whereof I commanded they that thou shouldest not receive?
12) And the Pastor said, The Church whom thou gavest me to Pastor, she gave me benefits, and I did take them.
13) And the Lord God said unto the Church, What is this that thou hast done? And the Church said, The I.R.S. tempted us, and we voted to receive their subsidies.
14) And the Lord God said unto the I.R.S., Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all institutions, and above every organization in the world; you are lower than a snakes belly, and shall be cursed every day of your existence.
15) And I will put division between thee and the true Church, and between your Corporate Churches and Hers: they shall win in the end, and yours shall persecute Hers until the rapture.
16) Unto the Corporate Church he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy future ministries, and thy desire shall be to the Chairman of the Trustee board, and he or she shall rule your Corporate Church with a Constitution given to it by the State.
17) Any unto the Pastor he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of the Corporate Church, and have received your Tax Exempt Status from the I.R.S., of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not receive subsidies of the I.R.S.: cursed is your Corporate Church because of you; in sorrow shalt thou receive of it’s subsidies all the days of thy life;
18) Divisions also and stife shall Corporate Status bring to thee; and you shall submit to the I.R.S. because of the subsidies you receive from it:
19) In the days preceding your business meetings shall thou study thy Constitution, till thou return unto the true Church; for out of it did you come: for it is a Christian you claim to be, and unto my Church only should you return.
20) And the pastor called his Corporation, “First Baptist Church, Inc.” because it was the founder of all future Corporate Churches.
21) Unto the pastor also and to his Corporate Church did the Lord God allow to be established the Christian Law Association, to convince Churches that it is better to obey the “Public Policy” that it is to obey the Word of God.
22) And the Lord God said, Behold, the Pastor thinks he is smarter than us, to know whit is good for him and what is not: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take over an unregistered Church, and compromise it, and it remains a Corporation forever:
23) And God sent the Pastor forth from the true Churches, to preside over his Corporate one which he established.
24) So he drove out the Pastor; and he placed at the pulpit of the real Church a man of God, with a King James Bible, to keep Jesus Christ as the Head of His Church.

Pastor Jim Phillips
Remnant Independent Baptist Church
Assembles at:
131 S. Springfield Street
In St. Paris Ohio 17 miles east of I-75 at Piqua off Rt. 36

Our mailing address is
2934 Bahia Dr. Springfield, Ohio 45503
937-342-0572 Home Office Phone

* Disclaimer notice: The writer of this article in no way supports the changing of God’s word as do all of the Modern translators of the Bible today. The sold intent of this article is to take a Scripture passage and apply it to a modern day predicament and to make the scripture relevant to the issue.

I do not pretend to speak for God on this issue, but I do not believe that God would allow His Church to be dictated to by I.R.S. or the State as to its manner of Government, or as to the content of the messages that are preached from it’s pulpit.

* The writer of this article is in no way against the paying of any lawful taxes due to the I.R.S.



Pope OKs opening of St. Paul's tomb
Investigators to remove plug from stone coffin, insert probe

Posted: June 30, 2007
4:45 a.m. Eastern

Basilica in Rome where Vatican says it found remains of St. Paul

© 2007

Basilica in Rome where Vatican says it found remains of St. Paul
Eighteen months after the sarcophagus believed to have once contained the remains of St. Paul the apostle was positively identified by Vatican archaeologists, Pope Benedict XVI has given his approval to plans by investigators to examine the interior of the ancient stone coffin with an optical probe, according to a German Catholic paper.

As WND reported in 2005, the sarcophagus was discovered during excavations in 2002 and 2003 around the basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls in south Rome.

"The tomb that we discovered is the one that the popes and the Emperor Theodosius [A.D. 379-395] saved and presented to the whole world as being the tomb of the apostle," said Giorgio Filippi, a specialist with the Vatican Museums.

The excavation was conducted after the administrator of St. Paul's basilica, Archbishop Francesco Gioia, received inquiries about the location of the apostle's tomb from thousands of pilgrims visiting during the Jubilee Year of 2000.

Over the centuries, the basilica grew over the small church built at the burial site early in the 4th century. While the authenticity of the site – or at least, the authenticity conferred by the actions of Theodosius – was not in doubt, repeated enlargements and rebuildings, as well as a fire in 1823, meant the exact location of the sarcophagus was lost for many years.

"There has been no doubt for the past 20 centuries that the tomb is there. It was variously visible and not visible in times past and then it was covered up. We made an opening (in the basilica floor) to make it visible at least in part," Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, archpriest of the basilica, told Reuters last year.

An initial survey of the basilica enabled archaeologists to reconstruct the fourth century building's original shape.

The Vatican team found the sarcophagus during a second excavation under the basilica's main altar.

Under the altar, a marble plaque is visible, dating to the 4th century, bearing the inscription "Apostle Paul, martyr."

Surprisingly, said Filippi, "nobody ever thought to look behind that plaque," where the Vatican team found the sarcophagus.

"We tried to X-ray it to see what was inside but the stone was too thick," said Montezemolo.

Since the rediscovery of the tomb, measuring approximately eight feet long, four feet wide and 3 feet high, archaeologists have cleared away centuries of debris and plaster that surrounded the site. According to, investigators have been given permission to remove a plug with which the coffin has been sealed so an endoscopic probe can be inserted and images of the contents captured.

"Absolute proof that it holds St. Paul's bones is impossible," Leonard Rutgers, an archaeologist at the University of Utrecht who visited the excavation, told Archaeology magazine in April.

St. Paul's remains were removed from the original burial site in A.D. 258, according to documentary evidence, reburied in another part of Rome, and then moved back to the site of the basilica when it was built over the original church in the late fourth century.

"So they were schlepping these bones around a lot," says Rutgers. "It's hard to say if the remains in the sarcophagus itself belong to the saint. But it is still a significant late-fourth-century burial."

The Bible does not state how Paul died. Many scholars believe he was beheaded in Rome in about A.D. 64 during the reign of Roman Emperor Nero. The "apostle to the gentiles," as he described himself, was the most prolific of all the New Testament writers.

Friday, June 29, 2007



I: Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

II:Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy GOD am a jealous GOD, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

III: Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy GOD in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who taketh his name in vain.

IV: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day [Saturday] is the Sabbath of the LORD thy GOD: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor they stranger that is within they gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day [Saturday]: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.

V: Honor they father and they mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy GOD giveth thee.

VI: Thou shalt not kill.

VII: Thou shalt not commit adultery.

VIII: Thou shalt not steal.

IX: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

X: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s. Exodus 20:3-17.

God’s 10 Commandments As Found in the New Testament:

I: Matthew 4:10

II: 1 John 5:21

III: 1 Timothy 6:1

IV: Mark 2:27, 28

V: Ephesians 6:1, 2

VI: James 2:11

VII: Mark 10:19

VIII: Matthew 19:18

IX: Romans 13:9

X: Romans 7:1, 7

Scripture Backing That God Does Not Change:

“My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” Psalms 89:34.

“For I am the LORD, I change not...” Malachi 3:6.

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the ingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:17-19.

“...For thou blessest, O LORD, and it shall be blessed forever.” 1 Chronicles 17:27.

“All thy commandments are truth.” Psalms 119:151.

“All thy law is truth.” Psalms 119:142.

“For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.” Psalms 100:5.

“All his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.” Psalms 111:7, 8.

“And this is love, that we walk after his commendments. This is the commandment, that, as ye have heard from the beginning [see Exodus 20:8-11], ye should walk in it.” 2 John 1:6.

“He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” 1 John 2:4.



“You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” -James Cardinal Gibbons, The faith of Our Fathers (1917 ed.), pp. 72, 73.

Ques. -How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
Ans. -By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church.” -Henry Tuberville, An Abridgement of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation) p. 58 (same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. By Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.] p. 67).

Ques. -Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to insitute festivals of precept?
Ans. -Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her, -she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptual authority.” -Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism (3rd ed.), p. 174.

"The Catholic Church, virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday.” -The Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893.

“If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday.” -John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academics, vol.1 (1936 ed.), p. 51. Quoted by permission of Benziger Brothers, Inc., proprietors of the copyright.

“It was the Holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday to Sunday, the first day of the week. And it not only compelled all to keep Sunday, but at the Council of Laodicea, A.D. 364, anathematized those who kept the Sabbath and urged all persons to labor on the seventh day under penalty of anathema.
“Which church does the whole civilized world obey? Protestants call us every horrible name they can think of--anti-Christ, the scarlet-colored beast, Babylon, ect., and at the same time profess great reverence for the Bible, and yet by solemn act of keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the power of the Catholic Church.
“The Bible says: ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.’ but the Catholic Church says, ‘No, keep the first day of the week,’ and the whole world bows in obedience.” -Father T. Enright, Roman Catholic Priest, Kansas City, Mo.

(All of the above quotations are from Catholic authors and/or published by Catholic publishing houses.)


“And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh, but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day....The reasons why we keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, not because the Bible, but because the church, has enjoined it.” -Isaac Williams (Anglican), Plain Sermons on the Catechism, vol.1, pp.334, 336.

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox (Baptist): “There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but the Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will, however, be readily said, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the Seventh to the First day of the week....Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not.” -Paper read Aug. 20, 1893, at a Baptist ministers’ meeting at Saratoga, New York.

Dr. R. W. Dale (British Congregationalist): “It is quite clear that, however rigidly or devoted we may spend Sunday, we are not keeping the Sabbath....The sabbath was founded on a specific, Divine command. We can plead no such command for the obligation to observe Sunday....There is not a single sentence in the New Testament to suggest that we incur any penalty by violating the supposed sanctity of Sunday.” -The Ten Commandments, pp.127-129.

“We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian Church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christians of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both.” -The Sunday Problem (1923 ed.), a study book of the United Lutheran Church, p. 36.

“The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect; far from them, and from the early apostolic church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday.” -The History of the Christian Religion and Church, Dr. Augustus Neander p. 186.

Methodist Episcopal Theological Compend, by Amos Binney: “It is true there is no positive command for infant baptism....Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week.” -Pages 180, 181.

On what authority have Protestants observed Sunday? Plainly on the authority of the very Catholic Church which they abandoned.
“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: FearGod, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.” Ecclesiastes 12:13.


Note: Sidebar Issue: Highlighted and Boldened the Second Commandment because some churches "worship" Idols or Icons, and yet, claim to be the Church of God;
When YWH (Am a jelaous God) Jehovah precisely forbade it. Blogmaster


Toward a North American Union

By: Patrick Wood
Editor, The August Review

Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an
astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada
simultaneously further diminish U.S.
Accordingly, the internal
authority of the state supersedes that of all other bodies.Sovereignty
. Have our political elites gone mad?

Lou Dobbs on
Lou Dobbs Tonight, June 9, 2005


The global elite, through the direct
operations of President George Bush and his Administration, are creating a
American Union that will combine Canada, Mexico and the U.S. into a
called the North American Union (
North American Union - the
integration of Mexico,
Canada and the U.S. into a single economic and
political union, similar to the
European Union.(NAU
). The NAU is roughly patterned after the European Union (EU). There is
no political or economic mandate for creating the NAU, and unofficial polls
of a
cross-section of Americans indicate that they are overwhelmingly
against this
end-run around national sovereignty.

To answer Lou Dobbs, "No, the political
elites have not gone mad", they just want you to think that they

The reality over appearance is easily
cleared up with a proper historical perspective of the last 35 years of
political and economic manipulation by the same elite who now bring us the

This paper will explore this history in
order to give the reader a complete picture of the NAU, how it is made
who are the instigators of it, and where it is headed.

It is important to first understand that
the impending birth of the NAU is a gestation of the Executive Branch of the
U.S. government, not the Congress. This is the topic of the first
discussion below.

The next topic will examine the global
elite's strategy of subverting the power to negotiate trade treaties and
international law with foreign countries from the Congress to the President.
Without this power,
NAFTA and the NAU would never have been possible.

After this, we will show that the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is the immediate genetic and necessary
ancestor of the NAU.

Lastly, throughout this report the NAU
perpetrators and their tactics will be brought into the limelight so as to
blame where it properly belongs. The reader will be struck with the
fact that
the same people are at the center of each of these

The Best Government that Money
Can Buy

Modern day globalization was launched
with the creation of the
Trilateral Commission in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Its
membership consisted of just over 300 powerful elitists from North America,
Europe and Japan. The clearly stated goal of the Trilateral Commission was
foster a "New International Economic Order" that would supplant the
economic order.

In spite of its non-political rhetoric,
The Trilateral Commission nonetheless established a headlock on the
Branch of the U.S. government with the election of James Earl
Carter in 1976.
Hand-picked as a presidential candidate by Brzezinski,
Carter was personally
tutored in globalist philosophy and foreign policy by
Brzezinski himself.
Subsequently, when Carter was sworn in as President, he
appointed no less than
one-third of the U.S. members of the Commission to
his Cabinet and other
high-level posts in his Administration. Such was the
genesis of the Trilateral
Commission's domination of the Executive Branch
that continues to the present

With the election of Ronald Reagan in
1980, Trilateral Commission member George H.W. Bush was introduced to the
House as vice-president. Through Bush's influence, Reagan continued to
key appointments from the ranks of the Trilateral Commission.

In 1988, George H.W. Bush began his
four-year term as President. He was followed by fellow Trilateral Commission
member William Jefferson Clinton, who served for 8 years as President and
appointed fourteen fellow Trilateral members to his Administration.

The election of George W. Bush in 2000
should be no surprise. Although Bush was not a member of the Trilateral
Commission, his vice-president Dick Cheney is. In addition, Dick
Cheney's wife, Lynne, is also a member of the Commission in her own

The Hegemony of the Trilateral Commission over the Executive Branch of the U.S.
government is unmistakable. Critics argue that this scenario is merely
circumstantial, that the most qualified political "talent" quite naturally
to belong to groups like the Trilateral Commission in the first place.
examination, such explanations are quite hollow.

Why would the Trilateral Commission seek
to dominate the Executive Branch? Quite simply - Power! That is, power to
things done directly which would have been impossible to accomplish
through the
only moderately successful lobbying efforts of the past; power
to use the
government as a bully platform to modify political behavior
throughout the

Of course, the obvious corollary to this
hegemony is that the influence and impact of the citizenry is virtually

Modern Day "World Order"

After its founding in 1973, Trilateral
Commission members wasted no time in launching their globalist strategy.
what was that strategy?

Richard Gardner was an original member
of the Trilateral Commission, and one of the prominent architects of the New
International Economic Order. In 1974, his article "The Hard Road to World
Order" appeared in Foreign Affairs magazine, published by the Council on
Relations. With obvious disdain for anyone holding nationalistic
views, Gardner proclaimed,

"In short, the 'house of world
order' would have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top
It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William
famous description of reality, but an end run around national
sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the
old-fashioned frontal assault.
1 [emphasis added]

In Gardner's view, using treaties and
trade agreements (such as General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs or
GATT) would bind and supercede constitutional law piece by piece, which is
exactly what has happened. In addition, Gardner highly esteemed the role of
United Nations as a third-party legal body that could be used to erode
national sovereignty of individual nations.

Gardner concluded that "the
case-by-case approach can produce some remarkable concessions of
that could not be achieved on an across-the-board basis"2

Thus, the end result of such a process
is that the U.S. would eventually capitulate its sovereignty to the newly
proposed world order. It is not specifically mentioned who would control
new order, but it is quite obvious that the only 'players' around are
and his Trilateral cronies.

It should again be noted that the
formation of the Trilateral Commission by Rockefeller and Brzezinski was a
response to the general frustration that globalism was going nowhere with
status quo prior to 1973. The "frontal assault " had failed, and a new
was needed. It is a typical mindset of the global elite to view any
roadblock as
an opportunity to stage an "end-run" to get around it. Gardner
confirms this

"Certainly the gap has never
loomed larger between the objectives and the capacities of the international
organizations that were supposed to get mankind on the road to world order.
are witnessing an outbreak of shortsighted nationalism that seems
oblivious to
the economic, political and moral implications of
interdependence. Yet never has
there been such widespread recognition by the
world's intellectual leadership of
the necessity for cooperation and
planning on a truly global basis, beyond
country, beyond region, especially
beyond social system."

The "world's intellectual leadership"
apparently refers to academics such as Gardner and Brzezinski. Outside of
Trilateral Commission and the
CFR, the vast majority of academic thought at the time was opposed to such
notions as mentioned above.

Laying the Groundwork: Fast Track Authority

In Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S.
Constitution, authority is granted to Congress "To regulate commerce with foreign nations." An end-run around
this insurmountable obstacle would be to convince Congress to voluntarily
over this power to the President. With such authority in hand, the
could freely negotiate treaties and other trade agreements with
foreign nations,
and then simply present them to Congress for a straight up
or down vote, with no
amendments possible. This again points out elite
disdain for a Congress that is
elected to be representative "of the people,
by the people and for the people."

So, the first "Fast Track" legislation
was passed by Congress in 1974, just one year after the founding of the
Trilateral Commission. It was the same year that Nelson Rockefeller was
confirmed as Vice President under President Gerald Ford, neither of whom
elected by the U.S. public. As Vice-President, Rockefeller was seated
as the
president of the U.S. Senate.

According to Public Citizen, the bottom
line of Fast Track is that...

"...the White House signs and
enters into trade deals before Congress ever votes on them. Fast Track also
the parameters for congressional debate on any trade measure the
submits, requiring a vote within a certain time with no amendments
and only 20
hours of debate."4

When an agreement is about to be given
to Congress, high-powered lobbyists and political hammer-heads are called in
manipulate congressional hold-outs into voting for the legislation. (*See
CAFTA Lobbying Efforts) With only 20 hours of debate allowed, there is little
opportunity for public involvement.

Congress clearly
understood the risk of giving up this power to the President, as evidenced
the fact that they put an automatic expiration date on it. Since the
of the original Fast Track, there been a very contentious trail
of Fast Track
renewal efforts. In 1996, President Clinton utterly failed to
re-secure Fast
Track after a bitter debate in Congress. After another
contentious struggle in
2001/2002, President Bush was able to renew Fast
Track for himself in the Trade
Act of 2002, just in time to negotiate the
Central American Free Trade Agreement
(CAFTA) and insure its passage in

It is startling to realize that since
1974, Fast Track has not been used in the majority of trade
Under the Clinton presidency, for instance, some 300 separate
trade agreements
were negotiated and passed normally by Congress, but only two of them
were submitted under Fast Track: NAFTA and the GATT
Uruguay Round. In fact, from 1974 to 1992, there were only three
instances of Fast Track in action: GATT Tokyo Round, U.S.-Israel Free Trade
Agreement and the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Thus, NAFTA was only the fourth invocation of Fast Track.

Why the selectivity? Does it suggest a
very narrow agenda? Most certainly. These trade and legal bamboozles didn't
stand a ghost of a chance to be passed without it, and the global elite knew
Fast Track was created as a very specific legislative tool to accomplish
a very
specific executive task -- namely, to "fast track" the creation of
the "New
International Economic Order" envisioned by the Trilateral
Commission in

Article Six of the U.S. Constitution
states that "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority
the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land and the Judges in
State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of
any State
to the Contrary notwithstanding." Because international treaties
national law, Fast Track has allowed an enormous restructuring of
U.S. law
without resorting to a Constitutional convention (Ed. note: Both
Henry Kissinger
and Zbigniew Brzezinski called for a constitutional
convention as early as 1972,
which could clearly be viewed as a failed
"frontal assault"). As a result,
national sovereignty of the United States
has been severely compromised - even
if some Congressmen and Senators are
aware of this, the general public is still
generally ignorant.

North American Free Trade

NAFTA was negotiated under the executive
leadership of Republican President George H.W. Bush. Carla Hills is widely
credited as being the primary architect and negotiator of NAFTA. Both Bush
Hills were members of the Trilateral Commission!

NAFTA Initialling

NAFTA "Initialing"
Ceremony: From left to right (standing)
President Salinas, President
, Prime Minister Mulroney
(Seated) Jaime
Serra Puche, Carla Hills, Michael Wilson.

With Bush's first presidential term
drawing to a close and Bush desiring political credit for NAFTA, an
ceremony of NAFTA was staged (so Bush could take credit for
NAFTA) in October,
1992. Although very official looking, most Americans did
not understand the
difference between initialing and signing; at the time,
Fast Track was not
implemented and Bush did not have the authority to
actually sign such a trade

Bush subsequently LOST a publicly contentious presidential race to democrat William Jefferson
Clinton, but they were hardly polar opposites on the issue of Free Trade and
NAFTA: The reason? Clinton was also a seasoned member of the

Immediately after inauguration, Clinton
became the champion of NAFTA and orchestrated its passage with a massive
Executive Branch effort.

Some Unexpected Resistance

Prior to the 1992 election, there was a
fly in the elite's ointment -- namely, presidential candidate and
Ross Perot, founder and chairman of Electronic Data Systems
(EDS). Perot was
politically independent, vehemently anti-NAFTA and chose to
make it a major
campaign issue in 1991. In the end, the global elite would
have to spend huge
sums of money to overcome the negative publicity that
Perot gave to

At the time, some political analysts
believed that Perot, being a billionaire, was somehow put up to this task by
same elitists who were pushing NAFTA. Presumably, it would accumulate
all the
anti-globalists in one tidy group, thus allowing the elitists to
determine who
their true enemies really were. It's moot today whether he was
sincere or not,
but it did have that outcome, and Perot became a lightning
rod for the whole
issue of free trade.

Perot hit the nail squarely on the head
in one of his nationally televised campaign speeches:

"If you're paying $12, $13,
$14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory south of the
border, pay a dollar an hour for labor, hire young -- let's assume you've
in business for a long time and you've got a mature workforce - pay a
dollar an
hour for your labor, have no health care - that's the most
expensive single
element in making a car - have no environmental controls,
no pollution controls,
and no retirement, and you didn't care about anything
but making money, there will be a giant sucking sound going
[emphasis added]

Perot's message struck a nerve with
millions of Americans, but it was unfortunately cut short when he entered
public campaign debates with fellow candidate Al Gore. Simply put, Gore
Perot's lunch, not so much on the issues themselves, but on having
debating skills. As organized as Perot was, he was no match for a
and globally seasoned politician like Al Gore.

The Spin Machine gears up

To counter the public relations damage
done by Perot, all the stops were pulled out as the NAFTA vote drew near. As
proxy for the global elite, the President unleashed the biggest and most
expensive spin machine the country had ever seen.

NAFTA emblem

Former Chrysler chairman Lee Iacocca was
enlisted for a multi-million dollar nationwide ad campaign that praised the
benefits of NAFTA. The mantra, carried consistently throughout the many spin
events: "Exports. Better Jobs. Better Wages", all of which have turned out
to be
empty promises

Bill Clinton invited three former
presidents to the White House to stand with him in praise and affirmation
This was the first time in U.S. history that four presidents had ever
together. Of the four, three were members of the Trilateral
Commission: Bill
Clinton, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush. Gerald Ford was
not a Commissioner,
but was nevertheless a confirmed globalist insider.
After Ford's accession to
the presidency in 1974, he promptly nominated
Nelson Rockefeller (David
Rockefeller's oldest brother) to fill the Vice
Presidency that Ford had just

The academic community was enlisted
when, according to Harper's Magazine publisher John MacArthur,

...there was a pro-NAFTA
petition, organized and written my MIT's Rudiger Dornbusch, addressed to
President Clinton and signed by all twelve living Nobel laureates in
and exercise in academic logrolling that was expertly converted
by Bill Daley
and the A-Team into PR gold on the front page of The New York
Times on September
14. 'Dear Mr. President,' wrote the 283

Lastly, prominent Trilateral Commission
members themselves took to the press to promote NAFTA. For instance, on May
1993, Commissioners Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance wrote a joint op-ed

"[NAFTA] would be the most
constructive measure the United States would have undertaken in our
in this century."7

Two months later, Kissinger went

"It will represent the most
creative step toward a new world order taken by any group of countries since
end of the Cold War, and the first step toward an even larger vision of
free-trade zone for the entire Western Hemisphere." [NAFTA] is not a
conventional trade agreement, but the architecture of a new
international system.
[emphasis added]

It is hardly fanciful to think
that Kissinger's hype sounds quite similar to the Trilateral Commission's
original goal of creating a New International Economic Order.

NAFTA Signing
President Clinton
signing NAFTA

On January 1, 1994, NAFTA became law:
Under Fast Track procedures, the house had passed it by 234-200 (132
and 102 Democrats voting in favor) and the U.S. Senate passed it
by 61-38.

That Giant Sucking Sound Going

To understand the potential impact of
the North American Union, one must understand the impact of

NAFTA promised greater exports, better
jobs and better wages. Since 1994, just the opposite has occurred. The U.S.
trade deficit soared and now approaches $1 trillion dollars per year; the
has lost some 1.5 million jobs and real wages in both the U.S. and
Mexico have
fallen significantly.

Patrick Buchanan offered a simple
example of NAFTA's deleterious effect on the U.S. economy:

"When NAFTA passed in 1993, we
imported some 225,000 cars and trucks from Mexico, but exported about
vehicles to the world. In 2005, our exports to the world were still
a shade
under 500,000 vehicles, but our auto and truck imports from Mexico
had tripled
to 700,000 vehicles.

"As McMillion writes, Mexico now
exports more cars and trucks to the United States than the United States
to the whole world. A fine end, is it not, to the United States as
"Auto Capital
of the World"?

"What happened? Post-NAFTA,
the Big Three just picked up a huge slice of our auto industry and moved it,
the jobs, to Mexico.

Of course, this only represents the auto
industry, but the same effect has been seen in many other industries as
Buchanan correctly noted that NAFTA was never just a trade deal:
Rather, it was
an "enabling act - to enable U.S. corporations to dump their
American workers
and move their factories to Mexico." Indeed, this is the
very spirit of all
outsourcing of U.S. jobs and manufacturing facilities to
overseas locations.

Respected economist Alan Tonelson,
author of The Race to the Bottom, notes the smoke and mirrors that
cloud what has really happened with exports:

"Most U.S. exports to Mexico
before, during and since the (1994) peso crisis have been producer goods -
particular, parts and components sent by U.S. multinationals to their
factories for assembly or for further processing. The vast majority
of these,
moreover, are reexported, and most get shipped right back to the
United States
for final sale. In fact, by most estimates, the United States
buys 80 to 90
percent of all of Mexico's exports."10

Tonelson concludes that "the vast
majority of American workers have experienced declining living standards,
just a handful of losers."

Mexican economist and scholar Miguel
Pickard sums up Mexico's supposed benefits from NAFTA:

"Much praise has been heard
for the few 'winners' that NAFTA has created, but little mention is made of
fact that the Mexican people are the deal's big 'losers.' Mexicans now
greater unemployment, poverty, and inequality than before the agreement
began in

In short, NAFTA has not been a friend to
the citizenry of the United States or Mexico. Still, this is the backdrop
against which the North American Union is being acted out. The globalization
players and their promises have remained pretty much the same, both just as
disingenuous as ever.

Prelude to the North American

Soon after NAFTA was passed in 1994, Dr.
Robert A. Pastor began to push for a "deep integration" which NAFTA could
provide by itself. His dream was summed up in his book, Toward a North
Union, published in 2001. Unfortunately for Pastor, the book was
released just a
few days prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York and
thus received
little attention from any sector.

However, Pastor had the right
connections. He was invited to appear before the plenary session (held in
Ontario, Canada) of the Trilateral Commission on November 1-2, 2002, to
a paper drawing directly on his book. His paper, "A Modest Proposal
To the
Trilateral Commission", made several recommendations:

  • "... the three governments
    should establish a North American Commission (NAC) to define an agenda for
    Summit meetings by the three leaders and to monitor the implementation of
    decisions and plans.
  • A second institution should
    emerge from combining two bilateral legislative groups into a North American
    Parliamentary Group.
  • "The third institution should be a
    Permanent Court on Trade and Investment
  • "The three leaders should
    establish a North American Development Fund, whose priority would be to
    the U.S.-Mexican border region to central and southern Mexico.
  • The North American
    Commission should develop an integrated continental plan for transportation
  • "...negotiate a Customs Union and
    a Common External
  • "Our three governments should
    sponsor Centers for North American Studies in each of our countries to help
    people of all three understand the problems and the potential of North
    and begin to think of themselves as North
    12 [emphasis added]

Pastor's choice of the words "Modest
Proposal" are almost comical considering that he intends to reorganize the
entire North American continent.

Nevertheless, the Trilateral Commission
bought Pastor's proposals hook, line and sinker. Subsequently, it was Pastor
emerged as the U.S. vice-chairman of the CFR task force that was
announced on
October 15, 2004:

"The Council has launched an
independent task force on the future of North America to examine regional
integration since the implementation of the North American Free Trade
ten years ago... The task force will review five spheres of policy
in which
greater cooperation may be needed. They are: deepening economic
reducing the development gap; harmonizing regulatory policy;
enhancing security;
and devising better institutions to manage conflicts
that inevitably arise from
integration and exploit opportunities for

Independent task force, indeed! A total
of twenty-three members were chosen from the three countries. Each country
represented by a member of the Trilateral Commission: Carla A. Hills
Luis Rubio (Mexico) and Wendy K. Dobson (Canada). Robert Pastor
served as the
U.S. vice-chairman.

This CFR task force was unique in that
it focused on economic and political policies for all three countries, not
the U.S. The Task Force stated purpose was to

"... identify inadequacies in
the current arrangements and suggest opportunities for deeper cooperation on
areas of common interest. Unlike other Council-sponsored task
which focus primarily on U.S. policy, this initiative includes
participants from
Canada and Mexico, as well as the United States, and will
make policy
recommendations for all three countries.
14 [Emphasis added]

Richard Haass, chairman of the CFR and
long-time member of the Trilateral Commission, pointedly made the link
NAFTA and integration of Mexico, Canada and the U.S.:

"Ten years after NAFTA, it is
obvious that the security and economic futures of Canada, Mexico, and the
States are intimately bound. But there is precious little thinking
available as
to where the three countries need to be in another ten years
and how to get
there. I am excited about the potential of this task force to
help fill this

Haass' statement "there is precious
little thinking available" underscores a repeatedly used elitist technique.
is, first decide what you want to do, and secondly, assign a flock of
to justify your intended actions. (This is the crux of academic
funding by NGO's
such as Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation,
Carnegie-Mellon, etc.) After
the justification process is complete, the same
elites that suggested it in the
first place allow themselves to be drawn in
as if they had no other logical
choice but to play along with the "sound
thinking" of the experts.

The task force met three times, once in
each country. When the process was completed, it issued its results in May,
2005, in a paper titled "Building a North American Community" and subtitled
"Report of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America." Even
sub-title suggests that the "future of North America" is a fait accompli
behind closed doors.

Some of the recommendations of the
task force are:

  • "Adopt a common external
  • "Adopt a North American Approach
    to Regulation"
  • "Establish a common security
    perimeter by 2010."
  • "Establish a North American
    investment fund for infrastructure and human capital."
  • "Establish a permanent tribunal
    for North American dispute resolution."
  • "An annual North American
    Summit meeting"
    that would bring the heads-of-state together for the
    of public display of confidence.
  • "Establish minister-led working
    groups that will be required to report back within 90 days, and to meet
  • Create a "North American Advisory
  • Create a "North American
    Inter-Parliamentary Group."

Sound familiar? It should: Many of the
recommendations are verbatim from Pastor's "modest" presentation to the
Trilateral Commission mentioned above, or from his earlier book, Toward a
American Union.

SPP Summit

2006 SPP Summit in Cancun

Shortly after the task force report
was issued, the heads of all three countries did indeed meet together for a
summit in Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The specific result of the summit
the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
(SPPNA). The joint press release stated

"We, the elected leaders of Canada,
Mexico, and the United States, have met in Texas to announce the
of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North

"We will establish working
parties led by our ministers and secretaries that will consult with
in our respective countries. These working parties will respond
to the
priorities of our people and our businesses, and will set specific,
and achievable goals. They will outline concrete steps that our
governments can
take to meet these goals, and set dates that will ensure the
achievement of results.

"Within 90
days, ministers
will present their initial report after which, the working
parties will submit
six-monthly reports. Because the Partnership will be an
ongoing process of
cooperation, new items will be added to the work agenda
by mutual agreement as
circumstances warrant.

Once again, we see Pastor's North
American Union ideology being continued, but this time as an outcome of a
meeting of three heads-of-states. The question must be raised, "Who
is really in
charge of this process?"

Indeed, the three premiers returned to
their respective countries and started their "working parties" to "consult
stakeholders." In the U.S., the "specific, measurable, and achievable
were only seen indirectly by the creation of a government website
billed as
"Security and Prosperity Partnetship of North America."
( The
stakeholders are not mentioned by name, but it is clear
that they are not the
public of either of the three countries; most likely,
they are the corporate
interests represented by the members of the
Trilateral Commission!

The second annual summit meeting took
place on March 30-31, 2006, in Cancun, Mexico between Bush, Fox and Canadian
prime minister Stephen Harper. The Security and Prosperity Partnership
was summed up in a statement from Mexican president Vicente

"We touched upon fundamental
items in that meeting. First of all, we carried out an evaluation meeting.
we got information about the development of programs. And then we gave
necessary instructions for the works that should be carried out in the
period of work... We are not renegotiating what has been
successful or
open the Free Trade Agreement. It's going beyond the
agreement, both for
prosperity and security.
[emphasis added]

Regulations instead of

It may not have occurred to the
reader that the two SPP summits resulted in no signed agreements.
is not accidental nor a failure of the summit process. The so-called
integration" of the three countries is being accomplished through a
series of
regulations and executive decrees that avoid citizen watchdogs and

In the U.S., the 2005 Cancun summit
spawned some 20 different working groups that would deal with issues from
immigration to security to harmonization of regulations, all under the
of the Security and Prosperity Partnership ( The SPP
in the U.S. is
officially placed under the Department of Commerce, headed by
Secretary Carlos
M. Gutierrez, but other Executive Branch agencies also have
SPP components that
report to Commerce.

After two years of massive effort, the
names of the SPP working group members have not been released. The result of
their work have also not been released. There is no congressional
legislation or
oversight of the SPP process.

The director of SPP, Geri Word, was
contacted to ask why a cloud of secrecy is hanging over SPP. According to
investigative journalist Jerome Corsi, Word replied

"We did not want to get the
contact people of the working groups distracted by calls from the public."

This paternalistic attitude is a typical
elitist mentality Their work (whatever they have dreamed up on their own) is
important to be distracted by the likes of pesky citizens or their

This elite change of tactics must not be
understated: Regulations and Executive Orders have replaced Congressional
legislation and public debate. There is no pretense of either. This is
Gardner-style "end-run around national sovereignty, eroding it
piece by

Apparently, the Trilateral-dominated
Bush administration believes that it has accumulated sufficient power to ram
NAU down the throat of the American People, whether they protest or not.

Robert A. Pastor: A Trilateral
Commission Operative

As mentioned earlier, Pastor is hailed
as the father of the North American Union, having written more papers about
delivered more testimonies before Congress, and headed up task forces to
it, than any other single U.S. academic figure. He would seem a
architect and advocate of the NAU.

Although he might seem to be a fresh,
new name to in the globalization business, Pastor has a long history with
Trilateral Commission members and the global elite.

He is the same Robert Pastor who was the
executive director of the 1974 CFR task force ( funded by the Rockefeller
Ford Foundations) called the Commission on US-Latin American

- aka the Linowitz Commission. The Linowitz Commission,
chaired by an original
Trilateral Commissioner Sol Linowitz, was singularly
credited with the giveaway
of the Panama Canal in 1976 under the Carter
presidency. ALL of the Linowitz
Commission members were members of the
Trilateral Commission save one, Albert
Fishlow; other members were W.
Michael Blumenthal, Samuel Huntington, Peter G.
Peterson, Elliot Richardson
and David Rockefeller.

One of Carter's first actions as
President in 1977 was to appoint Zbigniew Brzezinski to the post of National
Security Advisor. In turn, one of Brzezinski's first acts was to appoint his
protege, Dr. Robert A. Pastor, as director of the Office of Latin American
Caribbean Affairs. Pastor then became the Trilateral Commission's
point-man to
lobby for the Canal giveaway.

To actually negotiate the
Carter-Torrijos Treaty, Carter sent none other than Sol Linowitz to Panama
temporary ambassador. The 6-month temporary appointment avoided the
for Senate confirmation. Thus, the very same people who created
the policy
became responsible for executing it.

The Trilateral Commission's role in the
Carter Administration is confirmed by Pastor himself in his 1992 paper The
Carter Administration and Latin America: A Test of Principle:

"In converting its
predisposition into a policy, the new administration had the benefit of the
research done by two private commissions. Carter, Vance, and Brzezinski were
members of the Trilateral Commission, which provided a conceptual framework
collaboration among the industrialized countries in approaching the full
of international issues. With regard to setting an agenda and an
approach to
Latin America, the most important source of influence on the
administration was the Commission on U.S.-Latin American Relations,
chaired by
Sol M. Linowitz.

As to the final Linowitz Commission
reports on Latin America, most of which were authored by Pastor himself, he

"The reports helped the
administration define a new relationship with Latin America, and 27 of the
specific recommendations in the second report became U.S. policy."22

Pastor's deep involvement with
Trilateral Commission members and policies is irrefutable, and it continues
the present.

In 1996, when Trilateral Commissioner
Bill Clinton nominated Pastor as Ambassador to Panama, his confirmation was
forcefully knocked down by Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), who held a deep
against Pastor for his central role in the giveaway of the Panama
Canal in 1976.

The setback obviously did not phase
Pastor in the slightest.

Where from

The stated target for full
implementation of the North American Union is 2010.

"The Task Force proposes the
creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security,
and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle
affirmed in the
March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that 'our
security and
prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary.' Its
boundaries will be
defined by a common external tariff and an outer security
perimeter within which
the movement of people, products, and capital will be
legal, orderly, and safe.
Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure,
just, and prosperous North

Don't underestimate the global elite's
ability to meet their own deadlines!


This paper does not pretend to give
thorough or even complete coverage to such important and wide-ranging topics
discussed above. We have shown that the restructuring of the United
States has
been accomplished by a very small group of powerful global
elitists as
represented by members of the Trilateral Commission.

The Trilateral Commission plainly stated
that it intended to create a New International Economic Order. We have
their members from 1973 to the present, only to find that they are
at the dead
center of every critical policy and action that seeks to
restructure the U.S.

Some critics will undoubtedly argue that
involvement by members of the Trilateral Commission is merely incidental.
However, the odds for their involvement at random is too large to be even
remotely understandable; it would be like winning the lottery jackpot five
in a row, with the same numbers!

The credo of The August Review is
"Follow the money, follow the power." In this view, the United States has
literally been hijacked by less than 300 greedy and self-serving global
who have little more than contempt for the citizens of the
countries they would
seek to dominate. According to Trilateralist Richard
Gardner's viewpoint, this
incremental takeover (rather than a frontal
approach) has been wildly

To again answer Lou Dobbs question,
"Have our political elites gone mad?" -- No Lou, they are not
nor are they ignorant. To look into the face of these global elites
is to look
into the face of unmitigated greed, avarice and treachery.


  1. Gardner, Richard, The Hard Road to
    World Order, (Foreign Affairs, 1974) p. 558
  2. ibid, p. 563
  3. ibid. p. 556
  4. Fast Track Talking Points, Global Trade Watch, Public Citizen
  5. MacArthur, The Selling of Free Trade,
    (Univ. of Cal. Press, 2001) p. 228
  6. Washington Post, op-ed, Kissinger
    & Vance, May 13, 1993
  7. Los Angeles Times, op-ed, Kissinger,
    July 18, 1993
  8. The Fruits of NAFTA, Patrick Buchanan, The Conservative Voice, March 10, 2006
  9. Tonelson, The Race to the Bottom
    (Westview Press, 2002) p. 89
  10. A Modest Proposal To the Trilateral
    , Presentation by Dr. Robert
    Pastor, 2002
  11. ibid.
  12. ibid.
  13. Building a North American
    , Council on Foreign
  14. North American Leaders Unveil Security and
    Prosperity Partnership
    , International
    Information Programs, U.S. Govt. Website
  15. Concluding Press Conference at Cancun
    , Vicente Fox, March 31, 2006
  16. Bush sneaking North American super-state
    without oversight?
    , Jerome
    Corsi,WorldNetDaily, June 12, 2006.
  17. The Carter Administration and Latin America: A
    Test of Principle
    , Robert A. Pastor,
    Carter Center, July 1992, p. 9
  18. ibid. p. 10
  19. Building a North American
    , Council on Foreign
    2005, p. 2


Meet Robert Pastor: Father of the North
American Union, Human Events
R. Corsi, July 25, 2006
Robert A. Pastor Resume, American University, 2005
North America's Super Corridor Coalition, Inc.


Note: If any HOTLINKS don't work go
directly to source above.