As a result, I began this exchange with SNOPES. For clarity, my color code is: brown = self-quote, blue = SNOPES quote, green = third party quote.

First Comment:

First, on the SNOPES "North American Union" webpage, it is written that "The SPP is not itself an agreement or a treaty." I suspect that you might have you obtained your information from the "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America" Myths vs Facts webpage (note the ".gov" domain name), http://www.spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp. There it says:

"Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

Fact: 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."

I urge you to consider that the SPP "Myth vs Fact" post is directly contradicted by this signed statement by the Prime Minister of Canada, appearing on the "Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada" website,
http://geo.international.gc.ca/cip-pic/ips/ips-overview2-en.aspx

"Thus, on March 23, President Bush, President Fox and I signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that establishes the way forward on our continental agenda for security, prosperity and quality of life. It is a partnership." - Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada –

In my opinion, a signed partnership between the heads of state of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico is an agreement, and the signed statement by the Prime Minister of Canada should be accepted in lieu of the misleading "Myths vs Facts" section of the SPP website.

Second, I respectfully suggest that you reconsider the general tenor of the SNOPES North American Union post which downplays the connection between CFR "proposals" and subsequent Government policies and laws. The following true statements might be more than you wish to use verbatim, but perhaps it would be fair to make a statement that the CFR is extremely influential on the executive branch of U.S. Government, its proposals frequently serve as planning documents, and U.S. policy and law often fall in line with them.

1. The Council on Foreign Relations was formally established in 1920. Since 1920 there have been 22 Secretaries of State, at least 18 have been Council on Foreign Relations members.

2. All of the following sixteen people are members or former members of the CFR: former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, former Secretary of State James Baker, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State Alexander Haig, former Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.

3. According to a variety of sources, the following presidential candidates or former candidates are either CFR members or have strong ties, including advisors who are CFR members: Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, John Edwards, Fred Thompson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson. Mike Huckabee, though not a member, spoke to the CFR in September, after which he rose to became a top-tier candidate.

Certainly, "proposals" produced by people such as these should be taken seriously. You are welcome to use any of this information.

SNOPES Reply to First Comment (below):

The SPP is clearly not a treaty (as it was not submitted to and approved by the U.S. Senate), and even the Canadian source you cite does not describe the signing of an "agreement." As our article correctly notes, the only tangible outcome of the meeting was the creation of the SPP, which is merely an outline for dialogue that imposes no requirements or obligations on any of the parties.

Urban Legends Reference Pages -- http://www.snopes.com”

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5