The End of the American Trucker: NASCO Emails Uncovered!

I am telling you guys, Dr. Jerome Corsi (co-author of "Unfit for Command" and "Minutemen") is NOT going to let this issue die. We owe it to OURSELVES to start paying attention.

Mexican Trucks with cheap Mexican truck drivers will mean THE END of the American Patriot Trucker as we know it. (incidentally I come from a family of truck drivers so it also personal for me). Our own transport companies will set up mexican companies and run operations out of Mexico in order to "cut costs". Those "cuts" are OUR jobs! Sound familiar???

Please Read this. Please keep this issue on your radar! Retaining our Sovereignty is our most important War.

[quote]Despite claims to the contrary, a planned Midwest "inland port" with a Mexican customs office will not be restricted to railroad traffic, according to internal documents obtained by WorldNetDaily.

As WND has reported, Kansas City SmartPort plans to utilize deep-sea Mexican ports such as Lazaro Cardenas to unload containers from China and the Far East as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement super-highway plan.

The plan would include the hotly contested allowance of Mexican trucks on U.S. roads, WND has reported, but Tasha Hammes of the Kansas City Area Development Council has insisted the port will be restricted to railroad traffic.

Hammes has argued the railroad link is "nothing new, other than the fact that Kansas City Southern acquired the Mexican railroad serving this port and that major work has been done on the port of Lazaro Cardenas so that it has higher capacity and can handle larger containers."

But internal e-mails make it clear that officials, hoping to stay below the radar of public opinion, plan to expand from rail to trucks after the Mexican customs facility is operational.

The Mexican customs facility project was championed by David W. Eaton, president of Monterrey Business Consultants in Monterrey, Mexico, and the former executive director of North American International Trade Corridor Partnership, a non-profit group with the aim of internationalizing U.S. highways to facilitate trade with Mexico and Canada.

They are still going back and forth on the rail and truck focus. However, according to Manuel [Manuel Ruiz, a Mexican customs official], the first stage will most likely be "rail only" with trucking added later. Kenneth Hoffman of the law firm Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin, outside council to KC SmartPort, was copied on Eaton's e-mail.

"My feeling is that we need to get this done in such a way that [the Mexican customs facility] is successful when it opens. If it starts small that is fine as long as there is productive work that we can point to as evidence that the effort was worthwhile. We can expand to trucks after getting the process up and running.

The e-mails are consistent with a position paper Eaton authored for the Montreal-based Institute for Research on Public Policy, entitled "Roads, Trains, and Ports: Integrating North American Transport."

In the paper, Eaton argued railroad transport should be developed as the first mode to bring containers from China through Mexican ports into the U.S., because "one unit train can carry the equivalent of approximately 250 trucks."

Moreover, Eaton had argued that use of Mexican trucks was impaired by the poor condition of Mexico's roadways and the wear and tear on Mexican trucks resulting from overuse. Eaton had concluded "North America would be well served by linking its rail infrastructure and systems," which has been advanced by Kansas City Southern's acquisition of Mexican railroads.

An examination of the internal e-mails from Kansas City SmartPort over the last two years shows the development of the city's international "inland port" concept – including the Mexican customs facility – involved an ambitious multi-year process with the aim of tying into the emerging corridor-oriented NAFTA Super-Highway network.

Development of the KCSmartPort vision included active involvement of the North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition, or NASCO, a non-profit group "dedicated to developing the world’s first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America."

Chris Gutierrez, president of KCSmartPort, frequently copied NASCO President George Blackwood on details of the negotiations with Mexican and U.S. officials regarding the Mexican customs office.

An April 26 e-mail from Gutierrez included Blackwood among the list of recipients. In his message, Gutierrez reported he worked directly with the office of Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., and with Mexican government officials to apply political pressure to influence the State Department and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, to move faster in approving the Mexican customs facility application:

CBP told me that the State Department is reviewing the C-175 [form needed to approve Mexican customs facility]. Bond's office has calls into the State Dept; letter to Gil Diaz [Mexican Secretary of Finance] went out last week asking him to encourage CBP and State Dept to move it along. Here is the draft letter to Minister [Luis Ernesto] Derbez [Mexican Foreign Ministry Secretary]. I was still tweaking it but here it is for your review.

In 1998, before becoming NASCO president, Blackwood established the North American International Trade Corridor Partnership while he served as mayor pro tem of Kansas City. The NAITCP has been absorbed into NASCO.

A NAIPC summit meeting in 2004 was attended by Mexican officials, including Secretary of Finance Gil Diaz, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Geronimo Guiterrez, Deputy Counsel of Mexico Noemi Hernandez, Counsel of Mexico in Kansas City Everardo Suarez. Also in attendance was Kansas City, Mo., Mayor Kay Barnes and the president and CEO of Kansas City Southern railroad, Mike Haverty.

Photographed on the first page of the summit executive summary is Robert Pastor, an American University professor who has written "Toward a North American Community," a book promoting the development of a North American unionas a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso.

Pastor also was vice chairman of the May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force entitled "Building a North American Community" that presents itself as a blueprint for using bureaucratic action within the executive branches of Mexico, the U.S. and Canada to transform the current trilateral Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America into a North American union regional government.

2. Why are they keeping their goals a secret? Why did they lie about their goal of integrating mexican trucking?

For your information...

New Poll: Americans Prefer House
Approach on Immigration

Poll is First to Offer the Public a Choice
Between House and Senate Plan

Download a pdf of this announcement

WASHINGTON (May 3, 2006) – A new Zogby poll of likely voters, using neutral language (see wording on following pages), finds that Americans prefer the House of Representatives’ enforcement-only bill by 2-1 over Senate proposals to legalize illegal immigrants and greatly increase legal immigration. The poll was conducted for the Center for Immigration Studies.

On immigration generally, Americans want less, not more, immigration. Only 26 percent said immigrants were assimilating fine and that immigration should continue at current levels, compared to 67 percent who said immigration should be reduced so we can assimilate those already here.

While the Senate is considering various bills that would increase legal immigration from 1 million to 2 million a year, 2 percent of Americans believe current immigration is too low. This was true for virtually every grouping in the survey by ethnicity, income, age, religion, region, party, or ideology.

When offered by itself, there is strong support for the House bill: 69 percent said it was a good or very good idea when told it tries to make illegals go home by fortifying the border, forcing employer verification, and encouraging greater cooperation with local law enforcement while not increasing legal immigration; 27 percent said it was a bad or very bad idea.

Support for the House approach was widespread, with 81 percent of Republicans, 72 percent of independents, 57 percent of Democrats, and 53 percent of Hispanics saying it was good or very good idea.

When offered by itself, there is also some support for the Senate approach, thought not as much as for the House bill: 42 percent said the Senate approach was a good or very good idea when told it would allow illegal immigrants to apply for legal status provided they met certain criteria, and it would significantly increase legal immigration and increase enforcement of immigration laws; 50 percent said it was a bad or very bad idea.

There were few groups in which a majority supported the Senate plan, even when presented by itself, exceptions included Hispanics 62 percent of whom said it was a good or very good idea and the most liberal voters (progressives) 54 percent of whom approved of it.

When given three choices (House approach, Senate approach, or mass deportation), the public tends to reject both the Senate plan and a policy of mass deportations in favor of the House bill; 28 percent want the Senate plan, 12 percent want mass deportations; while 56 percent want the House approach.

But when given a choice between just the House and Senate approaches, without the choice of mass deportations, the public prefers the House approach 64 percent version to 30 percent.

One reason the public does not like legalizations is that they are skeptical of need for illegal-immigrant labor. An overwhelming majority of 74 percent said there are plenty of Americans to fill low-wage jobs if employers pay more and treat workers better; just 15 percent said there are not enough Americans for such jobs.

Another reason the public does not like Senate proposals to legalize illegals and double legal immigration is that 73 percent said they had little or no confidence in the ability of the government to screen these additional applicants to weed out terrorists and criminals.

Public also does not buy the argument we have tried and failed to enforce the law: 70 percent felt that past enforcement efforts have been "grossly inadequate," while only 19 percent felt we had made a "real effort" to enforce our laws.

Poll Results: Click here

FYI...

Saturday, July 8, 2006

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
More evidence Mexican trucks coming to U.S.
Internal document anticipates increasing volume of traffic

Posted: July 8, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi

(TTNews.com)

An internal document shows a planned "inland port" in Kansas City anticipates an increasing volume of Mexican truck traffic, despite claims it will be restricted to railroad transports from south of the border.

WND has obtained, via a Missouri Sunshine Law request, an internal spreadsheet analysis prepared by the port project, Kansas City SmartPort, indicating that "with marketing," it projects that in 2010 a high of 508 trucks per day would pass through a Mexican customs facility located at the port. The volume would grow to a projected high of 881 trucks per day in 2015.

As WND has reported, KC SmartPort plans to utilize deep-sea Mexican ports such as Lazaro Cardenas to unload containers from China and the Far East as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement super-highway plan.

The plan would include the hotly contested allowance of Mexican trucks on U.S. roads, WND has reported, but Tasha Hammes of the Kansas City Area Development Council has insisted the port will be restricted to railroad traffic.

Internal KC SmartPort e-mails obtained by WND show that both Kansas City and Mexican officials were concerned that enough truck volume would be processed through the Mexican customs facility to make the project economically viable for Mexico to maintain a customs staff on site.

A Jan. 13, 2005, e-mail from David Eaton, the president of Monterrey Business Consultants in Monterrey, Mexico, who is credited with first proposing the Mexican customs facility, stresses the need for success:

Other communities such as Dallas and San Antonio have requested that Mexican Customs put facilities in their communities. Mexico has determined that our project will be the Pilot and others will not be approved until it is determined that this works … as Ken Hoffman [outside counsel to KC SmartPort] said … we need to make sure this works! [ellipsis in original]

An e-mail dated Jan. 10 from Jose M. Garcia, representative of Mexico's Ministry of Finance in Mexico's Washington, D.C., embassy, asks KC SmartPort President Chris Gutierrez to be more precise. Garcia wrote:

The statistical data show in the study hardly offers us a list of potential users (targets), those that we (Mexican Customs and USCBP [U.S. Customs and Border Protection]) must attract and convince to move their cargo through [KC SmartPort] and be cleared by US and Mexican Customs. This list will be used for our promotional efforts.

Replying to Garcia's e-mail, Erendira Rodriguez of KC SmartPort affirmed Jan. 17 that "SmartPort has $400,000 specifically to market the [Mexican customs] facility and the increased exports of U.S. products to Mexico. The marketing will not start until there are more assurances that the facility will open."

KC SmartPort consistently has maintained to WND that the Mexican customs facility was intended to be for outbound exports to Mexico only and would separate from the Lazaro Cardenas-to-Kansas City corridor. In a June 29 e-mail to WND, Hammes of the Kansas City Area Development Council emphasized the distinction:

The proposed KC Customs Port and Lazaro Cardenas to KC Corridor (made possible by KCS [Kansas City Southern]) are two non-related, separate efforts that KC SmartPort is supporting. (One is rail, the other truck. There is no crossover between the corridor and the proposed facility.)

Yet, that contention is inconsistent with a U.S.-Mexico Freight Flow Analysis presented on the KC SmartPort website. According to that study, conducted for KC SmartPort by MARC [Mid-America Regional Council], the dominant mode for hinterland trade export to Mexico was rail.

As the MARC report noted on page 5, "For the SmartPort hinterland, grain products were the largest export commodity group. Manufactured and intermediate goods were the top import commodities." And, again, "Turning to exports by mode, rail is forecast to grow faster than truck which reflects the predominance of bulky and lower value commodities in the export trade with Mexico."

Still, KC SmartPort argues the Mexican customs office is for outgoing trucks only and that only the Kansas City Southern railroad will be used to import goods that enter Mexico via the port of Lazaro Cardenas.

Hammes wrote in her June 29 e-mail to WND: "Mexican trucks will NOT be coming to KC or utilizing the facility."

Even more emphatically, she stated a paragraph later:

The containers that come in through the port of Lazaro Cardenas will enter the U.S. on a U.S. railroad (Kansas City Southern) NOT a Mexican Railroad or via Mexican trucks. The LC to KC corridor is a rail corridor ONLY. As I stated earlier, this is nothing new other than the fact that KCS acquired the Mexican railroad that served the port of Lazaro Cardenas last year.

But the KC SmartPort internal e-mails indicate otherwise. A Jan. 13 e-mail from David Eaton noted: "The authorities agreed that the [Mexican customs] facility will be BOTH TRUCK AND RAIL from the beginning."

Other internal e-mails reveal a determination by KC SmartPort and KC city officials to control their public relations message.

When an Associated Press report hit the wires Jan. 30 revealing a scandal in Mexico that could affect Kansas City's Mexican customs facility, it prompted a flurry of e-mails within KC SmartPort.

A Jan. 30 e-mail from KC SmartPort President Gutierrez to outside counsel Hoffman noted with apparent alarm: "The Associated Press story has reach 30 markets now. Many of the stories have appeared in the last day."

On Jan. 31, Gutierrez broadcast an e-mail to more than 50 respondents, including Kansas City Council members and a Kansas City Southern railroad spokesman, in which he dismissed the AP article, advising that the scandal was only Mexican "presidential election campaigning with one party stirring up things on the other parties and vice versa."

Previous stories:

Docs reveal plan for Mexican trucks in U.S.

Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil?

Tancredo confronts 'super-state' effort

Bush sneaking North American super-state without oversight?

Previous column:

Coming soon to U.S.: Mexican customs office

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.