Posted on 12/02/2006 11:31:59 AM PST by Lorianne
Just when you thought it might be safe to go on to topics other than regional integration and trade practices driven by the love of money and the lust for power, you get blindsided again.
While ordinary Americans were reflecting on the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, globalists of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico were making their way quietly, quietly, to Banff, Alberta for the North American Forum held at the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel Sept. 12–14. The meeting was closed-doors. According to some reports buses with attendees were arriving at night. There was no print media coverage in the U.S. and very little in Canada; I was able to download an article from the Toronto-based Star. Those who do not get their news from the Internet remain in the dark about one of the biggest unfolding events of the present decade: the globalist social engineering of a North American Union.
WorldNetDaily was able to obtain materials marked Internal Document, Not For Public Release. The whistleblower, Mel Hurtig, noted Canadian author, publisher, and leader of the National Party of Canada, told WorldNetDaily that the “secret meeting was designed to undermine the democratic process…. It was clear that the intention was to keep this important meeting about integrating the three countries out of the public eye.”
Representing the U.S. in Banff was Former U.S. Secretary of State George Schulz. Representing Mexico was Former Mexican Finance Minister Pedro Aspe. Representing Canada was Former Premier of Alberta, Peter Lougheed. The first session featured opening comments by each. The sessions that followed had names like, “A Vision for North America: Issues and Options,” “Toward a North American Energy Strategy,” “Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration,” and “Border Infrastructure and Continental Prosperity.”
The event was co-hosted by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, the business wing of Canada’s superelite, and the Canada West Foundation, a “think tank” that has been promoting regional integration.
Prominent on the panel of the “Vision for North America” session was none other than Robert Pastor, who might go down in history as the Father of the North American Union. Paster is the author of Toward A North American Community (2001) published by the globalist Institute for International Economics. He chairs the Council on Foreign Relations’ Task Force on North America and served as lead author of the CFR’s Building a North American Community (May 2005). Among other things, this document proposes a North American “security perimeter” around all three nations by 2010. It was this that inspired CNN commentator Lou Dobbs to wonder, last summer, if our elites “had gone mad.”
Providing the keynote address at the Banff confab was our very own Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense. Rummy’s speech was entitled, “Opportunities for Security Cooperation in North America: Military-to-Military Cooperation.”
When the powerful begin reading papers on “cooperation” between the military hierarchies of three nations, are there really grounds for doubt that we are looking at compromises of U.S. sovereignty and possibly security on an unprecedented scale? Currently there is a North American Cooperative Security Act, sponsored also in 2005 and languishing in committee, but doubtless far from dead. The plan here is to integrate Mexican and Canadian security forces into the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The terms security and prosperity were bandied about freely. This, of course, ties the North American Forum—actually the second (the first, at Sonoma, Calif. in October 2005 was also held in maximum secrecy)—to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), now housed in the NAFTA office of the U.S. Department of Commerce where it has received the full backing of our Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez.
The watchword, however, was deep integration, which Pastor, the CFR, and outfits like the Canada West Foundation have been promoting. The many working groups created under the SPP umbrella are currently “harmonizing” regulations by all three governments on food, drugs, the environment, electronic commerce, rules of origin, textiles and apparel labeling, movements of capital and labor, and foreign policy. The various working groups have signed “memoranda of understanding” or “frameworks of common principles”—or are working on such—in all these areas.
If there’s anything you can take to the bank, this “harmonizing” process is not about, e.g., increasing food and drug safety for the people; it is about making life easier (and profits fatter) for the superelite CEOs in leviathan-sized food and pharmaceutical corporations—wired to leviathan-sized governments through public-private partnerships. What is likely is that food safety will go down, and consumers’ choices of, say, dietary supplements over expensive, poorly tested and therefore possibly hazardous pharmaceuticals will begin to be restricted. Major globalists, we ought to note, are well connected to the multibillion dollar pharmaceutical industry. Rummy owns over $5 million in stock in Gilead Sciences, the company that developed Tamiflu® and sold it to Roche, the pharmaceuticals giant. George Schulz owns more than $7 million in Gilead Sciences stock and unlike Rummy, actually sits on the company’s board. At one time, the concept conflict of interest would have applied. Today, those in the transnational globalist class do as they please, unencumbered by considerations of ethics, law, or Constitution.
When confronted, shills for the power elite (including on the SPP website, which for the past several weeks has sported a disinformational “Myths and Facts” section) insist that its goals are benign. They just want to increase the prosperity of the three nations so as to better compete with the booming economies of China and India, as well as the European Union, while also ensuring the safety of our peoples in an age of terrorism. The sovereignty and independence of Canada, Mexico and the U.S., they insist, will be respected.
But if the superelites of the three nations have the populations’ best interests in mind, then why the secrecy? Why have the agendas (and memberships) of the various working groups of the SPP been kept out of sight, not even available on the SPP website? Why does the latter’s “Myths and Facts” describe the SPP as only a “dialogue” between the leadership of the three nations when it is clearly much more than that? Why has it been necessary to invoke the Freedom of Information Act to penetrate the wall of secrecy?
Geri Wood, SPP Secretary, told Jerome R. Corsi that the working groups did not want to be “distracted by answering calls from the public.”
What incredible arrogance!
There is now a North American Competitiveness Council whose advisory board involves representatives from corporations including Wal-Mart, Chevron, General Motors, Lockheed Martin, and others. The NACC met in Washington in mid-August, but we have almost no information because again what was said was kept out of public view and this time we have (so far) no whistleblowers.
There is also a North American Energy Security Initiative, a North American Steel Trade Committee, an Automotive Partnership Council of North America, and a North American Aviation Trilateral, among other transnational bureaucracies formed under the SPP umbrella. Work is underway towards North American Emergency Management and towards Smart, Secure Borders (now there’s a phrase apt to make Orwell spin in his grave!).
There is also the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), or NAFTA Superhighway, construction on which is scheduled to begin in 2007 by public-private partnerships (a foreign corporation, Spain’s Cintra, has already signed a contract). This system, which will parallel I-35 running north from Mexico all the way to Canada, with a branch extending I-69 also going to Canada through Port Huron, Mich. TTC-35 will consist of six lanes for passenger cars, four for trucks, a rails system, lines for telecommunications, oil and natural gas pipelines, etc. Its size across has been estimated at four football fields; construction will result in the taking of over 500,000 acres of land from farmers and ranchers in Texas alone through eminent domain. This puts last year’s roundly (and rightly) condemned Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London, Conn. in a new light!
There are, finally, the expected incursions into education which have been going on roughly during what we may come to call the SPP era. Students everywhere, at all levels from elementary school to colleges and universities, are being encouraged to think globally—to think of themselves as “world citizens,” which means supporting regionalism and downplaying loyalty to their own nations. Last year a group of students from ten universities spread across the U.S., Canada and Mexico met for a simulated “model Parliament,” the organizers declaring: “A North American Parliament is born.” The universities included Harvard and Robert Pastor’s home base American University, as well as Simon Fraser University and Universite de Montreal representing Canada and Monterrey University and Ecole nationale d’administration publique representing Mexico. The event, sponsored by the Canada-based North American Forum on Integration (NAFI), yet another think tank promoting deep integration, was held in the Mexican Senate last May. Pastor is on the NAFI board of directors.
The superelite has indeed been busy of late! Also meeting in September, this time in Miami (Sept. 15) was the Miami Herald Americas Conference. Attendees of this confab included more business and governmental elites from Latin and South America. They focused on “free trade agreements, open democracies and security.” One attendee in particular is worth noting: Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, our El Presidente’s brother, who gave the keynote address. Gov. Bush hailed our El Presidente as the “chief Latin Americanist” in Washington. He further let the cat out of the bag by urging Congress to pass “fast track” trade promotion legislation this fall that would authorize President Bush to reopen negotiations on the stalled Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the superelite’s long-term goal for the Western hemisphere.
The superelite had originally hoped to implement their FTAA by 2005, but didn’t count on the level of grass roots opposition either here or by influential South American leaders such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Chavez’s economics are wrong and I don’t think he correctly identifies his enemy—it isn’t President Bush personally or even “American hegemony,” but rather the emerging New International Economic Order which is transnational and globalist. As a populist, however, his instincts are sound. He understands that an FTAA would benefit the superelite—many of them based in America—at the expense of his people. To elites like Florida’s Gov. Bush, this is just capitalism: “I believe in entrepreneurial capitalism from the top of my head to the tip of my toes.” When superelite domination of national economies is equated with free market “capitalism” and no one with visibility questions it, should we wonder when the Hugo Chavezes of the world move “leftward”?
It may be useful to examine a brilliant article by Christopher S. Bentley’s entitled “Immigration & Integration,” from the July 24 issue of The New American. Bentley outlined in very clear fashion how “free trade” rhetoric is taking us into regional government and will proceed from there to world government. “Free trade” is a core tool of the emerging New World Order, currently building transnational corporatist “capitalism” that (given the collectivist ethos being ruthlessly promoted in schools at all levels) they expect will evolve naturally and easily into global socialism with the superelite wielding absolute power.
Bentley outlines the process occurs in five steps, or phases.
First, the superelite creates a free trade area. This lowers barriers to the trade of goods and services among member nations, while quietly instituting a raft of political and bureaucratic controls. This was done in Europe in the late 1940s. In North America, think NAFTA / CAFTA.
Second, it creates a customs union, which adds a common external trade policy and expands the bureaucracy to implement it. Think of that common “security perimeter” planned for North America.
Third, it creates a common market, which ends restrictions on migration and allows labor and capital to move freely across increasingly meaningless national borders of member states. “This,” Bentley wrote, “is exactly what is behind the Bush Administration’s fanatical zeal to implement its guest worker / amnesty program.” Indeed, the Bush regime’s immigration policy—or lack of—makes perfect sense if we simply accede that Bush is committed philosophically to a borderless, globalized world.
Fourth, it develops the foregoing into an economic union—which requires a fully harmonized regulatory structure, a common currency, a common tax policy and a common fiscal policy. Robert Pastor and others have advocated replacing the dollar and the peso with a common North American currency that would be called the amero.
The fifth and final phase, political union, follows almost naturally, given that since Keynes the idea of an economy—national or global—not regulated to the teeth by bureaucrats hasn’t been on anyone’s radar. Political union develops out of the system of public-private partnerships, yielding a symbiosis between international bankers, other corporations, and the governmental-bureaucratic establishment.
The EU is practically to this point, its Parliament able to implement significant elements of the EU Constitution despite member nations like France and the Netherlands getting cold feet last year.
These phases are, in the last analysis, not separable but part of a single guided process. The SPP working groups and attendees of meetings like this North American Forum are taking us in the same direction as Europe at breakneck speed. NAFTA’s Chapter 11 tribunals actually begin laying in place the final phase of the process by reviewing U.S. court decisions. If you have an internationalized legal process, then as enforcement mechanisms fall into placce you are on your way to political union under a regional, hegemonic authority.
Thus what has taken the superelite took over 50 years to accomplish in Europe could be done in North America in about half the time. Not helping matters is the American sheeple’s indifference to what doesn’t affect them directly and immediately.
We will still have a geographical entity known as the U.S. Much of our political infrastructure will doubtless remain essentially intact. The sheeple will doubtless continue to have their sports contests every Saturday and the latest Survivor on prime time. The globalists, after all, want the masses to stay entertained, and they probably don’t care how the sheeple entertain themselves so long as the economy keeps humming. But they will have complete control over everything of real importance, being able to overrule whatever court decisions or Congressional legislation they decide contravenes official globalist policy. Our Constitution will be history. To be sure, we barely have a Constitution now. But at least our national elites must pay lip service to Constitutional government.
When transnational committees of unelected bureaucrats begin overruling our laws and precedents—or if elected officials bow to globalism on their own (as Calif. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has done with NAFTA regulations on occasion)—we will know that Constitutional government is dead in America. The superelite will then be free to do as they please, which will probably be to begin integrating North America and Europe into a larger union. Other groups around the world are working towards integrating other regions including the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Africa, and elsewhere.
We have more illegal aliens here now than when nafta was introduced 10+years ago and it was supposed to help them. Scrap the damn thing...it ain't working.
Generally speaking, countries do not sign treaties, or individuals sign contracts, without an element of self-interest. To paint NAFTA as being some sort of social program for Mexico is rather odd, imo.
Have a good day. Banging my head against a brick wall will give me a headache.
These people think they've bought themselves a ticket to fame and fortune by participating in such a thing. But guess where their ticket is really destined for? I'll give one clue and it's not Heaven...
I see what you mean
You only have to get to the second paragraph and events in Banff and you are back the same unanswered question.
Who was the original source of the story?
WND won't say. Freepers won't say. Nobody wants to admit the source.
What is the point of reading beyond that second paragraph?
I think you'll find this interesting.
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2315
Nationwide Candidates Win by Fighting for New Trade Policies, Opposing NAFTA Model; No Fair Trader Loses, 36 “Free” Trade Seats Flip
Trade Helped Put Democrats Over Top, Emerges as National Electoral Issue with More Than 25 Paid Ads and 115 Races Using Trade as Differentiator, Public Citizen Report Shows; Exit Polls Show Voters’ Economic Anxiety a Top Concern
WASHINGTON, D.C. – From Florida to Hawaii and parts in between, pro-fair trade challengers Tuesday beat anti-fair trade incumbents, according to a report on the 2006 midterm results conducted by Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch division. Incumbents who had voted for the U.S. trade status quo of NAFTA, WTO and Fast Track were replaced by those rejecting these failed policies and advocating improvement with 36 congressional seats (seven Senate and 29 House) being won by proponents of fair trade, and perhaps as high as 44 total congressional seats once all election results are in.
“This election changed the composition of Congress on trade to more closely represent U.S. public opinion. Congress needs a system for negotiating U.S. trade agreements – with a steering wheel and emergency brakes on negotiators – that delivers on the public’s expectations for a new trade policy that wins for American workers and farmers and does not harm the environment or food safety,” said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch division.
Trade and off-shoring were wedge issues actively used in 115 congressional campaigns nationwide with more than 25 paid campaign ads. Election exit polls conducted by CNN and The New York Times revealed that Americans’ anxiety about the economy and job security trumped Iraq war concerns.
“This election evaporated whatever doubts remained that trade was a politically powerful issue,” Wallach said. “Given the national sweep of fair trade winners and the key races in which trade played a big role, trade and globalization issues will have major saliency in the 2008 presidential election and beyond.”
No incumbent fair trader was beaten by a “free trader.” The only Democratic incumbents seeking higher office who were defeated were anti-fair trade Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., running for Tennessee’s open Senate seat, and Rep. Jim Davis, running for Florida’s open governor slot. Despite the Democratic sweep, Republican Rep. Rob Simmons (CT-2), who opposed Fast Track, CAFTA and the Oman FTA, is in a too-close-to-call race despite being listed for months as a likely loser.
Many GOP anti-fair trade leaders were defeated in surprise upsets: Clay Shaw (R-Fla.) the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee chair, and Ways and Means members Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.), Chris Chocola (R-Ind.), Melissa Hart (R-Penn.) and J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.). Each was replaced by a fair trader: FL-22 Ron Klein; CT-5 Chris Murphy; IN-2 Joe Donnelly; PA-4 Jason Altmire; and AZ-5 Harry Mitchell.
“The election results show that campaigning for a new trade policy that benefits American workers and farmers is a winner,” said Todd Tucker, research director for Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch. “Failure to disassociate from the NAFTA-WTO status quo and its trade deficits and job losses was a liability, including in traditionally ‘free trade’ states.(snip)
I dont think this is stoppable anymore if it ever was stoppable. I dont think it will be a political merger. It might end up there though. There will be open or near open borders and Mexicans and/or latin americans will be the vast majority of our new citizens. Political merger (unlikely) or not a line can be drawn right here in history with before and after being two different Americas.
I agree. We can't use medieval thinking in terms of borders anymore. We have to come up with a new way.
bttt
"Do you have anything in your deck of cards that does not involve impugning my motives? Try some facts. Step up."
It would seem to me that you, sir, went right to the Nazi accusations. It's a little hypocritical to suggest that he's impugning your motives while you impugn his.
"Careful of the knives some FROBL are gonna be hurling at your back."
Amazing, isn't it...the extent to which they will go, the dedication, organization, and almost immediate reaction, every single time, on every single related thread, in defense of something they claim to be 'nonexistent' and little more than 'conspiracy' by 'tinfoil' hat wearers.
And clearly no one is fooled by their antics into believing that they don't support the OBL agenda, when they do. Just takes a bit of prodding to get them to admit it. Wonder what keeps them from doing so to begin with?
by Arizona Senator Karen S. Johnson - District 18
November 20, 2006
I just returned from a week in Washington, D.C., with a group of concerned women where we learned about the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), also known as “The North American Union.” This partnership was agreed upon at a private meeting held in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005, between then-President of Mexico, Vicente Fox; U.S. President George Bush; and then-Prime Minister Paul Martin of Canada. The SPP is an agreement to merge our United States of America with Mexico and Canada.
I am outraged about what the Bush administration is doing with this partnership behind Congress’s back. (See www.spp.gov)
With virtually no mention in the mainstream media and no oversight from Congress, Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez is pushing forward, through his department, the “working groups” that are currently implementing this plan. Government bureaucrats and business leaders are “harmonizing and integrating” our laws with Mexico and Canada on a broad range of issues such as E-Commerce, Transportation, Environment, Health, Agriculture, Financial Services, and National Security just to mention a few. Do we want our laws “harmonized” with Socialist Canada and corrupt Mexico?
If you are concerned about terrorism in our country, just remember that enlarging our borders, merging our security functions with one of the most corrupt nations on earth (Mexico), and giving up sovereignty and constitutional protections does NOT make us safer.
Dr. Jerome Corsi, a Harvard Professor, who has spent months researching this issue was recently able through a Freedom of Information request to obtain about 1,000 pages on SPP/North American Union, which clearly reveal that the Bush administration is running a “shadow government” with Mexico and Canada in which unelected bureaucrats are crafting a broad range of policy changes. The SPP is truly rewriting U.S. administrative law, all without Congressional oversight or public disclosure.
The government watchdog organization, Judicial Watch, obtained many of the same documents that Dr. Corsi has received, including the organizational chart and a listing of trilateral Mexican, Canadian, and U.S. administrative officers who report on multiple, cabinet-level “working groups.”
The SPP.gov web site has now put up a “Myth vs. Fact” document posted for public relations purposes to begin the “whitewash” in which they think they can hoodwink the American public. One of the ways the administration has been able to go around Congress is by not having the three countries sign a treaty or “law” on SPP. I want to know -- and the American public should demand to know – where does the Bush administration get the congressional authorization to invite two foreign nations to the table to rewrite U.S. law?
The Bush administration is trying to create the infrastructure for a new regional North American government in stealth fashion, under the radar and out of public view. Congress has unequivocally been asleep at the wheel.
It is incredible but, if this template is followed, just four years from now the United States may cease to exist as an independent nation. Its laws, rules and regulations – including all freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution – will be subject to review and nullification by the
North American Union’s governing body (unelected). There will no longer be a Canadian or Mexican border. Transnational transportation corridors will crisscross the United States delivering the cheapest goods possible from China and Vietnam with Mexican truckers who will work for a pittance of what our U.S. truckers earn. Thousands of middle-class jobs will be wiped out, and the U.S. will become nothing more than a province in an emerging North American superstate.
The American people have got to be alerted and we must contact our members of Congress to put a stop to this. Most Representatives and Senators are largely unaware of the SPP/North American Union. I am certain that an aroused and deeply concerned electorate would have little trouble gaining support to block what is planned and retain our nation’s hard-won independence. Please help stop this insane move towards a North American Union.
Senator Karen S. Johnson - District 18
602-926-3160 (office)
480-734-1954 (cell)
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=011920&From=News
"I agree. We can't use medieval thinking in terms of borders anymore. We have to come up with a new way."
Part of the problem, imo, is that many of our lawmakers are being 'kept in the dark' and are unaware of this issue. See my post above. A grassroots effort needs to be made, so that every lawmaker, nationwide, is aware of what is happening and what is intended to be a done deal if action is not taken immediately to stop the OBL. I plan to send a copy of Johnsons letter to every Senator, Congressman, and Mayor in my state of Ohio.
I don't think S.P.P. is what Ronald Reagan had in mind.
But..... I'm no mind reader.
;-)
Please re-read comment #2, and then my #8, and get back to me.
Responses generated by a conspiracy-related (for lack of a better term) thread are evidence of the conspiracy. Brilliant!
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.