Mr Corsi continues his extremely well researched series of articles on the death of American sovereignty and constitutional government.
FYI
Do you realize the maps have already been changed? Speaking with friends, I mentioned that Mexico was always part of "Latin America" or "Central America" as I remembered geography growing up. They disagreed, saying it was always part of North America.
I explained I tried computer searches and all maps showed the "new" North America; USA, Canada and Mexico. I commented that I wish I had not thrown out a set of really old encyclopedias. Sure enough, one of them had a set copyrighted in 1959.
Guess what? Not only did the old maps CLEARLY show Mexico as part of "Latin/Central America" it listed each country in the narrative. Does anyone know when the maps changed?
Yes, he does. And I certainly haven't seen much in the way of factual counter arguments that hold water.
The NAFTA Super Corridor plan is ultimately to reduce the transportation costs of using cheap labor in China, South Korea and Indonesia to produce goods for American markets. Bypassing West Coast ports in the U.S. means bypassing U.S. union wages. Mexican port and rail transport are expected to keep the shipping costs low. Also, allowing free access to the U.S. to Mexican trucks means that the containers can be moved through the U.S. by Mexican nationals, again bypassing Teamster union wages and benefits typically paid U.S. truck drivers.
* * * I continue to argue that a "follow the money" strategy must be utilized to understand why President Bush has refused to close our border with Mexico, pushing instead for "comprehensive immigration reform" legislation that would allow the vast majority of illegal immigrants now in the U.S. to remain under a "guest worker" or "pathway to citizenship" provision. The underlying agenda of the Bush administration seems to be to create a NAFTA-plus environment in which workers, trade and capital will be allowed to flow unimpeded within the trilateral orth American community consisting of the United States, Canada and Mexico.
What's a valid and reasonable explanation as to why "NASCO has received $2.5 million in earmarks from the U.S. Department of Transportation" if this isn't planned? I'd like someone to provide a reasonable argument to me that can even attempt to suggest that Americans will have ANY decent jobs left after all these PLANS comes to fruition?
Where are all the men (and women) (entry level on up) who are working at the ports going to be working if the port jobs are going to be shut down and outsourced to Mexico? What's going to happen to the communities which have been historically dependent upon those workers and their income? Those same cities/towns, BTW (i.e., Los Angeles/Long Beach and Seattle/Tacoma harbor areas), have been invaded by illegals, illegally taking lower-paying, non-union jobs. Where are the entry level young men (and women), and middle-aged men and women going to find new work in those towns/cities? And since manufacturing companies have already outsourced thousands of jobs to China, on top of there being less jobs created at home, the number of GOOD jobs left standing is not only dwindling, they're becoming non-existent.