Posted on 09/12/2006 10:11:55 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Another NAFTA Super-Highway is moving state-by-state from the planning stage to the funding and construction process. As listed on the U.S. Department of Transportations Federal Highway Administrations website, the I-69 Corridor is planned to connect Mexico and Canada through Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois and Michigan.
Still, skeptics -- even congressmen and senators in the nine states where the I-69 corridor will be built -- continue to charge that any idea that NAFTA Super-Highways are being built are nothing more than internet conspiracy theories.
Even NASCO (North Americas SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc.) continues to be in denial, refusing to acknowledge that any NAFTA Super-Highways are being built. A second NASCO homepage makeover reflecting a new public relations attempt by NASCO to defuse criticism now lists a NASCO FAQs section, which opens to a .pdf file letter on NASCO stationary. In response to the question, Will the NAFTA Superhighway be four football fields wide? NASCO answers: There is no new, proposed 'NAFTA Superhighway.' Next, NASCO attempts to redefine the SuperCorridor in its name as a reference not to a super-highway, but intermodal integration along the existing NASCO Corridor.
We have previously argued that as a trade association NASCO itself will never build any highway of any type, but we continue to argue that NASCOs members, such as the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), are very actively involved in creating substantial NAFTA corridor infrastructure, including super-highways. Moreover, NASCO not yet responded to our challenge that NASCO repudiate the plans of TxDOT to build the planned Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC-35), the first leg of the NAFTA Super-Highway planned to stretch into Canada parallel to I-35. Otherwise, NASCO is just dealing in semantics, trying to distinguish Super-Corridors from Super-Highways, or defeating their own straw argument on the basis that we somehow presumed that a trade organization like NASCO would be required to build a NAFTA Super-Highway in order to support a NAFTA Super-Highway one of their members was building.
We need turn no further than the TxDOTs TTC-35 website to find evidence linking the I-69 NAFTA Super-Highway project to the I-35 NAFTA Super-Highway project. There the TxDOT openly admits the reality:
Interstate 69 is a planned 1,600-mile national highway connecting Mexico, the United States and Canada. Eight states are involved in the project. In Texas, I-69 will be developed under the Trans-Texas Corridor master plan.
The TTC-35 website further acknowledges that:
Congress passed several pieces of legislation defining the I-69 corridor. Legislation included ISTEA (1991), 1993 DOT Appropriations Act, 1995 National Highway System Designation Act and TEA-21 (1998).
Further, the TTC-35 website indicates that TxDOT anticipates completing the I-69/TTC environmental impact statement in fall 2007 and receiving federal approval in winter 2007. The TTC-35 website includes a proposed I-69/TTC map and a schedule of the locations where 37 public hearings were held during July and August 2006 in Texas to review I-69/TTC recommended corridor alternatives.
The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LaDOT) acknowledges conducting a I-69 environmental and location study in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to study a proposed route through Bossier, Cado and DeSoto Parishes. As described on the LaDOT website: The proposed highway is part of the I-69 Corridor, which will link Indianapolis, Indiana to the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas. The description of the I-69 Corridor on the LaDOT website echoes the description on the TxDOT website:
Interstate 69 is a 1,600 mile-long national highway that will ultimately connect Canada to Mexico. I-69 traverses nine states from the Gulf of Mexico and Texass Golden Triangle, through the Mississippi Delta, the Midewst, to the industrial north and, finally, to Canada.
Again, LaDOT has obtained federal highway funds to begin construction and a series of final public hearings were announced for July 2006.
We find similar I-69 Corridor discussions on the state department of transportation websites in Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan. The only state department of transportation website that does not have a specific discussion of the I-69 Corridor is Illinois. The FHWA specifies that the involvement of Illinois in the I-69 corridor is limited and that the current plan is that the I-69 Corridor in Illinois will utilize the existing roads, particularly I-94 from Chicago to Detroit. The I-69 Corridor will cross the U.S. border with Canada in Port Huron, Mich., continuing in Canada as Highway 402 in Ontario.
The FHWA has defined the I-69 corridor as a Megaproject, defined as a major transportation project that costs at least $1 billion and attracts a high level of public attention or political interest because of their impact on the community, environment, and State budgets. We realize how the FHWA considers Texas and the TTC to be an essential component of the coming system of planed NAFTA Super-Highways, including I-69, when we consult a FHWA map that portrays Texas as the critical NAFTA/CAFTA gateway into the United States.
The FHWA caption under this map reads:
This map of the United States shows the heavy volume of freight shipped through Texas, a major trade gateway from Mexico and South America, as red lines branching out from the heart of the Lone Star State.
The second section under study, I-69/TTC, extends from northeast Texas to the Mexican border, incorporating about 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) of the planned I-69 corridor. Although part of a national project, I-69/TTC is being developed in Texas under the Trans-Texas Corridor master plan. I-69 is a 2,570-kilometer (1,600 mile) national highway that, once completed, will connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Other States involved in the I-60 project include Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisana, Michigan, Mississippi, and Tenessee. The planned location for I-69, designated by the U.S. Congress in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) was chose because of the economic opportunities that could be created along the north-south corridor, especially those related to increased trade resulting from NAFTA.
We are struck by the close similarity between this FHWA language and the language used by states such as Texas and Louisiana in describing the I-69 corridor. Reading this language should leave no doubt that the I-69 Corridor is envisioned by the FHWA to be truly a NAFTA Super-Highway. Any congressman or senator, especially one who represents a state affected by the I-69 Corridor, who argues differently or who appears unaware of the I-69 NAFTA Super-Highway is admitting their own negligence in oversight responsibilities, if not also in just plain public awareness as a citizen of their respective states.
Anyone doubting the importance of NAFTA Super-Highways to the Bush Administration should reflect on President Bushs nomination last Tuesday of Mary Peters to be the next secretary of Transportation replacing Norm Mineta. Ms. Peters served as the head of the FHWA in the Bush administration as the TTC and I-69 Corridor projects were being developed.
"There are no "NAFTA Super-Highway" projects being built at all."
Come see what's going on right now in Texas. Check out the Texas Super Corridor.
Eminent domain should be a last resort, especially when other options exist. They could have easily done IN-37 --> US-50 --> IN-57 --> I-164 which only requires a small amount of expropriation (for bypasses and interchanges). Alternatively they could have upgraded US-41 to a freeway for even less expropriation...
I pity the fool that can't see the forest for the trees. The folks you mention would fit the bill completely.
Well I guess it is ok this time, as long as I can get from Indy to Evansville in 2 hours instead of 4.
I've observed that the smoothest entry into Canada for me is when I am going there to watch a hockey game.
"Welcome to Canada. Where are you going?"
"London"
"For what purpose?"
"A hockey game"
"Well, why wouldn't you? Come on in, eh?"
Get a clue:
BEN BERNANKE & THE NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER
By Steven Yates
September 11, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
When we read some of Ben S. Bernankes recent writings, it becomes clear why he was picked to succeed Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Corporation.
First, unlike Greenspan, Bernanke is a good writer who expresses himself clearly. An academic by inclination, his essays are sprinkled with citations and endnotes. There are bibliographies at the end. Greenspans remarks (except, perhaps, for irrational exuberance) often elicited, Huh? Bernanke leaves few doubts where he is coming from.
On August 25, Bernanke made a presentation to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas Citys 30th Annual Economic Symposium at Jackson Hole, Wyomingone of this countrys prime hideaways for the elite, with tracts of real estate priced out of the reach of lesser mortals. The title of Bernankes presentation: Global Economic Integration: Whats New and Whats Not. (Its on the Federal Reserve website). In this lecturewhich appears tailored as much for outsiders who follow such things as for the Insiders likely to be seen at Jackson HoleBernanke adopts a familiar ploy: to depict global economic integration as an exclusively technology-driven process. Thus the section entitled A Short History of Global Economic Integration which traces the process to the Romans who unified their far-flung empire through an extensive transportation network and a common language, legal system, and currency. (The Roman Empire grew increasingly barbaric and decadent and finally collapsed from withina little detail of history Bernanke neglects to notebut never mind that for now.)
There are three possible implications of this one remark. One, the current wave of the New International Economic Order is at base an exercise in building an empire owing more to the Romans than its purveyors care to admit. Two, when Americas borders with Mexico and Canada are effectively eroded and the North American Community comes into being, do not be surprised if NAFTA Chapter 11 tribunals so far limited to judging trade disputes evolve into a full-fledged North American legal system that can override our courts and render our Constitution null and voidvery possibly with the full cooperation of globalist-leaning Justices such as Stephen Breyer. Three, despite the belligerent denials that anything of the sort is on the drawing board, do not be shocked when, a few years down the road, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFRs) Building a North American Community lead author Robert Pastors proposal for a North American currency, the Amero, becomes a live option somewhere down the pike.
A collapse of the dollar would definitely hasten this last. The Federal Reserve, by arranging for the printing of unbacked currency (fiat money) at an unprecedented rate, is hastening the collapse of the dollar. Since the unheralded end of M3 reporting in March of this year, no one knows for sure how much fiat money is in circulation generating real inflation (as opposed to the cooked core inflation rate the Fed pawns off on the public through the controlled news media). The contrarian International Forecaster estimates the actual inflation rate at 10.9 percent!
What is clear is that Bernankes Federal Reserve is following the agenda of Alan Greenspans Federal Reserve without significant change. What the Fed has done is create what author and contrarian economist Gary North describes as an international time bomb. The time bomb has two components: (1) the huge accumulation of fiat money; (2) the massive build-up of debt to foreign countries, some of whom (like China) surely do not have our best interests at heart! If the bomb goes off all at once, it will precipitate a global economic collapse that will make the Great Depression look like a bad day at the races by comparison.
Bernankes essay also weighed in against protectionismalways safe, since few economists consider protectionism a good idea. The problem here: arguments against protectionism are invariably presented as part of a false dichotomy with the globalist-managed trade being sold as free trade. Bernankes reasoning is fallacious because of the third alternative: the real thing, allowed to develop on its own rather than orchestrated through economic social engineering. It is difficult to know for sure what real free trade would look like right now, but since genuine free markets operate to enable all to pursue their needs, wants and interests unhampered by government interference and not bankrolled by government, central banks or foundations, it would probably reflect a mixture of the small and local with the large and international. But I digress. Bernankes argument is invalid, if its aim is to establish the necessity of global economic integration by making a case against protectionism.
Bernanke sees global economic integration as stemming from technological change. Following World War II, he states, Technological advances further reduced the costs of transportation and communication
. Telephone communication expanded, and digital electronic computing came into use
. At first glance, this sounds reasonable. But it reflects ignorance of the elites long term motives and efforts to integrate the planet having integrated financial and economic systems.
In 1931well before the explosion of developments Bernanke invokes (except for the telephone)Arnold Toynbee, Fabian socialist, Rhodes Round Tabler and court historian for the British Royal Institute for International Affairs (counterpart to our CFR) gave a speech to the Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Affairs in Copenhagen entitled The Trend of International Affairs Since the War He told his fellow globalists of the day:
If we are frank with ourselves, we shall admit that we are engaged on a deliberate and sustained and concentrated effort to impose limitations upon the sovereignty and independence of the fifty or sixty local sovereign independent States which at present partition the habitable surface of the earth and divide the political allegiance of mankind.
Toynbee went on, It is just because we are really attacking the principle of local sovereignty that we keep on protesting our loyalty to it so loudly. The harder we press our attack upon the idol, the more pains we take to keep its priests and devotees in a fools paradiselapped in a false sense of security which will inhibit them from taking up arms in their idols defense.
Toynbee then launched into an attack on national sovereignty of the sort reserved for his fellow elitists: The local national state, invested with the attributes of sovereigntyis an abomination of desolation standing in the place where it ought not. It has stood in that place now
for four or five centuries. Our political task in our generation is to cast the abomination out
.
Finally:
I will not prophesy. I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local national states of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or a publicist can beperhaps not quite burnt at the stake, but certainly ostracized and discredited.... (Italics mine.)
This was well before Richard Gardners much more often cited remark in a 1974 issue of the CFRs flagship journal Foreign Affairs that the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down ... an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.
There is thus every reason to believe that dissolving national borders and working in the direction of a global state was on the agenda all along. The effort was intended to sail under the radar until it was too late; obviously, most Americans would reject it if they knew about it, since globalism both has and will mean a serious diminishing of the American standard of living through lost jobs; lowered wages; unchecked immigration; and massive debt (consumer, national and foreign).
Given all this evidence, attributing global economic integration to advancing technology commits a different fallacy, post hoc ergo prompter hoc (after this, therefore because of this). Technological change did not cause global economic integration, but happened alongside of it, and was perhaps encouraged as a path to eroding borders, undermining sovereignty, and setting us on course to regional political and bureaucratic integration, ending U.S. independence and paving the way first to regional government and then to world government.
David Rockefeller, international banker and archglobalist, stated back in 1993 following the passage of NAFTA: Everything is in placeafter 500 yearsto build a true 'new world' in the Western Hemisphere. Rockefeller and his colleagues in the CFR and the Trilateral Commission had a name for this new world: the New International Economic Order.
Ben Bernanke has sold his soul to this, else he would not have been appointed to one of the most powerful positions in this country, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Corporation.
Bernanke came to his home state of South Carolina two weeks ago, visiting his rural home town of Dillon (population 6,800), one of many rural towns in the Carolinas devastated by plant closings since the passage of NAFTA. The official unemployment rate in Dillon in June was 9.7 percent! Bernanke delivered remarks under the title Productivity (also available on the Fed website), again pushing globalization.
His message to the ordinary mortals struggling to survive in post-NAFTA South Carolina: change is going to be forced on you whether you like it or not. Recommendation: tailor your education to technology-driven economic development and become good little worker bees. Now Ive nothing against learning new technology. What bothers me acutely: from the purveyors of education tailored to economic development we hear not a word about the Constitution or history or the economics of private property rights or critical thinking or other skills appropriate for citizens of a free society. What we heard instead from Ben Bernanke was a thinly veiled warning: you backward South Carolinians are dragging your feet on joining the New International Economic Order. Either get with the program or expect even worse unemployment, underemployment and abject poverty.
I note that you guys have to post interminably long articles to make your point. Here's why: You have to get people to accept your premise. You can't argue it directly, you have to have somebody wade through a long diatribe so that when I try to poke holes in it, you point to other parts. It's whack-a-mole debating. Sorry, I don't play that game.
Microsoft Word put the "contribution" to this thread in comment #70 at 1691 words. And "intellectually lazy" is expecting someone to wade through it all in order to find the "nugget," and forcing your reader to assume he knows the point you are making, if it even exists at all. There's a reason we learned what a "topic sentence" is in our Elementary Writing classes.
Furthermore, I note (not without some irony) that in the past week or so, our colleague cc once urged us to follow one of his links only to allow us to discover he was linking to the same document at the top of the thread. Why should he be given the benefit of the doubt when it's clear he's not reading the material he himself is citing?
I suspect that Corsi thinks that I-69 is going to become a TTC-style monster highway with 10 to 12 lanes and rail lines. That's what makes this article so ludicrous.
They're incrementally widening it in Kentucky to...(cue spooky music)...SIX LANES.
The DNC Talking Points Generator.
I also think the notion that a private consortium will front the vast majority of the cash to build and operate a road that will not be used (or at least suffer from drastic over-capacity) is rather "peculiar."
I refer to the TTC, of course.
But but now I am not so sure.... I mean it could be a nefarious plan to allow Canadians to ship Hockey Sticks to the port of Mobile for shipment to Latin America.
---look of Wide Eyed panic----
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.