North American Union threat gets attention of congressmen

WorldNetdaily.com ^ | October 1, 2006

[Man50D]

WASHINGTON – While several members of Congress have denied any knowledge of efforts to build "NAFTA superhighways" or move America closer to a union with Mexico and Canada, four members of the House have stepped up to sponsor a resolution opposing both initiatives.

Rep. Virgil Goode Jr., R-Va., has introduced a resolution – H.R. 487 – designed to express "the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union (NAU) with Mexico and Canada."

"Now that Congress is preparing to take up the issues of the North American Union and NAFTA superhighways, we are moving out of the realm where critics can attempt to disparage the discussion as 'Internet conspiracy theory,'" explained Jerome Corsi, author and WND columnist who has written extensively on the Security and Prosperity Partnership – the semisecret plan many suspect is behind the efforts to create a European Union-style North American confederation and link Mexico and Canada with more transcontinental highways and rail lines. "This bill represents a good first step."

Corsi explained to WND that the Bush administration is trying to create the North American Union incrementally, under the radar scope of public attention.

"Even today," said Corsi, SPP.gov has a 'Myths vs. Facts' section that denies the administration is changing laws or working to create a new regional government. Unfortunately, the many references on SPP.gov to Cabinet-level working groups creating new trilateral memoranda of understanding and other trilateral agreements makes these denials sound hollow."

The resolution introduced by Goode had three co-sponsors: Reps. Thomas Tancredo, R-Colo., Ron Paul, R-Texas, and Walter Jones, R-N.C.

The "whereas" clauses of the resolution lay out the case against the North American Union and NAFTA Superhighways as follows:

Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);

Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA;

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union;

Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers;

Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities;

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States. The resolution calls for the House of Representatives to agree on three issues of determination:

The United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System;

The United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and

The President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States. "As important as this resolution is," Corsi said, "we need still more congressional attention. Where is congressional oversight of SPP? We need congressional hearings, not just congressional resolutions."

H.Con.Res.487 has been referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and to the Committee on Internal Relations for consideration prior to any debate that may be scheduled on the floor of the House of Representatives.

[Ben Ficklin]

Will you adding a by-pass or 2?

[Smartass]

Kim, 1rudeboy already admitted, on another thread, that he does this 7/24 for his own amusement and humor$$$ In other words, so called Free Republic Conservatives, bashing, insulting, demeaning, degrading other Conservatives that are concerned about the sovereignty of America.

Then he admits being a full time lobbyist for the CFR$$$ It doesn't take to much calculating of why he hawks NAFTA, Trans-Texas, NASCO Corridor threads$$$

 

[processing please hold]

Shooo, ya 'bother me.

I'll just take my measly 7.63 miles and get out of your life.

[Ben Ficklin]

How are Texas's roads any business of your's?

[Kimberly GG]

The difference between *pinging* someone to a thread and 'calling in reinforcements' is the motive. Yours is objectionable.

[Kimberly GG]

Why am I not surprised!

[Ben Ficklin]

Does Spain own your 7 miles? Hahhahhahhahhhhhhhhhah

[1rudeboy]

We need to get some things straight, n00b. Generally, I do not begin "bashing, insulting, demeaning, or degrading" other ostensible conservatives until they begin themselves. In other words, I do not fire unless fired upon.

So much for my policy on personal attacks. Now, if someone makes a claim that is inherently absurd (for example, the Trans-Texas Corridor will make it easier for the Chinese to invade the United States), then it's weapons-free. Again, in other words, if someone presents a stupid idea I call the idea stupid at once. If you prefer threads or debates that are better moderated, there are plenty of other forums out there. If you feel that I am egregiously violating FR guidelines, then I invite you to click "Abuse" and have my comments removed.

[1rudeboy]

I refer you to my comment #88.

[zeugma]

Just as soon as I find it, shill. They've included these clauses in other contracts they've signed. No reason to think that Gov Goodhair would threaten his retirement by not allowing it to be included in this case.

[processing please hold]

Does Spain own your 7 miles?

Time will answer that question.

[Ben Ficklin]

You are correct that non-compete clauses exist. The question is, do they include I35?

[zeugma]

Do you have a link to the comments you mentioned by 1rudeboy? It might be useful to keep handy.

[processing please hold]

Here's an entire encyclopedia, maybe the info is in there.

DOT report to Congress on public-private partnership

[Smartass]

There are many. I suggest you back over his comments page for the last few days, where I'm sure you'll find ample admissions.

:o)

 

[Kimberly GG]

"I refer you to my comment #88."


LMAO...yeah, that'll work.

[1rudeboy]

Aw shucks, Smartass, are you saying you don't have the evidence?

[texastoo]

How are Texas's roads any business of your's?

Anyone who pays federal taxes will be funding Cintra to build the corridors. This is really the business of the whole country however, this been kept quiet and few people of other states are aware.

I refer you to the excellent post #94.

[texastoo]

Thanks for this information.

[processing please hold]

You're welcome.