Controversial SPP moves towards North American air traffic control system.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57073
The U.S. has built nine navigation system for Mexico and Canada under the controversial Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America in an apparent first step toward establishing the satellite infrastructure needed to create a North American air traffic control system.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8375
In March of 2005, the leaders of Canada (Paul Martin), the U.S. (George W. Bush), and Mexico (Vicente Fox) signed an agreement called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP is about securing prosperity for a rich elite, while taking what remaining power the people have, through democratic sovereign institutions, and placing that power in a few hands of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats whose strings are pulled by global corporations and banks. However, in discussing the SPP, we must first go back a little further than 2005 to the origins from which it arose.
The same group that on their own website admits to being the predominant force in Canada behind NAFTA, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) — Canada’s most powerful interest group made up of the CEOs of the 150 largest corporations in Canada, many of which are subsidiaries of foreign, predominantly American, corporations — in January of 2003, issued a press release announcing the creation of their North American Security and Prosperity Initiative. In this, they proposed five main changes to be undertaken in the North American political-economic landscape: “Reinvent borders, maximize regulatory efficiencies, negotiate a comprehensive resource security pact, reinvigorate the North American defense alliance, and create a new institutional framework.”
Several months later, in November of the same year, the CCCE issued a short document titled, “Paul Martin urged to take the lead in forging a new vision for North American cooperation.” In this document, they stated that, “all of the CCCE’s 150 member CEOs are involved in this ambitious two-year initiative,” in which Thomas D’Aquino, president and CEO of the CCCE, “urged that Mr. Martin champion the idea of a yearly summit of the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States in order to give common economic, social, and security issues the priority they deserve in a continental, hemispheric, and global context.”
Apparently, Martin was listening, because one of the signatories of this letter was none other than a vice chairman of the CCCE and then-CEO of Canfor Corporation, Canada’s largest softwood lumber producer, David L. Emerson. Emerson would go on to be Martin’s Minister of Industry.
When the CCCE’s two-year initiative ended, it formed a new task force, called the “Independent Task Force on the Future of North America” in conjunction with the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations and the U.S.’s most powerful think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), founded by the Rockefeller and Morgan families in 1921.
This task force released a statement on March 14, 2005 entitled, “Trinational call for a North American economic and security community by 2010.” In the Trinational Call, it was recommended that the North America nations create “a community defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter,” and to “harmonize” the areas of energy, security, education, military, immigration, resources, and the economy.
Nine days after this recommendation was issued, Bush, Martin, and Fox signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), and in the joint statement explained it would, “implement common border security and bioprotection [enhanced surveillance] strategies, enhance critical infrastructure protection, implement a common approach to emergency response, implement improvements in aviation and maritime security, combat transnational threats, enhance intelligence partnerships, promote sectoral collaboration in energy, transportation, financial services, technology, and other areas to facilitate business, [and] reduce the costs of trade.” The SPP agreement oversees the creation of SPP “working groups” in each country, which have a mandate of overseeing “harmonization,” or “integration,” in over 300 policy areas.
Two months later, in May of 2005, the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America released a document titled, “Building a North American Community,” of which Canadian Task Force members included D’Aquino, Wendy Dobson, professor at University of Toronto and former president of the C.D. Howe Institute, Allan Gotlieb,(former Canadian Ambassador to the United States as well as being Chairman of the CCCE), and John Manley, former Liberal deputy prime minister.
The report’s recommendations included initiatives to establish “a common security perimeter by 2010, develop a North American Border Pass [North American ID card] with biometric identifiers, expand NORAD into a multi-service defense command,” share intelligence, develop Mexico’s energy resources, “harmonize” areas of energy, education, military, foreign policy, immigration, health, expand “temporary” migrant worker programs, and adopt a common external tariff.
In 2002, based in Montreal, the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) was formed, which, according to their website, “aims to address the issues raised by North American integration as well as identify new ideas and strategies to reinforce the North American region,” and hold “NAFI organized conferences which brought together government and academic figures as well as business people.” The first conference was held in Montreal in 2003, the second in 2004 in Mexico, of which was stated on the organization’s website: “About 200 participants and conference speakers took part in the conference, [including] former Energy Minister, Mr. Felipe Calderon,” the current President of Mexico.
NAFI later organized a ‘mock’ North American Parliament, called the Triumvirate, which allows 100 Canadian, American, and Mexican university students “to better understand the North American dynamic” — the first of which took place in the Canadian Senate in May of 2005, hosted by the Triumvirate president and former ambassador Raymond Chrétien, the son of Jean Chrétien. Participating Canadian universities included Carleton, McGill, and yes, Simon Fraser University. The board of directors of NAFI includes Stephen Blank, a member of CFR and Robert Pastor, CFR member and co-chair of the Independent Task Force.
In January of 2006, the Council of the Americas and the North American Business Council issued a report titled, “Findings of the Public/Private Sector Dialogue on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” which called for the establishment of a “North American competitiveness council” to advise governments on the implementation of ‘deep integration.’ The Chairman of the Council of the Americas is former banker David Rockefeller, and top executives from J.P Morgan, Merck & Co., Chevron, McDonald’s, Shell, Citigroup, IBM, Ford, PepsiCo, Microsoft, GE, Pfizer, MetLife, Wal-Mart, Exxon Mobil, Credit Suisse, General Motors, Merrill Lynch, and individuals from the U.S. Department of State.
In March of 2006, a second SPP summit was held, this time with Bush, Fox, and newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The press release (which can be found at spp.gov, “Report to Leaders August 2006”) announced the formation of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), which “provides a voice and a formal role for the private sector” whose job is to advise the SPP ministers in their respective governments. Current Canadian SPP ministers are Maxime Bernier (Foreign Affairs), Jim Prentice (Industry) and Stockwell Day (Public Safety, ha!).
The NACC is run out of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and with the Council of the Americas, and is made up of corporate leaders from each of the three countries. In Canada, these corporations include Manulife Financial, Power Corporation of Canada, Ganong Bros. Ltd, Suncor Energy, Canadian National, Linamar Corporation, Bell Canada Enterprises, Home Depot, and the Bank of Nova Scotia. U.S. companies include Campbell Soup, Chevron, Ford, FedEx, GE, GM, Lockheed Martin, Merck, Procter & Gamble, UPS, Wal-Mart, and Whirlpool.
On September 12 to 14, 2006, business and government representatives from the three North American countries met in secret, with no media coverage, at the Banff Springs Hotel and convened the North American Forum. Judicial Watch, a U.S. public watchdog group got declassified government documents through a Freedom of Information Act request and made the documents available on their website. These documents reveal the discussions and membership in the secret meetings. The Canadian co-chair of the meeting was former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed, and Canadian participants included Day, D’Aquino (also a member of the NACC), all NACC corporate representatives, and John Manley. In the released documents, under the forum discussion on “Border Infrastructure and Continental Prosperity,” chaired by John Manley, a startling quote was revealed: “While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might yield more benefit and bring more people on board (‘evolution by stealth’).” What exactly are they evolving by stealth? Oh right, our country.
On the Canadian government’s SPP website, a list of priorities is provided which gives recommendations to be implemented by date, and then tracks their status. Under Aviation Security: “For aviation security purposes, each country has developed, is developing or may develop its own passenger assessment (no-fly) program for use on flights within, to or from that country to ensure that persons who pose a threat to aviation are monitored or denied boarding, within 24 months (June 2007).” On June 18, 2007, Canada instituted our very ‘own’ no-fly list.
On May 8, 2007, The Montreal Gazette reported that “Canada is set to raise its limits on pesticide residues on fruit and vegetables for hundreds of products. The move is part of an effort to harmonize Canadian pesticide rules with those of the United States, which allows higher residue levels for 40 per cent of the pesticides it regulates,” and that “Canadian regulators and their U.S. counterparts have been working to harmonize their pesticide regulations since 1996, as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Now the effort is being fast-tracked as an initiative under the Security and Prosperity Partnership.”
The Vancouver Province reported on January 22, 2008, that “B.C. is about to become the first province to use a high-tech driver’s license. For an extra fee, it will enable drivers to cross the border into the U.S. without a passport and still comply with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerns,” and that “the enhanced driver’s license or EDL has a radio-frequency identification chip that will broadcast a number linked to a computer database, allowing a border guard to assess data and flag security issues as drivers approach the booth.” Introduced by Gordon Campbell and Stockwell Day, this is the “biometric” card as recommended under the SPP — essentially, a North American ID card.
There is also much discussion of a common currency for North America, often called the “Amero,” much like the euro for the E.U. The Fraser Institute published a paper entitled, “The case for the Amero.” The C.D. Howe Institute followed that with the publication, “From fixing to monetary union: options for North American currency integration.” In May of 2007, as reported by The Globe and Mail, David Dodge, then-governor of the Bank of Canada, said, “North America could one day embrace a euro-style single currency.” The Globe reported in November of 2007 that Stephen Jarislowsky, board member of C.D. Howe, told a parliamentary committee, “Canada should replace its dollar with a North American currency, or peg it to the U.S. greenback.”
The SPP is not about “security” or “prosperity” (except for the very few over the many), but is rather about forming a North American Union. When Vicente Fox recently appeared on The Daily Show, Jon Stewart asked him about NAFTA, of which Fox stated, “NAFTA’s been good. As a matter of fact we should have a new vision, go further, integrating,” and Fox went on to discuss the “solidarity” of the European Union. When asked if he wanted a North American Union, and if it would include Canada, Fox said, “Long term, yes.” On May 16, 2002 Fox spoke at Club 21 in Madrid, and stated, “Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union.”
Mussolini has been attributed as once saying, “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” Gandhi once said, “A democrat must be utterly selfless. He must think and dream not in terms of self or party but only of democracy.” So are those behind the SPP listening to, Gandhi or Mussolini?
Frontera Nortesur
Building on a cross-border educational initiative, Mexico’s federal government plans to expand educational and vocational training programs Mexican migrants in the United States. Speaking at an educational and economic development conference in Mexico last week, Mexican Education Minister Josefina Vazquez Mota said the administration of President Felipe Calderon plans to open an additional 100 community education centers to serve the migrant population in the US. The functionary also announced that Mexico will open a similar educational facility in Canada for the first time.
And just who will pay for these centers? You guessed it, it will be funded by the American tax payers. It is saddening that these centers will be built in the United States and not in Mexico where they could benefit all the children in Mexico. Millions of children are left behind as one or more of their parents travel to the United States for work each year. Having additional educational measures put into place in Mexico for those unfortunate children would be highly beneficial, with this latest move by the ever failing Mexican educational system, once again the children of Mexico are overlooked and kept in the shadows.
The purpose of the centers is two-fold. Besides providing basic and secondary education skills, the program aim to professionalize the work skills of migrants. Certification programs will be made available for Las Angeles gardeners, New York restaurant industry employees, California cosmetologists and Wisconsin diary workers, Vazquez said, adding that better education and economic competitiveness are linked together by the ties between the three member states of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
This again is no more then a low income wage game played combined with a push for the NAU. They will be certifying people to cut lawns and bus tables? For American’s wanting to get certification for these type of jobs? Well since they are being offered only to Mexicans, American’s will be out of luck. This truly is a waste of American tax payer money, and a smack in the face for Mexican’s living in Mexico who could benefit much better from these services being provided to them.
For those that keep watchful eyes on out Government happenings, so frequently we see Unconstitutional actions and deceitful acts on the floor being played off as something else. This is a wonderful read about yet another Unconstitutional action that our Government squeaked through.
By Cliff Kincaid
March 9, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
The liberals have come up with a clever way of ratifying dangerous treaties, which now require a two-thirds vote (67) to pass in the Senate. They will introduce them as legislation, requiring only a majority vote to pass. The model for this new approach is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which President Bush mistakenly refers to as a treaty.
Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been portrayed by our media as being opposed to it. In fact, they want to make NAFTA stronger. They want to renegotiate the pact and attach binding commitments and strong enforcement mechanisms on labor and environmental issues. In effect, the Democrats are calling for NAFTA to assume even more supranational authority over economic activity in the U.S., Canada and Mexico. This could be the next step on the road to a proposed North American Union.
Regarding NAFTA, Hillary says she wants “to fix NAFTA by making it clear that we’ll have core labor and environmental standards in the agreement. We will do everything we can to make it enforceable, which it is not now. “Obama says, “As president of the United States, I intend to make certain that every agreement that we sign has the labor standards, the environmental standards and the safety standards that are going to protect not just workers, but also consumers.”
When President Bush criticized these comments as tantamount to threatening a U.S. withdrawal from NAFTA, he said that “It’s not good policy on the merits and it’s not good policy as a message to send to…people who have in good faith signed a treaty and worked with us on a treaty.”
But it was not treated as a treaty in the U.S.
Clinton submitted NAFTA as an agreement, requiring only a majority of votes in both Houses of Congress for passage, and not a treaty, requiring a two-thirds vote in favor in the Senate. NAFTA passed by votes of 234-200 in the House and 61-38 in the Senate.
Clinton did it this way because he didn’t have the votes to pass NAFTA as a treaty (requiring 67 votes) in the Senate. But how did he pull off such a blatantly illegal and unconstitutional move?
Although the strict text of the U.S. Constitution includes the treaty clause as the only means by which the U.S. can enter into such international agreements, there’s a growing body of mostly liberal-left “legal opinion” that holds that “congressional-executive agreements” like NAFTA can serve as substitutes for treaties.
Clinton’s move was seen at the time, even by some on the left, as an effort to bypass constitutional processes and the United Steelworkers challenged NAFTA’s constitutionality in court. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001, after lower courts had thrown the case out, saying it was a political matter between the President and Congress. The Bush Administration sided with Clinton and the Supreme Court declined to get involved.
The Bush Administration’s support for the unconstitutional Clinton approach could easily backfire on conservatives if the Democrats take the White House and hold Congress in the fall elections. Citing NAFTA as a precedent, liberal Democrats could submit and pass treaties by a simple majority vote.
In an article in the liberal American Prospect, Thomas Geoghegan lamented that the Kyoto global warming treaty and the International Criminal Court “are among the great global projects of our day” but are not getting through the Senate because of the two-thirds majority required for passage. “So what’s the way out of this bind? It’s the same way out we used for NAFTA or for fast-track free-trade agreements. That is, we just pass a simple law,” he said.
Geoghegan says the reason liberals can’t get these measures currently passed in the Senate is because this body “overrepresents” states like “Wyoming, Idaho and America’s backwoods.” In other words, Red State Senators have too much clout under the Constitution. They are obstructing the “progressive” vision.
Geoghegan says legal justification for this new approach can be found in an article in the American Journal of International Law by Steve Charnovitz, an associate professor of international law at the George Washington University School of Law. The article complains about Senate inaction on such treaties as the feminist Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the anti-parent U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, Convention on Biological Diversity, the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, and various U.N. human rights treaties.
Since this article appeared, in October of 2004, the Bush Administration has been trying to pressure the Senate into ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty. It now awaits full Senate action.
Charnovitz admits the approach of pushing these treaties as mere agreements would be controversial. But he finds comfort in the fact that the legal action against NAFTA was thrown out.
It would make a good issue for John McCain, except for the fact that he’s for NAFTA and most of the U.N. treaty agenda.
© 2008 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved
March 10, 2008
Sen. Byron Dorgan, (Dem-N.C.) has called for an investigation by the Government Accountability Office to determine whether the Transportation Department has broken the law by spending federal funds on a program allowing Mexican trucks on U.S. roads.
This call came just hours after Transportation Secretary Mary Peters warned of economic losses if Mexican trucks were prohibited from driving deep into the United States. Peters has been busy fighting in court to prevent the program’s end, disregarding that Congress prohibited spending money on the program last year.
NAFTA granted Mexican trucks greater access to U.S. roads beginning in 1995. When the pilot program began in September only a few trucks were agreed upon. Without the program at all, Mexican trucks are confined to only 20 miles beyond the border where the goods they bring in are picked up by U.S. drivers to carry the final U.S. destination.
Dorgan firmly states that the agency is violating the Antideficiency Act with their current policy, an act which prohibits spending federal money which has not been authorized or appropriated.
Peters claims the agency is not violating any law as the law, according to her, prohibits using funds to establish the program, but that the money is being used on the existing program.
This argument is the same as was given in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who are considering an appeal by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters to stop the program all together.
This is a very interesting article to read. It is regarding a protest late last year that was designed to show opposition to the visit by Mexico’s Vincente Fox in Lynnwood, Claifornia. The protesters were required to “stand down”, completely abandoning their First Amendment rights to peaceful assembly.
What makes this article so interesting is the fact that among the LAPD police force, were some that were in military like uniforms wearing “Command Center” emblems on their sleeves along with “Private Security”. This logo displayed a globe in it’s insigna. But there is more to this story. Read the linked report to see how this same globe connects to display what very well may be the NAU on United States soil.
Lou Dobbs will not be silenced! Lou Dobbs 3 hour radio program via live satellite.
Launching March 3, 2008
Monday - Friday, 3-6pm ET.
By Frosty Wooldridge October 8, 2007 NewsWithViews.com "This is our culture - fight for it. This is our flag - pick it up. This is our country - take it back." --- Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo We, as a nation, stand on the precipice of our own cultural disintegration. Our culture stands in the crosshairs of clashing civilizations via importation of millions of immigrants from incompatible cultures. This week, in Denver, Colorado, immigrants want Halloween celebrations taken out of the school systems. Peter Boyles, talk jock of KHOW 630 AM said, “Next they will demand Thanksgiving be taken away from us.” Americans like Boyles do the job Congress refuses to do! Diversity proves a great divide that dissolves American culture. Why do we allow multiculturalism to trump 231 years of successful U.S. culture? Chicago Sun Times reporter Warner Todd Huston wrote, “At the end of September the school district in Oak Lawn, Illinois announced it was considering eliminating holiday celebrations like Christmas in its schools. Oak Lawn has seen increasing numbers of residents that identify with the Muslim faith who are naturally sending their children to the public schools there and school board members are afraid that Christian holidays are "offensive" to Muslim students.” What drives the school culture? American history and American values! Columbus Manor Principal Sandy Robertson said, "It's difficult when you change the school's culture." Ask yourself, if you resided in Mexico, would you allow a Middle Eastern immigrant to change your wedding customs. If you hailed from Nepal, would you allow immigrants to change your flag festival? Would the Chinese allow an immigrant to change their national holidays to fit their sensitivities? Should the French give up their language to placate immigrants? Would France remain French if all its citizens spoke Arabic? What if Americans immigrating to Saudi Arabia demanded they speak English and celebrate Christmas? “Since we have become a culture that won't back a homogeneous observance of being an American, how do we address this issue?” Huston wrote. “How do we serve local communities that are made up mostly of "immigrants" here unlawfully?” This travesty illustrates America losing its cultural identity to a massive influx of people from incompatible cultures that will not assimilate into America but inject their own culture against ours. They cannot comprehend that our national culture and history form the bedrock of our existence. Culture permeates our cells. Our schools must teach our children about our culture in our country. Nothing about America remains more sacred than our culture. Without it, we become listless, lose our moorings and drift on an unidentifiable sea. To lose one’s identity is to lose one’s individual self. What happens next? Depression, apathy and futility--ultimately spiritual and physical suicide! A country that loses its identity suffers the same kind of disintegration as a child who loses its family. As proven around the world today with examples in Great Britain, France, Holland, Palestine and Sweden--multiculturalism fails at every level of human interaction. It proves, ultimately, one of the greatest dangers to humanity. If America loses Christmas, Halloween, Easter, 4th of July, Labor Day, Memorial Day, President’s day and Thanksgiving to multiculturalism, we lose the foundation of our spiritual grounding in an uncertain world. Huston wrote, “In fact, we should not be celebrating any other holidays but American holidays. American holidays reflect our national culture. The holidays and traditions of other cultures deserve to remain in their homes, not in the halls of our schools. By NOT indulging their desires to obviate American influences replacing them with ideas antithetical to our American first principles we would be doing a far better service to our children than to twist-and-squeeze every district to a different standard, to placate foreign nationals.” This greatest of nations on the planet became successful BECAUSE of its culture. If we bend it, break it and turn it into multicultural mush soup, we, as a people will not stand together nor will we succeed into the future. Do we want Spanish to conflict with our language in our schools? Can we withstand the trauma of multiple languages? Can we bend over backwards for the Koran that has nothing to do with our history or culture? Do we want our children bent into the violence and intolerance of much of the world from which these immigrants fled? Can we survive as a cohesive civilization if we lose our culture? Do we not see their failed cultures will become our failed culture if we continue importing millions from failed countries? When will Americans start speaking out about open borders, American culture and demand English first. These facts must be publicly and factually disclosed to every American and their children. That disclosure must be based on facts, not the emotional rhetoric and deception of teachers, politicians and biased "politically correct" news media. The discussion of diversity must be made openly and recognizing the opinions and needs of Americans, not pro-multicultural vested interests that buy and pay for elected officials. Stephen Steinlight answered it best in his, “Amnesty and the Plot Against America”: “Everything we hold most sacred in our national life and civil society, in our public places and private spaces, from our splendidly rambunctious democratic culture to the experience of solitude in our sublime untouched natural environment is at stake in this battle--because the forces that reign against us are powerful, the fate of the nation unimaginable—if they prevail.” © 2007 Frosty Wooldridge - All Rights Reserved
Read more of Frosty's works and articles at his website: www.FrostyWooldridge.com
By Jim Kouri Posted 1:00 AM Eastern October 8, 2007 NewsWithViews.com In the midst of the current presidential race, American voters are being denied information regarding alleged plans to merge the three nations of North America -- the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Not only are most political leaders in both major parties failing to discuss allegations of an impending North American Union, but the mainstream news media are failing to examine what promises to be THE major news story of the 21st Century. Meanwhile, the Mexican government has revealed to its own citizens that Mexico has entered extensive discussions with government officials in Texas and top representatives from the Bush administration to extend what it called the Trans-Texas Corridor into Mexico, with a plan to connect to the Mexican ports on the Pacific, including Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas. In fact, the official website of the Mexican northeastern state of Nuevo León contains multiple reports that José Natividad Gonzáles Parás, governor of the Mexican state of Nuevo León, has actively discussed these plans with numerous US government officials, including Texas' state and local officeholders. "All one needs to do is to look at the social mass viewpoint on Americans themselves by their own media as well as media outlets in other countries," Emmy and Golden Globe Award winning actor Michael Moriarty told NewsWithViews.com during an exclusive interview. "Americans are looked at [sic] majoritively speaking, as gun-toting, constitution quoting, trigger happy [sic] misinformee's. Yet, carrying a gun is the first and foremost sign of being a truly free person. The view that Americans are stupid is a widely held one, yet they are one of the last bastions of freedom left to view," added the former Law & Order star. Texas Governor Rick Perry, Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice all discussed the extension of the Trans-Texas Corridor into Mexico to create what's called a "Trans North America Corridor." In fact, just last August during a trip to Mexico, Perry made news in the conservative news media by calling the idea of building a fence along the US-Mexico border "idiocy." "Largely unreported in the American press were meetings Perry held in Mexico with Gonzáles Parás in which the two discussed extending the corridor into Mexico," said Moriarty. "In their private meetings, the pair thoroughly discussed extending Trans-Texas Corridor into Mexico," said Moriarty during his NWV interview. "We have had interaction with the governor of Texas," Gonzáles Parás said on the government web site. "We have had a very productive relationship with Rick Perry, who is also interested in what we can do to continue that which is known as the Trans-Texas Corridor, that in reality is the corridor of North America, the Trans North America Corridor, that includes railroads, bridges, passenger automobile highways, and truck highway lanes." Gonzáles Parás further explained the extension of TTC-35 into Mexico would connect through Monterrey, a city which he suggested would function as a hub for truck-freight traffic. Monterrey is the capital of Nuevo León. "One of the themes that merited the most attention on the part of the two governors was the development of the infrastructure needed for the competitive development of the region as it relates to developing the Trans-Texas Corridor in connection with the project we call the Corridor of Northeastern Mexico," the Nuevo León government web site reported Gonzáles Parás saying Sept. 1, at the conclusion of Perry's visit. "Gonzáles Parás is reportedly pursuing plans to establish Monterrey as an 'inland port' where international container freight cargo, largely delivered into Mexico via the Mexican ports on the Pacific, could be transported via a Trans North America Corridor into the United States via Laredo, Texas," claims Moriarty, who's been following this story closely. Once on I-35, the Mexican trucks transporting the Chinese containers could travel north, heading toward US inland ports are being established by the Free Trade Alliance San Antonio in San Antonio and in Kansas City by the Kansas City SmartPort. On May 24, Gonzáles Parás announced during his meetings in Austin, Perry had agreed the envisioned Trans North America Corridor would pass through Laredo and connect with San Antonio, just as Mexico ultimately planned to extend the superhighway south into Colombia. "We have also worked in Monterrey to create an inland port, a metropolitan center for moving rapidly the commercial traffic from Monterrey to the inland port at San Antonio," Gonzáles Parás said in the state-published interview. "For this strategic project to be accomplished, we have been working with the federal government in Mexico as well as holding discussions with the secretary of transportation and the secretary of state in the United States," he said. Similar comments made by Gonzáles Parás at a press conference in Mexico that first announced Transportes Olympic had been selected as the first trucking firm to cross the border in the Mexican truck-demonstration project.
In speaking to the group assembled at the company's headquarters, Gonzáles Parás announced the Trans-Texas Corridor was not just the NAFTA Superhighway, but "the Logistical Trans-Corridor of North America," uniting Mexico, the United States and Canada. He next announced the time had arrived to declare a North American Economic Community. Gonzáles Parás explained the Trans-Texas Corridor was more accurately known in Mexico as the "Logistical Trans-Corridor of North America." "I want to let you know how much we in this border state of Nuevo León have been working with our neighbor state of Texas," he said, "making agreements which permit us to enrich what in Texas is called the 'Trans-Texas Corridor,' but what we in Mexico know as the 'Logistical Corridor of North America.'" "We, Canada, and the United States have to perfect this Logistical Trans-Corridor of North America for our mutual benefit," Gonzáles Parás continued. He expanded his vision of a Logistical Corridor of North America to include the construction of a train and truck corridor that would cut through the heart of North America. As far as a NAFTA Superhighway, the first segment is the planned four-football-fields-wide Trans-Texas Corridor which the Texas Department of Transportation plans to build parallel to Interstate 35. "At the recent Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) third summit held in Montebello, Quebec, President Bush and Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper ridiculed the idea that SPP might result in the creation of a North American Union or NAFTA Superhighways," said Moriarty. "However, these reports written in Spanish and published on the Nuevo León government website suggest that discussions about extending TTC-35 into Mexico are much further advanced that have been admitted by the Bush administration or reported upon in the US mainstream media," Moriarty added. The well-known actor and musician takes a dim view of America's future if the current trend continues unabated. "The Old World Order is now legally dead, but is still on life support in America. The old world was about individual freedom and protection of the family unit and the family of countrymen. The New World Order is about the loss of sovereign rights given by God, and the replacement of those rights with freedoms handed out by man, or "the world government" such as the United Nations," said Moriarty. "The New World Order is alive and well today and has been for quite sometime. The founding of International Banking Cartels, Foreign Relations advisers and the creation of a World Court were all the political egg and semen needed to begin the pregnancy, global crisis (real or fabricated) was all that was needed to give birth to the dreams of powerful men."
Meanwhile, the Mexican government has revealed to its own citizens that Mexico has entered extensive discussions with government officials in Texas and top representatives from the Bush administration to extend what it called the Trans-Texas Corridor into Mexico...
Hitler Meets Christ, A Michael Moriarty film. Municipio de Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico Nuevo Leon - Wikipedia Michael Moriarty, the Emmy and Golden Globe award-winning star of Law & Order, is set to premiere his much anticipated film Hitler Meets Christ at the 17th Annual Cinequest Film Festival in San Jose, California. A dark comedy exploring the polar philosophies of two of the most controversial figures in human history, Hitler Meets Christ stars Moriarty as Hitler and Canadian actor Wyatt Page as Christ. Moriarty adapted the screenplay from a controversial play he wrote in New York in the early 90s (then called Hitler and Christ Meet Death at the Port Authority Bus Terminal). The film has already generated sizable online interest due to both its risky characterization and the recent crop of films and novels centered on Hitler and the Holocaust. According to Moriarty, the film is about the tenacity of Christ and his love — and Hitler's agony in the face of it. "It ultimately comes down to good and evil," says Moriarty. "And the two greatest, most polar opposites of good and evil are Jesus of Nazareth and Adolf Hitler of Germany... It's a comedy in as much as it allows the audience to laugh at Hitler, and it's a tragedy in that he's really a poor homeless man trapped and imprisoned by the soul of Hitler." Shot on location in some of the darkest neighborhoods of Vancouver, Canada, Hitler Meets Christ was directed by newcomer Brendan Keown and produced by Keown and Jeremy Dyson, whose previous production credits include the award-winning Dark Arc (2005). Moriarty has starred in Law & Order (1990-1994), The 4400 (2004), Shiloh (1997), Pale Rider (1985), Holocaust (1978) and Bang the Drum Slowly (1973). He received his most recent Emmy Award in 2003 for the television movie James Dean.
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/07/02/01643.html
Stéphane Dion continues to ignore New American Union project to take over Canada
The Stéphane Dion led Liberal Party of Canada has totally abdicated supporting vital cross-Canada public discussions on the efforts of the Stephen Harper government to work with the U.S. Bush administration’s effort to consolidate the continentalist agenda to create a “New American Union” (NAU). The NAU is a plan to replace democratically elected governments in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a fascistic “capitalistocracy” run by a greed-driven North American political-military-industrial complex.
While Mr. Dion has apparently elected to ignore the pending destruction of Canada under the New American Union plan, he has chosen to issue the following Canada Day statement:
As we celebrate Canada’s 140th birthday, we must also renew our commitment to build a better tomorrow: a commitment to protect our natural environment and fight the threat of climate change, to strengthen our economy through our committed work ethic and our know-how, and to ensure that all Canadians have the same opportunities to realize their fullest potential.
While Mr. Dion markets his leadership as pro-Canada and pro-environmentalistic, his Office has not championed Canada’s national interest against the “New American Union” agenda, which would led to the accelerated destruction of Canada’s environment. The New American Union would also hasten the privatization of healthcare in Canada, and would totally destroy Canada’s social programs under a greed-driven agenda.
The “plan to create” a New American Union in 2010 is “directly stated only” in the May 2005 task force report Building a North American Community published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Jerome Corsi wrote June 26, 2006.
The “blueprint” which President George W. Bush is following to create a “New American Union” was “laid out” in the May 2005 report, Corsi wrote May 19, 2006. “The CFR report connects the dots between the U.S. Bush administration’s actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union.”
A “New American Union” is being created through a process of anti-democratic inter-governmental “harmonization”, and “deep integration”, without ever having to bring the issue before Canadians for a clear referendum or vote. The closed door consolidation of the NAU is a fundamental violation of the constitutional democratic rights of Canadians. Stephane Dion’s apparent appeasement of the NAU agenda is a further betrayal of the Liberal Party of Canada’s defence of Canadian sovereignty and independence from the U.S., since the leadership of former Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
Powered by WordPress
