Up in Canada this summer, President Bush met with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon in what should have been a standard, wholly positive “meeting of the minds” between the leaders of the three leading nations in our hemisphere.
But many are rightfully concerned that this meeting and other developments of recent years are setting the stage for a government-like North American Union.
At its fullest completed vision, the North American Union (NAU), which has also gone by a few other names as well, would essentially replace the United States, Mexico and Canada as a governing level above the three once-independent nations.
Styled nearly identically to the current European Union, there would be one currency, open borders, and many subtler features that would overwhelm the U.S. Constitution.
Back in 1973, U.S. banking leader David Rockefeller met with American geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski and along with other business and political leaders formed the Trilateral Commission.
Conspiracy theories aside, the commission was formed in order to foster closer working relationships among the leaders of the three leading economic spheres of influence: North America, Europe, and Pacific Asia.
A year later, one of the commission members, Richard Gardner of Columbia University, wrote an influential article for Foreign Affairs magazine titled “The Hard Road to World Order” in which he called for “an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece”.
It is from this line of thinking that covert attacks on the United States of America as an independent, sovereign nation began to take place.
In 1979, while running for President, Ronald Reagan called for a “North American Agreement” to produce “a North American continent where the goods and people of the three countries will cross boundaries more freely.” Upon taking office in January of 1981, Reagan called for a North American common market.
In October of 1984, the Congress passed the Trade and Tariff Act, a part of which extended the powers of the president to concede trade benefits and enter into bilateral free trade agreements.
In October of 1987, the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was finalized, and signed into law by President Reagan and the Canadian Prime Minster in January 1988.
This led U.S. trade representative Clayton Yeutter to utter the statement “We’ve signed a stunning new trade pact with Canada, the Canadians don’t understand what they’ve signed. In twenty years they will be sucked into the U.S. economy.” Well, those twenty years have now passed, and Yeutter is proving to be a visionary.
In 1990, President George H.W. Bush began negotiations with the Mexican president to foster the same type of relationship as had been forged with Canada. A year later, Canadian PM Brian Mulroney asked that the negotiations become trilateral among the three nations.
Over the next couple of years the framework was laid for what has become known simply as NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, which formally went into effect in January 1994.
NAFTA basically eliminated tariffs on products traded between the three nations while protecting intellectual property rights and removing many investment restrictions. Over the ensuing half dozen years, negotiations take place aimed at enlarging the scope of NAFTA to include the Caribbean region nations and Chile.
Mexico elected Vicente Fox as President in 2000, and Fox quickly proposed what became known as his “20/20” vision: the U.S. and Mexico would have a common market within 20-30 years.
In 2001, Robert Pastor published the book “Toward a North American Community” in which he called for the formation of a formal North American Union. Calls began to come in from all quarters to move towards this vision, not only on the economic levels already being achieved, but also on a political and social level. It appeared that the North American Union was on the fast track to reality, and the United States of America as a wholly sovereign nation was being eroded.
And then the world changed, and sleeping Americans awoke.
On September 11th, 2001, nineteen hijackers who were inspired and backed by a world-wide web of Islamofascism attacked the United States on our own soil, killing three thousand people and wreaking havoc across our nation. The iconic Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York were completely destroyed. The home of the U.S. defense department, the Pentagon, was directly attacked. The airline industry was decimated by a first-ever full shutdown and ensuing security restrictions.
With these direct attacks on our nation, many Americans began to wake up not only to our vulnerability and fragility on a physical basis, but also on a national identity basis as well. In the same decades that had seen the vast economic changes highlighted here, vast cultural changes had been occurring that were undermining the basic Judeo-Christian ethics that had founded our nation. The American “way of life” was under assault, and Americans have begun to fight back.
However, the debate still rages as regular, everyday, working-class Americans, the political pundits who give them voice, and the politicians who recognize what is truly at stake fight to protect American ideals and sovereignty.
In the years following the attacks, which have simply become known as “9/11”, these folks have been attacked as “protectionist” and “isolationsist” simply because they want the United States both protected and preserved, something our leaders are supposedly sworn to ensure.
There is little doubt that the early American presidents involved in this process, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, were solely looking to expand economic security and benefits in the region while ensuring American sovereignty. But that separated vision has begun to blur beginning with the first Bush presidency, and has absolutely changed under both President Bill Clinton and now President George W. Bush.
In March 2005, an agreement was struck to build the NAFTA Superhighway. This monstrosity would begin on the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas and run up through the I-35 corridor already present, into Canada. It would be a 10-lane superhighway that is approximately four football fields wide running through the heart of the United States. The Texas Department of Transportation has already signed on to build the first leg, known now as the Trans-Texas Corridor project.
In April 2005, U.S. Senator Richard Luger and his co-sponsors, including current Republican presidential candidate John McCain, introduce U.S. Senate bill 853 calling for the creation of the North American Union to consist of the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
Touted as a “security” arrangement, the bill called for open borders between the nations to be accomplished by the year 2010. The bill never became law, or even came up for debate, but instead was submitted for the consideration of the Senate Foreign Relations committee.
In June 2006, current Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo demanded accounting on issues from the Bush administration to “fully disclose the activities of an office implementing a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada that apparently could lead to a North American Union, despite having no authorization from Congress.”
Still, the efforts to erase the borders between the three nations, develop a single currency (to be known as the “Amero”), and to eradicate American, Canadian, and Mexican national identity and sovereignty move forward, right under the noses of and often with the full knowledge of the silent mass media of all three nations.
On September 19th, 2006 a meeting took place in Alberta, Canada that went entirely unreported, and one that should have led the evening news.
In this meeting, attended by such American luminaries as U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Commander of the US Northern Command Admiral Tim Keating, former Secretary of State George Schultz, and former Secretary of Energy and Defense Dr. James Schlesinger, among dozens of others, topics were discussed for integration among the nations that ranged from energy to border infrastructure to the military. One of the session topics was even titled “Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration”.
The path that these political, business, military, and academic leaders are taking us down is one that is already tried and tested with the European Union that merged nations such as England, France, Italy, Norway, Germany and many others under a common “Euro” currency and many other laws and practices. “Euroskeptics” have emerged in mass numbers to protest a system that was largely shoved down the throats of the people, and that either subverted or in some cases blatantly ignored the democratic process.
In the European Union, the UK, Sweden, and Denmark declined full participation in economic facets of the agreement. , the French and Dutch rejected the European Constitution entirely, Norway has twice rejected EU membership, and Iceland has never even applied to the Union. All across Europe, increasing voices are being raised in protest that the very concept of the EU is an invention of bureaucrats seeking to create a bureaucratic and undemocratic superstate.
At the risk of being labeled a “conspiracy theorist”, the same exact process that took place in Europe over the past few decades has been taking place here in the Americas, and is beginning to directly threaten American sovereignty.
Unless the rising tied of nationalism in the wake of 9/11 is encouraged and continues, including the building of a full southern border fence, stronger security at both our northern and southern borders, retention of our own national currency, re-institution of the teaching of American history and civics in our schools, and a return to the full support of Judeo-Christian principles as an ethical and moral national compass, hard times are ahead.
For the survival of the United States of America, we the people must once again rise up and let our voices be heard in print, on the airwaves, and most importantly at the ballot box. We must educate ourselves and our children, demand information from our media sources, demand action on sovereignty from our politicians.
In short, we must do here in the Homeland what our brave soldiers are doing overseas, fight for freedom, democracy, and our way of life. The North American Union is one union that we all must fight to bust.
No comments:
Post a Comment