Hear the Truth America

The North American Union Is Coming
*The Southern most point of the NASCO freeway – Lazaro Cardenas in Mexico – IS OPERATED BY THE CHINESE PARAMILITARY SHIPPING MAGNATE HUTCHINSON WHAMPOA
World Net Daily's Jerome Corsi, who was banned from a secret meeting of the Transportation Department in Texas (March 10, 2008), plus SPP gatherings
, talks about the dangers of the North American Union
Protest SPP New Orleans meeting April 21-22-2008
Zeitgeist - New World Order, North American Union, RFID chipping
************************************************************ **************
The North American Union - You Could Be Voting Your Rights Away
************************************************************ **************
Natural News
February 24, 2008
Barbara L Minton
http://www. naturalnews. com/022707. html
One issue that is conspicuously absent from the rhetoric of the presidential candidates is the North American Union (NAU). The questions of immigration and border security are frequently raised and the candidates claim to realize the need for a clear immigration policy and effort to secure the borders of the United States.
Yet when you begin to understand the purposes of the North American Union and the agenda of its proponents, you will understand why this will never happen And you may also begin to see that you are being manipulated by the major candidates
The NAU, a goal of the Council on Foreign Relations, follows a plan laid out by Robert Pastor. It is currently promoted by the Bush administration to expand the size and scope of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). Its goal is to effectively create a North American trading block by erasing the borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada resulting in free, unimpeded movement of people and goods across those borders.
It is also a political union that would integrate the governments of the three countries And clearly it is an economic union with the intention of equalizing the wages and standard of living of all but the ruling elitists
Sounds a lot like the European Union, doesn’t it? There are even plans for a common currency called the amero.
But there is one glaring difference The people of the United States have never been asked if they want to become integrated with Mexico and Canada, two countries of enormously different laws, culture, economic systems, standards of living, and acceptance of the role of government
The European Union followed years of open debate at all levels, intense coverage of the ramifications and implications in major media, and a vote of the people
History and Origins of NAU
President Bush signed the Declaration of Quebec City in April, 2001, making a “commitment to hemispheric integration” After Hugo Chavez of Venezuela voiced opposition, these plans were scaled back to include only North America
The Independent Task Force on North America, a project organized by the Council on Foreign Relations and co-chaired by Robert Pastor, was launched in October, 2004. This group published two documents: Trinational Call for a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010 (March, 2005), and its final report Building a North American Community (May, 2005). This Task Force had as its central recommendation the establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community. The boundaries of this community would be defined by a common external tariff and outer security perimeter. Also called for is the replacing of all three branches of the US government with a North American version effectively ending U.
S representative government
In March 2005, at their summit meeting in Waco, Texas; Bush, President Fox of Mexico and Prime Minister Martin of Canada issued a joint statement announcing the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The creation of this agreement was never submitted to Congress for discussion or decision. The U.S. Department of Commerce merely created a new division implementing working groups to advance a North American Union agenda.
This agenda included movement of goods, finances, e-commerce, environment, business facilitation, food and agriculture, and health The result is an action agreement to be implemented immediately and directly by regulations, without any envisioned Congressional debate or oversight
In September 2006, Rep. Virgil Goode (Va), Rep. Ron Paul (Tx), Rep. Walter Jones (NC), and Rep. Tom Tancredo (Co) introduced House Concurrent Resolution 487, expressing concerns about the NAU. Resolution was passed by the House of Representatives with the Senate concurring that the U.S. should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; the U.S.
should not engage in the construction of the NAFTA Superhighway System, and the President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the US
In October 2006, Congressman Paul formally denounced the formation of the SPP and the plans for the North American Union and the SPP as “an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments”. Paul says that the real issue raised by the SPP is nation sovereignty. “Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress.
Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution – which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade” In this speech Paul predicts that the NAU will become a sleeper issue for the 2008 election, stating that “any movement toward a NAU diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live”
A report authored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIC) was presented to all three governments in September 2007. CSIC is a political influence group of internationalists who have crafted many of the government policies of the past several years. At the core of the report is its plan for America’s future, North American “economic integration” and “labor mobility”.
The plan for government integration is also revealed as the report states: “to remain competitive in the global economy, policymakers must devise forward-looking, collaborative policies that integrate governments” Also called for is the adoption of “unified North American regulatory standards”
Features of NAU:
The Trans-Texas Corridor and the NAFTA Superhighway
The NAFTA Superhighway and its entry point at the trans-Texas corridor were first proposed in 2002. It consists of a 1,200 foot wide highway that also carries utilities such as electricity, petroleum and water as well as railway tracks and fiber-optic cables. When completed, the new road will allow containers from the Far East to enter the U.S. through the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman’s Union. With Mexican drivers and without the involvement of the teamsters union, the Mexican trucks will drive straight into the heart of the US, crossing the border in fast lanes, and checked only by a new electronic system. The first customs stop will be the new Smart Port complex in Kansas City. From there the trucks may disperse into the U.
S or continue northward into Canada, again crossing the border with only an electronic checkpoint
Millions of acres of land for the completion of this highway will be taken under the new laws of eminent domain
A government pilot program has allowed Mexican trucking companies to make deliveries anywhere in the U.S. since April 2007, even before the completion of the superhighway. There is no limit on the number of trucks the 100 companies in the pilot program can operate. Eventually all Mexican trucking companies are to be granted the same access. These Mexican drivers are paid substantially less that their U.S. counterparts, their operations are not regulated, and they are driving on U.
S taxpayer subsidized roads
The Amero
This is the name of what may be the North American Union’s counterpart to the euro. It was first proposed by Canadian economist Herbert G. Grubel in his book The Case for the Amero published in 1999, the same year the euro became currency.
Robert Pastor supported Grubel’s idea in his book Toward A North American Community published in 2001 If implemented, the Amero’s debut may come later in the progression of the NAU, with exchange rates that depend on market forces at the time, after the economies of the three countries have been integrated and homogenized
The North American Plan for Avian and Pandemic Influenza
Finalized and released at the September 2007 summit of the SPP, this plan calls for a “comprehensive coordinated North American approach during outbreaks of influenza" It gives authority to international officials “beyond the health sector to include a coordinated approach to critical infrastructure protection,” including “border and transportation issues”
It sets up a “senior level Coordinating Body to facilitate the effective planning and preparedness within North America for a possible outbreak of avian and/or human influenza pandemic under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP).
” The SPP is to act as “decision-makers” “The chair of the SPP Coordinating Body will rotate between each national authority on a yearly basis” resulting in foreign decision making for Americans in two out of every three years
The plan suggests that these powers will include “the use of antivirals and vaccines... social distancing measures, including school closures and the prohibition of community gatherings, isolation and quarantine”
Council on Foreign Relations
Since its inception in 1921, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has attracted men and women of power and influence. Its stated intentions are to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty of the national independence of the United States. The ultimate, declared aim of the CFR is to create a one-world government, and to make the U.S. a part of it. The stated intentions of the CFR are clearly treasonous to the U.
S Constitution
The influence of the CFR is wide. Not only does it have members in the U.S. government, but its influence has also spread to other vital areas of American life.
Members have run, or are running, NBC and CBS, the New York Times, and The Washington Post, and many other important newspapers The leaders of Time, Newsweek, Fortune, Business Week, and numerous other publications are CFR members
The organization’s members also dominate the political world. U.
S presidents since Franklin Roosevelt have been CFR members with the exception of Ronald Reagan The organization’s members also dominate
the academic world, top corporations, unions and military They are on the board of directors of the Federal Reserve
Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, John McCain, and Rudy Guiliani are all either members of the CFR or have close ties with it. Mike Huckabee is reportedly not a member, but following his interaction with the group in September, he has become a favored candidate in the eyes of the media.
Republican Ron Paul is the only remaining significant candidate who does not have ties with the CFR He has has voiced opposition to the NAU for several years
Where Do You Stand on This Issue?
There is an ideological battle being waged between the forces supporting globalism and the forces supporting national sovereignty.
If you plan to participate in the 2008 presidential election, you will need to answer these questions for yourself: Do you believe in the timelessness of the Constitution, or do you believe that the Constitution has served its usefulness and it’s time for another model for government? Are you in favor of international government and more regulation by the United Nations, or do you favor continuation of the institutions that have served the US in the past? Do you want big government with its attendant costs and regulations, or do you favor small government that allows for self direction?
About the author
Barbara is a school psychologist, a published author in the area of personal finance, a breast cancer survivor using "alternative" treatments, a born existentialist, and a student of nature and all things natural
******************************
************************************************************ ***************
Meeting Of the Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy
************************************************************ ***************
http://interestalert. com/story/02190000aaa01dcb. nb/siteia/WORLDNEW/world. html
The Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy (ACIEP) will meet on Monday, March 10, 2008, at 2:00 p.m. in Room 1105 of the Harry S. Truman Building. The meeting will last until approximately 4:00 p.
m and is open to the public
The meeting will be hosted by Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs (EEB) Daniel S Sullivan and Committee Chairman Theodore Kassinger
The Committee serves the U.S.
Government in a solely advisory capacity concerning current issues and challenges in international economic policy Topics for the March 10 meeting will focus on "Regulatory Dialogues: Current State and Future Prospects" with a particular emphasis on the US-Canada-Mexico Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and the US-EU Transatlantic Council (TEC)
The public may attend this meeting as seating capacity allows. Admittance to the State Department building will be by means of a pre-arranged clearance list. In order to be placed on this list, please provide your name, title, company or other affiliation if appropriate, valid government-issued ID number (i.e., U.S. Government ID [agency], U.S. military ID [branch], passport [country], or drivers license [state]), date of birth, and citizenship to the Office of Economic Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy by fax (202) 647-5936 (Attention: Sherry Booth), e-mail ([email protected]), or telephone (202) 647-0847 by March 6
For further information about the meeting, please contact Senior Coordinator Nancy Smith-Nissley, Office of Economic Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs, at (202) 647-1682 or [email protected]
Source: US Department of State
[email protected]
King Of Spain Juan Carlos, Titled King of Jerusalem (WTF), has an even more impressive royal inbred heritage than Queen Elizabeth II. He is a STAKE HOLDER of the NAFTA NAU NASCO, as his private company CINTRA is being funded to build the TEXAS CORRIDOR TOLL ROAD - talk about European royalty (BILDERBERG)dismantling US sovereignty... what are YOU doing about this?
King Juan Carlos of Spain told Venezuela President Hugo Chavez to SHUT UP- Nov 2007
Texas Governor Rick Perry was a special guest to the ultra secret BILDERBERG meeting in Istanbul Turkey 2007 - to discuss about the TEXAS TOLL ROAD
**************************
Taking the High Road
**************************
The John Birch Society What is the John Birch Society?
By Kelly Taylor
Published: 2007-06-11
http://www. jbs. org/node/4134
Seventeenth-century Spanish explorers, following established Indian and buffalo trails, crossed the Rio Grande northward from Mexico, effectively blazing the Camino Real, the King’s Highway. Later known as Old San Antonio Road, Camino Real wasn’t a single road but a network of trails used by explorers to transport goods and missionaries through the colony of Tejas. A major thoroughfare between Mexico City and eastern Tejas, the Handbook of Texas states, the roadway enabled freight and supply movement, and also enjoyed the king’s military protection. As time progressed and trade increased, so did the system.
Eventually caminos reales in the provinces were everywhere, from modern-day Texas to California, and were critical for expansion of “New Spain” Camino Real also enabled immigration
While Spain’s present king, Juan-Carlos, isn’t attempting to conquer modern America, a system startlingly similar to the ancient caminos reales is being fashioned, constructed by a Spanish company, Cintra. In the form of the NASCO SuperCorridor, a transport network is being implemented right under our noses for the purposes of accelerating the movement of goods and people across the Rio Grande and facilitating the creation of a North American Union (NAU), wherein our borders with Mexico and Canada would become as meaningless as our state lines are now.
This is well documented in a variety of sources One of the most comprehensive sources is Building a North American Community, the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force Report about how to create a North American Union, which explains the necessity of this transportation infrastructure for integrating Canada, Mexico, and the United States into a regional government
High-priority highway corridors — collectively dubbed the “NAFTA Superhighway” by critics — are planned coast to coast and, in Texas, are already under construction. That’s unsettling. But the mischief doesn’t stop there. And this time, the road enjoys better than a king’s protection because it’s being implemented with the active participation and direction of a U.S. president — George W.
Bush But, precisely because President Bush is acting like a king in this matter, trying to impose his will without approval of the people or oversight by Congress, citizen-activists are assembling above and below Texas’ northern border, the legendary Red River, to oppose his plans
The Trans Texas Corridor-35 (TTC-35), a segment of the NAFTA Superhighway, runs parallel to (and sometimes coexistent with) the current Interstate 35. Though massive in scale, it’s only a part of the bigger road system planned from Mexico’s west coast all the way through Canada. Its geographical and political positions make it ground zero of a watershed conflict for American independence, which would no longer exist should America become a province of the NAU.
The TTC-35, much of which would be a 12-lane-wide monster of concrete, cabling, pipelines, toll roads, electronic surveillance capabilities, rails, depots, and an appetite for property rivaling the British Empire, has taken on a life of its own and is literally steamrolling over Texans, heading north Designed for, among other things, the transport of cheap goods from China through Mexico into America’s heartland, it will facilitate border crossings at the Rio Grande virtually free of security checks*
Grass-roots Reaction
New readers should know that NASCO (North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition) claims that the SuperCorridor is the largest engineering project ever undertaken in U.S. history — ever. You’d think that would attract attention. Yet the measure authorizing the Texas segment was passed by the Texas Legislature with virtually no knowledge by the voters, though it represented the largest spending bill in Texas history (H.
B 3588)
Now grass-roots organizations, property owners, environmentalists, constitutionalists, and others recognize the Trans Texas Corridor and the whole concept of a North American superhighway as a big, fat uh-oh and have relentlessly pressured their lawmakers to stop their implementation The current crop of Texas legislators is between a rock and a hard place — either accede to Texas Governor Rick Perry’s demands for the Trans Texas Corridor or listen to their constituents
Many Texas legislators are opting to heed the call of their constituents and are working to pull the plug on the deal. This spring, Representative Lois Kolkhorst, the scrappy state legislator from Brenham, Texas, authored an amendment to this year’s transportation bill, H.B.
1892, requiring the state to place a two-year moratorium on entering into contracts with private entities, and to submit the Cintra deal (finally!) to analysis She also introduced legislation that would force the Texas attorney general to examine agreements, such as documents pertaining to the North American Union or NAFTA, that threaten Texas sovereignty
Because of the success of the constituency groups, the Bush administration is trying to coerce the Texas legislators, and Texans in general, into going against their best judgment and allowing the highway to be built. As the moratorium bill was pending, Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison received a letter from the Federal Highway Administration’s J. Richard Capka expressing concerns that “Senate amendments … may make it impossible for Texas to administer the [Federal-aid Highway] Program in a manner consistent with Federal law.
” In other words, Texas was threatened with loss of federal highway funds if the moratorium bill is passed The bill passed anyway — in the Texas House by a near-unanimous 139-1, and in the Senate by 27-4 — and then was sent to Governor Perry’s desk
Perry vetoed the bill on May 18 and has been lobbying legislators for a “compromise” bill (SB 792), essentially allowing the SuperCorridor juggernaut to continue rolling. Rep. Kolkhorst stepped up to the plate again, adding a critical amendment to keep the moratorium in place, and effectively defanging the bill.
Obviously, there are enough votes to override Perry’s veto — unless the governor and the NASCO forces can buy or coerce a large number of votes in both houses So, the fight is still on in the Lone Star State, as we write
While Texans have been struggling simultaneously to stop the end-run made around them and to undercut the corridor, a low-pressure storm has been brewing to the north.
Since any proposed SuperCorridor in Texas must cross the Red River, Oklahomans sniffed the wind for danger, and they found it They realized that they were the second line of defense if the front line collapsed What to do?
Last fall, members of the influential Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) got a wake-up call from the special (October 2, 2006) “North American Union” issue of THE NEW AMERICAN. The issue revealed the agenda of the NAU proponents and the SuperCorridor’s role in that agenda. Tulsa activists and a handful of OCPAC members formed OK-SAFE, Inc. (Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise), an educational and lobbying group, for the main purpose of stopping the corridor.
Calling upon influence forged through OCPAC, they promptly distributed copies of the NAU special issue of TNA as part of an information packet to legislators and became well known at the capitol OK-SAFE’s crack researchers began to be consulted by Oklahoma lawmakers, who started to take the matter seriously
Patriots’ Persistence Pays Off
As knowledge spread about the corridor’s sheer scope and about its origins as a major NAU component, resistance to the corridor grew. But that didn’t stop legislators from introducing measures to prompt its construction. Fortunately, a sharp-eyed legislator who had been informed by the OK-SAFE campaign spotted a bill (H.B. 1917) that would be used by pro-NAU forces to facilitate the corridor’s river crossing. He alerted the OK-SAFE members, who sounded the alarm to other concerned citizens. On the day the bill was to be heard by Oklahoma lawmakers, OK-SAFE members appeared at the capitol and distributed a copy of THE NEW AMERICAN NAU issue to each legislator. Along with the magazine, they distributed a packet of independent research and supporting documents that included a bullet list detailing the main dangers and concerns in H.B.
1917’s language The OK-SAFE educational effort stirred such strong opposition that the bill was never brought up for a hearing
However, that didn’t end the threat. After H.B. 1917 was stopped in the House, the same language appeared in another bill as a committee substitute on the Senate side. This new bill, H.B. 1819, had its original wording bumped in favor of pro-SuperCorridor language. The battle was back on to educate the legislators and stop H.B. 1819. OK-SAFE again jumped into the fray, and the bill was defeated. Oklahoma state Senator Randy Brogdon, who argued against H.B.
1819 on the Senate floor, told THE NEW AMERICAN after the vote that “this legislation was potentially another step of a stealth movement to expand the NAFTA Superhighway through Oklahoma” He added that “protecting the sovereignty of this nation is far more important than building an international highway system, which could eliminate our trade and security borders”
Brogdon also sponsored Senate Concurrent Resolution 10 “urging the United States to withdraw from the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and any other activity which seeks to create a North American Union.
” The resolution explicitly cites the NAFTA Superhighway as part of that subversive scheme The Oklahoma House passed it 97-0 on May 15 and the Senate passed it by voice vote two days later, making Oklahoma the third state (Idaho and Montana being the first two) to pass a resolution urging Congress to oppose a North American Union
Oklahoma state Rep. Charles Key, the principal sponsor of Sen. Con. Res. 10 in the House, told us: “There is a real level of knowledge within the legislature about the North American Union and the Security and Prosperity Partnership because of the educational work the John Birch Society has done. All 97 members of the House present and voting [on Sen. Con.
Res 10] agreed to cosponsor the resolution — reflecting the strong sentiment in the Oklahoma legislature against surrendering the independence of our country to a North American Union”
Oklahoma’s opposition has been so potent, in fact, that it has drawn the attention of NASCO, whose Executive Director Tiffany Melvin traveled to Oklahoma on May 10 to try to persuade lawmakers that NASCO is innocuous and does not promote the NAU, SPP, or any superhighway connected to it!
During Melvin’s address to the legislature, highly dubious events took place: in the “publicly broadcast” Senate Transportation conference committee meeting, audio access was mysteriously turned off, limiting public knowledge of the proceedings, and citizen participants were not allowed their promised time to rebut the spurious pro-corridor arguments Melvin, however, was given abundant time to reiterate repeatedly that she was there “to eliminate public confusion about NASCO and the SuperCorridor”
She had her say, Oklahomans didn’t have theirs; but for now, the bill is dead — unless the enabling language allowing the corridor surfaces in yet another bill before the session ends on May 25.
The modern-day battle at the OK Corral is both exciting and desperate, for if Texas fails to stop the corridor, it will be increasingly difficult for the next states in line To head off the problem, Oklahomans are stepping up to defeat what could be the next Oklahoma land rush — only this time the state will be taking the land back
* For more information, see Kelly Taylor’s “Coming Through! The NAFTA Super Highway” in the August 7, 2006 issue of TNA
The article is available online at: www. jbs. org/node/2048