NASCO Alters Super-Corridor Message [They Don't Like Sunshine On Their Little Plan Alert]

Human Events ^ | July 5, 2006 | Jerome Corsi

[AmericaUnited]

Once the truth was known, most of these guys quit posting. But not believing. LOL!

[Jedidah]

You need to settle down.

I'm not defending anybody. I'm not even weighing in on these transportation issues.

I merely said not everything has to be political or idealogical or tagged with a label. Sometimes ideas are just good or bad, and individual opinions can cross idealogical/political lines.

You have absolutely no idea how I stand on NAFTA, NASCO, or the TTC. Take a deep breath.

[taxed2death]

"Sometimes a bad idea is just a bad idea, not owned by an ideology."

Smartest thing I've read here on FR in a while.

[AmericaUnited]

We find the same here. NASCO is a trade organization that will never fund or build a single highway anywhere. Yet NASCO supports its members and NASCO members are hard at work building the NAFTA Super-Highway.

Well, that's the smoking gun, yes indeed!!!

I mean why on earth would a 'trade' group want highways built? What the heck would they use those roads for?!! To make it easier to transport the stuff they TRADE? That's utterly ridiculous. We all know you just put 'the traded stuff' in giant intergalactic molecule transporters. You don't need roads.

[AmericaUnited]

I've asked several FReepers, who think this is a 'tinfoil' issue, to give reasons for their dismissal of this info. I haven't received a single response.

Try this one:

NASCO is a trade organization that will never fund or build a single highway anywhere. Yet NASCO supports its members and NASCO members are hard at work building the NAFTA Super-Highway.

Only a conspiratorial NUT JOB would think it "strange" or some type of "plot", that a trade group would be very interested and involved, in new and better ways of transporting the items they trade.

[conservativecorner]

And only someone with dementia can read an article, and then immediately forget all the facts just read. NASCO is not in the interests of this sovereign country. They are free to push their globalist agenda, but don't expect Americans to stand by and watch as they fill their own pockets while allowing America to be turned into a third world nation.

[Dog Gone]

And only someone with dementia can read an article, and then immediately forget all the facts just read.

tsk, tsk, that's perilously close to name-calling...

[hedgetrimmer]

PING

[conservativecorner]

The pot calling the kettle black nonsense. It must be tough defending the giveaway when you have nothing but name calling to back up your opinion. LOL!:

"Only a conspiratorial NUT JOB would think it "strange" or some type of "plot", that a trade group would be very interested and involved, in new and better ways of transporting the items they trade."

[hedgetrimmer]

Thanks for posting this one.

[hedgetrimmer]

Mexican corruption and Kansas City. A little mordita, and the investigation is 'frozen'.

*****

If the project is approved, Kansas City would function much like a dual U.S.-Mexican port at the border. Mexican and U.S. officials would work side by side processing long lines of semis, housed in a large building on a lot once filled with slaughterhouses.

Once the export goods were inspected, the trucks would be electronically sealed and sent back out onto the North American Free Trade Agreement corridor. Gutierrez estimates that 350 trucks could speed through the border each day, bypassing the current logjams.

But first, the two sides likely would need to set out legal obligations for each country. Some outstanding questions include the legal status of Mexican officials working inside the U.S., the choice of technology to electronically seal merchandise post-inspection, and the overall capacity of the proposed customs house.

Such complications aside, the project already has cleared several obstacles. Earlier this year, Mexican legislators sought a formal briefing on the Kansas City project as part of a wider corruption probe involving the sons of Mexico's first lady.

That part of the investigation is now frozen in committee, said Congressman Jesus Gonzalez Schmal, and is not likely to be taken up this legislative session. The first lady and her family have said the probes were politically motivated.

"They've managed the plan for a foreign customs agency with a lot of secrecy," said Schmal. "We're all curious to see what happens."

KC 'inland port' moves forward

[Jim Hill]

While Mr. Corsi seems to suggest that NASCO has denied support for TTC-35, NASCO's own website is clear about their support at the following link:

http://www.nascocorridor.com/pages/projects/ttc-35.html

[AmericaUnited]

Why am I being attacked? Didn't I agree that it's PROOF that a secret conspiracy exists, because a trade group wants better ways to trade their stuff. That's a smoking gun if I ever saw one! Any one in their right mind would know they should have no "real" interest whatsoever in the transportation of goods.

[conservativecorner]

It's all about people who can give a rat's arse about America as long as they line their filthy little pockets.

[1rudeboy]

Here is a link to the website that upsets Prof. Corsi. I really hope this thread goes to 100+ responses. I am amused.

[Ben Ficklin]

If Corsi is going to put himself up a an expert on this subject, he needs to become better informed.

He is confused about I 35, TTC 35, and the NAFTA Highway.

The NAFTA Highway's main function is to link Laredo and Port Huron, as one road, because these two locations carry 60% of the cross border freight.

To accomplish this, I 69 will be built.

In the meantime, several roads are functioning as the NAFTA Highway. I35 from Laredo to Dallas, I30 from Dallas to Little Rock, I40 from Little Rock to Memphis. While I don't know the route(s) from there to Port Huron, it eventually gets there.

Corsi is further confused by the fact that Texas' main concern is to alleviate congestion on I35 from San Antonio to Dallas so TTC 35 will be built before The I69 road from Laredo(or Brownsville) to Texarkana(or perhaps that road will enter Louisiana south of Texarkana). While TTC 35 will reach Oklahoma at some unknown place, much of the freight traffic will still transfer to I30 headed to Texarkana, Little Rock, etc. Some will go up US 271. Some will go up US 75.

Which brings up another subject that Corsi is confused about: The actual locations/placements of these roads are not known. He is confused over concept drawings.

[TXnMA]

Today, there are some 5,000 miles of interstate highway in the U.S. and the TxDOT is proposing a full build-out of the TTC network that will build some 4,000 miles of TTC Super-Highways in Texas over the next 50 years. The TTC project at full development will involve the removal of as much as 584,000 acres of productive Texas farm and ranchland from the tax rolls permanently, while displacing upwards of 1 million people from their current residences. The 11 separate corridors planned will permanently cut across some 1,200 Texas roads, with cross-over unlikely for much of the nearly quarter-mile corridor planned to be built. Our research shows that dozens of small towns in Texas will be virtually obliterated in the bath of the advancing TTC behemoth. Reviewing statistics such as these, we can see why NASCO might prefer a low profile, preferring to stay below the radar of public scrutiny.

---

Good to see someone highlighting the disaster that the TTC would be for the 95% of Texas outside the liberal elite metroplexes.

[expat_panama]

What part of the article do you wish to refute with facts, if any?

The article was fine in that the grammar was good and there were very few spelling errors.  I'd been looking for more than that; I'd hoped that Corsci would offer specific reasons why we shouldn't update our roads.  Speaking as a civil engineer (with a registration certificate signed by Ronald Reagan), I can say that today's Interstate system is as inappropriate for this era as the state highway system (eg. route 66) was in the '50's --not withstanding Henry Ford's original endorsement.

We need modern roads so we can be free and so we can defend ourselves.  Corsci doesn't want this and doesn't explain why.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here is a link to the website that upsets Prof. Corsi.

Don't confuse him with the facts.

[1rudeboy]

Actually, it appears that Prof. Corsi believes that countering his argument with facts merely establishes the conspiracy.