Posted on 07/05/2006 5:21:34 AM PDT by conservativecorner
NASCO has altered the organizations website homepage, apparently in direct response to the North American Union series we have published here, including discussion of NASCO and NAFTA Super-Highways.
NASCO appears to be reacting from recent publicity deriving from our argument that NASCO actively supports the goals of their members, including the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Kansas City SmartPort. TxDOT plans to start the first segment of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) as early as next year and the Kansas City SmartPort plans to house a Mexican customs operation within their Inland Port design. These are new infrastructure developments along the North American NAFTA Super-Corridor that NASCO as a trade organization was created to support.
A box has been inserted to the left of the NASCO map on the homepage, emphasizing the following:
This map is not a blueprint or plan of any kind. The Infrastructure depicted on this map is not drawn to scale. The highways shown EXIST today, and have been enlarged to highlight the NASCO Corridor focus area. The rail lines have been placed on the map to show NASCOs multimodal approach.
The subtitle on the home page still reads Secure Multi-Modal Transportation System, evidently referring to the automobile, truck, and railroad nature of the NASCO Super-Corridor described in the top title on the page. By so adding to the homepage, NASCO appears engaged in a public relations marketing effort to defuse concerns that the organization supports any new NAFTA Super-Highway development that would include TTC features.
This modification to the homepage echoes an email the author received from Tiffany Melvin, NASCOs Executive Director, on June 23, 2006, in which she wrote:
If the map were drawn to scale, it would be very difficult to see our focus area. The map is designed for marketing purposes, to highlight the highways we are focusing on. It is for our Coalition. Thats it.
An insert box has been placed on the homepage in the Atlantic Ocean area east of Massachusetts, reading NASCO Myths Debunked. We understand that our articles are among the myths intended to be debunked. The first line of text in the 4-page document linked to the debunked box reads: There is no new, proposed NAFTA Superhighway. The next paragraph seems to say the NAFTA Super-Highway already exists -- it is evidently the current I-35:
As of late, there has been much media attention given to the new, proposed NAFTA Superhighway. NASCO and the cities, counties, states and provinces along our existing Interstate Highways 35/29/94 (the NASCO Corridor) have been referring to I-35 as the NAFTA Superhighway for many years, as I-35 already carries a substantial amount of international trade with Mexico, the United States and Canada. There are no plans to build a new NAFTA Superhighwary -- it exists today as I-35.
The debunked text even wants to de-emphasize the Super in the NASCO Super Corridor name. As Ms. Melvin expressed in a June 22, 2006 email to the author:
We have been using the name SuperCorridor since 1996. It does not mean huge, mega highway. We use Super in the sense of more inclusive than a specialized category (dictionary definition). Like Superman was not a huge, giant four football field wide man. He was MORE than a man. We are MORE than a highway coalition. We work to promote the use of multiple modes of transportation. We work on economic development along the corridor. We work on environmental issues. We work on networking inland ports. We work on developing business relationships for our members.
Perhaps NASCO would be well advised to review the Trans-Texas Corridor website of its member TxDOT agency. There the 4,000 page Environmental Impact Study (EIS) clearly describes the 1,200 foot new Super-Highway that TxDOT plans to build parallel to I-35. Page 4 of the EIS Executive Summary shows an artists rendition of the full build-out of the TTC-35 concept, an automobile-truck-railroad corridor with a utility space for energy pipelines and electronic circuits, along with tower electricity strung out on the perimeter. No artists conception of the TTC drawn by the TxDOT bears any resemblance to the current I-35 in Texas or anywhere else.
This TTC-35 description belies NASCOs contention that the organization does not support the constructing any new Super-Highway infrastructure.
Perhaps NASCO wants to advance the argument that no state north of Texas will continue the TTC-35 project to connect through Oklahoma City with the Kansas City SmartPort, continuing north toward Duluth, or that TTC-35. As we have already shown, the investment bankers and international capitalists who are funding the development of TTC-35 can be expected to develop extend this NAFTA Super-Highway north, whether NASCO or the states north of Texas have the funds or current plans to do so.
From a public relations point of view, NASCOs emphasis that the NASCO Super-Corridor only involves existing highways, truck routes, and rail lines is a strategy consistent with a desire to stay below the radar of public awareness, so as to avoid criticism that might otherwise stop or impede NASCOs true mission -- to support the development of a NAFTA Super-Highway, either through enhancements to the existing north-south corridor along Interstate Highways 35/29/94 (the NASCO Corridor), or any Super-Highway enhancements its members initiate, including the TTC and the Mexican customs facility in the Kansas City SmartPort.
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.
We also note that George Blackwood, NASCO President, attended the January 10-11 meeting in Louisville, Kentucky, held by the Council of the Americas and the North American Business Committee to conduct a Public/Private Sector Dialogue on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. A key finding of this meeting was that associations in the U.S. organized to promote particular corridors needed since the dawning of SPP in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, to coordinate their efforts in a less provincial style, more reflective of the North American regional orientation of SPP itself:
For instance, conversation at the Louisville forum raised the potential for commonalities and/or synergies between disparate transportation efforts in the US Midwest (the SuperCorridor initiative), the North American West (CANAMEX Corridor), and in the Southeast United States and Mexico (the Gulf of Mexico Trade Corridor initiative). Before SPP, there was no obvious mechanism through which to promote coordination of these discrete activities.
The Louisville SPP meeting also advised the establishment of bilateral or trilateral commissions to facilitate border and cross-border infrastructure.
While the NASCO debunking text is correct in asserting that NASCO is a trade organization, not a government organization, NASCO officers appear deeply involved in working with federal and state departments of transportation, local and state governments, and regulatory agencies in promoting the goal of developing a Super Corridor structure for integrating the U.S., Canada, and Mexico into a corridor-dimensioned transportation system to promote NAFTA trade. NASCO trade organization professionals evidently are much more comfortable working in professional SPP conferences and dealing with government bureaucrats in the closed confines of their offices than answering the questions that public citizens are openly discussing on the Internet.
The NASCO debunking text continually asserts that a primary NASCO concern is transportation security, much as SPP itself asserts that the North American Partnership is put in place to promote security and prosperity, two goals SPP could assume no one would object to pursuing. The idea seems to be that NASCO wants to present itself as only concerned about security and efficiency as the volume of traffic on the existing NASCO SuperCorriror of existing interstate highways gets expanded under NAFTA.
NASCOs debunking text asserts that the organizations mission is develop (NOT BUILD) the worlds first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America.
Given this, we have a challenge. Lets see NASCO come forward and repudiate the TTC-35 plans of their TxDOT member, because clearly the TTC-35 plan to build 4-football-field-lengths wide of NAFTA Super-Highway corridors is inconsistent with NASCOs goal as expressed in the debunking text of only using existing transportation infrastructure. We also challenge NASCO to come forward and repute the Mexican customs facility plans of its Kansas City SmartPort member. Otherwise, we will assert that NASCO is continuing to say one thing for public relations effect, while doing something quite different -- quietly supporting their members as the members build the new and improved NAFTA Super-Highway infrastructure along the NASCO Corridor.
Corsi is a card-carrying lifetime member of both groups.
Whoa! You tell me. What is this, 20 questions? Why do I have to respond? I am making no assertions about anything. You are all-knowledgable about the NAU, you tell me.
But Bush III will be in office. Son, Clinton's wife will in 2010. Best bud's.(LOLOL)
The father of NAFTA couldn't get it passed, so son, Clinton did. Just keeping it in the family.
The plan was in place long before that. In fact, NWO maps were made in 1941 Map=Proof Of Evil Plan.
It is forbidden knowledge, as you can see from the website, so keep it under your toup.
Dang! Where the hell's the New York Times now that we need them?
I didn't blame the new world order on him. I said he was the first one I had ever heard mention it. All of this crap goes back to the League of Nations.
Here's the info:
2nd Annual Inland Ports Across North America
(IPANA) Conference San Antonio, Texas
October 11-13, 2006
"Make plans to join NASCO and San Antonios Free Trade Alliance for the 2nd Annual IPANA Conference being held on October 11-13, 2006 at the historic Menger Hotel. Please check the NASCO web site for updates about the conference.
IPANA provides inland ports with a unique conference focused on port development, security, industry trends and infrastructure issues. This conference provides port projects that are in the conceptual stage to fully operational projects with an opportunity to hear and learn from industry experts directly and network with other port officials, shippers, brokers and other conference attendees.
Last year over 120 people participated in the conference representing various port projects in Mexico, Canada and the U.S. We expect this years conference to double in size. The focus of this years conference is Rail. We have invited Mr. Michael Haverty, CEO of Kansas City Southern, to serve as the keynote speaker."
Also, are you planning on attending any of the TTC's 54 open meetings in Texas from now through August?
What happens? The black-helicopter fruitcakes act as though it's an issue of first impression. The same people that were beating this to death years ago (here, I mean) are beating it to death again, and acting as though they don't remember doing it the first time.
I should add that, if I ever write a book, I want Corsi's publisher's marketing staff to flog it for me.
You are correct that Reagan couldn't get NAFTA passed, but he had to deal with a Democrat-controlled Congress. Not sure what you mean by Clinton being Reagan's son, however.
You are a little late. I have have already posted the site showing the 54 locations and dates on a number of threads.
I don't guess you will be at any meetings since you are from Utah.
You obviously didn't get the memo. The CFR is a shadow government. It's got all kinds of freemasons and illuminati members.
It's the boogeyman of all boogeymen.
It hides under your bed at night plotting THE END OF SOVEREIGNTY AS WE KNOW IT.
Well, now you know it goes way back to The Scary Map, and maybe you'll be more skeptical of conspiracies.
By the way, Bush 41 first mentioned the phrase "New World Order" in a speech on Sept. 11, 1990, which has conspiracy theorists in an "eleven years to the day!" tizzy.
Now, you know Reagan never mention the North American Free Trade agreement while he was in office. He only mention a vision just like Goldwater did in 1964.
The first mention of the North American Free Trade Treaty and the New World Order was done by you free traders mentor, George H. Bush. Now, why don't you free traders like to claim George H. Bush as your mentor? LOLOLOL
Well, I must not have heard that speech.
We live on a continent whose three countries possess the assets to make it the strongest, most prosperous and self-sufficient area on Earth. Within the borders of this North American continent are the food, resources, technology and undeveloped territory which, properly managed, could dramatically improve the quality of life of all its inhabitants.It is no accident that this unmatched potential for progress and prosperity exists in three countries with such long-standing heritages of free government. A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico and the United States--a North American accord--would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them--strong as they are--could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation. In fact, the key to our own future security may lie in both Mexico and Canada becoming much stronger countries than they are today.
No one can say at this point precisely what form future cooperation among our three countries will take. But if I am elected President, I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent. First, I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders on this issue, and work tirelessly with them to develop closer ties among our peoples. It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners.
Ronald Reagan, November 13, 1979.
You never know. I think it would be interesting. I'll keep ya posted.
At last, now we know where Bush 41 got his "vision thing".
That's going to leave a mark.
But, Reagan didn't actually say the phrase "North American Free Trade Treaty". He said "North American Accord", which is the same thing, of course, but I don't think tex will buy it.
By the way, if anyone wants to get into the "real meetings", not the fake meetings for the rubes mentioned above, just sign up for my newsletter ( $2500/year) and you'll receive the locations and also the secret handshake needed to get in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.