North American Union to Replace USA? ("is this the plan?" alert!)

HumanEventsOnline.com ^ | 5/19/2006 | Jerome R. Corsi

[mjolnir]

Sorry, I meant to say at the end

"But Buchanan and Dobbs (unlike you) give those who favor EU style supranational harmonization a rhetorical advantage because it enables the latter to falsely present themselves as representing the free trade side against the economic isolationists."

[little jeremiah]

BTTT.

[hedgetrimmer]

Here's another article:

·                     Trinational Call for a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010

March 14, 2005
Council on Foreign Relations

 

March 14, 2005 - Three former high-ranking government officials from Canada, Mexico, and the United States are calling for a North American economic and security community by 2010 to address shared security threats, challenges to competitiveness, and interest in broad-based development across the three countries.

 

Former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of FinanceJohn P. Manley, former Finance Minister of MexicoPedro Aspe, and former Governor of Massachusetts and Assistant U.S. Attorney General William F. Weld make policy recommendations to articulate a long-term vision for North America in a Chairmen's Statement of the Independent Task Force on the Future of North America sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in association with the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives.

 

Chief Executive of the Canadian Council of Chief ExecutivesThomas d'Aquino, President of the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales Andres Rozental, and Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University Robert A. Pastor serve as vice chairs of the Task Force. Chappell H. Lawson, associate professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is the director.

 

The statement was released in Washington, DC today in advance of the upcoming North American Summit on March 23 in Texas with President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, and Mexican President Vicente Fox. It reflects the consensus of the chairs and vice chairs. In the spring, the Task Force will release its complete report, which will assess the results of the Texas summit and reflect the views of the full membership.

 

Findings and recommendations:

o        Build a North American economic and security community by 2010. To enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity for all North Americans, the chairs propose a community defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter.

o        Create the institutions necessary for a North American community. The chairs propose annual summit meetings among the three countries and the creation of a North American Advisory Council to prepare for and implement the decisions made at the summits.

o        Enhance North American competitiveness with a common external tariff. Over the last decade, nations around the world, from China to India to Latin America to the expanded membership of the European Union, have become increasingly integrated into the global market. To meet these challenges to North American competitiveness, the chairs recommend that the three governments negotiate a common external tariff on a sector-by-sector basis at the lowest rate consistent with multilateral obligations: "Unwieldy rules of origin, increasing congestion at ports of entry, and regulatory differences among the three countries raise our costs instead of reducing them."

o        Develop a border pass for North Americans. The chairs propose a border pass, with biometric indicators, which would allow expedited passage through customs, immigration, and airport security throughout North America. "The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically reducing the need for physical scrutiny of traffic, travel, and trade within North America."

o        Adopt a unified Border Action Plan. The three governments should "strive toward a situation in which a terrorist trying to penetrate our borders will have an equally hard time doing so no matter which country he elects to enter first. "First steps should include: harmonized visa and asylum regulations; joint inspection of container traffic entering North American ports; and synchronized screening and tracking of people, goods, and vessels, including integrated "watch" lists. Security cooperation should extend to counterterrorism and law enforcement, and could include the establishment of a trinational threat intelligence center and joint training for law enforcement officials. On the defense front, the most important step is to expand the binational North American Aerospace Defense Command to make it a multi-service Canada-U.S. command with a mandate to protect the maritime as well as air approaches to North America. Canada and the United States should invite Mexico to consider closer military cooperation in the future.

o        Narrow the development gap with Mexico. While trade and investment flows have increased dramatically, the development gap between Mexico and its two northern neighbors has widened. "Low wages and lack of economic opportunity in parts of Mexico stimulate undocumented immigration, and contribute to human suffering, which sometimes translates into violence." Mexico must increase its rate of economic growth and decide on the steps it will take to attract investment and stimulate growth. As a matter of their own national interests, the United States and Canada should assist Mexico by establishing a North American Investment Fund, designed to channel resources for the purpose of connecting the poorer parts of the country to the markets in the north.

o        Develop a North American energy and natural resource security strategy. Canada and Mexico are the two largest oil exporters to the United States; Canada alone supplies the United States with over 95% of its imported natural gas and 100% of its imported electricity. The three governments should expand and protect energy infrastructure, fully exploit continental reserves, conserve fossil fuels, and reduce emissions. "Regional collaboration on conservation and emissions could form the basis for a North American alternative to the Kyoto protocol."

o        Deepen educational ties. "Given its historical, cultural, political, and economic ties, North America should have the largest educational exchange network in the world." To that end, the chairs recommend expanding scholarship and exchange programs, developing Centers for North American Studies in all three countries, and cross-border training programs for school teachers.

o         

Founded in 1921, the Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, national membership organization and a nonpartisan center for scholars dedicated to producing and disseminating ideas so that individual and corporate members, as well as policymakers, journalists, students, and interested citizens in the United States and other countries, can better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other governments.

 

The Mexican Council on Foreign Relations(COMEXI) is the only multi-disciplinary organization committed to fostering sophisticated, broadly inclusive political discourse and analysis on the nature of Mexico's participation in the international arena and the relative influence of Mexico's increasingly global orientation on domestic priorities. The Council is an independent, non-profit, pluralistic forum, with no government or institutional ties that is financed exclusively by membership dues and corporate support. The main objectives of COMEXI are to provide information and analysis of interest to our associates, as well as to create a solid institutional framework for the exchange of ideas concerning pressing world issues that affect our country.

 

Founded in 1976, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives is Canada's premier business association, with an outstanding record of achievement in matching entrepreneurial initiative with sound public policy choices. A not-for-profit, non-partisan organization composed of the chief executives of 150 leading Canadian enterprises, the CCCE was the Canadian private sector leader in the development and promotion of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement during the 1980s and of the subsequent trilateral North American Free Trade Agreement.

[hedgetrimmer]

We need to push free trade

For America to maintain its system of free enterprise, we cannot push "free trade". You cannot have "free trade" and not have supranational law. You cannot have "free trade" and a free country at the same time.

[texastoo]

The only reason NAFTA passed was because of illegal immigration. Both President GH Bush and Clinton lied saying it would stop illegal immigration. This country has been in a mess ever since. No one even bothers about enforcing laws.

Go here for the official NAFTA website.

http://www.naalc.org

Just don't click on the part that says Mexico will give foreign workers health care like the U.S. does. Mexico gets a pass as they won't pay for anyone. They just expect more and more of U.S. Taxpayer money.

Now go and click on the borderless map, then the table of contents. This gives rights to illegal aliens going against our constitution.

Since you are a newbie to this site and a free trader, are you going to admit to the socialization of these treaties? By the way, the activities of the secretariat and ministers are explained on this site. You know the annointed ones who were not elected and get to have closed door hearintgs. Totally unAmerican.

[hedgetrimmer]

The term must be of international origins, here it is mentioned in an article published in Canada in 2003.

Time to get on board

Spending in each area would have to achieve agreed-upon public interest goals such as improved traffic flow, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and better air quality, the requirement to support strategic trade corridors of national significance, the preservation of land, the diminution of noise, the contribution to improved children's health and safety, or any other legitimate public objectives.

[hedgetrimmer]

Here is some detailed information on North American Trade corridors.

[hedgetrimmer]

Here is a reference from July 8, 1998

Expansion Expansion of Southwest Passage Corridor Designation for Federal Funding under TEA 21

Section 1118 of TEA 21 makes federal funds available for planning and construction in transportation corridors of national significance. Representatives of the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas and the Councils of Governments within those states have been conferring for over a year to develop an integrated and comprehensive trade/transportation strategy for the East-West trade corridor, named the Southwest Passage. The objective of the Southwest Passage is to connect the East-West trade routes along the U.S./Mexico border with a seamless freight transportation system extending from Los Angeles to Houston, Texas. To date the only portion of the corridor that has been identified for funding in TEA 21 is that section extending from Los Angeles along I-10 and San Diego along I-8 to the Arizona border. However, there are provisions in the TEA 21 legislation for designating additional corridors. On June 23, 1998, the Transportation Review Committee recommended that the Management Committee support the expansion of the Southwest Passage corridor to include the portion running through Arizona to Houston, Texas for funding as a high priority corridor in TEA 21.

For more information, contact Harry P. Wolfe, Program Manager, 254-6300.

[calcowgirl]

It's Continent Security--aka incontinent borders.

[hedgetrimmer]

Here is a summit that took place in Denver in 1997
(the 'stakeholders' were at work here) In your research you can look for intermodal transportation too.

The Roundtable Discussion:
An Overview of the Nexus between Government Policies and Stakeholder Concerns

The feasibility of an integrated North American rail, highway, and port system was examined. A consensus emerged emphasizing coordination rather than integration. The complexity and sheer number of policy-making structures clearly complicates the creation of intermodal systems within and among countries. The importance of seamless borders to an "integrated" system was reiterated, and a particularly important concern identified the need to improve the current border-crossing procedures between the US and Mexico. The considerable financial investment needed to achieve an integrated system was acknowledged, as "equal quality among the partners" will require not only increased coordination, within as well as among the countries, but also a greater focus on processes and policies. The topic of "North American transportation corridors of national significance" was raised, in general, without specific identification of what would constitute such corridors.

http://www.du.edu/transportation/TransportationResearchProjects/1997_roundtable.html

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for the references. It will take me a day (or more) to read through some stuff and absorb it all.
I don't have much time to do that today.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for the response. I agree with some of what you posted, but disagree with others. I'm not familiar with the detailed reasoning of either Dobbs or Buchanan, but I can see where deeming NAFTA not "Fair" is perfectly consistent with conservative principles. You're probably aware that the U.S. agreed to drop or phase out tariffs on their products but allowed Mexico to continue tariffs for many years. I don't think the issue is so much about "Fair Trade" as much as a "Fair Agreement". If I give you a dollar for 10 nickles is that Fair?

A couple of other things... You wrote:

But giving in unions, Democrats, etc. on some of these issues is sometimes needed to increase freedom of trade.

I disagree. See tagline. It diminishes out sovereignty and freedom in the name of "free trade". New requirements placed on USA businesses, and jurisdiction of foreign courts or other quasi-governmental bodies is not a positive step, IMO.

And...

But I think both are eminently justified, as proven by the opposition of Teacher's unions.

I don't see these issues as two dimensional. Opposition by one group does not rise to the level of "proof" in my estimation.

[reg45]

Hey! You forgot the Bilderbergers.

[hedgetrimmer]

I'm guessing the Intermodal Transportation institute is a Clinton construct. The term you were looking for turned up these proceedings.

http://www.du.edu/transportation/Resources/pdfs/Summit.pdf#search='Joanne%20Casey%20iti'

[TigersEye]

When I legally became an American, I didn’t give up my heritage, but I certainly don’t place my birth country before the USA, ever! I saw the “protests” that the illegals staged throughout the country.

What gall. I haven’t seen anything like it since the organized “rallies” that enabled Hitler to take over Germany and the Communists to take over Eastern Europe. “Protest” my foot! It was well-organized sedition, and should be treated as such!

Amen to that! Where are the office holding patriots standing up and calling it what it is? They're cowards. Pissants that should be driven from office, ridiculed and spat on in public.

Smith Act of 1940 This is the U.S. statute that ought to apply to the organized gathering of tens of thousands of foreign nationals calling for the overthrow of our country.

[calcowgirl]

Keep 'em coming! They will not go unread!

[TigersEye]

What a joke. That whole CFR vision of the future is a fantasy that wouldn't work if they do implement it. It's as blindly utopian as Marxism.

[Rokke]

"You're talking like a Mexican or, even worse, George W. Bush."

You start your post with this and ask me at the end if I'm a troll. You're on the wrong site buddy.

"Haven't you ever heard of "The United States of America"? It is the free, creative, prosperous nation that all these other nations that you say we are dependent on are flocking to get into because their countries stink!"

This very powerful and free nation has been forming alliances since before it had its Constitution. That you are unaware of that does not surprise me in the least. I have no trouble imagining that your knowledge of this nation and its history barely extend beyond your own driveway.

"NORAD? NATO? NAFTA? UN? You could remove every one of them from the face of the earth and you would still have what we have now: The United States supplying the prosperity and the security of the world as best it can ALONE! "

True. But try taking away NORAD and NATO during the hottest days of the Cold War and see where you'd be. Long term alliances with strong allies are a positive for all countries involved. Kind of like having longterm friendships. You've heard of those?

"Dilute it with these other inconsequential entities and you will have diluted freedom, security and prosperity. That's what I see our administration doing."

That is because it appears all you can really see is the dying azalea bush at the end of your driveway. For anyone with even superficial exposure to the real world, the importance of alliances and treaties in our history lifts them far above the level of "inconsequential". Enjoy your freedom to remain ignorant. Great Americans have paid for it fighting alongside great men from allied nations all over this world.

[Rokke]

"Thanks, but this whole deal is so upside down, it's making my head spin!"

It is much easier to shriek ignorance than explain reality. As soon as you engage any one of these folks in a discussion based on facts, they run away. Watch what happens if anyone takes the opportunity to discuss the CFR publication mentioned earlier in this thread. None of them will be able to discuss the document without referring to another "article" that explains what the document is "really" saying. The reason the MSM has any influence remaining is because too many people still would rather be told what to think than process the facts themselves. It's easy, and lazy. And it makes any rational person's head spin.

[TigersEye]

Yes and we still have troops in harms way in Bosnia ensuring that radical Muslims aren't unduly harrassed in Eastern Europe. What a great precedent it was sending NATO troops in to settle an internal dispute violating their national sovereignty essentially doing what NATO was created to prevent.

Nation busting bump.