 |
Posted on 09/27/2006 5:27:45 PM PDT by SwinneySwitch
MEXICO CITY — Mexico’s president-elect says murder and mayhem fueled by drug smuggling have overwhelmed the governments of the nation’s capital and key states across the country. Felipe Calderón said the wave of bloodshed knows no politics; it is ravaging state governments controlled by each of Mexico’s three major parties. He singled out Mexico City, the northern states of Sinaloa and Tamaulipas, the southern state of Guerrero and his home state of Michoacan, as being especially hard-hit.
“It seems to me that drug violence has overwhelmed the governments of the PAN, the PRI and the PRD,” Calderón said in a radio interview.
The PAN is the ruling National Action Party, while the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, controlled Mexico’s presidency from 1929 until losing to President Vicente Fox in 2000. In the July 2 presidential election, Calderón, of National Action, barely beat leftist former Mexico City mayor Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the PRD, or Democratic Revolution Party.
Calderón called for legislative and law-enforcement efforts to curb drug violence across party lines “in a very coordinated way.”
Fox spokesman Rubén Aguilar agreed with Calderón on Tuesday, saying “we coincide completely with the president-elect.”
He said during his daily briefing with reporters at Los Pinos, the Mexican equivalent of the White House, that “the fight has not been overwhelmed, but there’s still much to do.”
Calderón will take office Dec. 1, replacing the term-limited Fox.
The U.S. Embassy in Mexico City has long expressed concern about the growing wave of violence along the northern border, where people are gunned down with automatic weapons almost daily, and dozens of Americans have been kidnapped.
Authorities say more than 1,500 people have died in Mexican drug violence so far this year.
Narcotics investigators on both sides of the border attribute the spike in killings to a territorial war between drug gangs battling for control of lucrative smuggling corridors into the United States.
But U.S. Ambassador Tony Garza recently extended warnings to say Americans should use extreme caution when traveling anywhere in Mexico.
“The bottom line is that we simply cannot allow drug traffickers to place in jeopardy the lives of our citizens and the safety of our communities,” Garza said in a statement Sept. 14.
Calderón said drug violence “is generating much more diplomatic pressure” from Washington, adding that upcoming U.S. congressional elections have made Mexico even more of a hot issue than usual.
Most of Mexico’s top drug lords hail from Sinaloa. Drug killings that have included beheadings have occurred in Guerrero, home to the Pacific resort of Acapulco; in Baja California, where the violent border city of Tijuana is located; and in Calderón’s native Michoacan state, in central Mexico west of the capital.
On Sept. 6, gunmen with their faces covered burst into a seedy nightclub in the Michoacan city of Uruapan, fired guns in the air and rolled five severed human heads onto the dance floor.
The gunmen left scrawled notes on pieces of cardboard, a tactic that has suddenly become common in Michoacan and elsewhere. The notes made reference to “the Family,” while other beheadings in Acapulco and elsewhere have referenced the letter “Z,” suggesting the involvement of “Las Zetas,” a group of former elite Mexican soldiers now working as hit men for the Gulf drug cartel.
On Tuesday, police recovered the body of a man who had been shot 24 times with machine guns in the Michoacan city of Turicato. Messages had been attached to the unidentified 35-year-old victim’s body, including “Anti Z” and “greetings, Z family. This is for the traitors to their country,” the government news agency Notimex reported.
Investigators say Michoacan is a base for powerful cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine smugglers with ties to some of the country’s largest and most-violent drug gangs.
Me too, Presidente electo!
***Cesspool Alert***
Old Mexico Ping!
Well then, I guess it's time to run a big superhighway of dubious jurisdiction and security from Mexico right into the heartland of the US. < /sarc>
He's right about Tamaulipas! That's for sure!
Pretty soon they will be running San Diego and San Francisco.
If the Mexicans have an army it looks like time to call them up. Although in actuality the army is probably filled with drug dealers too.
Maybe the best way for the US to help Mexico is to close off those lucrative smuggling corridors.
BUILD the FENCE now !!!
Will wonders never cease?
This has been going on for years. Nothing new. I wonder if Calderone just found out.
Meet the new boss, same as the old bosses.
"Excuse me Sir but, those DrugLords pay half your salary"
"Really?"
Nothing like that is planned, that is a myth perpetuated by conspiracy kooks and the ignorant fools who lap it up instead of bothering to get any actual facts.
What is proposed is a tollway from San Antonio to Dallas, later to be expanded north and south to the Oklahoma and Mexican border. It would not cross the border, no new border crossing would be built, all cargo would still be subject to the same level of border inspections, the road would only serve traffic that has already cleared the border checkpoints. Some have proposed other tollways that would connect with the Texas one and run north to their states, just like some have always proposed new highways to better connect their areas and spur economic development. The Texas road would still be patroled by DPS troopers and local law enforcement, just like every other road in Texas, and subject to the exact same laws.
But don't let facts and common sense get in the way of knee-jerk rants.
"Nothing like that is planned, that is a myth perpetuated by conspiracy kooks and the ignorant fools who lap it up instead of bothering to get any actual facts.
Here are your facts that were obtained from the Freedom of Information Act.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/SPP.shtml
My printer is not working. Can anyone tell me how to turn these papers so I can read them? I'll be gone most of the day but will be back this evening.
What is Larry Klayman's success record in court, won 1 in 100?
This isn't about Larry Klayman. I will say this though. It is sad that it took a lawyer to get the facts. Maybe you can answer this question. Why have the facts been kept a secret since 2005?
EEE: I pinged you to read #15 as I know you like to keep up with the facts.
Oops! Read #14.
"Nothing like that is planned, that is a myth perpetuated by conspiracy kooks and the ignorant fools who lap it up instead of bothering to get any actual facts.
What is proposed is a tollway from San Antonio to Dallas, later to be expanded north and south to the Oklahoma and Mexican border. It would not cross the border, no new border crossing would be built, all cargo would still be subject to the same level of border inspections, the road would only serve traffic that has already cleared the border checkpoints. Some have proposed other tollways that would connect with the Texas one and run north to their states, just like some have always proposed new highways to better connect their areas and spur economic development. The Texas road would still be patroled by DPS troopers and local law enforcement, just like every other road in Texas, and subject to the exact same laws.
But don't let facts and common sense get in the way of knee-jerk rants."
You won't mind providing links that support your claims? Unwilling to be labeled as an ignorant fool or conspiracy kook, I wouldn't mind doing a 'common sense' comparison before letting my usual knee-jerk rants in support of President Bush get in the way of the truth. TIA
"My printer is not working. Can anyone tell me how to turn these papers so I can read them? I'll be gone most of the day but will be back this evening." |
Thank you for the link Texastoo.
|
Good post devolve, thank you
Sorry, I'm tired and don't care to spend any more time debunking some of the ridiculous myths being spread around over and over and over again. But if you will just click on or search the keywords "transtexascorridor", "transtinfoilcorridor", and "kookmagnetthread" you will get tons of threads over the last year or more where the kook theories are spouted and then refuted with facts.
Thanks a million. Now, I feel like an idiot not looking at the top of the page. LOL
You are welcome.
This is a good post. Thanks.
Remember it was a Mexican illegal alien that got the IDs for the 911 skyjackers
Thanks for the reminder, I tend to forget things like that!
Which includes this:
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP): Myth vs. Fact
Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.
Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.
Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.
Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.
Myth: The SPP is being undertaken without the knowledge of the U.S. Congress.
Fact: U.S. agencies involved with SPP regularly update and consult with members of Congress on our efforts and plans.
Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.
Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.
Myth: The SPP is illegal and violates the Constitution.
Fact: The SPP is legal and in no way violates the Constitution or affects the legal authorities of the participating executive agencies. Indeed, the SPP is an opportunity for the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to discuss common goals and identify ways to enhance each nation’s security and prosperity. If an action is identified, U.S. federal agencies can only operate within U.S. law to address these issues. The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security coordinate the efforts of the agencies responsible for the various initiatives under the prosperity and security pillars of the SPP. If an agency were to decide a regulatory change is desirable through the cooperative efforts of SPP, that agency is required to conform to all existing U.S. laws and administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.
Myth: The SPP will cost U.S. taxpayers money.
Fact: The SPP is being implemented with existing budget resources. Over the long-term, it will save U.S. taxpayers money by cutting through costly red tape and reducing redundant paperwork. This initiative will benefit the taxpayers through economic gain and increased security, thereby enhancing the competitiveness and quality of life in our countries.
Myth: The working groups and SPP documents are a secret and not available to the public.
Fact: The SPP’s initiatives and milestones with timelines can be found by clicking the Report to Leaders link at www.spp.gov. The Web site contains a section to enable interested persons to provide input directly to the various working groups.
Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework.
Fact: The framework will support and enhance cooperation and encourage the compatibility of regulations among the three partners while maintaining high standards of health and safety. Enhanced cooperation in this area will provide consumers with more affordable, safer, and more diversified and innovative products. Any regulatory changes will require agencies to conform to all U.S. administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.
Myth: The SPP is meant to deal with immigration reform and trade disputes.
Fact: Immigration reform is a legislative matter currently being debated in Congress and is not being dealt with in the SPP. Likewise, trade disputes between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are resolved in the NAFTA and WTO mechanisms and not the SPP.
Myth: The SPP will result in the loss of American jobs.
Fact: The SPP seeks to create jobs by reducing transaction costs and unnecessary burdens for U.S. companies, which will bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally. These efforts will help U.S. manufacturers, spur job creation, and benefit consumers.
Myth: The SPP will harm our quality of life.
Fact: The SPP improves the safety and well-being of Americans. It builds on efforts to protect our environment, improves our ability to combat infectious diseases, such as avian influenza, and ensures our food supply is safe through the exchange of information and cooperation ─ improving the quality of life for U.S. citizens. Americans enjoy world class living standards because we are engaged with the world.
Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.
Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.
Well, they should make those drugs illegal then people will stop selling them.
"Sorry, I'm tired and don't care to spend any more time debunking some of the ridiculous myths being spread around over and over and over again."
Good! It's about time! Because quite frankly, I was getting pretty sick and tired of self appointed debunkers wasting their time on these threads, bashing those of us who wish to have a serious discussion on the topic, and getting away with it. Doesn't take a pencil pusher to see that the schoolyard bullies around here have an agenda to silence any dissent by anyone against any of President Bush's agendas and are doing so with approval. Frankly, the behavior is childish and becoming a bore, but I'm sure there are plenty of other threads on topics about which there IS something constructive to contribute.
http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom63.htm
BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN DENIAL OF 'NORTH AMERICAN UNION' PLAN
By Tom DeWeese
September 19, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
“Conspiracy theories.” “Fringe nuts.” “Lies.” “Myths.” These are the words being used by officials of the Bush Administration and others to brand those who have reported on the activities of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), currently operating out of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Opponents have charged the SPP will result in the establishment of a North American Union, much on the same lines as the European Union.
In response to its critics, the SPP has added a “SPP Myths Vs Facts” section to its website at www.SPP.gov. According to the “Myths Vs Facts” document the SPP is simply a “dialog” among the three countries to “enhance prosperity.” It goes on to say the SPP is not an agreement, nor is it a treaty. It says “no agreement was ever signed.”
The truth is, on March 23, 2005, President Bush met at his ranch in Crawford, Texas with Vicente Fox and Paul Martin (then PM of Canada) in what they called a Summit. The three heads of state then drove to Baylor University in Waco, where they issued a press release announcing their signing of an agreement to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
This year, on March 31, 2006, Bush. Fox and new Canadian PM, Stephen Harper met in Cancun, Mexico. This time their press release celebrated what they called the first anniversary of the SPP.
The use of the word “dialog” is a carefully selected euphemism designed to make the SPP sound like an innocent discussion among friends. To admit that it is anything more would force the government to provide Constitutional justification for its actions.
Moreover, the SPP says it won’t change our court system or legislative process and that it respects the sovereignty of each nation. And, says the SPP Myths and Facts document, it strongly rejects the idea that it is creating a European Union-like structure.
That defense is almost laughable in light of the massive activity-taking place in the SPP office located in the Commerce Department............"
In fact, for several years the equivilent of the manpower for an ARMY DIVISION has been coming across the border EVERY FEW DAYS.
Translation: "I am too lazy to actual do research after being pointed in that direction, especially since it will probably contradict and disprove my worldview and my rants."
Look, there have literally been hundreds of threads on this subject in the last year, and I don't have time to refute and debate at length when I have done so numerous times in previous months. There is a lengthy archive of posts, links, arguments, and sources in the keywords I gave you, so why should I spend an hour reconstructing and repeating them for the 100th time when a latecomer demands it? Do your own research. Especially since the "Bush wants to turn us into Mexico" kooks just simply ignore factual refutations and relaunch into their oft-disproven mantras.
Do your homework and get back to me, and maybe we'll debate.
Watch what happens to Open Borders, Big Spending, Good Hair Perry in this election and you will see that there are a lot of us kooks out there.
The Myths Of Socialism-Terry Pearson
September 11--Last week I did an article on the fact that almost fifty percent of Canadians want to see the oil companies nationalized.
When you add up the popularity polls of the liberals and the NDP, you get a little over fifty percent of the population of Canada that think in terms of socialism. That doesn't include the left wing element of the Bloc.
It sets a dangerous precedent, when 50 percent of a country thinks the world owes them a living.
I can't say it enough, the philosophy of socialism is refutable.
In it's simplest form, its the story about the bum, who approached a well dressed business man and said, "You owe me one thousand dollars." "Why is that?" asked the business man. The bum replied, "because you have it and I don't."
Source: The Myths Of Socialism
Debunking the Myth: "Communism Isn't All That Bad"
 Tuesday, September 26, 2006 THE NEW WORLD DISORDER Documents disclose 'shadow government' Indicate U.S. far advanced in constructing bureaucracy united with Mexico, Canada Posted: September 26, 2006 1:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The documents, a total of about 1,000 pages, are among the first to be released to Corsi through his FOIA request to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, which describes itself as an initiative "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation." "The documents clearly reveal that SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law, all without congressional oversight or public disclosure," Corsi said. (Story continues below)
Among the initial discoveries, said Corsi, is the existence of an internal Intranet website that never has been revealed to Congress or the public. "This private internal website," he claims, "undoubtedly contains a wealth of documentation that the FOIA request has so far intentionally excluded." Corsi told WND the documents reveal hundreds of internal meetings, memoranda of understanding and other referenced agreements that have not been disclosed. "We have here the beginnings of a whitewash," he said, "in which SPP evidently thinks the public will be hoodwinked by a 'Myths vs. Facts' document posted for public relations purposes on their public website." Among the documents is an organizational chart accompanied by a listing of trilateral Mexican, Canadian and U.S. administrative officers who report on multiple cabinet level "working groups." The government watchdog Judicial Watch announced today it has received some of the same documents, including the organizational chart, which can be seen in this pdf file, on page seven. "There is no specific authorization for this massive administrative-branch integration with Mexico and Canada other than what amounts to a press conference jointly issued by President Bush, Mexico's President Vicente Fox, and Canada's then-Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23, 2005, at the end of their summit in Waco, Texas," Corsi said. Corsi added that even the "Myth vs. Facts" blurb on the SPP.gov website admits the SPP is neither a treaty nor a law. "The Bush administration is trying to create the infrastructure of a new regional North American government in stealth fashion, under the radar and out of public view," Corsi claims. "Where is Congress, asleep at the wheel?" The SPP organizational chart Corsi obtained shows 13 working groups covering a wide range of public policy issues, including Manufactured Goods; Energy, Food & Agriculture; Rules of Origin' Health; E-Commerce; Transportation; Environment; Financial Services; Business Facilitation; External Threats to North America; Streamlined & Secured Shared Borders; and Prevention/Response within North America. U.S. administrative-branch officers participating in these working groups are drawn from the U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative. The released documents affirm that counterparts from official governmental agencies in Mexico and Canada are combined with the U.S. administrative branch to form new trilateral "working groups" that actively rewrite U.S. administrative law to "harmonize" or "integrate" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada. "What we have here amounts to an administrative coup d'etat," Corsi told WND. "Where does the Bush administration get the congressional authorization to invite two foreign nations to the table to rewrite U.S. law?"
If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.
Related offers: For a comprehensive look at the U.S. government's plan to integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American super-state – guided by the powerful but secretive Council on Foreign Relations – read "ALIEN NATION: SECRETS OF THE INVASION," a special edition of WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine. Get Tom Tancredo's new book, "In Mortal Danger," for just $4.95.
Previous stories: N. American students trained for 'merger' North American confab 'undermines' democracy Attendance list North American forum North American merger topic of secret confab Feds finally release info on 'superstate' Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate' Congressman presses on 'superstate' plan Feds stonewalling on 'super state' plan? Cornyn wants U.S. taxpayers to fund Mexican development Trans-Texas Corridor paved with campaign contributions? U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies More evidence of Mexican trucks coming to U.S. Docs reveal plan for Mexican trucks in U.S. Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil? Tancredo confronts 'superstate' effort Bush sneaking North American superstate without oversight? Related columns: Coming soon to U.S.: Mexican customs office
|
|
IS, American University Professor Robert Pastor more dangerous than Osama bin Laden?
Friday, September 29, 2006 THE NEW WORLD DISORDER Mexicans have better claim to U.S. than 'Euro-Americans' This from student who 'represented' immigration PAC at 'parliament' Posted: September 29, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
One of the participants in this year's "model Parliament" in which university students pretended to run a new North American "union" took on a role as a lobbyist for Americans for Legal Immigration, then announced that Mexicans have a more legitimate claim to the land in the U.S. than those "Euro-Americans." "America was created by Europeans who stole this land (or in some cases traded it for a few bottles of whisky and some shotguns) from its indigineous (sic) peoples whilst plundering, murdering and raping its inhabitants," said a student who identified himself as Tyson Sadler, on a forum at ALI-PAC.
"They set up borders, stole important artifacts and kidnapped people which (sic) were sent back to Europe," he added. "This land belongs to the indigineous (sic) peoples – the very ones you are trying to keep out. Mexicans have more claim to the territorial United States than Euro-Americans do. There are NO illegals. (Story continues below)
"I would love to see ALIPAC dismantled. This organization makes me sick," he said. Wow, said William Gheen, the director for ALI-PAC. "I'm flabbergasted," he told WND during an interview on the subject. "I'm blown away by this." ALI-PAC is Americans for Legal Immigration, a group set up to "address the disparity between the public's desire for more control of illegal immigration and the actions of lawmakers," the group itself says. The "model Parliament" was a recent event in which students from 10 universities in the U.S., Mexico and Canada participated This year they met in the Mexican Senate for five days in what was called "Triumvirate," with organizers declaring "A North American Parliament is born." It's sponsored by the Canadian based North American Forum on Integration, and a similar staged event happened in the Canadian Senate in 2005. Organizers make clear their intent: "The creation of a North American parliament, such as the one being simulated by these young people, should be considered," explained Raymond Chretien, the president of the Triumvirate and the former Canadian ambassador to both Mexico and the U.S. Participants discuss draft bills on trade corridors, immigration, provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement and produce a daily newspaper called "The TrilatHerald."
The board of directors of NAFI includes Robert A. Pastor, professor and director of the Center for North American Studies at American University and vice chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on North America. He has testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on the idea of merging the United States, Mexico and Canada in a North American union stretching from Prudhoe Bay to Guatemala. The 10 universities taking part include Harvard, American University, Carlton University, Simon Fraser, Universite de Montreal, Ecole nationale d'administration publique, Monterrey TEC, CIDE, Monterrey University and Instituto Mexicano de la Juventud. NAFI claims the event enjoys the support of the U.S. Embassy in Canada, the Canadian Embassy in Mexico and the North American Development Bank. It also has been supported by at least one U.S. news organization – the Houston Chronicle. So what was a student doing describing himself as a representative from ALI-PAC when ALI-PAC didn't know anything about it, and the student clearly wasn't in the same philosophical book as ALI-PAC, much less on the same page? A political move, probably, said Gheen. "It must have been some sort of clinical observation, a human experiment," he said. "They were testing the political dynamics." "It looks like they instructed these students to study us and try to replicate us and our message, and put it into the context of a legislative governing system," said Gheen, He said he found out when the student's signature arrived on the ALI-PAC website forum, where he started out bragging that he'd won an award. The posting listed the "Final Report 2006" from "The Tirumvirate in La Reforma" and said that Sadler, as "Lobbyist for the organization 'Americans for Legal Immigration'" and member of the delegation from Simon Fraser University, was being honored. After the initial posting, Gheen simply asked Sadler to clarify. "Please explain these reports for us. We would like to know why the name of our organization is being used in some Globalist exercise to practice the unlawful merger of the US, Canada, and Mexico," Gheen wrote. Initially Sadler responded with a terse: "Please direct your questions to INFO@FINA-NAFI.ORG or visit http://www.fina-nafi.org." But under some prodding from others on the forum, he returned, and unloaded. "I don't wish to contribute to a thread of an organization I find to be extremely racist, elitist and exclusionary. ALIPAC hurts us all," he wrote. "I represented your organization at the North American Forum on Integration (a model parliament) this past summer. I won the title of 'Distinguished Delegate' for lobbying on behalf of ALIPAC. I won the award because I represented 'Americans For Legal Immigration' well as I lobbied on their behalf. If you read the final report, you will see that I was successful in persuading legislators from Canada, the US, and Mexico to sympathize with ALIPAC's aims. "Rest assured that your organization, no matter how dispicable (sic) it is, was represented by myself with the most amount of professionalism and accuracy. "The name of your organization is not being used to practice the unlawful merger of the US, Canada, and Mexico. We are assuming that the merger has already taken place in a completely lawful and sustainable manner," he wrote. "Mr. Sadler, I doubt very seriously that an Open Borders advocate like yourself could ever do ALIPAC the slightest justice," responded Gheen. He said Sadler didn't even understand the group's purpose. "You cannot lawfully reconstruct the United States of America without changing the US Constitution and gaining ratification by the states." "If you are correct and this is already the case to be prepared for and practiced, then your masters have just set the stage for massive unrest as the side you advocate for has deprived all American, Canadian, and Mexico citizens of their rights," he said. "How does it feel to be a doll of the devil?" One other participant in the forum was more direct: "Tyson, Thank you for … admitting that you defamed and slandered ALIPAC. You showed your real intentions with your post. Guess what, there are 250 million Americans opposed to your ideals." Pastor is the author of "Toward a North American Community," a book promoting the development of a North American union as a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso. As vice chairman of the May 2005 CFR task force, he is an architect of the Building a North American Community" plan that presents itself as a blueprint for using bureaucratic action within the executive branches of Mexico, the U.S. and Canada to transform the current trilateral Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America into a North American union regional government. The next Triumvirate model parliament conference will be in the United States – in either New York or Washington, according to a spokeswoman for the North American Forum. Earlier this month, a high-level, top-secret meeting of the North American Forum took place in Banff, Canada – with topics ranging from "A Vision for North America," "Opportunities for Security Cooperation" and "Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration." Pastor was listed as a confirmed participant in that meeting, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Central Intelligence Agency Director R. James Woolsey, former Immigration and Naturalization Services Director Doris Meissner, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former Energy Secretary and Defense Secretary James Schlesinger and top officials of both Mexico and Canada. But there's also been significant opposition. One set of suggestions came from Lou Dobbs of CNN – a frequent critic of President Bush's immigration policies. "What in the world are these people thinking about? You know, I was asked the other day about whether or not I really thought the American people had the stomach to stand up and stop this nonsense, this direction from a group of elites, an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value. And I hope, I pray that I'm right when I said yes. But this is – I mean, this is beyond belief," he said. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. and the chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus as well as author of the new book, "In Mortal Danger," may be the only elected official to challenge openly the plans for the new superstate. Responding to a WND report, Tancredo is demanding the Bush administration fully disclose the activities of the government office implementing the trilateral agreement that has no authorization from Congress.
Related offers: For a comprehensive look at the U.S. government's plan to integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American super-state – guided by the powerful but secretive Council on Foreign Relations – read "ALIEN NATION: SECRETS OF THE INVASION," a special edition of WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine. Get Tom Tancredo's new book, "In Mortal Danger," for just $4.95.
Previous stories: N. American students trained for 'merger' North American confab 'undermines' democracy Attendance list North American forum North American merger topic of secret confab Feds finally release info on 'superstate' Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate' Congressman presses on 'superstate' plan Feds stonewalling on 'super state' plan? Cornyn wants U.S. taxpayers to fund Mexican development Trans-Texas Corridor paved with campaign contributions? U.S.-Mexico merger opposition intensifies More evidence of Mexican trucks coming to U.S. Docs reveal plan for Mexican trucks in U.S. Kansas City customs port considered Mexican soil? Tancredo confronts 'superstate' effort Bush sneaking North American superstate without oversight? Related columns: Coming soon to U.S.: Mexican customs office
|
Thank you for the ping!
Aint that a fact. Somtimes I think we are being sold out and wonder why?
By Robert A. Pastor
Special to CNN Interactive
|
||||||
(CNN) -- The evolution of U.S. leadership in the world can be seen in its relationship to the Panama Canal at the dawn of the 20th century and at its dusk.
America's construction of the canal in 1904-14 was one of the century's great technological feats, one that Europeans tried but failed to do. On the last day of the century, the United States will officially transfer to Panama responsibility for the operation, administration and defense of the canal.
If the canal's construction symbolized the arrival on the world stage of a new power, the United States, the transfer demonstrates that America's real source of strength lies in its ability to adapt to a changing world.
At the beginning, the United States needed to control the canal to secure it; at the end, we understand that the best defense of the canal required that we transform a resentful neighbor into a partner.
With the help of Panamanian, Caribbean and Chinese labor, Americans built a canal through the middle of Panama. We protected it with a 10-mile wide Canal Zone. During the two world wars, the canal was a vital strategic artery for the United States and our allies. By the Korean War, however, the canal's width could not accommodate the huge aircraft carriers that had become the centerpieces of our fleets in both oceans. Still, the canal remains very important economically as a transportation route. Panama's pride eventually became resentment
The Panamanians were proud of their greatest resource but increasingly resentful over what they viewed as a colonial presence that divided their country in half. In 1964, a fight over a flag in the Canal Zone between Panamanian and American students left 23 Panamanians and four U.S. Marines dead. Panama insisted on new treaties, and most Latin American leaders supported them. The talks began in 1964 and concluded in 1977 with two new treaties.
|
||||||
The Panama Canal Treaty called for the end of the Canal Zone in 1979 and the gradual transfer of responsibility for the canal to Panama to be completed on December 31, 1999, with the withdrawal of U.S. troops and closure of bases. Panama would be responsible for the canal's defense. The Treaty on the Permanent Neutrality of the canal, however, gave the United States the right to defend the canal, preferably in support of Panama, but if necessary and under extreme circumstances, by itself.
The debate on the treaties was intense and politically controversial. Many felt a sentimental attachment to this great achievement. One senator joked that "we should keep it because we stole it, fair and square."
President Jimmy Carter, with the support of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Republican Senate Minority Leader Howard Baker, former President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, argued that the 1903 treaties actually endangered the canal by enraging Panamanian and Latin American nationalism. The best defense of the canal, they said, would be to become a partner with Panama. The treaties passed by a single vote in the Senate. Panama has a better idea
The United States operated the canal as a model of state socialism. Panama has a better idea. It will do a good job operating the canal, and it is privatizing the ports and inviting foreign investors to build hotels, industrial parks, eco-tourism, ship repair facilities and private housing.
|
||||||
One of the largest shipping and container operators in the world, a Hong Kong firm called Hutchison-Whampoa, bid successfully to manage two ports. Some conjure up phantoms of Chinese Communists using Hutchison to threaten the canal, but China does not have the capability to seize Taiwan -- just 90 miles off-shore -- let alone a canal that is 10,000 miles away. Furthermore, Hutchison has a stake in promoting the canal, not harming it.
More importantly, Panama has no intention to trade away its new independence, and the United States has all the rights and the power needed to defend the canal.
In the new century, the continued ability of the United States to lead will depend on the partnerships we forge around the world. The best place to start is with our friends in Panama. We will demonstrate our greatness twice if we exhibit as much pride in transferring the canal at the end of the century as we did in building it at the beginning.
Robert A. Pastor, professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta, is the editor of "A Century's Journey: How the Great Powers Shape the World" (Basic Books, 1999). He was director of Latin American Affairs on the National Security Council when the canal treaties were negotiated and ratified.
Thanks for all the informative articles SA!
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.
.jpg){kind=small}
NARRATIVE
