Inside the hush-hush North American Union confab

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | March 13, 2008 | Jerome R. Corsi

[Man50D]

WASHINGTON -- A largely unreported meeting held at the State Department discussed integration of the U.S., Mexico and Canada in concert with a move toward a transatlantic union, linking a North American community with the European Union.

The meeting was held Monday under the auspices of the Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy, or ACIEP. WND obtained press credentials and attended as an observer. The meeting was held under "Chatham House" rules that prohibit reporters from attributing specific comments to individual participants.

The State Department website noted the meeting was opened by Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs Daniel S. Sullivan and ACIEP Chairman Michael Gadbaw, vice president and senior counsel for General Electric's International Law & Policy group since December 1990.

WND observed about 25 ACIEP members, including U.S. corporations involved in international trade, prominent U.S. business trade groups, law firms involved with international business law, international investment firms and other international trade consultants.

No members of Congress attended the meeting.

The agenda for the ACIEP meeting was not published, and State Department officials in attendance could not give WND permission under Chatham House rules to publish the agenda.

[Man50D]

Chatham rules allow the reporter to report on everything except to identify who said it.

No kidding. That's exactly my point! They don't dare let those who are pushing to destroy our country be identified as to how they will accomplish the destruction.

You probably fell for that one, too.

I'm not falling for the Bush administration trying to cover up its socialist agenda by trying to downplay these types of meetings. Denying this is happening by trying to bury your head in the sand does not negate the fact Bush wants to end U.S. sovereignty.

[wolfcreek]

You and other deniers seem to isolate WMD as the main culprit.

I say Thank goodness ‘someone’ is reporting on these issues. OTOH, other than a worldwide revolution, I see little that can be done to prevent a NWO/NAU.

[1rudeboy]

Well, there is some irony in WND seeing a profit in it all. I think more people would take the threat more seriously if it wasn’t yellow journalism.

[1rudeboy]

If the destruction of this nation is truly at hand, why doesn't the reporter just blow-off the rules and report who said what? Oh, that's right, he'd lose his meal ticket.

Note also that instead of discussing what was actually said, we are discussing the fabricated issue of this "secret" agenda. Like I said, you fell for it.

[wolfcreek]

Ha! *Yellow* journalists reporting on a *Yellow* World Order. LOL!!!

That’s PHAT!

[1rudeboy]

That one went over my head.

[Man50D]

I think more people would take the threat more seriously if it wasn’t yellow journalism.

Prove it's yellow journalism! Cite your sources that refute what Corsi is reporting.

[1rudeboy]

Wait a minute. I just identified an example of Corsi's yellow journalism, and you accused me of going "off-topic."

[Man50D]

If the destruction of this nation is truly at hand, why doesn't the reporter just blow-off the rules and report who said what?

Try using a little common sense. Corsi is considering the long term problem if he reports individual quotes. He would be completely removed from the process and therefore not be able to report on any of these meetings if he ignored these so called "rules".

[1rudeboy]

Or, if you are a sceptic, he manufactures a controversy where there is none in order to sell copy.

[Man50D]

Wait a minute. I just identified an example of Corsi's yellow journalism, and you accused me of going "off-topic."

That doesn't answer post #27.

[upchuck]

No members of Congress attended the meeting.

Of course not.

[1rudeboy]

If Corsi has engaged in yellow journalism in the past, it is permissible to infer that he will continue to do so. He is no different from the NYT editorial staff in that regard.

What you fail to understand is that, when the truth finally does come out (perhaps even in another one of his books), his original statement (and the "controversy" behind it) will have long since disappeared down the memory hole.

That's why I'm a sceptic and you are a believer.

[Designer]

ping

[Designer]

No members of Congress attended the meeting.

They all think we just made it up.

[Designer]

"..because it’s all a secret."

BS

It has always been public record, just that the MSM chooses not to publicize it.

[Designer]

"..I just identified an example of Corsi's yellow journalism,"

Where did I miss that?

Which post?

[Designer]

"..when the truth finally does come out.."

The truth is already out.

"..his original statement..will have long since disappeared down the memory hole."

Some people, yourself for sure, will have forgotten, but not everyone.

"That's why I'm a sceptic and you are a believer."

I'm sure people such as yourself will continue to be skeptical even when there is a sign above the door.

[1rudeboy]

Yes, it is important that we believe everything we read, particularly if it appears in World Net Daily.

[Just mythoughts]

We will just have to wait until the Canadian or Mexican press leaks the story. Something is up because of the Obama and Hillary promising to renegotiate NAFTA.

Isn't is curious how that cheap illegal labor is consider a ‘free market’ idea.