Posted on 03/13/2008 4:09:15 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Very quietly, behind the scenes, a little known NGO has been working to advance plans to merge the United States with Europe. No one has heard of the work of this group, the Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN), because it has never been covered by the mainstream media....
These efforts have garnered significant transoceanic support, both from political and business leaders, for TPN’s plan. In 2004 and again in 2005, the EU parliament passed resolutions “in which the concept of completing the transatlantic market by 2015 is supported.” TPN notes with apparent satisfaction that the U.S. Congress has done likewise and points out that the “House of Representatives has also passed a resolution endorsing the concept of a ‘Transatlantic Partnership Agreement’ between the EU and the US.”
For those keeping track of Congressional malfeasance, this legislation, H. Res. 390, was introduced in the House by Nebraska Republican Doug Bereuter on October 2, 2003. It passed the House little more than a month later on November 5. The resolution found that the “United States and the European community are aware of their shared responsibility, not only to further transatlantic security, but to address other common interests such as environmental protection, poverty reduction, combatting international crime and promoting human rights, and to work together to meet those transnational challenges which affect the well-being of all.”
Moreover, it found that because of the “threats posed by global terrorism, terrorist states, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the nexus of the three, the partnership should be expanded progressively from a transatlantic community of values to an effective transatlantic community of action by developing a collaborative strategy and action plan for dealing with those challenges of mutual interest and concern.”
There are many other important legislators on both sides of the Atlantic that continue to back the integration plan, and some of them actually serve as leaders within TPN itself. The most prominent of these is Republican Senator Robert Bennett of Utah. Bennett is chairman of the TPN Management Committee, one of the top leadership positions at TPN, according to the organization’s Website. The Honorary U.S. President of TPN is Robert S. Strauss, a key Carter administration official and former ambassador to the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation. Joining Strauss and Bennett in TPN leadership positions are: Former Congressman Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) — now Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the US, another group promoting U.S.-EU integration; Democratic Congressman Ron Kind of Wisconsin who has been an active supporter in Congress of regional free trade agreements; Former Congressman Mike Oxley (R-Ohio), infamous co-author of the notorious Sarbanes-Oxley Act that, as described by Congressman Ron Paul, unconstitutionally gave “the federal government authority to regulate the accounting standards of private corporations” in the wake of the Enron and other financial scandals of the early part of the decade. In addition to these U.S. legislators serving in leadership positions with TPN, there are many others who are members of TPN’s “U.S. Congressional Group.” These include six Senators — the aforementioned Senator Bennett of Utah, Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi), Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska), Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), Pat Roberts (R-Kansas), Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) – and 49 Representatives. Some of the noteworthy members of the latter cohort include former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin), current Chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee Tom Lantos (D-California), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee John Dingell (D-Michigan), and current House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).
Among think tanks, the TPN membership list is a who’s who of internationalism-promoting groups. Included on the list is the granddaddy of them all, the Council on Foreign Relations. Joining the CFR is the Atlantic Council of the United States which seeks a “healthy transatlantic relationship” as “an essential prerequisite for a stronger international system.” Other organizations serving as TPN members include:
>>In this case, you simply don’t want “journalists” such as Corsi (or Kinsolving, WND’s man at the White House) playing gotcha-games. I can see it now, “Mr. President? Joe Blow of Evil Corporation said ‘blah blah blah’ at a meeting at the State Department. Do you stand by those comments?”<<
Its not hard to see than happening and the whole advice and feedback mechanism breaking down.
It might have been at a State of the Union speech. Don’t hold me to that. I have it bookmarked and will post it when I find it.
Oh wait, that would be yellow journalism . . . .
>>Here it is in all it’s glory.
New World Order<<
When he talks about a New World Order where the rule of law governs the conduct of nations I thought he was talking about repelling Saddam out of Kuwait and preventing similar invasions.
The Feb, 07 document contains all the NACC recommendations for 07, 08, & 10.
At the bottom you will see a link to membership. Since these are large membership groups, they don't list every member but they do list the Executive Committe from all three countries.
What’s your definition of NWO?
>>What’s your definition of NWO?<<
I think it means different things to different people.
I think President Bush mean international law being enforce that prevents invasions between nations. Then people put their own spin on it - some people think this means that the second Iraq invasion is justified. Some people think this is a slippery slope where the U.S. is called on to be the world’s policeman. And some see a shadowy conspiracy.
Personally, I agree with President Bush41 - that international law that stops invasions is good but that we don’t have the obligation to remake other countries.
You're right it does mean different things to different people.
If someone should ask what NWO means to me I would answer...
It means doing away with countries borders and sovereignty. A unified currency. The world's richest people, top political leaders, and corporate elite around the world deciding on what rules and laws to keep and which ones to toss out. An unelected ruling hierarchy. The death of the middle class. Only rich and poor classes. All the laws of the world would eventually be unified, either through treaties or agreements. If you stole a loaf of bread in the US the penalty would be the same if caught stealing a loaf of bread in Ireland. Privately owned firearms would be prohibited. I see that and more when the phrase NWO is brought up.
Is this accurate:
Rockefeller’s Memoirs (Random House, New York, 2002) Chapter 27, pages 404 and 405. Cited by Dr. Dennis Cuddy:
“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
I just don’t any factual basis for using that definition. And in fact I think it distracts from dealing with real issues.
For example, take border security and illegal immigration. They are real problems with real risks and real immediate and long term consequences.
But if these problems are framed as a world wide conspiracy to do away with sovereignty and put an elite wealthy ruling class in charge that will eliminate middle class people the main effect is that less will get done about illegal immigration and border security, not more.
You are in denial. Here are your words:
Could it be FR wants to cover up the fact George Bush is trying to destroy our national sovereignty?
That clearly implies that the management here is knowingly helping someone destroy the American Republic. Stop being a little girl and own up to your assertion.
Bush was force fed as the only option. Go back and read the old threads around the 2000 elections, there were plenty of posters giving warning to Bush as a globalist.
Aw jeez...go back to post 86 and figure it out.
Why folks in plural?
Is Man50D the only person on Earth who believes the stuff he believes about the NAU? Is he the only person posting about it on FR? In this thread?
You mean the McCain supporters?
Yep. History repeating itself.
So the McCain supporters warned us that Bush is a globalist, when McCain is a globalist as well?
And nothing is being done about it. Ever ask yourself why? If there are no borders there would be no illegal aliens.
But if these problems are framed as a world wide conspiracy to do away with sovereignty and put an elite wealthy ruling class in charge that will eliminate middle class people the main effect is that less will get done about illegal immigration and border security, not more.
Look at what condition our country is in. Who's making money off keeping our borders wide open and using cheap labor? Me? You? Nope.
Look around again, our middle class is drying up.
It's apparent we differ in what the NWO means. For now that's cool, I hope it stays that way. I would hate being told how to think.
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.