North American Union: The Dream Is Dead
|
|
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70864
Type of Content: Article By Jerome R. Corsi /Father of alignment of U.S., Mexico, Canada says secret plan has been killed by left, right/ The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is dead, says Robert A. Pastor, the American University professor who for more than a decade has been a major proponent of building a North American Community. "The new president will probably discard the SPP," Pastor wrote in an article titled "The Future of North America," published in the current July/August issue of the Council on Foreign Relations magazine Foreign Affairs. The SPP, which critics contend is a step toward a North American Union, is an agreement to increase cooperation on security and economic issues signed by the leaders of the U.S., Mexico and Canada in 2005. Despite having no authorization from Congress, the Bush administration launched extensive working-group activity to implement the agreement. The working groups – ranging from e-commerce, to aviation policy, to borders and immigration – have counterparts in Mexico and Canada. "The April summit meeting was probably the last hurrah for the SPP," Pastor wrote, referring to the fourth annual SPP meeting held in April in New Orleans. Pastor attributes the failure of SPP to its largely bureaucratic nature and the decision policy makers made to keep SPP largely below the radar of public opinion. "The strategy of acting on technical issues in an incremental, bureaucratic way and keeping the issues away from public view has generated more suspicion than accomplishments," Pastor admitted. Pastor blames critics for the failure of the SPP, charging it has come under attack from both ends of the political spectrum. "From the right have come attacks based on cultural anxieties of being overrun by Mexican immigrants and fears that cooperation with Canada and Mexico could lead down a slippery slope toward a North American Union," he wrote. "From the left came attacks based on economic fears of jobs lost due to unfair trading practices." "These two sets of fears came together in a perfect storm that was pushed forward by a surplus of hot air from talk-show hosts on radio and television," he continued. "In the face of this criticism, the Bush administration was silent, and the Democratic candidates competed for votes in the rust-belt states, where unions and many working people have come to see NAFTA and globalization much as (commentator Lou) Dobbs does." Pastor denied he had ever urged the creation of a North American Union. "Dobbs, among others, viewed a report by a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force (which I chaired), 'Building a North American Community,' as the manifesto of a conspiracy to subvert American sovereignty," he asserted. "Dobbs claimed that the CFR study proposed a North American Union, although it did not." Pastor has argued consistently for a "North American Community," as suggested by the title of his 2001 book entitled "Toward a North American Community." In a commentary authored for WND, Pastor stressed, "I do not propose a North American Union; I propose a North American Community." Pastor argued the two were different in that North American Community would involve "three sovereign governments that seek to strengthen bonds of cooperation." Noting that the European Community was a transitional state between the European Common Market and the European Union, Pastor conceded to WND that, "I don't think a political union of North America is an inherently bad idea, nor do I think it is a good idea for right now." Despite the SPP setback, Pastor remains determined to advise a different approach to his continued goal of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American Community. "The three heads of state must also commit to building a new consciousness, a new way of thinking about one's neighbors and about the continental agenda," he said. "Americans, Canadians and Mexicans can be nationals and North Americans at the same time." To correct the defects of the SPP bureaucratic closed-door process, Pastor's CFR article recommended creating new North American institutions, including a North American Investment Fund of at least $20 billion a year "to connect central and southern Mexico to the United States with roads, ports, and communications." Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, dropped his support for Senate bill 3622 in the 109th Congress when WND reported the North American Investment Fund proposed by the legislation would enact a key proposal Pastor has frequently made for advancing his North American Community agenda. In his CFR article, Pastor also called for the continuation of annual North American heads-of-state summits and the appointment in the next administration of a national adviser for North American affairs, who would chair a cabinet-level committee to formulate a comprehensive plan for North America. Pastor also encouraged creating a dozen university centers for North American studies "to educate a new generation of students to think North American." WND reported on the fourth annual North American Model Parliament held this year in Montreal, Canada, for 100 university students from the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The North American Model Parliament is sponsored by the North American Forum on Integration, on which Pastor serves as a board member. Read »
Created 16 weeks 22 hours ago
Made popular 16 weeks 19 hours ago |
- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 267 reads






NAFTA and NAU are not going to go away by the will of politicians, their will is not great enough to stop the ruthless establishment...
If anything, this means their movement will become even more secret, so as not to disturb critics anymore. I am not fooled one bit by all of this. I first heard of the NAU, not from Lou Dobbs, or any internet outlet, but from the JBS, who have been creating public awareness on this issue for years. I can grant you that they are not fooled either, and will continue to provide coverage of this attack against our soveriegnty. Of course, the MSM will now consider the matter closed.
As for the establishment, of course it will be business as usual. To them, the word "No" simply means "Not yet".
I suppose next you will be trying to imply the European Union is DEAD because the powers that be are weeks if not months away from creating the United States of Europe.
In Europe the biggest opposition of them all to the EU is now the leader.
In Europe the general populous were lulled into a false sense of security by vocal objectors and all the while well laid out plans were being instigated on the quiet.
NAFTA and NAU are not going to go away by the will of politicians, their will is not great enough to stop the ruthless establishment, take a lesson from Europe. Us Europeans did nothing to stop the EU from expanding and now it is possibly too late. Learn the lesson from 'across the pond' and act, get off of your fannies and on a road to Washington. Demand that your sovereignty is protected and DO IT NOW.
Oh well I guess as long as its not a Union, and its only a Community, that changes everything. Community, Commune, Communism...
Wait a second you slippery bastard!! That doesn't change anything!!! In fact it makes it worse by sullying a good positive word like community with NWO taint.
Government has solved the age old dilemma of the alchemists. In order to turn lead into gold, just add blood.
It's funny that Dr. Pastor denies he has ever urged the creation of a North American Union. He would be the person most likely acknowledged as the "father" of the NAU if it ever comes into existence. In addition to those noted in the article, he argued in a 2004 article in CFR’s Foreign Affairs, entitled “North America’s Second Decade,” that the United States would benefit by giving up U.S. national Sovereignty. “Countries are benefited,” he wrote, “when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete.”
Reading this reminds me of an article I read several months ago in which NAU proponents were discussing renaming the NAU to further confuse issues surrounding the SPP/NAU agenda.
Officials at the Fraser Institute proposed the name "North American Union," or NAU, be discarded and replaced with "North American Standards and Regulatory Area," or NASRA. A Fraser Institute article acknowledges that the attacks by SPP critics "are starting to hurt."
The think tank also acknowledges that the SPP has a "low profile" stresses that trilateral talks within the bureaucratic working groups constituted under SPP by the three governments are continuing on both security and competitiveness policy issues.
"Its critics may have tarnished the 'SPP brand,'" the Institute's officials concede, "but the precise areas of its work need to follow where NAFTA left off and to do so by [using] a post-9/11 strategy such as security criteria, public safety and quality of life issues such as pandemic illnesses and food safety."
They plan to use the age-old tactic of using euphemisms and semantics in order to pull a fast one on the American and Canadian people," warns Mike Baker.
"This whole ploy is designed to make critics believe they've won the debate, when actually they're merely being marginalized by cynical leaders and their minions in the media,"said former NYPD detective and owner of the security firm FLT Security Systems, Sidney Francis.
"There are too many people involved who've invested too much money to allow their North American Union paradigm to disintegrate because of a few people who understand what's being done in the name of unity," said Francis.
Officials at the Fraser Institute are opposed to expanding the list of SPP advisers to include public interest groups or the media, preferring to stay with the secret, closed-door advice offered by the 30 corporations picked by the chambers of commerce in the three countries to serve as members of the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC.
In 1999, Dr. Herbert Grubel a political scientist the Fraser Institute wrote a revealing article titled, "The Case for the Amero."
In it he presents the first arguments in print that a North American currency should be created similar to the euro in the European Union. as a replacement for the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso.
(per Jim Kouri/NewsWithViews.com)
I was just about to post the article you are referring to. =)
"US & CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS RENAMING "NORTH AMERICAN UNION" TO FOOL CITIZENS"
http://www.newswithviews.com/BreakingNews/breaking57.htm