U.S. legislator warns of Bush plot to merge Canada, the U.S. and Mexico

Status
Not open for further replies.
longeyes wrote:
Then go down fighting, bravely.

Sometimes all you can do is the right thing.

Well said. Some people read the words "Live Free, or Die" and do not understand the true meaning. Some of us who place value on Living Free, are going to demand a price for our Time to Die. I expect for see a premium.

Jerry
 
Some people read the words "Live Free, or Die" and do not understand the true meaning. Some of us who place value on Living Free, are going to demand a price for our Time to Die. I expect for see a premium.

Amen to that. So much of the idea of a NAU scares me I dont know where to begin. Rest assured Glockfan will do his part to try and stop it. Should all the conventional means fail (writing reps, protesting, etc) and the day comes where a few like minded folks like myself decide to make a stand I plan on making it hurt. God can bear witness with a pile of brass at his feet.
 
The selling of America continues at a fast pace. In my opinion what looks good on paper or appears to raise the stock market is not always good for the country. Our government and major corporations seems intend on profit without regard to the security and quality of life that this country once stood for, what a shame.:banghead:
 
When I hear that the "North American Union" is about more than market expansion and economic efficiency I will be interested in hearing more. Our problem, in this nation, is the erosion of our own Constitution, so it's no wonder that we don't hear discussion of our view of liberty as the model for all of North America. We must not be conned; without that the idea is dangerous. Growing the economy at the expense of our freedoms is a very, very bad deal.
 
NEW WORLD DISORDER
Chinese have ownership in U.S. cargo monitors
Firm tied to communist regime involved in deal to set up high-tech sensors
Posted: December 7, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi

A Chinese company with close ties to the communist government owns 49 percent of the Lockheed Martin subsidiary that is negotiating a contract with the North American SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc. – the Dallas-based trade association – to place cargo monitoring sensors along as superhighway stretching from Mexico to Canada.

China's Hutchinson Port Holdings entered into a $50 million joint venture in 2005 with Savi Technology, a Lockheed Martin wholly-owned subsidiary, to form a new company called Savi Networks LLC. Savi Technology owns 51 percent and Hutchinson Port Holdings, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Chinese holding company Hutchinson Whampoa Limited, holds the rest.

Lockheed Martin spokeswoman Leslie Holoweiko confirmed to WND that Savi Networks LLC is the company named in the contract currently being negotiated with NASCO to provide cargo sensors all along the NASCO I-35 super-corridor. If successfully negotiated, the contract would appear to give Hutchinson Holdings operational involvement all along the emerging I-35 NAFTA superhighway. Hutchinson Holdings also operates the port at Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexico.

Hutchinson, Whampoa, Ltd. is the holding company of billionaire Li Ka-shing, a well-known businessman, whose companies make up 15 percent of the market capitalization of the Hong Kong Stock Market. According to the Washington, D.C., government watchdog Judicial Watch, a declassified U.S. government intelligence report that Judicial Watch obtained in a Freedom of Information Act request indicates Li is "directly connected to Beijing and is willing to use his business influence to further the aims of the Chinese Government."

A Judicial Watch complaint filed in 2002 at the time HWL was purchasing the then-bankrupt Global Crossing, notes Li Ka-Shing's holdings includes ports, telecom and energy assets around the world. Hutchinson Ports was forced to drop a bid to purchase Global Crossing when the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States refused to approve the transaction on national security grounds.

Savi Networks LLC operates RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) equipment and software to track and manage containerized ocean-going cargo. According to the company, the goal of Savi Networks LLC is to install "active RFID equipment and software in participating ports around the world to provide users with information on the identity, location and status of their ocean cargo containers as they pass through such ports."

Conceivably, the Savi-installed RFID software would permit NASCO to track containers from the time they leave ports in China and the Far East to when they enter North America at Mexican ports such as Lázaro Cárdenas.

Data on the cargo could be read then by any sensor-reading station the Savi-NASCO project placed anywhere along what NASCO calls the North American SuperCorridor, generally identified by NASCO as incorporating Interstates 35, 29 and 94.

NASCO and Savi Networks LLC plan to put Savi sensor reading stations all the way north, to destinations in Canada such as Winnipeg.

The Savi technology includes an architecture designed to accommodate Automatic Identification Data Collection (AIDC) technologies, such as is used in barcodes, RFID technologies and Global Positioning Systems (GPS) that can track container ships on the ocean or the containers as they travel on land by truck or train.

The NASCO plan to use cargo tracking technology is consistent with the plans announced by the working groups in the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, to rely primarily on technology, instead of in-person inspection, to track and monitor containers entering the U.S.

As disclosed in the "2005 Report to Leaders" on the SPP website, FAST lanes and SENTRI software will be used extensively to "streamline the secure movement of low-risk traffic across our shared borders" with Mexico and Canada.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership was declared by President Bush, Mexico's President Fox and then-Prime Minister Paul Martin of Canada at their summit meeting in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005.

Global Crossing was noted for turning Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe's $100,000 investment into an $18 million personal fortune. The company's bold move to control the U.S. international fiber-optics network, however, ending in a corrupt, corporate meltdown that preceded the Enron debacle.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=53271
 
wingman, what you or I "like" about the future of the economy and its necessary features is purely irrelevant. I don't like the idea of another several thousand trucks a day coming out of Presidio through Marfa and Alpine, but you, your relatives, friends and neighbors--and I--are buying "stuff" that's on those trucks.

Sounds mighty like...

"It is written."

Sorry, I don't buy that we are helpless bystanders who have to watch our country turn into a colonial state run by international interests preying on the moral and spiritual flaccidity of an addicted population.

Our addiction to consumerism is a repetition of the Opium Wars, and the irony is that we are now the Chinese.
 
thirty-thirty, your last post illustrates the magnitude of world trade. Everybody is in on the deal; the idea is to get "stuff" to the stores where you shop, where I shop, where all our families and friends shop.

longeyes, when I was born, the US population was around 160 million. I have watched the change from easy access to fishing and hunting to access via lots of $$$. I have watched the increase in affluence and trade and the onset of "big box" stores. And the paving-over of a helluva lot of territory. And a gazillion other things, as well.

My likes and dislikes about these changes have been irrelevant. It is not that "it is written"; it is that change is inevitable--and few can accurately predict the directions of the changes that WILL occur.

And for you both: Yeah, we're consumers. Call it a modern version of the opium wars if you will, but it's a societal thing, isn't it? Has anybody forced you to go out and buy more than one rifle, pistol and shotgun? Forced you to buy that new or newer car instead of driving your 1985 model? (My primary critter is a 1985 Toy 4WD PU. 290K miles.)

Hey, how long back was it that Walt Kelly had Pogo say, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."?

It ain't a Bush thing or a political party thing. It's purely a money thing, and people who want the Great Big $$$ aren't interested in political philosophy. Y'all are; I am, but most folks aren't. Hey, San Diego beat Denver! Britney Spears did something or another; Paris Hilton said something or another! Ya gotta get your societal priorities straightened out!

Pardon my cynicism. My coffee hasn't really kicked in, yet.

Art
 
But, Art, the issue is, can we do anything about it other than be cynics?

What a society does isn't by chance, it's actively encouraged. How much we buy, what we buy, what we are allowed to buy, what we produce, what we learn how to produce--these are all choices and they are set in motion by people with significant power and reach.

I'm not arguing against "consumerism" or, Heaven forfend, the pursuit of happiness, just trying to raise deeper questions that if left unanswered will redound to the huge detriment, in my opinion, of America. The idea that the consumer is king is, to me, heresy; the consumer is a slave more often than not. The rush to "consume," if not balanced by wise and competitive production, if not kept within reasonable debt limits, is a disease, not a sign of healthy national energy. We only need to look around us to see that a lot of negative trends are in place and that many in power seem utterly uninterested in doing anything about them.

The other day I went to the Autoshow in Los Angeles. I remember going to these as a kid. Of course in those days it was pretty much an American show; now, from what I could see, the American automakers were minor players in what has become a Japanese-dominated industry. If we don't want to understand how exactly this came about and what it implies for our future, we are sliding toward becoming a large but marginal nation, more an "India" than an "America."
 
wingman, what you or I "like" about the future of the economy and its necessary features is purely irrelevant.

Art, that is a very defeatist attitude and sad to say I hear that from many folks now, again what a shame that we must accept anything and the bottom dollar is more important then the good of our country. Profit is good, profit at any cost is wrong.
 
If I remember correctly, the issue of the NAFTA super highway came up here about 1 year ago, and got many responses. Here it is 1 year later, and more expansion and ramifications commented on. This is not going away, and the reality is evident in the construction in Texas. Money is at the heart of this project, and will change the core of our American lifestyle as we know it now. How can National Security not be affected? Our ally is to illuminate the project and call our legislators to task. Art and Longeyes raise some important issues and where we might look to in personal responsibility. Wild consumerism and credit card debt is encouraged. We have been a "throw away" society for years rather than recycle and repair. Many of us pay for warrantees on top of warrantees and still buy new after 5yrs. Image is everything, as is keeping up with the Jones. I am taking these comments to heart and making a change. I'm going to do my best to buy American.
 
To hell with the NWO Inc.


"..let us not have such a machine any longer."
..
"A drab of stat,
a cloth-o'-silver slut,
To have her train borne up,
and her soul trail in the dirt."

~Henry David Thoreau (On the Duty of Civil Disobedience)
 
As I've said before in other threads on this general subject, the only thing I know of is to focus on the political and work on the elected types to try for public hearings and far, far more openness about what's going on.

I still think I'm right about separating the political--the various proposed agreements and such--from the transportation. I think I've given good examples as to why there are widespread benefits from the latter; if I can, anybody can.

But I don't see openness in what to me is the important part of the Big Package. That's the part that to me calls for raising a ruckus. If all the other stuff is included, it becomes too complicated for ready understanding of the negatives.

So, keep it simple enough that even a newspaper editor can understand. They thrive on the issue of openness in government. That's something they can understand.

Same for a lot of elected politicos: Do they want their particular legislative body to have less influence over actions in their state? That's more important than the basic issue, itself; no politico wants any decrease in power.

Or, if a Congressman, less influence in the overall NAU? Do they take it for granted that the US Congress' notions of Righteousness will prevail at all times?

Seems to me a logical question is that since we already have vast amounts of trade coming and going, why do we need these new agreements? Why? NAFTA was supposed to eliminate tariffs between the three affected countries, for items traded between those countries. Other trade agreements already affect such things as goods offloaded into Mexico or Canada and brought into the US.

Containers already come through which are sealed and bonded, so what's needed to make Kansas City a Port of Entry for containers besides a US Customs service facility? That's a Congressional budget item, is all--seems to me.

I dunno. If it's a Bush thing, write Ms. Pelosi. But without media curiosity and pressure, I don't see much openness happening...

Art
 
Right now Bush has on his desk the "Totalization agreement". It is a step to meld our social benefit system with mexico's.

CWatson

[http://www.azconservative.org/Barton.htm]

BRUCE BARTON

Totalization Sell-Out: What You Don't Know will Cost You


While most Americans were riveted to the hotly contested Democratic National Primary in June of 2004 and the national media speculated on Howard Dean or John Kerry, the Commissioner of the U.S. Social Security Administration (Jo Anne Barnhart) and her Mexican counterpart concluded the U.S.-Mexican Totalization Agreement. This agreement had to be in place prior to the administration’s second term and it’s all-out offensive for Social Security reform.

What would be the potential effects of this totalization agreement with Mexico, should the president choose to move it forward? Unauthorized illegal aliens working in the U.S. could qualify for Social Security benefits with as few as six coverage credits, as opposed to the 40 now required of American workers. Additionally, illegal workers could qualify for partial benefits after only 18 months (working illegally and with a false identity), while the American worker would still have to work 10 years in order to vest in the program. Lastly, families and dependents of illegal workers would be entitled to benefits as dependents and survivors, even if not residing in the U.S.

So what is a “totalization” agreement? These are bilateral agreements between the U.S. Social Security Administration and its counterpart in foreign countries to coordinate their Social Security programs. Presently the U.S. has 20 such agreements, mostly with European nations. This overall program has been in place since the Carter Administration. However, this is the first totalization agreement between the United States and a nation responsible for nearly 70 percent of the illegal immigration into the United States.

How odd it is, that amid the national debate currently raging in Washington, no mention is being made about this agreement with Mexico. This lack of debate is made all the more curious, since in September of 2003 the General Accounting Office (GAO) warned of the Social Security Trust Fund that “… a totalization agreement with Mexico has raised concerns that many such workers would become newly eligible for social security benefits at a time when long-term solvency is threatened.”

According to the GAO report, the agreement will likely increase the number of “unauthorized” Mexican workers and their family members eligible for social security benefits.

The Social Security Administration’s estimate is that only about 50,000 Mexican workers (both legal and illegal) will enter the program in its first year at a cost of $78 million. This ignores the fact that presently there are an estimated 5 to 6 million undocumented Mexicans now in the American workforce. In 2004, the SSA did a study and determined that there were up to 800,000 mis-matched social security accounts, many of which were workers using non-work social security cards, or worse, using stolen social security numbers.

Meanwhile, estimates of the SSA are that by 2050 only 300,000 Mexican workers in the U.S. would be in the system at a cost projection of $650 million annually.

Among its negative findings, the GAO summarized its report this way:“Under the Social Security Act, all earnings from employment in the United States count towards earning social security benefits, regardless of the lawful presence of the worker, his or her citizenship status, or country of residence. Immigrants [both legal and otherwise] become entitled to benefits from unauthorized work if they can prove that the earnings and related contributions belong to them. However, they cannot collect such benefits unless [or until] they are either legally present in the United States [hence the Administration’s Guest Worker Program], or living in a country where SSA is authorized to pay them their benefits. [Hence an SSA office in Mexico City] Mexico is such a country.”

The GAO continued, “A lack of transparency in the SSA’s processes, and the limited nature of its review of Mexico’s program, [a two-day visit] cause us to question the extent to which SSA will be positioned to respond to potential program risks should a totalization agreement with Mexico take place.”

A Congressional Ways & Means Committee Fact Sheet (Sept. 22, 2004) takes note that, “A totalization agreement with Mexico overrides restrictions to non-citizen spouses and children.” In effect, the U.S. Mexico Totalization Agreement signed June 29, 2004 allows non-citizen spouses and children residing outside of the United States to receive social security benefits.

Where to from here? Although signed in June 2004, the Totalization Agreement does not go into effect until 60 legislative days following the president’s submission to Congress. Thereafter, Congress has 60 days in which to pass a resolution of disapproval to prevent the agreement from taking effect. Congressman J.D. Hayworth (R-CD5) has sponsored House Resolution 20 to formally express the disapproval of Congress. Presently H. Res. 20 has 40 co-sponsors, of which the only other Arizona Congressman onboard is Rick Renzi (R-CD1).

However, according to the Congressional Research Service, the resolution of disapproval mechanism currently in the Social Security Act is an unconstitutional legislative veto, this based on the Supreme Court’s decision in INS vs. Chadha (462 U.S. 919 (1983)) in which the Supreme Court struck down a similar provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

As of now, the Administration has yet to send the U.S. Mexico Totalization Agreement to Congress for review. Perhaps they’re waiting for the approval of some form of social security reform package to emerge from the Senate? Perhaps they’re waiting for some form of Guest Worker Program to emerge from the House? In any event, enactment appears to depend on timing.

For more information, contact Congressman J.D. Hayworth’s office or request GAO report #GAO-03-993, “Social Security: Proposed Totalization Agreement with Mexico Presents Unique Challenges.”

Bruce Barton's background includes experience in economic development, energy policy, politics and higher education. He previously served as the Business Department chair of the American Samoa Community College in Pago Pago. A resident of Safford, Bruce and his wife Brenda, (a fifth-generation Arizonan) hold a passion for the land and the heritage which is America. See Bruce's website at: www.azbartons.org. He can be contacted at: [email protected].
 
While there is much to admire about the US frankly a political union between Canada and the US beyond an Economic and Military Union which, incidently has already taken place, is not going to happen.

There are any of number of reasons why but frankly the main reason is Canada has nothing to gain by such a union. Numerically you have 10 times the population so there would be little chance of Canadians having a material imput into the "New" federal government. Resources, we have water, and energy, both of which the US either needs or will need. We have access to your manufactured goods now. Lastly, your latest President called Mexico Americas best friend. With apologies to the Bush lovers, you folks can keep Mexico and the illegals that go with them.

Kind of like visiting relatives, nice to vist but nice to get back home.

Take Care

Bob

ps If Quebec ever separated Canada would join the US in about the time it takes to remove the stupid nuclear detectors along the 49th.

pps Besides our beer is better!
 
"the main reason is Canada has nothing to gain " Unfortunately, what the inhabitants want or have to gain has little to do with globalazation. Americans have much more to lose than to gain by their relationship with Mexico and most of us are quite conscious of that. But legislation and policies that are bringing us closer to world government continue unabated because we no longer have representative government.
 
The Monetary Side of this Equation:

Analysts: Dollar collapse
would result in 'amero'
Think deep recession likely
regardless of Fed's actions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


Two analysts who have reconstructed money supply data after the Fed stopped publishing it argue a coming dollar collapse will set the stage for creating the amero as a North American currency to replace the dollar.
The reconstructed M3 data – the broadest measure of money – published on econometrician Gary Kuever's website, NowAndFutures.com, shows M3 increased at a rate of 11 percent in May, compared to 9 percent when the Federal Reserve quit publishing M3 data earlier this year.

Asked why the Fed decided to stop publishing M3 data, Kuever told WND, "The Fed probably wants to hide how much liquidity is being pumped into the market, and I expect the trend to keep pumping liquidity into the market will continue, especially since the economy is slowing down."

(Story continues below)


Why is this important?

"The trend line in my M3-plus-debt chart is staggering," Kuever said. "There has been a straight, long-term trend line of M3-plus-credit increasing since 2000. Long-term, we are creating inflation and the dollar has lost almost 98 percent of its value in the past 100 years."

Kuever, a retired investor, is concerned that with growing budget and trade deficits "the dollar could collapse."

"Especially if the Fed cannot increase rates, because we have already entered a recession," he said.
Analyst Gary Kuever's chart shows M3-plus-credit, short term, from May 2000 to September 2006


Bob Chapman, who issued a reconstructed M3 estimate to the 100,000 subscribers to his newsletter, "The International Forecaster", agrees.

"The world is awash in money and credit," Chapman told WND. "My numbers show M3 increasing at about a 10-percent rate right now."

Chapman believes the U.S. economy entered a recession in February. In his newsletter of Dec. 9 he predicted the Fed would hold interest rates at 5.25 percent.

"The Fed is in a very tough spot here," Chapman wrote, "If they raise rates, the real estate market will collapse, and if they lower rates, the dollar will collapse."

Meeting yesterday, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee voted, as Chapman had predicted, to hold the overnight lending rates between banks steady at 5.25 percent. This was the fourth straight meeting the Fed had voted not to change rates. In its rate announcement, the Fed affirmed the economy had slowed.

Almost immediately after the announcement of the Fed's decision, the dollar weakened to a new 20-month low against the euro, with currency markets reportedly pricing in the expectation the Fed will be forced to lower rates next year to bolster the economy. Following the announcement by the Fed, the U.S. Dollar Index, or USDX, also dropped, with the dollar going below 83.

A dollar collapse is imminent, Chapman declared.

"Technicians studying the USDX think there is a support level for the dollar at 75, but I don't think so."

How low could the dollar go?

"If the dollar breaks through 78.33 on the USDX," Chapman answered, "my guess is the dollar will go through a 35-percent correction, which would put it at 55."

"The key in how low the dollar goes is the interest rates," Chapman told WND. "In January, the Fed is going to have to make a decision which way to go. If Fed rates go up, the dollar will hold in the 78.33 range, but the stock market and the economy will tank. If next year the Fed lowers rates to keep the economy from crashing, the bottom will fall out of the dollar, and I see it going as low as 55. Once the dollar hits bottom, it will take the stock market and the economy right with it anyway. The Fed is in a box they can't get out of."

As WND reported earlier this week, in an unusual move, the Bush administration is sending virtually the entire economic "A-team" to visit China for a "strategic economic dialogue" in Beijing Thursday and Friday. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke are leading the delegation, along with five other cabinet-level officials, including Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. Also in the delegation will be Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.

But Chapman doubts the trip will help the Fed to engineer a slow dollar slide.

"The Chinese are going to do what the Chinese want to do, not what we want them to do," he said. "I believe the Chinese are going to send Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke home packing, with little or nothing to show for the trip."

How severe will the coming dollar collapse be?

"People in the U.S. are going to be hit hard," Chapman warned. "In the severe recession we are entering now, Bush will argue that we have to form a North American Union to compete with the Euro."

"Creating the amero," Chapman explained, "will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery. In the process of creating the amero, the Bush administration just abandons the dollar."
__________________
 
I saw this posted on another forum:

FOREIGN FIRM BIDS FOR CONTROL OF TEXAS FREE TRADE CORRIDOR



By Mark Anderson

American Free Press has learned that a group of foreign companies, which currently lease a toll road in Indiana and are looking at buying up other highways across the country, has its eyes on the Trans-Texas Corridor, or TTC. The TTC is a planned toll road system through the Lone Star State that will largely be used for trucking foreign merchandise into the United States on the wings of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

It will be a major leg of the so-called “NAFTA Superhighway,” and, according to watchdog groups, it will lead to more cheap goods flooding the country and will be devastating to the U.S.-based trucking industry.

In the April 17, 2006 edition, AFP reported that ITR Concessions LLC, a partnership of Cintra of Spain and the McQuarie Bank of Australia, spent $3.85 billion to lease the Indiana Toll Road from the state for 75 years.

Now that same coalition is branching out into Texas. On Nov. 21, the Internet version of The Lone Star Iconoclast, a Crawford, Tex.-based publication, reported that Todd Spencer, the executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, or OOIDA, “is asking truckers to bypass the Indiana Toll Road that has been leased to the Spanish consortium, Cintra, the same outfit that Gov. [Rick] Perry and TXDOT (The Texas Department of Transportation) contracted with to operate the hated Trans Texas Corridor.”

According to Spencer, McQuarie will also be involved in the TTC. Steve Bonney, a Lafayette, Ind., farmer who helped fight this arrangement in Indiana courts, revealed then that some of that money would be used to extend Interstate 69 from Indianapolis to the Kentucky border. From there I-69 would proceed into south Texas by the Mexican border, eventually becoming yet another conduit in the vast network of “NAFTA tollways” being envisioned. Interstate 69 ends to the north in Port Huron, Mich., at the Canadian border.

An Oct. 26 OOIDA pre-election news bulletin noted, “Texas lawmakers made a very big mistake when they overwhelmingly voted in 2003 to move forward with Gov. Rick Perry’s plan for the Trans-Texas Corridor—they did it despite overwhelming public sentiment against the effort. The corridor
is an intermodal route that would cut across Texas from the Mexican border to Oklahoma and include toll lanes.”

Cintra is teaming up with Zachry, a San Antonio firm, for the project’s planning phase.

“The Associated Press released an analysis of a campaign ad . . . erroneously stating that Spain-based Cintra holds a 65% equity position in Cintra Zachry LP. That’s wrong. The correct equity position is 85% with Zachry Construction holding the small 15% equity balance, noted a report on Corridorwatch.org, a web site that is monitoring the growth of the NAFTA Superhighway.

Corridorwatch.org features a map on its web site that reveals various TTC segments that crisscross Texas.

Activist Sal Costello of People for Efficient Transportation, based in Austin, Tex., told AFP that while much of the Texas public is perhaps dimly aware of the TTC, the concept behind the TTC is becoming better known and opposition to it is increasing, especially since the Nov. 7 gubernatorial race.

In the lead-up to the election, three of the four candidates, particularly Independent Carol Strayhorn, opposed the TTC and made it one of their top campaign issues. Not surprisingly, incumbent Perry, who was reelected, did not mention the TTC. Despite this, the mainstream media throughout Texas largely ignored the issue.

Costello told AFP that officials would like Americans to believe that work has not commenced on the TTC. However, he said ground has actually been broken on the TTC. He pointed out that highway 130, a north-south segment that will stretch 49 miles when completed sometime in 2007, is already partially finished.

Costello also said that while some TTC sections represent new tollway construction, existing freeways already paid for with tax dollars are being converted into tollways. “It’s a combination of a land grab, which is the TTC, and a road grab, which is the conversion of our freeways,” he said.

Traditionally, motorists use tollways as an alternative to other taxpayer-financed interstates. However, if these Texas developments continue, Costello said, most drivers there will be forced to use tollways. Furthermore, voter-approved bond dollars for more traditional Texas transportation needs are being diverted into toll road plans.

The TTC is one of many planned routes for which land will have to be gobbled up to lay pavement, to run utility lines and to construct new railroad routes on the way to Kansas City, Mo., a major hub for these free trade conduits.

Even though Kansas City is some 1,000 miles away from the Southern border, it will function as a U.S. Customs inspection point. Activists believe it is likely that eminent domain land grabs will soar in the coming years as the project steams on. Texas was not among the states with eminent domain restrictions on the ballot Nov. 7.

Spencer noted the TTC will largely be used by truckers from Mexico, who will be transporting goods from Mexico, China and other nations where people work for slave wages.

“The Bush Administration is bending over backwards to accommodate Mexican trucks coming into the United States,” said Spencer. “Worldwide, trucks are the weapons of choice of terrorists. Nobody is going to check [what is really in that truck]. We evidently have a lot of people in the U.S. who have lost their minds.”

Spencer said Mexican truckers will be able to go anywhere once they cross the border. Since Mexico does not have stringent safety regulations, there is no way to verify the safety of Mexican trucks or drivers. He doubts that anyone will do background checks on drivers before they can enter the United States.

Spencer said the TTC will be devastating to domestic truckers and freight companies.

TXDOT wants to charge truckers 40 cents a mile to travel the TTC. “This is the equivalent of about $2.40 (per gallon) in just new fuel taxes,” said Spencer. “If gas were $2.60 a gallon, that would be equivalent to gas at $5 a gallon.”

Furthermore, an anti-competition clause in the Cintra contract reportedly prohibits Texas from making improvements to parallel routes. Therefore, highway users “will be forced to use the TTC toll roads even if Texas has to close down lanes on existing highways,” said Spencer.

Some whopper TTC routes may be one-quarter-mile wide, with up to six lanes, in each direction and room for utility lines and rail lines.

Spencer told AFP that international investors are drooling at the prospects of acquiring U.S. toll roads in 35 states, including in Pennsylvania where State Rep. Rick Geist of the House Transportation Committee plans early in 2007 to introduce House Bill 1 to sell or lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the highest bidder. Spencer said the terms “sell” and “lease” are synonymous when it comes to toll road deals, since many agreements last for 75 years or longer.

“This is the latest Wall Street craze,” Spencer said. In Illinois, elected officials have been resisting a proposed toll bridge, largely funded by foreign investors, over the Mississippi River from Illinois to St. Louis, Mo. Spencer thinks Illinois officials will be lobbied hard to change their minds.

“Goldman Sachs made more than $20 million on the Indiana Toll Road deal,” Spencer told AFP. “This is U.S. transportation policy coming right from the White House—sell our roads.”

American Free Press reporter Mark Anderson can be reached at [email protected] Watch future AFP issues for more on America’s welcome acceptance of biofuels and other energy alternatives, helping end our gluttonous addiction to foreign petroleum.

(Issue 49 & 50, December 4 & 11, 2006)

http://www.americanfreepress.net/htm...r-disasta.html
 
thirty-thirty

Economic Globalization is here and has been for sometime. There certainly is no political will in Canada for political union with the US. Not sure what drives this kind of talk. Assuming it is not wishful thinking, then one would hope it is not just paronoia. Someone mentioned China, a country that is the third largest holder of your debt. If I was am American I would be more worried about how or when the US Gov't thinks about running a surplus and start repaying some of the debt. Not sure how the American public will deal with higher taxes and substantially less government spending. Political mergers would be the last thing I would be worryung about.

Take Care

Bob
 
robertbank;

Then I suppose we could just seal off the Mexican and Canadian borders and be done with it? Sorry guy, there is a will, it ain't yours and it ain't mine, but it is there. It appears someone wants to cram it down our throats. Hopefully, what you and I want will trump this, but someone big is behind it and they may have a trump of their own.

If the dollar collapse prediction is true, things are going to steamroller through. I think a U.S. dollar being lower than the Canadian will be a shock no one is prepared for. A panicked U.S labor market working for whatever U.S dollar hourly rate they can get would put a lot of Canadians out of work, when that dollar is weaker than Canadian. The Casinos will surely suffer. :) Niagra Falls(?), I think we will have seen enough stuff dropping that any interest in the Falls will be slight. Yukon might be something, if there is any prospecting possible?

I am 55 years old and have lived the Life of Riley, I think the bill is coming due soon. My Mom & Dad lived through something like what may be coming. I am not sure I am up to it, but I'll give it a good hard try.

Jerry
 
It's the economy, stupid.....

....and like Hayek has said you can't separate economics from politics.

http://www.asu.edu/clas/nacts/bna/goals.html


The links, documents, and other materials on this site have been selected, organized, and in some cases designed to advance teaching and research on North American regional integration. In particular, we hope to expand teaching materials available to university professors, both those who teach courses with “NAFTA content” and those in a variety of disciplines such as political science (international relations, international political economy), economics (international economics), and business (international business, international finance, international marketing) for whom a module on some dimension of North American integration would illuminate an important theory or operational issue. At the same time, the site also aims to benefit the broader community of North Americanists, within the academy and beyond, by putting at our collective fingertips – or mouse-reach – the kinds of current and historical material that will benefit research into, and understanding of, North American integration – past, present, and future.
 
The foreigners bidding to do the construction are doing so because the tax money does not exist for it to be a federal/state project. Simple as that. The expansion is needed, but we can't afford it from tax $$$. So, toll roads.

And, after all, ain't that a very common Libertarian idea? Private sector toll roads? :)

Art
 
It's All About the Money

Art, this isn't libertarian. When a massive corporation contracts with a government to get sole rights for a toll road which will be used to fund the county that is it's home base. It also isn't a free market Libertarian approach because the conseumer will have no choice.

As for the whole "This helps out trade" idea, NAFTA isn't free market. It is government managed trade. But instead of mercantilism like the Chinese practice (supporting producing exports while restricting heavily imports with a view to having your country have self sufficiency in terms of production, and foreign dependence on your product), you have a government managed trade system weighted to assisting corporate interests regardless of borders.

NAFTA and CAFTA are designed to lower the value of labour everywhere without lowering the price of goods and services. The idea behind this is to destroy the middle class and restructure the economy to use mercantilism the way China now does.

Once it is equally cheap to produce in North America as it is in China, you can start over again. Bring back the industry. And compete on a level playing field once more. The problem is quite simply we aren't nor can we get on a level playing field. And, the Federal Reserve and the politicians int he US are not on the same page here. The money, the debt we have is the problem. The dollars out there have to go somewhere. Those debts aren't just imaginary. They have to be payed back.

Who owns the debt? Who claims it? Go to Bank of America, go to Chase Manhattan, go to Citibank. The banks that own the Federal Reserve. That is who owns the debt. Those banks are gonna want payment on the debt, and they aren't gonna care where it comes from. They also aren't gonna care that the corporations that payed the American Middle Class are gone for brighter horizons in India and China. As I said before, the plans of our government and the plans of the Federal Reserve are not the same.

Our politicians might want the restructuring for competition. But the Fed just wants it's money. As do the Chinese. They don't care what that means to Amercans, or to our way of life.

Can we prevent it?

Yes. But to do so would require us to eliminate the Federal Reserve, and have the Federal Government, per Congress take up the printing of money. It would require us to renounce our debts, and use some kind of precious metals standard with full backing in order to fight international attempts to destroy our economy for defying the will of central bankers. And, well, no one in Congress has the stones to attempt a plan like that (except maybe Ron Paul).

Ultimately, the problem with our money is that the constant shifting we do reports false information back to producers and consumers. Our monetary system is designed to benefit the members of banking conglomerates instead of tell us the value of our labour and goods.

And as bad as things are with the current system, an "Amero" would be even worse.
 
U.S. legislator warns of ...

"The Council on Foreign Relations is "the establishment." Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also announces and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of a one-world dictatorship." Former Congressman John Rarick, 1971


"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control...Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."
Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976


There are more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top