September 12-14, 2006 – A hush-hush meeting held in Banff, Canada explored the issue of how to sneak a North American Union (NAU) onto the people of the U.S. Canada, and Mexico. What we are talking about is making a de facto merger of the three countries a fait accompli by the time it’s too late to reverse it. What else can one believe when the term “evolution by stealth” is used? (For background on the NAU, see this column Illegal Aliens and the Secret Monster Highway (Oct. 9, 2006) and AIM Report America’s Borders: Going-Going-Gone! (Dec. 22, 2006).
Thanks to the sleuthing of Judicial Watch, we know that at this meeting in September, that exact term, “evolution by stealth,” was used in discussions of how to slip a North American Union past us before we knew it. The media were not invited to cover the Banff conference of the North American Forum for Integration (NAFI). The only media person listed as present for the gathering was Mary Anastasia O’Grady of the Wall Street Journal. Apparently she was there as a participant/observer, not as a journalist. A Google search indicates no article on the meeting appeared in the WSJ.
Here is the wording in the notes for presentation at the conference, and they leave no doubt that the attendees seriously considered sneaking the NAU through so as to avoid the anticipated popular opposition to merging the three countries:
“To what degree does a concept of North America help/hinder solving problems within the three countries? … While a vision is appealing, working on the infrastructure might yield more benefit and bring more people on board (‘evolution by stealth’).”
This prompted Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton to comment, “It is not encouraging to see the phrase ‘evolution by stealth’ in reference to important policy debates such as North American integration and cooperation. These documents provide more information concerned with the Security and Prosperity Partnership [an entity created by the leaders of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, with 20 secret working groups operating in the federal Department of Commerce, rewriting our laws, agreements, and regulations].
“The more transparency, the better,” says Fitton. But that is not what we are getting other than through the efforts of Judicial Watch, Jerry Corsi (who’s writing a book on this), Phyllis Schlafly, and others whose persistence has forced bureaucrats (kicking and screaming) to produce the documents on the big plans in store for us.
The NAFI documents show the Banff meeting included participation by officials of Democrat and Republican administrations. Among the attendees listed was then-Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld (though it is believed Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, actually represented him there). Also on hand were former Secretary of State George Schultz; former INS Director Doris Meissner; onetime CIA Director Jim Woolsey; and former Defense Secretaries William Perry and James Schlessinger.
It is also worth noting that among the attendees in Banff was Dr. Robert Pastor, listed as NAFI’s Vice President, International Affairs. It is he who co-authored the Council on Foreign Relations book Building a North American Community, and earlier Toward a North American Community. Therein, he advocated erasing the borders, so that we would all consider ourselves “North Americans,” with a common currency — the Amero.
One attendee spilled the beans. Mel Hurtig, a Canadian author and leader of the National Party of Canada told WorldNetDaily that the North American Forum intends to make the grandiose plans happen before the public realizes what is going on.
Hurtig further added: “What is sinister about the meeting is that it involved high level government officials and some of the most powerful business leaders of the three countries, and the North American Forum in organizing the meeting intentionally did not inform the press in any of the three countries. It was clear that the intention was to keep this important meeting about integrating the three countries out of the public eye.”
The meeting included presentations on immigration and border enforcement; full economic and energy integration; a North American investment fund; and common customs and duties.
Also, there was a discussion of a carbon tax to deal with the hysteria over “global warming.” The FOIA documents don’t indicate how such a tax would be imposed, possibly by a future North American Union entity, and over the heads of our elected members of Congress.
That, of course, goes right to the core of a major concern of NAU critics — i.e., that all of these huge issues about possible loss of sovereignty, international taxation, immigration, or whatever are being hashed out behind closed doors with very little (if any) input from Congress, let alone the American people.
As for the idea of a carbon tax — which NAFI seems to believe we citizens are not worthy of knowing about (don’t tell the children?) — some international “citizens of the world” at the UN have been flirting with that one for some time.
A Sept. 2005 memo signed by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff (again obtained by Judicial Watch) says that “ongoing action and reporting in various U.S.-Canada, U.S.-Mexico working groups led by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] should now be driven by a single agenda: SPP.”
At a hearing this past week (March 19) of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission (NSTPRC), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce flatly endorsed the concept of the so-called NAFTA highways, as exemplified by the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), an apparent early integral part of an NAU.
The proposed TTC is four football fields wide and includes separate lanes (up to six for automobiles and four for trucks), plus tracks for freight trains, separate tracks for high speed and commuter rail, also space for oil and gas pipelines, electricity wires, and cable and broadband transmission lines.
In answer to a question from Commissioner Paul Weyrich at the Tuesday hearing, Rolf Lundberg Jr., Senior Vice President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the Trans-Texas Corridor and highways like it are a “top priority” for the Chamber, since previous highways have emphasized east-west, rather than north-south passage. The latter typifies the planning for the NAFTA highways.
That the Chamber of Commerce would endorse huge highways of this type is no surprise, given that — according to more FOIA documents just released — the Chamber, along with Council of the Americas, “agreed to jointly lead the U.S. Secretariat” of the North American Competitiveness Council, yet another entity in this seemingly endless web of efforts to merge nearly every major governing activity of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
The council’s recommendations on dealing with illegal immigration came down to this: “A reasonable grace period should be established at border crossings, during which time people lacking documents are educated about their options and allowed to pass.”
Little wonder why there is a genuine concern that the bottom line in the whole drive for a North American Union is to wipe out the borders — de facto, if not officially — between the United States and its neighbors. Some have questioned the idea of merging the U.S. with “socialist” Canada to the north and “corrupt” Mexico to the south.
Dr. Pastor — the NAU guru referenced above — was the center of attention at a recent all-day conference devoted to the development of a North American legal system, according to the Aim Report.
Academic literature at the confab included such topics as a North American Court of Justice — with authority to overrule decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court — and a North American Trade Tribunal.
One speaker argued that U.S. integration with Canada will make it impossible for the U.S. not to recognize same-sex marriage as long as it is lawful in Canada. One of Pastor’s students notes that the good doctor has a “Vision of the North American Parliament,” and a step-by-step process to create it (step by step, bit by bit, just as was done to create the European Parliament — can you say “evolution by stealth”?).
If all of this sounds like something Americans will never swallow, you’re right. They won’t — if they know about it. But approach ten people at random on the street and ask them if they’re aware this is going on. “Evolution by stealth” won’t awaken them until it’s too late.
The Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas has been enlarged to accommodate more imports from China — to be unloaded on trucks and trains and shot up to the border at Laredo, Texas, and thence on the TTC to a sovereign Mexican customs station in heartland America at Kansas City. Ultimately the road leads to Canada.
Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum reports that 12 state legislatures have been considering — or are about to consider — resolutions opposing the very idea of a North American Union. Those states are Arizona, Georgia, Illinois, Missouri, Montana, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Washington State.
The overriding task before us is getting the word out so that the issue becomes dinner table conversation at home. The news media won’t put it on the front burner. So word of mouth, letters to the editor, calls to radio talk shows, and other grassroots efforts are going to have to get the public’s attention. Once that happens, you can bet that all 50 states will be up in arms, and the rest, as they say, will be history.
One more thing: This is not an issue of free trade per se. Free trade is a fact of life. It is here to stay. But free trade does not mean erasing our borders, giving away the store in a wealth distribution scheme between nations, or compromising our security.
In 2016, While we’ve all been distracted lately by political campaigns, global crisis and race issues, the North American Union has been quietly expanding. This report focuses in on the highway systems that run between Canada, the U.S.A. and Mexico. While hitting a few roadblock along the way, the highway system looks like it’s back with a vengeance.