Erasing Our Borders
by William F. Jasper
Globalists are   maneuvering America into a merger with the rest of the Western Hemisphere via   free trade  agreements. Their goal, as with the EU, is regional   government.
America is being hijacked, but the   hijackers don't go by names like Mohamed, Omar, and Osama. The hijackers to   whom we refer bear prominent names, such as Bush, Clinton, Kissinger,   McLarty, Greenspan, Rubin, and Rockefeller. They don't use box cutters and   bombs or commandeer airliners to create towering infernos; their weapons of   choice are instruments such as the WTO, NAFTA, the IMF, and the FTAA. They   hijack entire nations, stealing sovereignty and destroying constitutions --   usually under the banners of free trade,debt relief, and globalization- proclaiming all the while that their lawless   actions will advance global prosperity, democratization, and the rule   of law.
A colossal hijacking operation is in full   swing even now. Its primary target is the United States of America, but it is   aimed at all the other nations of North and South America as well. It is the   FTAA, the so-called Free Trade Area of the Americas, which proposes nothing   less than the economic and political merger of the 34 nations of the Western   Hemisphere.
EU Blueprint
Following the same plan of attack that was   used to hijack the nations of Europe into the sovereignty-destroying European   Union (EU), the internationalist architects of the FTAA intend to transform   the nation-states of the Western Hemisphere -- including the United States --   into mere administrative units of the supranational FTAA. (The article beginning   on page 23 examines the European model for this attack, where the hijacking   is so far advanced that the EU is now widely recognized as a developing   regional government sapping the sovereignty of France, Germany, Great   Britain, and the other member states. As it is in Europe, so it will be in   the Americas -- if the architects of world order are successful.)
The FTAA represents a vast  broadening and deepening of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade   Agreement, which set the hijack operation in motion by tying Canada, the   United States, and Mexico together in a system of ever-expanding and   tightening political, economic, social, and military entanglements. Following   the EU model, the trinational NAFTA is adding new members (what the   internationalists call broadening) and claiming jurisdiction over   an ever-increasing swath of functions (deepening) that have   previously been solely the purview of national governments and their state   and local governments.
The NAFTA/FTAA plan calls for an entire   hemispheric regime of regulations to harmonize business,   industry, labor, agriculture, transportation, immigration, education,   taxation, environment, health, trade, defense, criminal justice, and other   matters of policy and law rom Alaska to Tierra del Fuego. NAFTA   is not, and never was, about free trade.Free trade -- real free   trade -- is a voluntary exchange between two parties, unhampered by   government intervention and subsidies.
But NAFTA, like the European Union, seeks   to regulate and control virtually every industrial, agricultural, commercial,   social, environmental, and labor matter. Rather than creating or permitting   economic freedom by eliminating government intervention, NAFTA seeks to   homogenize the multitude of socialist programs that now hamstring the U.S.,   Mexican, and Canadian economies -- and add a new host of controls besides.   Also, in keeping with the EU pattern, the NAFTA/FTAA globalists have already   launched their campaign for a single hemispheric currency as a counterpart to   the euro, which replaced the currencies of the EU member states in January of   this year. For now, the dollar is being touted as the hemispheric legal   tender, but plans have already been floated to replace the dollar with a new   currency called the amero.
Strikingly obvious is that the NAFTA/ FTAA   "broadening and deepening and harmonization and   integration represent a radical, revolutionary assault on national   sovereignty and constitutional government. Piece by piece, governmental   functions are being ripped from protective firewalls so carefully constructed   by our own country's Founding Fathers. These powers are being transferred to   unaccountable, unelected international bureaucracies that are not bound by   the checks and balances that have prevented the accumulation of absolute,   tyrannical power in our constitutional system of government.
The people of the EU have only recently   begun realizing that the process started five decades ago under the banner of   free trade was really a stealth attack aimed at nothing less than   destroying their national sovereignties and imposing a tyrannical oligarchy   ruling over them from Brussels. The EU has become a supranational regional   bloc in the new world order, and its ruling elite now pushes to further   concentrate and centralize power at the global level -- under an all-powerful   United Nations. That same EU process is now being imposed on the Western   Hemisphere, but on an accelerated schedule. What took decades to accomplish   in Europe, the FTAA schemers intend to achieve in the next few years. They   have, in fact, set the fast-approaching 2005 as the target year for locking   the FTAA into place.
We're working to build a Free Trade   Area of the Americas, and we're determined to complete those negotiations by   January of 2005, President George W. Bush declared in his January 16,   2002 speech to the Organization for American States (OAS) and the World   Affairs Council in Washington, D.C. We plan to complete a free trade  agreement with Chile early this year. And once we conclude the agreement, I   urge Congress to take it up quickly. And I ask the Senate to schedule a vote,   as soon as it returns, on renewing and expanding the Andean Trade Preference   Act. Today, I announce that the United States will explore a free trade   agreement with the countries of Central America.... Our purpose is to   strengthen the economic ties we already have with these nations  and to take   another step toward completing the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
The 2005 timetable did not originate with   President Bush; he was merely renewing a pledge that his predecessor, Bill   Clinton, had also made when endorsing the FTAA agenda in 1994. In December of   that year, President Clinton hosted the Summit of the Americas in Miami,   which served as the FTAA launch pad. He endorsed both the Declaration   of Principles" and the Plan of Action promulgated at the   conference.
The Declaration's preamble declares, We are determined to consolidate and advance closer bonds of   cooperation.... We reiterate our firm adherence to the principles of   international law and the purposes and principles enshrined in the United   Nations Charter and in the Charter of the Organization of American States   (OAS).... Moreover, the Declaration pledges to begin immediately   to construct the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), to be   concluded no later than 2005. The signatories also swore to advance and   implement the commitments made at the 1992 United Nations Conference on   Environment and Development (the enviro-Marxist Earth Summit in Rio de   Janeiro) by creating cooperative partnerships to strengthen our   capacity to prevent and control pollution and promote sustainable   development (globalese for UN control over economic, industrial, and   population matters).
The FTAA Plan of Action states that   governments will cooperate fully with all United Nations and   inter-American human rights bodies,undertake all measures   necessary to guarantee the rights of children, and, where they have not   already done so, give serious consideration to ratifying the United Nations   Convention on the Rights of the Child.The governments will also seek   to strengthen the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the   Inter-American Court of Human Rights, both of which can be expected to   interfere with increasing frequency in U.S. civil and criminal cases.
That barely scratches the surface of the   kinds of transnational meddling in U.S. affairs that the FTAA will bring. At   that 1994 summit, the presidents of El Salvador and Guatemala condemned   California's Proposition 187. This measure to deny various welfare benefits   to illegal aliens was passed by an overwhelming majority of California   voters. Proposition 187, said the presidents, grossly violated   children's rights. In similar fashion, the Mexican consul demanded   that the U.S. consult with its hemispheric neighbors before   passing certain laws. However, news coverage of these and other   manifestations of the new world disorder bearing down on us received short   shrift. As with coverage of NAFTA, the internationalist media giants focused   public attention on the glorious economic benefits that allegedly would   accrue with the new wave of hemispheric trade that the FTAA would bring.
A few candid admissions did surface. Mack   McLarty, President Clinton's chief of staff, offered this comment:   [T]his summit is much broader than [lowering tariffs], and that's how   it should be looked at. This is not a trade summit, it is an overall summit.   It will focus on economic integration and convergence. The terms   integration and convergence pass over the heads of average Americans. But   they are pregnant with meaning for committed globalists, of which Mr. McLarty   is a hearty specimen. Subsequently moving on to a heady (and highly   profitable) partnership with Henry Kissinger, McLarty now prominently   advocates hemispheric integration and convergence in the business and   financial communities.
Henry Kissinger, a member of the executive   committee of the Trilateral Commission and a longtime power in the Council on   Foreign Relations (CFR), called the NAFTA vote the single most important   decision that Congress would make during Mr. Clinton's first term. Indeed,   Kissinger admitted in the Los Angeles Times in 1993 that passing NAFTA  will represent the most creative step toward a new world order taken by   any group of countries since the end of the Cold War.... NAFTA ;is   not a conventional trade agreement, he said, but the architecture   of a new international system.
Self-appointed Wisemen
Over the past decade, many of Kissinger's   Trilateralist and CFR brethren have expounded on how important this new   international system  is in constructing their subversive new   world order. Some of them openly admit that NAFTA and the FTAA can, and   will, follow the sovereignty-destroying path blazed by the EU. Many of   the most important revelations in this regard can be found in the pages of   the CFR's journal, Foreign Affairs. In the Fall 1991 issue, for   example, CFR member M. Delal Baer penned an article entitled North   American Free Trade, hinting at the hemispheric leviathan emerging from   the murky depths.
The creation of trinational   dispute-resolution mechanisms and rule-making bodies on border and   environmental issues may also be embryonic forms of more comprehensive   structures, said Baer. ;After all, international organizations and   agreements like GATT and NAFTA by definition minimize assertions of   sovereignty in favor of a joint rule-making authority." (Emphasis   added.) Dr. Baer went on to draw a direct analogy to the EU, suggesting:
It   may be useful to revisit the spirit of the Monnet Commission, which provided   a blueprint for Europe at a moment of extraordinary opportunity. The three   nations of North America, in more modest fashion, have also arrived at a   defining moment. They may want to create a wiseman's North American   commission to operate in the post-ratification period.... The commission   might also adopt a forward-looking agenda on themes such as North American   competitiveness, links between scientific institutions, borderland   integration, the continental ecological system and educational and cultural   exchanges.
The   Monnet Commission Baer refers to was named for Jean Monnet, the socialist   one-worlder who served as the principal architect of the Common Market. He   and his self-appointed, self-anointed wisemen -- together with   their American counterparts -- gradually foisted the EU on the people of   Europe, using deception, outright lies, bribery, extortion, and corruption to   achieve their objective.
Jacques   Delors, the socialist president of the European Community Commission in 1992,   when the NAFTA debate was raging, clearly saw the parallels between the two   regional organizations. Delors gloated that NAFTA is a form of flattery   for us Europeans. In many ways, we have shown what positive, liberating   effect these regional arrangements can have. Liberating for whom? Why,   for one-world wisemen  like Delors, naturally, who detest   constitutional limitations on their powers.
In  1994, an important study by Gary Clyde Hufbauer (CFR) and Jeffrey J. Schott   provided a fairly detailed guide to the globalist game plan for the   hemisphere. Entitled Western Hemisphere Economic Integration, the   Hufbauer-Schott study was published by the Institute for International   Economics (IIE), a close sister of the CFR. The IIE, says The London   Observer, may be the most influential think-tank on the   planet, with an extraordinary record in turning ideas into   effective policy.
After   four decades of dedicated effort, said the IIE report, Western   Europe has just arrived at the threshold of  monetary union, and fiscal coordination. It seems likely that trade and investment integration will   proceed at a faster pace within the Western Hemisphere. Yes, the IIE-CFR internationalists have learned from the EU experience and expect to   use those lessons to speed the process along in the Americas.
According   to Hufbauer and Schott, the more countries that participate in   integration and the wider its scope, the greater the need for some   institutional mechanism to administer the arrangements and to resolve the   inevitable disputes, and the stronger the case for a common legal   framework. This means supranational legislative, executive, and   judicial institutions, of course. The European Commission, Council,   Parliament, and Court of Justice have many of the powers of comparable   institutions in federal states, they noted approvingly before   commenting, ;On this subject, we score Europe with a 5 [on a scale of 0   to 5]."
But   Hufbauer and Schott propose going even beyond the EU's rapacious appetite.   They assert that integration between NAFTA and Latin America should be   legally open-ended; potentially the WHFTA [an earlier name for the FTAA]   should include countries outside the hemisphere. They assert:  Economic logic suggests that the expansion of NAFTA in an Asian   direction is just as desirable as its expansion in a Latin American   direction.
A   more recent brief for this hijacking of the Americas is provided by Felipe   A.M. de la Balze, director of the Argentine Council on Foreign Relations and   a professor of international economics. In an article entitled Finding   Allies in the Back Yard: NAFTA and the Southern Cone, in the   July/August 2001 Foreign Affairs, de la Balze points his fellow   Insiders toward the EU experience. Witness the successive expansions of   the European integration project (now the European Union), he says,  which incorporated Italy in the 1950s, Spain in the 1970s, and then   Greece, Ireland, and Portugal in the 1980s.
He   continues:
Now   a similar opportunity for integration exists in the Southern Cone of South   America. A core group of countries -- Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay   -- have made great strides in recent years and are poised, despite their   short-term economic problems, to make steady political and economic gains   over the next decade....
To   this end, the best incentive the United States can provide is an expansion of   the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to the Southern Cone, making   these South American nations members of the pact alongside the United States,   Canada, and Mexico. But economic integration will not succeed without a   compelling political rationale as well: namely, the promotion of democracy   and regional security that could follow the creation of a super   NAFTA."
Integration   Express
Having   helped design the economic program in Argentina that has brought about that   country's bankruptcy and present crisis, de la Balze believes it is time to   crank up the ;integration express A seven-state NAFTA,   incorporating democratic and security accords as well as economic agreements,   would offer a wide array of benefits to the entire hemisphere and could   eventually integrate other Latin American countries.De la Balze   acknowledges that the countries he proposes to integrate into the NAFTA/FTAA  need help in addressing endemic problems such as economic instability,   low per-capita income, illiberal democratic practices, and   narcoterrorism. And that bringing economic growth and social   stability to South America will require not only a vibrant private sector and   functioning markets but also public education for the young, job training for   the unemployed, public health care for the poor, and courts and police that   treat all citizens alike.In other words, it will take huge transfers   of wealth from U.S. taxpayers, as well as transfers of U.S. sovereignty to   the new FTAA institutions. The program he outlines is a hemispheric socialist   manifesto, disguised with rhetoric about free trade. Again, Europe provides  a good precedent,de la Balze claims.
President   George W. Bush, like Bill Clinton before him, is following the destructive   and subversive FTAA road plan laid out by de la Balze, Hufbauer, Schott,   Baer, Kissinger, et al. Why? Senator Barry Goldwater explained in his 1979   memoir, With No Apologies, that despite the heated rhetoric and change   in party label from one administration to the next, the same internationalist   policies continue unabated:
When   a new President comes on board, there is a great turnover in personnel but no   change in policy. Example: During the Nixon years Henry Kissinger, CFR member   and Nelson Rockefeller's protégé, was in charge of foreign policy. When Jimmy   Carter was elected, Kissinger was replaced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, CFR member   and David Rockefeller's protégé.
That   same musical chairs rotation of CFR-Trilateral one-worlders has continued   through the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush II administrations. This was   plainly evident at a February 15, 2002 CFR program televised on C-SPAN. Vice   President Dick Cheney, the featured speaker, drew a round of laughter by   noting that he had been a longtime member of the Council but that he couldn't   let his constituents back in Wyoming know that when he was serving as a   member of Congress. The first person to speak following Mr. Cheney's speech   was David Rockefeller, former chairman of both the CFR and Trilateral   Commission (TC). Mr. Vice President, said Rockefeller, I  just enjoyed so much your whole speech, but I was particularly pleased that   you gave such a strong endorsement for the free-trade agreement for all the   Americas -- a subject that has been of great concern to me for many years and   particularly recently.
Indeed,   David Rockefeller and the Rockefeller family have spearheaded the entire FTAA   process for several decades through organizations such as the CFR, TC, IIE,   the Chase Manhattan Bank, the Council of the Americas, The Americas Society,   the Center for Inter-American Relations, and other institutions.
Both   the FTAA and Trilateral processes entail building regional relationships that   will eventually coalesce in world government. In With No Apologies,   Goldwater noted that "the Trilateral Commission represents a skillful,   coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power   -- political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical.... What the   Trilaterals truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic power   superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved.... As   managers and creators of the system they will rule the future."
Clearly,   the EU-NAFTA-FTAA schemes are intended to accomplish precisely that criminal   and treasonous objective. As such, they are far more dangerous than any of   the terrorist attacks that Osama bin Laden or others of his ilk can throw at   us.
Order This Issue
Index11
Index11