Mon 20 Jun 2011
The North American Initiative Is Built on the EU Model: The Trilateral Commission´s One World Construction
offshoot of USA’s “invisible Government, the “Council on Foreign Relations, who also will rule the world by David Rockefeller’s ideas. And as NATO secretary-general, former Prime Minister and Bilderberger (2000, 2003) Anders Fogh Rasmussen, is trying in vain to militarily overcome the rascal states on behalf of “Our International Community” – as Helle Thorning-Schmidt puts it. Denmark is totally dominated by the NWO.
But the Trilateral Commission has more accidents on its inexistent conscience: The Trilateral Commission website: “The framework of the Trilateral European group is the European Union (formerly the European Community). Beyond their Trilateral commitment, European members are also committed to working for the European unification process. The idea that a united Europe must play a greater role on the global stage, has been a driving idea of the Trilateral Commission from the start.” The president of the European Convent, which wrote the European Constitution - now known as the “Lisbon Treaty” depriving the Europeans of their liberty - was the Trilateralist, Valéry Giscard d´Estaing. When the Trilateralists withdrew their credits for the Soviet Union it collapsed.
The NAU – The North American Union – is still a wishful dream of the globalists. But thanks to David Rockefeller, a big move forward has been made. The Organisation behind this idea is the Trilateral Commission – founded by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1973. Brzezinski has an idea of building a one world government through regionalisation – the model being the EU and here.
History of the Trilateral Commission (TC) in North America
The Trilateral Commission: The 2. North American chairman was David Rockefeller (1977-91), who continues to be recognized as founder and honorary chairman. The North American deputy chairmen are the heads of the Canadian and Mexican groups. Funding comes from foundations, corporations, and individual members.
The Trilateral Commission: “The Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 by private citizens of Japan, Europe (European Union countries), and North America (United States and Canada) to foster closer cooperation among these core industrialized areas of the world with shared leadership responsibilities in the wider international system. The “growing interdependence” that so impressed the founders of the Trilateral Commission in the early 1970s has deepened into “globalization.” That interdependence also has ensured that the current financial crisis has been felt in every nation and region. It has fundamentally shaken confidence in the international system as a whole. The Commission sees in these unprecedented events a stronger need for shared thinking and leadership by the Trilateral countries, who (along with the principal international organizations) have been the primary anchors of the wider international system. Doubts about whether and how this primacy will change do not diminish, and, if anything, have intensified the need to take into account the dramatic transformation of the international system. As relations with other countries become more mature—and power more diffuse—the leadership tasks of the original Trilateral countries need to be carried out with others to an increasing extent.
Our membership has widened to reflect broader changes in the world. Thus, the Japan Group has become a Pacific Asian Group, including in 2009 both Chinese and Indian members. Mexican members have been added to the North American Group. The European Group continues to widen in line with the enlargement of the EU. We are also continuing in this triennium our practice of inviting a number of participants from other key areas.”
Right: Danish Foreign Minister, Lene Espersen - here she confesses her membership on video - is a member of the Trilateral Commission, Rockefeller-Brzezinski´s private and self appointed club which sees itself as the rulers of the world, drumming together politicians and corporations for secret consulttions – without asking or telling the populations of the world about it. This is supposedly where she has her aggressive, martial pronouncements on Syria and Libya – countries that never did Denmark any harm. She has a TC colleage in the cabinet, Climate and Energy Minister Lykke Friis (left). The potentially coming Danish Primeminister, Helle Thorning Schmidt, is co–founder of the European Council on Foreign Relations – (along with George Soros, the Rothschild agent) – the layer of the US Council on Foreign Relations - which also plans to rule the world by David Rockefeller´s ideas. And she is Bilderberger 2009. Here is a very interesting list of top globalist members of the European Council on Foreign Relations – incl. Lykke Friis and Helle Thorning-Schmidt. So, Danish politics is heavily infected by Rockefeller-Brzezinski´s globalism/New World Order – not to mention former Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Bilderberger 2000 and 2003, now NATO Secretary-General. The US administration has 11 TC/CFRs. The president of the European Convent, which wrote the European Constitution - now known as the “Lisbon Treaty” depriving the Europeans of their liberty - was the Trilateralist, Valéry Giscard d´Estaing, In 1989, a Delegation of the Trilateral Commission (David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Valéry Giscard d´Estaing), during a visit, told Michael Gorbachev that the time of the Soviet Union was out (no more credits - as known in the case of the GDR). 1 year later, the Soviet Union ceased to exist!
What is the purpose of the Trilateral Commission?
Above, the Trilateral Commission declares to have developed the “global interdependence” into globalization. What globalization really is seems unclear to most people. Here is what US Senator, CFR-member Jesse Helms said from the floor of the Senate on Dec. 15, 1987: “Mr. President, a careful examination of what is happening behind the scenes reveals that all of these interests are working in concert with the masters of the Kremlin in order to create what some refer to as a new world order. Private organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relation, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Trilateral Commission, the Dartmouth Conference, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, the Atlantic Institute, and the Bilderberger Group serve to disseminate and to coordinate the plans for this so-called new world order in powerful business, financial, academic, and official circles….”And he continued: “The viewpoint of the establishment today is called globalism. Not so long ago, this viewpoint was called the “one-world” view by its critics. Mr. President, in the globalist point of view, nation-states and national boundaries do not count for anything. Indeed, even constitutions are irrelevant to the exercise of power. Liberty and tyranny are viewed as neither necessarily good nor evil, and certainly not a component of policy. …..All that matters to this club is the maximization of profits.”
Left: The Amero is a hypothetical currency that some think could some day replace the Dollars and the Mexican Peso in a future North American Union – just like the Euro.
The National Post 2 June 2011: The integration of North America’s economies would best be achieved through an “incremental” approach.The cable, released through the WikiLeaks website and apparently written Jan. 28, 2005, discusses some of the obstacles surrounding the merger of the economies of Canada, the United States and Mexico in a fashion similar to the European Union. The cable said Canadian economists were split on whether a fixed exchange rate, or a move to adopt the U.S. greenback, would benefit this country. It goes on to say North America would be well served by implementing a single, continent wide, tariff or a customs union arrangement. “We cannot make the claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale.” (See Addendum below)
The bait is shared prosperity – as for the Euromediterranean Project. The truth is wealth redistribution
Business Insider 11 Febr. 2011: Both of Perot’s opponents (George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton in 1992) argued that NAFTA would create jobs in the U.S. because of business expansion.
However, the goods balance of trade for the U.S. with Mexico has been negative and steadily growing over the years. In 2010 it amounted to $61.6 billion, which was 9.5% of the total goods trade deficit last year. And the US has lost 28.7 mio. jobs due to NAFTA.
New American 11 Febr. 2011: The move toward a North American Union received another big boost last week as President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met in Washington, D.C. to hammer out a deal on creating a common “perimeter” around the two countries while diminishing the role of the nations’ shared border and developing a biometric system to track North Americans.
The two leaders, touting the plan as a move toward security and prosperity, signed a four-page declaration supposedly committing the two countries to working together on a wide range of issues– and to enhance our security and accelerate the legitimate flow of people, goods, and services between our two countries,” the declaration states. It also praises the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Bringing in third countries — Mexico, perhaps? — and international institutions is part of the plan, too.
And it appears that Congress and the Canadian Parliament will have little to no say in the matter. “Responsibility for ensuring inter-agency coordination will rest with the Prime Minister and the President and their respective officials,” according to the agreement.“ Both governments deliberately tried to avoid scrutiny of the matter in the press and in their legislatures, as a government public-relations document leaked by The Toronto Star this week revealed. The new agreement proves yet again that a Council on Foreign Relations-backed North American Union — modeled after the European Union — is silently being erected with no input from citizens or their legislatures.
But the fusion of the regions is also going on
Global research 13 Jan. 2011: Canada and the EU have already held five rounds of negotiations towards a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) which will go beyond NAFTA. With the sixth round of talks scheduled to take place in Brussels, Belgium from January 17-21, Canadian and EU officials remain optimistic that a deal could be finalized by the end of 2011. As talks enter their final crucial stages, there are growing concerns over the threat CETA poses to Canadian sovereignty. Coupled with the financial turmoil sweeping Europe, deep economic integration with the EU could prove disastrous.
In a recent article Maude Barlow, national chair of the Council of Canadians, points out: “ At its heart, this deal is a bid for unprecedented and uncontrolled European corporations´access to Canadian resources.” She also added, “CETA will likely have a NAFTA-type investor-state enforcement mechanism, which means that European corporations will have the same right that U.S. companies now enjoy to sue the Canadian government if it introduces new rules to protect the environment.” CETA will further serve corporate interests. CETA is based on the failed NAFTA trade model and will only serve to accelerate the corporate takeover of the country.
But David Rockefeller´s NAFTA idea is by no means dead
WorldNet Daily 15 dec. 2010: Obama quietly erasing borders. Dem. administration advancing ‘North American Union’ agenda. Similarly, the U.S. State Department fact sheet calling for “A New Border Vision” with Mexico specified five areas of “joint border management.
CTV News reported that the draft declaration of “A New Border Vision” with Canada similarly also specified a cross-border policy agenda, including: *An integrated cargo security strategy; *Cross-border sharing of information between law enforcement agencies; i.a. *A closer working relationship between the two militaries in the event of emergencies; *A new level of collaboration on preventing and recovering from counter attacks.
To begin from behind: There is only a marginal and very uncertain prospect of economic gain from carrying on with the “North American Initiative”/The North American Union. Nor is that the real motive. As usual, they use a crisis – the financial one, which they created themselves and here – to deepen the power of “the International Community” at the cost of the populations of the world – Hegelian dialectics. Thus, Iain Begg, a professorial research fellow and expert at the London School of , argues that the European sovereign debt crisis will spur the development of new governance mechanisms that will ultimately deepen EU integration (The Council on Foreign Relations 14 June 2011).
This is precisely what is aimed at by the forces behind regionalisation. Who are those forces? The prime movers were the arch-one-worlders, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, perhaps the most dangerous man in the world. These two Illuminists started the Trilateral Commission, the task of which is to form corporate one world governance and government through regionalisation: North America, the Euromediterranean bloc and the Far East. Countries in the Middle East and North Korea barring the way of this movement are rascal states (and they are, in fact!) and have to be conquered. This is all part of Adam Weishaupt´s vision for a world government – and Brzezinski´s vision to obtain it by containment and weakening of Russia (The Grand Chessboard). In fact, TC was first to replace the “the New World Order”, a term, dating back to H.G.Wells and Satanist Alice Bailey – in order to have the masses put up with the concept without criticism.
The TC declares straightforward to be behind of the undemocratic EU – The Trilateral Commission Website: “The framework of the Trilateral European group is the European Union (formerly the European Community). Beyond their Trilateral ‘commitment, European members are also committed to working for the European unification process. The idea that a united Europe must play a greater role on the global stage, has been a driving idea of the Trilateral Commission from the start.”
The North American Union will come, unless the very skeptical and knowing freedom forces in the U.S. can exercise a so strong pressure that the Illuminati do not dare go ahead with it. I guess that is why that union does not already exist.
“Viewing cable 05OTTAWA268, PLACING A NEW NORTH AMERICAN INITIATIVE.”
This is a serious situation concocted by the Canadian Paul CELLUCCI and American Ambassador, which seems to never have been observed by Congress. Extract.
Back in 2005, the cable released recently by WikiLeaks explained how it would be done. And looking back, the document was right on the mark. 281556Z Jan 05 UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 000268 SIPDIS etc.
¶1. THIS MESSAGE IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE USG CHANNELS.
¶2. (SBU) An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers. Our research
leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both “security” and “prosperity” goals. This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration. While in principle many of them support more ambitious integration goals, like a customs union/single market and/or single currency, most believe the incremental approach is most appropriate at this time.
¶3. (SBU) The economic payoff of the prospective North American initiative - in terms of higher incomes and greater competitiveness - is available, but its size and timing are unpredictable, so it should not be oversold. We believe that, given growing Canadian concern about “border risk” and its effects on investment, a focus on the “security” side could also produce the most substantial economic/trade benefits.
CANADIAN ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE
¶4. (SBU) Canadian economists in business, academia and government have given extensive thought to the possible options for further North American integration. Following is our summary of the professional consensus:
BORDER RISK: The risk that business will be obstructed at the border by discretionary U.S. actions, inhibiting investment in Canada. For small businesses, the complexities of navigating the border are apparently even more intimidating than the actual costs. Reducing this risk is Canada’s top motive for pursuing further integration.
LABOR MARKETS: Many Canadian economists point to labor markets - both within and among countries - as the factor market where more liberalization would deliver the greatest economic benefits for all three countries.
REGULATION: Canadian economists agree that Canadian regulations (if not their standards, then their complexity) are needlessly restricting foreign investment and impeding food, communications and other industries. An international initiative could help to catalyze change.
CUSTOMS UNION: A common external tariff, or a customs union which eliminated NAFTA’s rules of origin (ROO), is economically desirable. NAFTA’s ROO are so restrictive that importers often prefer to pay the tariff rather than try to prove North American origin.
However, one study estimated that a full customs union which eliminated ROO would only raise national income by about one percent.
CURRENCY UNION: Canadian economists are split on whether a return to a fixed exchange rate, or adopting the U.S. dollar, would benefit Canada in current circumstances.
NORTH AMERICAN INTEGRATION: WHAT WE KNOW
¶5. (SBU) Past integration (not just NAFTA but also many bilateral and unilateral steps) has increased trade, economic growth, and productivity. Indeed, they may have been more important to our growing prosperity over the past decade than NAFTA’s tariff reductions.
¶6. (SBU) A stronger continental “security perimeter” can strengthen economic performance, mainly by improving efficiency at land borders and airports. It could also facilitate future steps toward trilateral economic integration, such as a common external tariff or a customs union, if and when our three countries chose to pursue them. Paradoxically, the security and
law enforcement aspects of the envisioned initiative could hold as much - or more - potential for broad economic benefits than the economic dimension.
WHERE’S THE UPSIDE?
¶7. (SBU) Some international economic initiatives (such as FTAs) produce across-the-board measures that generate broad benefits for a country’s industries and consumers on a known time-line. This was true of NAFTA but it is less likely to be true of the economic aspects of the NAI. This is a piecemeal process and the ratio of payoff to effort is likely to be lower than with across-
the-board measures. Governments naturally focus on resolving the problems which their firms or citizens bring to their attention. While this approach has merits, it tends to deliver the payoffs toward particular interests. If there are hidden costs, there might be little impact on national performance.
¶8. (SBU) In contrast, cooperative measures on the “security” side, a critical focus of current bilateral efforts, can deliver substantial, early, and widespread economic benefits.
A NOTE OF CAUTION
¶9. (SBU) There is little basis on which to estimate the size of the “upside” gains from an integration initiative concentrating on non-tariff barriers of the kind contained in NAI. For this reason, we cannot make claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale. CELLUCCI
4 Responses to “ The North American Initiative Is Built on the EU Model: The Trilateral Commission´s One World Construction ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.