Despite a few futile efforts by John Hawkins to disprove the allegations about the SPP, NASCO, SmartPort and other efforts that are said to be part of a proto-American Union, issues do remain. Now, I'm not saying that these efforts in and of themselves constitute a subtle, but systematic campaign to unite all three North American players, but Hawkins has made a fool of himself for the following reasons, which for the sake of brevity, I will simply enumerate:
- If NASCO's board members wanted a North American Union, would they actually admit that at a time when their plans are coming under public scrutiny? Come on John, it's called objectivity. What you did was take him at his word and say "well I guess he's telling the truth because no one with an agenda tells lies!" There may not be an evil, ulterior motive, but your "rebuttal" constitutes the same sort of unobjective, take-them-at-their-word crapfest that defines the mainstream media.
- The SPP is an effort to harmonize operational logistics between three countries with very different governmental systems and economies. This is, well, a prerequisite for any sort of integration of the three countries into a continental union.
- You're right, that the SmartPort is probably nothing sinister, but given the fact that the Mexican government has shown a shocking degree of contempt for our national sovereignty on many fronts, you could at least feign understanding of why a lot of people might not like the idea of federales working full time on this side of the border.
- If the Department of Commerce were to be using the CFR's document as a blueprint, I have news for you, super sleuth, they wouldn't tell you. Governments lie all of the time to their people. Maybe they are telling the truth. Hopefully they are, but if you just take them at their word, you're a fool, even if they're telling you the truth because of how many times governments have lied and betrayed their own people.
- Corollary to this rule, John. The first constitutional convention was conducted in secret and the states and the people were completely unaware of its true activities until it brought the final draft of the United States Constitution to the states. It was supposed to be a revision of the articles of confederation, you know, a few upgrades, not a whole new system of government. History is not on your side, though hopefully, honesty in government is this time. Will I bet anything of value that it is? No.
- It was 46 years (1952-1998) between the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community (predecessor to the European Union) and the ratification of the Euro. It took the European Union about 41 years to start solidifying into its current form, as a transnational confederation. Realistically, a North American Union would take another 20-40 years to complete, or approximately two generations of Americans between now and its realization. Nothing big and scary, no black helicopters. Gradual, but purposeful change driven by a ruling elite.
- Just because George Bush and his people don't support a united currency, doesn't mean that many power brokers in all three countries don't.
- John, my man, when has constitutionality ever been an issue for the United States government except on a handful of issues since FDR? Anyone with a passing knowledge of American history knows that modern politicians, judges and police care, compared to 100 years ago, not one bit about the US Constitution or any state constitution. Laws are frequently passed and upheld that are unconstitutional.
- None of us know the true extent of the plans, nor the extent of the political and economic power behind them. It could be anything ranging from an impotent cabal of sex-deprived geriatrics to a majority of the rich and well-connected people in politics, private industry and the military leaderships of all three countries. The point is, we don't know! The signs aren't good. They are all geared toward eventual harmonization.
The amusing part about this little spat is that John Hawkins is Jerome Corsi in reverse. Jerome sees a conspiracy under every bush (and in every Bush), John is quick to immediately give the highest benefit of the doubt to people with political agendas and to make the most superficial defense of "his guy," Bush. I don't think that Corsi has successfully made his argument that Bush is preparing us for a quantum leap into continental government, but neither has John come even remotely close to debunking the unionization accusations.
If history serves as any indicator, both of these guys are wrong. Unionization is inevitable with the current foreign policy establishment and monied interests. It won't happen on Corsi's timeframe, as it took three generations to get seriously underway in Europe. North America is hardly sufficiently homogenous to make it go any faster. If nothing more, it'll take Canadians a while to get used to being dominated by the United States and Mexico because of the demographics.
What John has done is akin to sticking his head out the window, noting the lack of rain right now and declaring the weatherman who predicted rain for the afternoon a fraud.
What's worrisome about this is the utter media-blackout in all this. When the NY Times and it's parrots in prime-time make Plame and Natalie Holloway bigger priorities than this, they're either too incompetent to be in the positions they are, or are useful idiots.
The Euiropean Union doesn't have to be a monolith (and never will be) in order to effectively be a superstate. Nor does it take belief in reptilian aliens running the Earth to see that the 40+ years of pan-European social engineering was just beta-testing for other parts of the world. Also don't forget that the Cold War was a major tether, as Germany was pinched in two, while NATO served as a stopgap to the current superstate.
North America, comparitively has far less differences, in language and even culture, than Europe ever had. Canada, Mexico, and the US are all federated republics. Grafting a political canopy onto that is logistically simpler than in Europe. You don't have to have NAU flags and offices dotting every corner of fly-over country to effectively serve the desires of those who want a North Am superstate. Just as Washington is more percieved in the periphereal churning than in direct line of sight, even more the embryonic superstate.
In the interest of full-disclosure, my being remitted back into the UK was due directly to the EU Human Rights Treaty. So as you might imagine, I'm not inherently opposed to a neo-confederation, not unlike that which the Constitution was orginally designed for. After all, that too was the first super-state, and it worked more or less for four score and seven years.
America stands to benefit economicaly from unfettered energy access to a land-pipeline from Alaska and a chance to tap the undeveloped energy resources of Mexico. And it wasn't until the advent of the welfare state that Mexicans even started looking to the anglo-speaking North. Even as late as seventies, mexican immigration was manageable. Immigration is only a problem when you create two sets of rules that benefits newcomers over natives.
The travesty here is that the American people are being mocked by the shell-game of sending troops to the border and such, when in five years time Mexican IDs will be honored anyway.
But to be honest, if bread and circus is more important than the birthright of liberty, bought of their forefather's blood, than like Ringo told Doc,
Eventus Stultorum Magister...
I'll just see to taking care of my own.
IMHO- you are not being hard enough on John Hawkins who thinks he has been anointed as the spokesman all things conservative.
Anyone with a little commons sense can see what is happening right before our eyes.
I also think that Jerome Corsi is not a conspiracy theorist but an American patriot that sees America being sold out to the globalist elite.
I happen to agree with him and am glad that he has exposed the end run around the constitution by CFR and TriLateral commission elite.
Hawkins is in denial.