Sunday, March 11, 2007

North American Union by 2010?

Canada, United States, and Mexico to be One, Big, Happy Family. Yeh, Right!


"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interest of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists ' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller


*******
When the government fears the People, that is Liberty. When the People fear the Government, that is tyranny. ~Thomas Jefferson
A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny. ~ Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." – Teddy Roosevelt
*******
North American Union: http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2007/02/07/north-american-union-explained-powerpoint-style/ Watch a 22-minute powerpoint presentation that gives an overview of the North American Union.
North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA by Jerome R. Corsi: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15233 In March 2005 at their summit meeting in Waco, Tex., President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin issued a joint statement announced the creation of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The creation of this new agreement was never submitted to Congress for debate and decision.
Globalists envision another 9/11 crisis as great for creating climate for North American Union: http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/04/10/01486.html The North American Union (NAU) would destroy and replace Canada, and subject Canadians to a Christian far right, neo-fascistic, and anti-democratic political-military-industrial complex toward a sought Orwellian "New World Order".
Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway by Jerome R. Corsi: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497 Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.
The NAFTA Super Highway by Patrick J. Buchanan: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16739 This is a "mind-boggling concept," exploded Lou Dobbs. It must cause Americans to think our political and academic elites have "gone utterly mad." What had detonated the mild-mannered CNN anchor? Dr. Robert Pastor, vice chair of the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on North America, had just appeared before a panel of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations -- to call for erasing all U.S. borders and a merger of the United States, Mexico and Canada in a North American union stretching from Prudhoe Bay to Guatemala.
The EU and The NAU ~ Two Peas In A Pod! By Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D. - The formation of the European Union (EU) is the 'blueprint' being used to construct the North American Union (NAU). http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/TwoPeas.html Dr. Robert A. Pastor, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) "told the Trilateral Commission in 2002 that the North American Union needed to implement a series of political proposals which would have authority OVER the sovereignty of the United States, Canada and Mexico. Specifically, Pastor called for the creation of North American passports and a North American Customs and Immigrations, which would have authority OVER U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security. They plan to turn North America into a totalitarian state ruled by a corporate plutocracy -- a totalitarian government, OF the wealthy, BY the wealthy, and FOR the wealthy.
America is a Constitutional Republic . . . NOT a Democracy by Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D. http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/NotDemocracy.html The larger problem we are facing is related to those who would support and approve of mob rule. It is called tyranny. What is tyranny? Simply put, we are being governed by tyrants who have usurped the will of the people. Our government has become a raging bull elephant, no pun intended, and is totally out of control. We are well on the road to fascism, which was defined by Mussolini as the combining of capitalism and Communism. I urge you to educate yourself. If you have access to a computer you need to read what your own government has posted on their official websites such as the Whitehouse.gov, SPP.gov, State.gov and Canada.USembassy.gov. You will be aghast at the nearly complete destruction of our sovereignty, Bill of Rights, Constitution, laws, Republic, and freedoms they have ALREADY achieved.
The Emerging North American Union (NAU) by Debra K. Niwa (12 January 2007) http://www.channelingreality.com/NAU/NAU_Timeline.pdf A lot of research went into this 23-page paper and it should be read by everyone so they can better understand what we are facing in the future.
Bill paves way for Canada's 'disappearance' - Critics say country moving toward 'deep integration' with U.S. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56332 The conservative minority government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is pressing for "The Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement", which would enable a Canadian company to challenge laws in provinces that block the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Globalists To Formally Propose Merger Of U.S., Canada, Mexico - North American Union to be presented to Congress by powerful think tank: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/050707proposemerger.htm The report is entitled "North American Future 2025 Project" and was prepared in collaboration with the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), who were previously instrumental in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994. The plan outlines an agenda to unify the three countries into a European Union style power bloc.
North American Union, Global Governance - Welcome to the no man's land of the 'North Americanist' By Judi McLeod, April 12, 2007: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover041207.htm Few call the coming end of the sovereignty of three nations globalization, but rarely what it really is, the persistent encroachment of One World Government. The United Nations-like European Union now governs all of Europe. Lou Dobbs on June 9, 2005, began his evening broadcast with the startling announcement: "Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad?"
North American Union driver's license created: By Jerome R. Corsi, Thursday, September 6, 2007: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57502 The first "North American Union" driver's license, complete with a hologram of the continent on the reverse, has been created in North Carolina. Jason King, spokesman for AAMVA, affirmed the North American hologram was created by AAMVA's Uniform Identification Subcommittee, a working group of its members. He explained the goal is to create a continental security device that could be used by state and provincial motor vehicles agencies throughout North America, including the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Bush doesn't deny plans for North American Union: President avoids question, ridicules 'conspiracy theorists' who believe it: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57263 Montebello, Quebec – President Bush today sidestepped a direct question about whether he'd be willing to categorically deny there is a plan to create the North American Union. Bush's comments echoed the comments published just a day earlier in the Ottawa Citizen by David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada. "While conspiracy theories abound, you can take it to the bank that no one involved in these discussions is interested in, or has ever proposed, a 'North American Union,' a 'North American super highway,' or a 'North American currency,'" he wrote. Harper joined in. There's not going to be any NAFTA Superhighway connecting the three nations, he said, and it's "not going to go interplanetary either," he said. Harper said the SPP discussions that were held concerned such pressing issues as jelly beans.
*******
North American Military Agreement Signed by the U.S. and Canadaby Jim Kouri
Global Research, April 4, 2008
NewsWithViews.com - 2008-03-11 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8551
While Americans are being bombarded with large doses of presidential primary news coverage, the US entered into an agreement with its northern neighbor that may have an impact on future internal military action.
In a political move that received little if any attention by the American news media, the United States and Canada entered into a military agreement on February 14, 2008, allowing the armed forces from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even one that does not involve a cross-border crisis, according to a police commander involved in homeland security planning and implementation.
It is an initiative of the Bi-National Planning Group whose final report, issued in June 2006, called for the creation of a "Comprehensive Defense and Security Agreement," or a "continental approach" to Canada-US defense and security.
The law enforcement executive told Newswithviews.com that the agreement -- defined as a Civil Assistance Plan -- was not submitted to Congress for debate and approval, nor did Congress pass any law or treaty specifically authorizing this military agreement to combine the operations of the armed forces of the United States and Canada in the event of domestic civil disturbances ranging from violent storms, to health epidemics, to civil riots or terrorist attacks.
"This is a military plan that's designed to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act that traditionally prohibited the US military from operating within the borders of the United States. Not only will American soldiers be deployed at the discretion of whomever is sitting in the Oval Office, but foreign soldiers will also be deployed in American cities," warns Lt. Steven Rodgers, commander of the Nutley, NJ Police Department's detective bureau.
In Canada the agreement paving the way for the militaries of the US and Canada to cross each other's borders to fight domestic emergencies was not announced either by Prime Minister Harper's administration or the Canadian military. The agreement met with protests and demonstrations by Canadians opposed to such treaties with the US.
"It's kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-US relations and contentious issues like military integration," claims Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians. "We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites," he said in a press statement.
The military Civil Assistance Plan is seen by critics as a further incremental step toward creating a North American armed forces available to be deployed in domestic North American emergency situations. According to the NORTHCOM press release, the plan "allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency."
The agreement was signed at US Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, by US Air Force General Gene Renuart, commander of NORAD and US Northern Command, or USNORTHCOM, and by Canadian Air Force Lt. General Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command.
"This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation's requests for military support of civil authorities," Renuart said in a statement published on the USNORTHCOM website.
Lt. Gen. Dumais seconded Renuart's sentiments, stating, "The signing of this plan is an important symbol of the already strong working relationship between Canada Command and U.S. Northern Command."
"Our commands were created by our respective governments to respond to the defense and security challenges of the twenty-first century," he stressed, "and we both realize that these and other challenges are best met through cooperation between friends."
"It's hard to believe that Americans and Canadians will go along with this agreement," opines conservative strategist Michael Baker.
"That's why [there's] all this secrecy. Has anyone heard Clinton, Obama or McCain complain about this significant policy shift? All three of these presidential hopefuls are in the US Senate, yet not a peep from them about a foreign army being called to 'police' US neighborhoods under the guise of an 'emergency,'" he said.
The statement on the USNORTHCOM website emphasized that the plan recognizes the role of each nation's lead federal agency for emergency preparedness, which in the United States is the Department of Homeland Security and in Canada is Public Safety Canada.
The US Northern Command was established on October 1, 2002, as a military command tasked with anticipating and conducting homeland defense and civil support operations where US armed forces are used in domestic emergencies.
Meanwhile, the Canada Command was established on February 1, 2006, to focus on domestic operations and offer a single point of contact for all domestic and continental defense and securities partners.
In May 2007, President Bush took it upon himself to sign the National Security Presidential Directive 51 which is also known as Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20, authorizing the president to declare a national emergency and take over all functions of federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, without necessarily obtaining the approval of Congress to do so.
While Americans are being kept in the dark about this treaty, Canadian citizens are being totally ignored by their government. The extent of military integration called for by the BNP is unprecedented and has received absolutely no public debate in the House of Commons. If they wish to read about the details of this military agreement, Canadians must go to the Northern Command website to see any evidence of the new agreement.
"Once the Canadian people discover they can be [legally invaded] by US troops, they will take to the streets and protest and use the very effective weapon of civil disobedience. Canadians will not stand for occupation by a foreign army same as Americans won't," said conservative columnist and commentator Rachel Marsden.
"I'm surprised that the Canadian people haven't already displayed their opposition to such a treaty. Economics is one thing, but military use of force is quite another. We have our own police, security and military forces, thank you. We don't been Americans coming into Canada with weapons," she said. "And Americans don't need Canadian soldiers.
*******
Stéphane Dion Liberals seek to prop-up the minority Conservative government while Canada is being assimilated into the U.S.by Yvette Lafleur
Global Research, April 2, 2008 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8536
Multinational Big Business interests linked to the U.S. political-military-industrial complex, are now coordinating the elites of the Conservative and Liberal Parties, as "One Big Party". This is being done through the prism of the Security and Prosperity and Partnership North American Union (SPP-NAU) agenda. This SPP-NAU agenda, was orchestrated directly and in violation of Canadian sovereignty, through the Office of U.S. President George W. Bush, as corroborated by the official SPP.gov website.
Stéphane Dion and Stephen Harper are effectively functioning as leaders of the same political party, under the cover of apparent faked displays of "disagreements" in front of colluding affiliate corporate media organizations. These public displays, are designed to lull rank and file party members, and dupe Canadians into believing otherwise. This strategy includes the defamation claim media spectacle about Chuck Cadman that was launched by Stephen Harper against Stéphane Dion. Learned legal experts agree that this litigation claim will never see the light of day in a Canadian courtroom.
Glenn McGregor in the Ottawa Citizen reported on 27 March 2008, in the front page article "Absent Liberals under fire for giving Tories de facto majority", documents that "Liberal MPs are casting votes in Parliament at a rate lower than the turn out of Canadian voters who made it to the ballot box, in the last federal election."
"By choosing to sit out confidence motions that could topple the minority government, Liberal MPs on average participated in only 64 per cent of recorded votes in the House this parliamentary session." That is, "just below the 64.7 per cent of eligible voters who cast valid ballots in 2006 general election, an Ottawa Citizen analysis shows.
When they do show up for votes, Liberals consistently voted in line with the Stephen Harper government. This includes Official opposition support for extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, effectively merging the Canadian and U.S. militaries through the Civil Assistance Plan; crime bill provisions, and the settlement of investment disputes. SEE http://www.trudeausociety.com/home/Frontpage/2008/03/10/02254.html
It is apparent the Stéphane Dion Liberals, have been corruptly acting on behalf of the transnational elites who prevail over SPP-NAU agenda, inclusive of the so-called "Civil Assistance Plan". The Dion Liberals do not seek to act as a responsible Canadian Opposition Party that seeks to represent either the majority of Liberal Party members, or Canadians, who are commensurately dismayed and alienated by the Stephen Harper government.
It is apparent that transnational elites who prevail over SPP-NAU agenda, who Liberal Party elites have sold their souls to, do not want a federal election triggered by a Parliamentary 'No Confidence' Motion against Canada's mission in Afghanistan, or by any other Harper agenda, that would likely result in Canadians tacitly rejecting the SPP-NAU agenda.
It is further apparent that Stéphane Dion's job, is to prop up his SPP-NAU associate Stephen Harper, while SPP-NAU elites continue to assimilate Canada under the terms of a "Bi-National Panel" documented by the Centre for Research on Globalization. But, don't expect CTV, CanWest Global, TVOntario, Radio Canada, the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, or other Canadian corporate media organizations to shed light on this destructive agenda. Indeed, the greed-driven and fascist SPP-NAU agenda, is also supported by the elite owners of Canada's media organizations.
Stéphane Dion's role, as an assimilated crypto-Conservative, is illuminated prophetically in the CBC mini-series Trojan Horse, that presents Canadian political elites in Parliamentary, as voting to support Canada joining the United States.
Paul Gross, in Trojan Horse plays the character Tom McLaughlin, an almost "anti-Stéphane Dion like" politician ,who as a former Prime Minister, refuses to lose his country without a fight.
The SPP-NAU is by far, the biggest and most uncovered political scandal in Canadian history. It involves the apparent execution of high treason against Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, as defined by the Canadian Criminal Code. Indeed, the SPP-NAU Affair, makes former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien Sponsorship Scandal, look like a very trivial matter.
*******
The North American 'Soviet' UnionBy Charlotte Iserbyt
February 27, 2007
NewsWithViews.com http://www.newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt36.htm
There is one common thread running through all articles and speeches by elected officials, well-known writers, and commentators in opposition to the merging of the United States into a political and economic regional arrangement known as the North American Union. To my knowledge, not one of them has chosen to use the “C” word (communism) when warning Americans of the dangers of this unconstitutional merger about to be foisted upon us without proper hearings in Congress. Excellent speeches and articles are being given and written warning us of all sorts of bad things related to this merger, including the fact that we will lose our sovereignty, but we are not being told that all these bad things are necessary for the full implementation of The North American Soviet Union (communistic/regional system). Isn’t the “C” word the one and only word which might shock Americans out of their state of conditioned apathy, thereby bringing about citizen activism which might result in killing this “regional” monster?
Morris Zeitlin, a communist writer for the Communist Party’s Daily World said in an article entitled “Planning is Socialism’s Trademark,” November 8, 1975: “We (USA) have no regional government and no comprehensive regional planning to speak of. Regional government and planning remain concepts our urban scholars and planners have long advocated in vain…In socialist countries, metropolitan regions enjoy metropolitan regional government and comprehensive planning. The economic and functional efficiencies and the social benefits that comprehensive national, regional and city planning make possible in socialist society explain the Soviet Union’s enormous and rapid economic social progress…”
Of interest regarding Zeitlin’s comment about “the Soviet Union’s enormous and rapid economic social progress…” is the following admission made by former President Gorbachev at the 2005 National School Board Association conference that “half the world’s population and two-thirds of Russia’s lives in poverty.”
The United States Government, at all levels, has since 1975 accepted wholeheartedly Zeitlin’s advice, to the extent that our country is, believe it or not, almost 100 percent socialist in its political, economic, social and environmental (sustainable development) policies. For documentation please read “Walks Like a Duck, Talks Like a Duck.”
The regionalization (consolidation) of the world is quite similar to the three-stage plan outlined by Stalin at the 1936 Communist International. At that meeting, the official program proclaimed:
“Dictatorship can be established only by a victory of socialism in different
countries or groups of countries, after which there would be federal unions of
the various groupings of these socialist countries, and the third stage would be
an amalgamation of these regional federal unions into a world union of socialist
nations.” (Ed note: The third stage is taking place right now as we in the
United States of America become part of a federal union, the North American
Union, which will in the near future become part of a world union of socialist
nations.)

Former President of the Soviet Union Gorbachev on March 23, 2000, in London, referred to the European Union (EU) as "the New European Soviet.” If he refers to the EU in that way, it only stands to reason that he would refer to the North American Union (NAU) as the “New American Soviet,” since the NAU is modeled on the EU. Gorbachev also said in his speech to the Soviet Central Committee on November 2, 1987, published by Novosti Press Agency Publishing House:
“We are moving toward a new world, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.”
How is it possible that if American citizens or United States officials involved in putting us under the North American Union were aware of Gorbachev’s statements, they would not be very concerned regarding our nation becoming part of a communist world? Have we forgotten the many hundreds of millions of innocent people tortured, starved, murdered and incarcerated by communist regimes around the world? Authorities say “over 20 million people suffered in purges under Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin -- and that more than 10 million died before Stalin's death in 1953. Some put the number even higher.” [Read]
Do we really believe the communists have changed or gone away?
[Read entire article at: http://www.newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt36.htm]
*******
Toward a North American Union (Part 1 of 3)
Patrick Wood
August 27, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Wood/patrick18.htm
Good evening, everybody. Tonight, an astonishing proposal to expand our borders to incorporate Mexico and Canada and simultaneously further diminish U.S. sovereignty. Have our political elites gone mad? --Lou Dobbs on Lou Dobbs Tonight, June 9, 2005
Introduction
The global elite, through the direct operations of President George Bush and his Administration, are creating a North American Union that will combine Canada, Mexico and the U.S. into a superstate called the North American Union (NAU). The NAU is roughly patterned after the European Union (EU). There is no political or economic mandate for creating the NAU, and unofficial polls of a cross-section of Americans indicate that they are overwhelmingly against this end-run around national sovereignty.
To answer Lou Dobbs, "No, the political elites have not gone mad", they just want you to think that they have.
NAFTA/NAU Emblem The reality over appearance is easily cleared up with a proper historical perspective of the last 35 years of political and economic manipulation by the same elite who now bring us the NAU.
This paper will explore this history in order to give the reader a complete picture of the NAU, how it is made possible, who are the instigators of it, and where it is headed.
It is important to first understand that the impending birth of the NAU is a gestation of the Executive Branch of the U.S. government, not the Congress. This is the topic of the first discussion below.
The next topic will examine the global elite's strategy of subverting the power to negotiate trade treaties and international law with foreign countries from the Congress to the President. Without this power, NAFTA and the NAU would never have been possible.
After this, we will show that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is the immediate genetic and necessary ancestor of the NAU.
Lastly, throughout this report the NAU perpetrators and their tactics will be brought into the limelight so as to affix blame where it properly belongs. The reader will be struck with the fact that the same people are at the center of each of these subjects.
The Best Government that Money Can Buy
Modern day globalization was launched with the creation of the Trilateral Commission in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Its membership consisted of just over 300 powerful elitists from north America, Europe and Japan. The clearly stated goal of the Trilateral Commission was to foster a "New International Economic Order" that would supplant the historical economic order.
In spite of its non-political rhetoric, The Trilateral Commission nonetheless established a headlock on the Executive Branch of the U.S. government with the election of James Earl Carter in 1976. Hand-picked as a presidential candidate by Brzezinski, Carter was personally tutored in globalist philosophy and foreign policy by Brzezinski himself. Subsequently, when Carter was sworn in as President, he appointed no less than one-third of the U.S. members of the Commission to his Cabinet and other high-level posts in his Administration. Such was the genesis of the Trilateral Commission's domination of the Executive Branch that continues to the present day.
With the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Trilateral Commission member George H.W. Bush was introduced to the White House as vice-president. Through Bush's influence, Reagan continued to select key appointments from the ranks of the Trilateral Commission.
In 1988, George H.W. Bush began his four-year term as President. He was followed by fellow Trilateral Commission member William Jefferson Clinton, who served for 8 years as President and appointed fourteen fellow Trilateral members to his Administration.
The election of George W. Bush in 2000 should be no surprise. Although Bush was not a member of the Trilateral Commission, his vice-president Dick Cheney is. In addition, Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne, is also a member of the Commission in her own right.
The hegemony of the Trilateral Commission over the Executive Branch of the U.S. government is unmistakable. Critics argue that this scenario is merely circumstantial, that the most qualified political "talent" quite naturally tends to belong to groups like the Trilateral Commission in the first place. Under examination, such explanations are quite hollow.
Why would the Trilateral Commission seek to dominate the Executive Branch? Quite simply - Power! That is, power to get things done directly which would have been impossible to accomplish through the only moderately successful lobbying efforts of the past; power to use the government as a bully platform to modify political behavior throughout the world.
Of course, the obvious corollary to this hegemony is that the influence and impact of the citizenry is virtually eliminated.
Modern Day "World Order" Strategy
After its founding in 1973, Trilateral Commission members wasted no time in launching their globalist strategy. But, what was that strategy?
Richard Gardner was an original member of the Trilateral Commission, and one of the prominent architects of the New International Economic Order. In 1974, his article "The Hard Road to World Order" appeared in Foreign Affairs magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations. With obvious disdain for anyone holding nationalistic political views, Gardner proclaimed,
"In short, the 'house of world order' would have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."[emphasis added]
In Gardner's view, using treaties and trade agreements (such as General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs or GATT) would bind and supercede constitutional law piece by piece, which is exactly what has happened. In addition, Gardner highly esteemed the role of the United Nations as a third-party legal body that could be used to erode the national sovereignty of individual nations.
Gardner concluded that "the case-by-case approach can produce some remarkable concessions of 'sovereignty' that could not be achieved on an across-the-board basis"
Thus, the end result of such a process is that the U.S. would eventually capitulate its sovereignty to the newly proposed world order. It is not specifically mentioned who would control this new order, but it is quite obvious that the only 'players' around are Gardner and his Trilateral cronies.
It should again be noted that the formation of the Trilateral Commission by Rockefeller and Brzezinski was a response to the general frustration that globalism was going nowhere with the status quo prior to 1973. The "frontal assault " had failed, and a new approach was needed. It is a typical mindset of the global elite to view any roadblock as an opportunity to stage an "end-run" to get around it. Gardner confirms this frustration:
"Certainly the gap has never loomed larger between the objectives and the capacities of the international organizations that were supposed to get mankind on the road to world order. We are witnessing an outbreak of shortsighted nationalism that seems oblivious to the economic, political and moral implications of interdependence. Yet never has there been such widespread recognition by the world's intellectual leadership of the necessity for cooperation and planning on a truly global basis, beyond country, beyond region, especially beyond social system."
The "world's intellectual leadership" apparently refers to academics such as Gardner and Brzezinski. Outside of the Trilateral Commission and the CFR, the vast majority of academic thought at the time was opposed to such notions as mentioned above. [Read entire article at: http://www.newswithviews.com/Wood/patrick18.htm and connect for parts 2 & 3]
*******
[under construction]