No need to wonder if those "New World Order" conspiracy theories are real or not, the bastards are out of the shadows and coming for your guns. Read the article below, add the word "guns" or "enforce arms control" after "Drugs" throughout the article. Should scare the crap out of you.
There's so much not-so-subtle unConstitutional subtext in this article it's hard to miss. But two things that ought to get your attention:
1) The use of military for law enforcement purposes (drug enforcement and anti-terrorist activities are STRICTLY law enforcement activities!).
2) Using a multi-national force to make sure NAFTA is enforced. This is an unholy alliance between big capital and big goverment. BTW, keep your cyber ears peeled for anything about the "Third Way", which is a term Clinton coined for his political and economic agenda and the combination thereof. The Dems are crazy about this idea. Its pure Satan. Basically, he wants to use the money of super-capitalists to finance his Socialist political agenda, rewarding big money in the process. Almost all of Silicon Valley is on his side as are others.
Just remember, "THEY" can't bring about their Socialist utopia without disarming "US"!
`NAFTA' for military proposed
U.S. war college report urges joint command with Canada, Mexico By Linda Diebel
Toronto Star Latin America Bureau
MEXICO CITY - A United States military report advocates a joint command for American, Mexican and Canadian forces, in the same way the three countries are united under free trade.
The report, by Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez for the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., also suggested a North American peacekeeping force, headquartered in the U.S., with deputy
commander positions rotating between Canada and Mexico.
``Moving from bilateral arrangements to a (military) organization that reflects regional economic and security concerns is a better strategy, particularly considering our burgeoning trade through NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the growing threat of terrorism that can penetrate through our borders,'' the report said.
The war college study is the first to publicly advocate the sensitive issue of integrated military command - a matter of sovereignty in Canada and Mexico, as well as countries throughout the hemisphere.
Such a command would co-ordinate military action on terrorism, insurgency, security threats and drug trafficking.
`It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently
operate. If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less
stable . . . . '
- Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez, for the U.S. Army War College
Nunez said the joint command would replace, for example, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defence command) which ``is getting pretty out-of-date when it comes to drugs, terrorism and other threats.''
``The U.S. does not have the kind of working arrangement with Canada and Mexico that it should.''
Nunez admitted the proposed unified command ``may be a U.S. defence arrangement, but a lot of things would evolve to the benefit of Canada and Mexico - that would be my hope.''
Most major initiatives in Canada in recent years - from free trade with the United States to the ongoing initiative of a
hemisphere-wide economic pact - began with reports from think-tanks or academia.
The report comes during debate over other controversial free-trade issues, such as whether Canada should adopt the U.S. dollar as advocated in a recent report by the C.D. Howe Institute, a conservative think-tank in Toronto.
`A lot of the
geographic
considerations are a
bit out-of-date'
Canadian nationalists have seen free trade as the tip of an iceberg that put Canada at risk in other areas, from culture to monetary policy.
``A lot of the geographic considerations are a bit out-of-date and do not reflect current realities,'' Nunez, 43, a former West
Point instructor, told The Star yesterday.
He said his report, which carries a stamp saying it does not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Defence Department, has garnered a lot of attention in recent days.
The war college has received requests for copies from the Canadian and Mexican governments, as well as several US government departments, including state and defence.
``It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently operate,'' he said.
In Ottawa yesterday, Lt.-Cmdr. Denise Laviolette, defence department spokesperson, said she had never heard of the study, adding it was not an ongoing concern of the Canadian
Forces.
She added the report would carry more weight if it had come from the Pentagon, rather than the war college, a teaching institute that focuses on strategic perspectives.
Nunez, a 22-year army veteran, said a joint North American command would expand as free trade involved more countries in the hemisphere. If, for example, the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas becomes reality, the military command would stretch from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego.
Asked whether he foresaw the joint command leading to an integrated armed force, with everyone marching under one flag, Nunez said: ``I see it growing, with all of the change and integration of new ideas . . . what it achieves depends on the types of missions it is assigned.''
`It's time to take a good, hard
look at how we currently operate'
The report has created a stir in Mexico since it was published by the Mexico City daily, El Financiero. Nunez' report is called ``A New United States Strategy for Mexico,'' and details current revolutionary movements in Mexico and the threat to U.S. national interests here.
``If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less stable, thus jeopardizing the viability of NAFTA and the Free Trade Area of the Americas,'' it said.
Nunez said yesterday a joint peacekeeping force could be deployed wherever it was needed, ``without people thinking the United States - or any other country - was trying to influence things too much.''
U.S. intervention is a touchy subject in Latin America. Because of the history of U.S. involvement in the region, any kind of
military co-operation, or shared duties with the U.S., is viewed with suspicion.
Whenever the Mexican government approves joint manoeuvres with the U.S., for example, there is a storm of opposition and media criticism.
Recently, the U.S. has been criticized for taking a stronger military role in Latin America after an apparent cooling-off period.
In his report, Nunez said a new North American peacekeeping force - which might be funded 60 per cent by the U.S., 25 per cent by Canada and 15 per cent by Mexico - would be used for everything from human rights work to hurricane disaster relief.
There's so much not-so-subtle unConstitutional subtext in this article it's hard to miss. But two things that ought to get your attention:
1) The use of military for law enforcement purposes (drug enforcement and anti-terrorist activities are STRICTLY law enforcement activities!).
2) Using a multi-national force to make sure NAFTA is enforced. This is an unholy alliance between big capital and big goverment. BTW, keep your cyber ears peeled for anything about the "Third Way", which is a term Clinton coined for his political and economic agenda and the combination thereof. The Dems are crazy about this idea. Its pure Satan. Basically, he wants to use the money of super-capitalists to finance his Socialist political agenda, rewarding big money in the process. Almost all of Silicon Valley is on his side as are others.
Just remember, "THEY" can't bring about their Socialist utopia without disarming "US"!
`NAFTA' for military proposed
U.S. war college report urges joint command with Canada, Mexico By Linda Diebel
Toronto Star Latin America Bureau
MEXICO CITY - A United States military report advocates a joint command for American, Mexican and Canadian forces, in the same way the three countries are united under free trade.
The report, by Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez for the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., also suggested a North American peacekeeping force, headquartered in the U.S., with deputy
commander positions rotating between Canada and Mexico.
``Moving from bilateral arrangements to a (military) organization that reflects regional economic and security concerns is a better strategy, particularly considering our burgeoning trade through NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the growing threat of terrorism that can penetrate through our borders,'' the report said.
The war college study is the first to publicly advocate the sensitive issue of integrated military command - a matter of sovereignty in Canada and Mexico, as well as countries throughout the hemisphere.
Such a command would co-ordinate military action on terrorism, insurgency, security threats and drug trafficking.
`It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently
operate. If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less
stable . . . . '
- Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez, for the U.S. Army War College
Nunez said the joint command would replace, for example, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defence command) which ``is getting pretty out-of-date when it comes to drugs, terrorism and other threats.''
``The U.S. does not have the kind of working arrangement with Canada and Mexico that it should.''
Nunez admitted the proposed unified command ``may be a U.S. defence arrangement, but a lot of things would evolve to the benefit of Canada and Mexico - that would be my hope.''
Most major initiatives in Canada in recent years - from free trade with the United States to the ongoing initiative of a
hemisphere-wide economic pact - began with reports from think-tanks or academia.
The report comes during debate over other controversial free-trade issues, such as whether Canada should adopt the U.S. dollar as advocated in a recent report by the C.D. Howe Institute, a conservative think-tank in Toronto.
`A lot of the
geographic
considerations are a
bit out-of-date'
Canadian nationalists have seen free trade as the tip of an iceberg that put Canada at risk in other areas, from culture to monetary policy.
``A lot of the geographic considerations are a bit out-of-date and do not reflect current realities,'' Nunez, 43, a former West
Point instructor, told The Star yesterday.
He said his report, which carries a stamp saying it does not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Defence Department, has garnered a lot of attention in recent days.
The war college has received requests for copies from the Canadian and Mexican governments, as well as several US government departments, including state and defence.
``It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently operate,'' he said.
In Ottawa yesterday, Lt.-Cmdr. Denise Laviolette, defence department spokesperson, said she had never heard of the study, adding it was not an ongoing concern of the Canadian
Forces.
She added the report would carry more weight if it had come from the Pentagon, rather than the war college, a teaching institute that focuses on strategic perspectives.
Nunez, a 22-year army veteran, said a joint North American command would expand as free trade involved more countries in the hemisphere. If, for example, the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas becomes reality, the military command would stretch from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego.
Asked whether he foresaw the joint command leading to an integrated armed force, with everyone marching under one flag, Nunez said: ``I see it growing, with all of the change and integration of new ideas . . . what it achieves depends on the types of missions it is assigned.''
`It's time to take a good, hard
look at how we currently operate'
The report has created a stir in Mexico since it was published by the Mexico City daily, El Financiero. Nunez' report is called ``A New United States Strategy for Mexico,'' and details current revolutionary movements in Mexico and the threat to U.S. national interests here.
``If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less stable, thus jeopardizing the viability of NAFTA and the Free Trade Area of the Americas,'' it said.
Nunez said yesterday a joint peacekeeping force could be deployed wherever it was needed, ``without people thinking the United States - or any other country - was trying to influence things too much.''
U.S. intervention is a touchy subject in Latin America. Because of the history of U.S. involvement in the region, any kind of
military co-operation, or shared duties with the U.S., is viewed with suspicion.
Whenever the Mexican government approves joint manoeuvres with the U.S., for example, there is a storm of opposition and media criticism.
Recently, the U.S. has been criticized for taking a stronger military role in Latin America after an apparent cooling-off period.
In his report, Nunez said a new North American peacekeeping force - which might be funded 60 per cent by the U.S., 25 per cent by Canada and 15 per cent by Mexico - would be used for everything from human rights work to hurricane disaster relief.