The deeper truth is that none of these agreements, pacts, spontaneously arose out of the ether. They are the end result of decades of plans for a merger of national governments into regional entities that themselves will be subsumed behind the scenes by trade pacts, treaties and agreements...
Alfred Adask brought an interesting story to my attention this week on his “Financial Survival” radio program. Back in 2013, while Senator Diane Feinstein was presenting information on terror “events” (whatever that means) that the NSA claims (without proof) to have “disrupted” (whatever that means) under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act and Section 215 of the Patriot Act,
two aides held up an infographic that shows four areas of operation in which these terror events had supposedly been disrupted. Along with Europe, Asia and Africa, the other shaded area of the map was North and Central America (and the Caribbean), which were collectively labeled “homeland.”
Excuse me? Are Canada, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean now part of the “Homeland,” as in “Department of Homeland Security.” Well, not officially. Or, at least, not explicitly. The DHS website contains a lot of rhetoric about its mission, its organization, its history and its laws and regulations, each of which refer to “the nation,” “the homeland,” “the U.S. homeland” and various other appellations seemingly interchangeably. Perhaps the key document in defining what precisely is meant by “the homeland” is The Homeland Security Act of 2002, which includes in its definitions the specification that “Each of the terms 'American homeland' and 'homeland' means the United States.” Well, that settles that, doesn't it?
Doesn't it?
If only. This particular NSA-provided map likely conflates North and Central America and the Caribbean with “the homeland” in order to inflate the Agency's already over-inflated “terror event disruptions” claim, but the idea of the US expanding its concept of its national borders to include that of its neighbors is all too real. In fact, there has been a concerted effort over the last several years to merge Canada, the US and Mexico into a united “continental security perimeter” complete with standardized security procedures and information sharing as part of an even longer-term plan to ultimately synthesize the three countries into one EU-like regional government.
This agenda of border security integration was kickstarted (like so many other tyrannical programs, including the DHS itself) by the false flag terror events of 9/11. The toxic dust was still settling on Ground Zero (and EPA head Christine Todd Whitman was still busy killing first responders by lying about that toxic dust) when then-Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and then-Deputy Prime Minister John Manley (aka Bilderberg / Trilateral stooge) signed the Canada-US Smart Border Declaration. The declaration included vows to coordinate security and law enforcement efforts in the name of facilitating the flow of people and goods between Canada and the States, exactly as a number of more detailed plans would propose in the coming years.
The Declaration was eventually superseded by the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a trilateral framework between the governments of the US, Canada and Mexico that began a process of regulatory integration. In documents obtained by The Corbett Report in 2007, it was revealed that the SPP was not only controlled by the "North American Competitiveness Council (NACC)" -- a "body created by Leaders in 2006 to give the private sector a formal role in providing advice on how to enhance competitiveness in North America" -- but that the SPP process itself was in fact an initiative launched by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCOCE) in January 2003. According to the CCOCE's own documents Council members comprise the CEOs of 150 leading Canadian businesses which "administer in excess of C$2.1 trillion in assets, have annual revenues of more than $500 billion" and, it seems, have a number of ranking governmental officials from all three North American nations in their back pocket. Oh, and the president and CEO of the CCOCE? Who else? The aforementioned Bilderberg / Trilateral stooge John Manley.
When some of these troubling connections came to light, Canadian Prime Minister Harper tried to laugh off accusations that the SPP represented a nascent North American Union by insisting that conspiracy theories about 'interplanetary highways' were untrue, and that the pact was more concerned with 'regulating jelly beans.' Thankfully, the public was not buying this and after unprecedented protests at the SPP meeting in Montebello, Quebec in late 2007 (including the now-infamous exposure of police agent provocateurs within the ranks of the protestors), negotiations drew to a standstill and the SPP was shelved in 2009.
Needless to say, work on integrating the governments of North America continued on behind the scenes under different auspices.
In February of 2008, the Canadian and American militaries signed an agreement allowing troops of either country to cross the border and carry out operations in the other country in the event of an emergency, such as civil unrest.
In 2010, the two countries signed the shiprider agreement, allowing the operation of specially designated vessels to patrol the shared waterways of the two countries by joint crew, consisting of both Canadian and American law enforcement. This agreement is cited in the new border proposal as an example of how cross-border policing can be implemented.
In 2011, President Obama and Prime Minister Harper issued a declaration asserting a shared security perimeter for the two countries. Broken into two "action plans," Beyond The Border and the Regulatory Cooperation Council, the agreement not only reaffirmed the commitment to a jointly-policed security perimeter and further harmonization of business regulation, but ominously noted that Canada and the U.S. "expect to work together with third countries and with international organizations, and intend to facilitate security sector reform and capacity building around the globe, to enhance standards that contribute to our overall security."
The deeper truth is that none of these agreements, pacts, partnerships, declarations or resolutions spontaneously arose out of the ether. They are the end result of decades of plans for a merger of national governments into regional entities that themselves will be subsumed behind the scenes by trade pacts, treaties and agreements that will eventually form a de facto world government.
In its modern context, the plan to merge Canada, the US and Mexico into a single "North American Community" was kickstarted in 2005 by (who else?) the CFR in the States, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives in Canada and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales in Mexico. That was the year they released "Building A North American Community," the blueprint for the consolidation of North America and the creation of a single "North American Community."
The process of the creation of this community is, unsurprisingly, taking place via a number of channels. It is not just a political process, but a cultural one, and is now being fostered by the creation of numerous "North American studies" programs exactly as outlined by globalist stooge Robert Pastor in an article in the CFR's own "Foreign Affairs" publication in 2008.
As independent researcher Dana Gabriel noted in an article published on The Corbett Report in 2010:
The Center for North American Studies at American University in Washington, D.C. "was established to educate a new generation of students, to promote policy debate among the governments and the public, and to undertake research on ideas for a continental future." Arizona State University has also created the North American Center for Transborder Studies whose mission, "is to advance greater understanding of border and trilateral issues in North America by supporting scholars who contribute to the development of innovative theory and actionable policy analysis regarding these issues." The North American Integration and Development Center based at the University of California, Los Angeles, "seeks to build linkages among a wide variety of institutions, organizations, and community groups in order to promote North American integration." These various centers, along with other initiatives are part of the ongoing efforts to further condition and train a new generation into accepting a North American consciousness.
The North American community, once consolidated, will quickly be merged through trade pacts like the TPP and the TTIP with countries in Asia and Europe. Africa has already taken steps toward the creation of the African Union. The European Union continues to attempt to consolidate power over Europe despite its startling failures. Putin's Eurasian Economic Union was officially birthed earlier this year. The Goldman Sachs-created BRICS continues on with its own attempts to harmonize regulations and bring down borders. The WTO, the WHO, the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the OECD, the World Customs Organization and a thousand other international frameworks, institutions, organizations and quasi-governmental structures continue to work behind the scenes to continue the process of creating the "global governance" that the arch-globalist oligarchs are so openly proud of.
So is it at all surprising that we are now seeing maps of "the Homeland" that just happen to include North and Central America and the Caribbean? Or is it just another part of the acclimation that the public is undergoing to accept the inevitability of regional (and eventually world) government? Readers of these pages should be in no doubt that it is most certainly the latter.
The logical question for those who oppose this agenda, then, is how best to oppose it. Is the answer to rally around the flag and cling to the nation-state framework as the bulwark against the oligarchical control structure? To elect this or that president in the hopes that he or she will reverse the tide of this generations-old plan for world domination by the money printers, kingmakers and oligarchs?
Certainly these ideas make sense if the natural, logical and defensible structure for the preservation of human freedom was the nation state. But what if the nation-state is not a natural institution, nor one dedicated to the preservation of liberty? What if it is itself the creation of the oligarchical elite of ages past in order to consolidate their control over the peoples of each nation, and what if that nation state structure is now being entered into a Hegelian dialectic with the globalist institutions from which "global government" is the only possible synthesis?
In that case, we're not only going to need to fundamentally rethink our strategies for opposing the globalist institutions; we're going to have to rethink what it even means to oppose them.
But that is a topic to be continued next week...