Global Warming Hysteria to Further North American Union?


Richard Moore

Original source URL:

Monday, April 09 2007 @ 08:59 AM MDT

Global Warming Hysteria to Further North American Union?
Contributed by: somebigguy

According to a recent article in the American Free Press (March 24, 'GLOBALISTS 
GATHER IN BRUSSELS') at a recent Trilateral Commission meeting, members of the 
government and the corporate elite have come up with an innovative solution to 
the global warming problem. With all the resources available to this group of 
individuals; government studies, climate reports, and taxpayer dollars; we can 
all rest assured that the most effective and informed decision was made. What is
this wonderful, radical solution that will adequately deal with the threat of 
global warming? Another tax of course.

And not just any tax, we are talking about a whopping one dollar per gallon 
gasoline tax as "penance" for causing pollution. Apparently these are the kinds 
of solutions being recommended at these super secret Trilateral Commission 
meetings by the ultra wealthy and former heads of the Central Intelligence 
Agency. But wait, the Trilateral Commission is a committee of private citizens 
from North America, Japan, and Europe isn't it? Who are they to be pushing 
additional taxation on the average taxpayer?

The terminology used at this meeting is also suspect. The fact that this tax 
should be imposed as "penance" should raise a few eyebrows. Penance? Like 
punishment or discipline? This suggests that this one dollar per gallon tax is 
simply reparations and not toward any effort to clean up the environment. So 
where will all this additional revenue go? Will any of it at all go to the 
environment? If so, who will police this new revenue stream? Can we trust a 
government with this huge windfall when it has shown such little respect for our
hard earned tax dollars in the past?

So as usual the solution to this problem, like every other problem the 
government has to deal with, is to increase taxes. Problem, reaction, solution. 
But surely this private group of elites doesn¹t have the power to lobby for such
a tax, do they? Let¹s dig a little deeper.

According to the same American Free Press article, back in 1991 at a meeting in 
Tokyo, the Trilateral Commission had called for a 10 cent increase in gasoline 
taxes. The Washington Post, who was in attendance, immediately followed up with 
an editorial on the topic the very next day. Would this pattern repeat itself 
this time? A quick search for "Carbon Tax" on the Washington Post website 
returns several results including two published on April 1; one entitled "Tax on
Carbon Emissions Gains Support" and another entitled "We Can Get Out of These 
Ruts" which specifically mentions a dollar per gallon gasoline tax, but makes no
reference to the Trilateral Commission. Are we to believe that both parties 
arrived at the exact same conclusion independently? This whole thing reeks of 
industry and media collusion, no big surprise considering the fact that the 
Washington Post attends all Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg meetings.

So it appears the writing is on the wall, get ready for a dollar per gallon 
carbon tax, another windfall for the powers that be. However, the phrase "carbon
tax" sounds vaguely familiar, perhaps something else is going on here. Documents
from the "North American Forum" which took place in September 2006 in Banff, 
Alberta have recently been released under Freedom of Information Act and may 
shed some light on the subject.

For those who are unaware (which is no big surprise due to the media's 
reluctance to cover the topic), the so called Security and Prosperity Plan of 
North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 by the leaders of Canada, the 
U.S., and Mexico in an effort to "increase security" and "enhance Prosperity" 
between the three nations through "greater cooperation and information sharing".
More loosely known as the North American Union or NAFTA's big brother, the SPP 
has enjoyed relative anonymity in the media as it seeks to integrate the 
governmental, economic, and defense policies among others of the three North 
American countries.

Getting back to the North American Forum meeting in Banff, notes from the 
meeting make the statement that there is "significant interest" in climate 
change, a fact which can be leveraged to impose a carbon tax. This document goes
on to state that the infrastructure of the North American Union should be 
implemented in secret, essentially "Evolution by Stealth". Wait a minute, this 
is supposed to be government by, of, and for the people, there was never any 
mention of stealth.

So in summary, we have the Washington Post publicly pushing for a carbon tax on 
behalf of the Trilateral Commission, and we have the SPP operating in relative 
obscurity thanks in no small part to the media's willingness to look the other 
way, privately pushing for a carbon tax to help fund the infrastructure of the 
forthcoming North American Union. Moreover, we suddenly have the unprecedented 
consensus between the media and all political parties, spearheaded by a former 
government official, regarding the threat of global warming, an issue that has 
only been ignored, obfuscated, and ostracized by politicians and the media in 
the past. Based on all of this, one can't help but ask the question; is the 
sudden Global Warming hysteria fueled by politicians and the media really an 
effort by the corporate elite to impose a carbon tax to fund the North American 

Should we be concerned about the fact that the North American Union is being 
implemented in secret, without consulting congress or the taxpayer? Should we be
concerned about our own sovereignty? Is this plan and the shady implementation 
of it even legal? Lets look a little further into the implications of such an 
agreement. The Banff North American Forum documents state on more than one 
occasion of the need to narrow the gap between the average Mexican income and 
its northern neighbours and that this might be the single most important issue 
on the North American Agenda. The question is how will they do it? And how much 
will the average Canadian and American incomes suffer?

One of the methods for achieving parity of North American income levels, 
according to the documents, involved yearly cash infusions of 10 billion dollars
compliments of North American taxpayers for a ten year period in order to set up
a North American Investment Fund to be doled out as grants for setting up 
infrastructure and communications services into Mexico. While this scenario may 
sound all warm and fuzzy to the contractors who will probably be awarded no-bid 
contracts to do the work, I have a problem with making a ten year investment 
designed solely to lower my income levels to be more compatible with my Mexican 
counterparts. Furthermore, the Banff documents recommend that this fund be 
managed by the World Bank. The World Bank? Just who exactly will be managing my 
money and in extension, the implementation of the North American Union?

The current president of the World Bank is a fellow by the name of Paul 
Wolfowitz. That¹s right, the same Paul Wolfowitz who served as Secretary of 
Defense under George W. Bush and who is also a "prominent architect" of the 
foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration known as the Bush Doctrine, 
which resulted in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But the invasion of Iraq was a 
horrible mistake, nobody can deny that now, and it has nearly bankrupted the 
U.S. I'm not sure I want Wolfowitz managing my money, and why would the North 
American Forum even recommend such a thing? Shouldn't the government manage this
project and my money? Since when do corporations control tax dollars? This is 
sounding more and more like fascism. Am I working for and serving my country or 
am I working for and serving a giant corporation?

It gets worse; Paul Wolfowitz is also a member of the Project for a New American
Century, a neo-conservative research group which called for significant 
increases in defense spending in the 1990s as well as to "boldly and 
purposefully promote American principles abroad". This same group also famously 
stated that achieving its goals would be difficult in the absence of some 
"catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor" in its "Rebuilding 
America's Defenses" document released in September of 2000. Unfortunately the 
9/11 attacks occurred one year later and the PNAC group have seen their plan 
come to fruition.

Convenient timing aside, it is somewhat disheartening to see statements like 
those of Robert Pastor, a leading intellectual force in the move to create a 
European Union style North American Community, who stated that a new 9/11 crisis
could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. I am not liking 
this one bit, it appears that the groundwork for a North American Union is being
secretly architected, allowing it to be swiftly implemented as circumstances (or
terrorist attacks) dictate. Once again, problem, reaction, solution.

Numerous other interesting statements can be found in the Banff documents, 
including a question as to whether or not a North American Passport should be 
imposed to facilitate travel within the three countries. Wait a minute, I 
thought that increased passport requirements were required to secure our borders
and to combat terrorism. And yet this requirement fits in nicely with the secret
plan to implement a North American Union, how convenient. Evolution by stealth. 
It might be time to ask those that are secretly meeting to integrate Canada, the
U.S., and Mexico to slow down and consult the taxpaying citizens of each of 
those countries for their opinions on the subject. And why not inform congress 
of the plan as well?

Contact your member of congress, contact the media, and demand open discussion 
on the subject of the North American Union, and if you don't like what you hear,
demand that its implementation be halted. Educate yourselves on the topic, this 
article has only scratched the surface. There are detailed plans to tear down 
borders, integrate emergency response and military, and to implement one common 
North American currency. For those who may believe the North American Union will
be good for the country, the Banff documents themselves state that Globalism has
caused vast imbalances of wealth in Mexico and that wealth and income tend to be
concentrated in the hands of conspicuous elites. So why would they continue down
this road toward a North American Union and an eventual World Government?

The North American Union is often called NAFTA's big brother, examples of abuses
of power in the NAFTA agreement include NAFTA's proportionality clause, which 
states that Canada must continue exporting the same proportion of oil and gas as
in the previous three years, even if Canadians are freezing in the dark. With 
this kind of misuse, what surprises will NAFTA's big brother have for us? It is 
time to wrestle the control of our country and our futures away from the corrupt
politicians and the elites whose only concern is cheap labour and increased 
corporate profits, none of which are good for any of us.



- Trilateral Commission:

- Trilateral Meeting in Brussels:

- Washington Post Gasoline tax Mar 25:

- Washington Post Carbon Tax April 1:

- North American Forum FOI Request:

- Official SPP website:

- Climate Change/Carbon Tax:, page 5

- Evolution By Stealth:,Page 9

- Gap in income must be narrowed significantly:,Page 11

- Narrowing the gap in income may be the single most important issue:, Page 28

- $10 billion per year for a decade:, Page 28

- World Bank approves Wolfowitz as the next president of the 184-nation 
development bank:

- World Bank President Paul D Wolfowitz:

- Wolfowitz serving as U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense reporting to U.S. 
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld:

- Wolfowitz on PNAC:

- New Pearl Harbor:

- Robert Pastor, new 9/11 crisis could be the catalyst to merge the U.S., Mexico
and Canada:

- North American Passport:, Page 12

- Conspicuous elites, vast imbalances of wealth:, Page 18

- The Amero:

- NAFTA Proportionality clause:

Escaping the Matrix website:  
cyberjournal website:             
Community Democracy Framework:
Subscribe cyberjournal list:            •••@••.•••  (send 
blank message)
Posting archives:                      
Moderator:                                         •••@••.•••  (comments