"Eventually our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union, with the goal of attending to future themes [such as] the future prosperity of North America, and the movement of capital, goods, services, and persons."

—Mexican President Vicente Fox in a candid address before the "Club XXI" at the Hotel Eurobuilding in Madrid, Spain, May 16, 2002

But Fox sees a large impediment to his vision: "what I dare to call the Anglo-Saxon prejudice against the establishment of supra-national organizations."

This vision of Vicente Fox is shared by many within the American Establishment (in fact, it is driven from behind the scenes by that Establishment, which makes it so dangerous – see Internationalism/Globalism). No less a figure than the editor of The Wall Street Journal has embraced the idea of a EU for the Americas:

"Reformist Mexican President Vicente Fox raises eyebrows with his suggestion that over a decade or two Nafta should evolve into something like the European Union, with open borders for not only goods and investment but also people. He can rest assured that there is one voice north of the Rio Grande that supports his vision. To wit, this newspaper...."

—Robert L. Bartley, July 2, 2002 editorial:
"Open NAFTA Borders? Why Not?"

These far-reaching visions of an evolving FTAA are much more than the revolutionary musings of the editor of a major American newspaper or of a Mexican President billed as reformist. In less public forums, FTAA advocates fully admit that the FTAA is intended to follow in the footsteps of the EU.

As with the EU, national borders will become like state borders. There will be no longer be an immigration problem because there will be no more immigration – only migration of populations at will.

Moreover, if the globalist plans for the FTAA succeed, the U.S. will soon be enmeshed in the same kind of supranational, regional government that is now swallowing the formerly independent nations of the European Union.

Judging from the following that Fidel Castro has among the regimes to the south, the make-up of such a regional government in this hemisphere would undoubtedly be hostile to American interests and to the American middle class.

Two centuries ago, the United States separated from England in part over the issue of taxation without representation. The current plans for hemispheric integration would cancel that achievement. The envisioned regional government, fully socialist in inclination, would doubtless covet the wealth of individual Americans who would lack any meaningful representation in the emerging government or protection against its assumption of authority. Americans would no longer control their own property or have a significant voice in their own destiny. And they would give up the protection of the U.S. Bill of Rights and other American standards of justice.

Strong evidence that the FTAA planners view the emerging European Union as a model for this hemisphere is contained in Western Hemisphere Economic Integration, a study published in 1994 by the Institute for International Economics, with close ties to the Rockefeller-dominated organizations that are behind the FTAA. For an analysis of this study, refer to "One-Hemisphere Under the Fed" in the "Archives".

Actually, the American Insiders driving the FTAA are not mere copycat observers of the EU example. They were, in fact, the principal architects behind the drive for a united Europe. A few years ago, declassified government documents revealed that our own intelligence community had funded and directed the Euro-federalist movement in the fifties and sixties. (See "Global Tyranny ... Bloc by Bloc" in "Recommended reading," below.)

With the so-called Laeken Declaration in December of 2002, the Eurocrats raised the ante, calling for a year-long convention to draw up a European constitution. This convention, known formally as the Convention on the Future of Europe, was the culmination of a decades-long process of transferring sovereignty via treaty. So in 2003, the EU launched a constitutional convention to formally legalize and expand the EU’s powers and to administer the coup de grace to the lingering shreds of national sovereignty.

In a speech to members of the European Parliament, European Commission President Romano Prodi, speaking of the goals of the convention, warned that "only united can we put our own humanist stamp on globalisation and infuse it with Europe’s social values.... I am convinced that we need a Constitution to mark the birth of Europe as a political entity.... [The Union] is not an alliance between States or a federation. It is an advanced supranational democracy that needs to be strengthened."

Recommended reading:

The “New European Soviet” - The New American - September 6, 2004

The European Union is rapidly descending into totalitarianism. Under NAFTA and the proposed FTAA, U.S. policymakers have adopted the same socialist EU program.

Eurocrats vs. Freedom of the Press - The New American - July 12, 2004

Last March, investigative journalist Hans-Martin Tillack was awakened by the proverbial “midnight knock” on the door of his Brussels home. Belgian police, acting on the orders of the European Commission’s anti-fraud unit (known by its French acronym Olaf), confiscated 17 boxes of records, as well as his computer, cell phones, diary, bank statements and address book. Olaf had accused Tillack of bribing agency officials to obtain information used in a 2002 fraud exposé he published in the German magazine Stern.

Further reading in Archives

© 2006 http://www.stoptheftaa.org/ is a campaign of The John Birch Society • Privacy Policy