Introduce myself to the audience.
Begin with Clint's adventure in Helena last Monday.
Use scenario of people paying for postage and then being asked to pay
insurance that the postal service is rendered correctly - use that scenario to
talk about how we become lulled into complacency.
Then move into the NAU mechanism - THE LATE GREAT USA by Dr. Jerome Corsi
Start by stating regrets about Phyllis Schlafly, President of Eagle Forum.
Then read her blurb on the back of the book.
Blurb: "Dr. Corsi has 'connected the dots' between the Security
and Prosperity Partnership, the sale of toll roads and other infrastructure to
foreign companies, and proposals for a North American Union with open borders
between Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. The Late Great USA is an essential read
for anyone concerned about the future independence and sovereignty of the United
States." ~ Phyllis Schlafly.
So - the sovereignty of the United States of America is now at risk,
according to Ms Schlafly, Dr. Corsi, and Lou Dobbs. If the USA were to lose its
sovereignty by being assimilated into a North American Union, and if Montana has
given up its sovereignty to the USA, where will that leave Montanans? That's a
pretty good question, but the answer is not so good for those of us who still
value good old Americanism.
To get the proper perspective on the creation of a NAU, we only need to look
at the history of the European Union. It's creation was done by incremental
steps, although its perpetrators disguised it's beginnings as trade agreements.
Here are the high points -
On August 05, 1943, as a member of the National Liberation Committee of the
free French Government in Algiers, Jean Monnet (father of the EU),
stated: "There will be no peace in Europe if the States rebuild themselves on
the basis of national sovereignty.... The States of Europe must therefore form a
federation or a European entity that would make them into a common economic
On May 09, 1950, French Foreign Minister Robert Shuman announced the Shuman
Declaration - a plan to pool French and German coal and steel production, saying
that this economic plan would prevent further war between France and Germany. On
December 18, 1951, six European nations signed the Treaty of Paris, which
established the "European Coal and Steel Community". On March 25, 1957,
these six nations signed Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic
Community, known as the European Common Market. On March 25, 1957, the
European Atomic Energy Commission was created. On October 17, 1957, a European
Court of Justice was established to settle trade disputes. In 1960 the European
Free Trade Association was created. In 1965, the three already existing bodies
were merged under the European Economic Community. In 1968 the European Customs
Union was formed. In Brussels and Luxembourg, "working groups" were formed. In
1978, the European Council met in Brussels and established a European monetary
system based on a "European currency unit." In 1986 the Single European Act
modified the Treaty of Rome and set up a framework for a completely unified
European market. Gradually, we see, what began as a limited coal and steel
agreement between France and Germany evolved into a common market, a Customs
union, and the underpinnings of a European currency.
On February 07, 1992, the Treaty of the European Union was signed, forming a
full-fledged regional government. Over this process of time a professional
bureaucracy was formed. On January 01, 2002, the Euro was introduced and
traditional national currencies began to be phased out.
One last thing -
For Americans who do not grasp
the significance of the adoption of the euro by European Union countries,
consider how one American globalist describes it.
C. Fred Bergsten is a prominent and core
Trilateral Commission member and head of the Institute for International
Economics. On January 3, 1999, Bergsten wrote in the Washington Post
" Money traditionally has
been an integral element of national sovereignty ...and the decision by
Germany and France to give up their mark and franc ...represents the most
dramatic voluntary surrender of sovereignty in recorded history".
I am proposing that it is entirely possible that an agenda exists which is
largely kept from public awareness. That agenda is known to some of us, and many
more are waking up to it daily. The
publicly known pillars which support and mobilize the agenda include the CFR, the Trilateral Commission,
and the Bilderberg Group. One of the most powerful frontmen for that agenda is
Zbigniew Brzezinski. Mr. Brzezinski is one of President Obama's advisers. In
that role, Mr. Brzezinski's bosses expect Mr. Brzezinski to steer the
President's policy-making so that the White House carries forward their agenda.
It is exactly how Col. Edward M. House steered President Woodrow Wilson. It's
how Clark Clifford steered President Harry Truman. It's how Henry Kissinger
steered President Richard Nixon. It's how Zbigniew Brzezinski steered President
Jimmy Carter. And it's how Zbigniew Brzezinski shall steer President Barrack
Obama. Mr. Brzezinski is a long-time member and trustee at the CFR; he is a
co-founder (with David Rockefeller, in 1973) of the Trilateral Commission; and he is a
Bilderberg Group attendee. All of those groups are globalist spear-heads in the
drive to do away with nation-states by assimilation into a one-world government.
And those groups dominate the American media, the U.S. State Department,
academia, and, since 1976, the White House itself.
I'd like to show you how it works.
Briefly, let's look at Brzezinski in Brzezinski's own published words. I've
read some of these words to the Judiciary Committee in Helena, holding up the
book in which I found them, for the committee members to see plain as day, in
the 2007 legislative session. I think what I read from that had an effect. The
book is entitled Between Two Ages: America's Role In The Technetronic Age. From
that book, published in 1970, I read the following to the committee -
"The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty. ... In the
economic-technological field, some international cooperation has already been
achieved, but further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More
intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be
undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable
"The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled
society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by
traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous
surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files
containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files
will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, in Between Two Ages, 1970
But wait - the man has said more. At Mikhail Gorbachev's first State of the
World Forum in 1995, Brzezinski revealed: "We cannot leap into world
government through one quick step....The precondition for eventual and genuine
globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward
larger, more stable, more cooperative units."
The man sees nations as component parts of regions, and he sees the desired
regions as "cooperative units". This man is working in abstractions for the sake
of directing international affairs between presently-competing nation-states. I
could do an entire show just on the things this man has done and published. And
he is presently one of President Obama's advisers. Want to guess how many of
Brzezinski's Trilateral and CFR buddies are also in President Obama's cabinet?
From the August Review,
http://www.augustreview.com/ but specifically from this lnk off the main
page, here -
- we find the following list of Trilaterals in the new cabinet:
* Secretary of Treasury, Tim Geithner
* Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice
* National Security Advisor, Gen. James L. Jones
* Deputy National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon
* Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee, Paul Volker
* Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair
* Assistant Secretary of State, Asia & Pacific, Kurt M. Campbell
* Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg
* State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Haass
* State Department, Special Envoy, Dennis Ross
* State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Holbrooke
These are all known globalists, and they're all Trilateral Commission
So we've talked in the first segment about HJ-26 and Clint's encounter with
the statist Robyn Driscoll. And we've talked a little about the Trilateral
Commission and the CFR. Now let's talk about the SPP and the role it plays
in taking down America from within.
The European Coal and Steel Community which we noted earlier has a matching
phenomenon in America called NAFTA. As Jean Monnet guided the evolution of the
ECSC into a European Union, here in America one Professor Robert Pastor holds
the same vision, and he has called for a North American currency called "The
October 17, 2001 - CFR held a meeting in Atlanta Georgia titled "The Future
of North American Integration".
Close by showing why it is important that Clint's story becomes known
around the state, and why it is important that the Democrats on the Judiciary
Committee, the nasty nine, be held accountable for their role in squashing
~ ~ ~ Notes ~ ~ ~
Between Two Ages: America's Role in the
by Zbigniew Brzezinski; copyright 1970 by Zbigniew
Brzezinski; published 1970 by The Viking Press, Inc., 625 Madison Avenue, New
York, New York 10022; (I)SBN: 670-16041-5.
From the following link:
|The North American Union and the
By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
In order to bring about a North American Union (NAU), the public first
has to be conditioned to think of themselves as North Americans. In that
regard, Thomas Donohue (president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce)
on June 16, 2006 remarked that "for CEOs, North America is already a single
market, and business decisions are no longer made with a Mexico
strategy---or a Canada strategy---but, rather, with a North American
strategy....I think it's pretty clear now that it no longer makes sense to
talk about U.S. competitiveness and Mexican competitiveness---or, for that
matter, about the competitiveness of Canada. We are all in this
together---we, as North Americans."
Also relevant to this process is the publication of NORTH AMERICAN
INTEGRATION MONITOR since 2002 by the Center for Strategic and International
Very soon, CSIS also will publish (and has agreed to send me) their final
document on their "North American Future 2025 Project." The Project has "an
emphasis on regional integration," and the year 2025 A.D. was selected "on
the basis of the data presently available on overall global projections."
Seven closed-door roundtable sessions have been looking at the methodology
of global and North American projections, as well as labor mobility, energy,
the environment, security, competitiveness, and border infrastructure and
Zbigniew Brzezinski has been a CSIS counselor, and at Mikhail Gorbachev's
first State of the World Forum in 1995, Brzezinski revealed: "We cannot leap
into world government through one quick step....The precondition for
eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by
that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units." This is
why the CSIS Project has "an emphasis on regional integration." (Brzezinski
also described the regions that would be formed, that Israel and the
Palestinians would be part of a Middle Eastern region, how Communist China
would be brought into an Asian region, and that Iran would be part of a
Central Asian region which would have important oil and gas pipelines
At this point, it is worth remembering that in Stalin's January 1913 address
in Vienna, he advocated national loyalties becoming subservient to regions.
And 3 years later, Lenin in 1916 proclaimed: "The aim of socialism is not
only to abolish the present division of mankind into smaller states and
all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other,
but also to merge them."
You may recall that in Brzezinski's BETWEEN TWO AGES (1970), he praised
Marxism, and he claimed that "the nation-state is gradually yielding its
One aspect of American sovereignty that is being yielded is ownership of
American companies by Americans. In the first 9 months of 2007, 69 companies
in New England alone have been sold to foreign buyers. Nationally, the
French company Alcatel bought Lucent Technologies in the U.S. last year, and
in September 2007 announced it will be cutting thousands of jobs.
Relevant to this, Alan Tonelson (research fellow at the U.S. Business and
Industry Council) said foreign companies are "acquiring control over the
most dynamic pieces of the American economy, and they're acquiring control
over America's future." Also relevant to this was the assessment by Donald
Klepper-Smith (chief economist at DataCore Partners) regarding decisions
made overseas and how they would effect American workers. He opined: "It
raises some red flags and some real questions about our independence."
Part of the conditioning process to cause Americans to accept a NAU is the
role of past and present government officials explaining the alleged
economic benefits of such a union. For example, Harry Roegner in a letter
titled "An economic union would be beneficial" in THE GREENVILLE (South
Carolina) SUN (October 15, 2007) pointed out the large oil reserves of both
Canada and Mexico that would be useful to the U.S., as well as Mexico's
excess manpower who, as immigrants, would help support U.S. and Canadian
economic growth. Roegner was an adviser on foreign trade issues to the U.S.
Department of Commerce from 1984 to 1994, and in his letter said: "A North
American economic union would provide the free flow of capital and labor
across national borders needed to address many of the (aforementioned)
Often regional economic integration into some type of union is argued on the
basis of free trade. However, John Fonte (who had an office next to mine at
the U.S. Department of Education) of the Hudson Institute has explained that
the concept of regional economic arrangements or trading blocs actually is
contrary to free trade to an extent. For example, in a NAU, there would be
trading arrangements among the 3 nations which would limit the ability of
the U.S. to trade freely with nations outside the NAU trading bloc.
But hasn't President Bush recently said all this talk about a NAU is
nonsense? On August 21, 2007 at the concluding press conference for the
Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) in Montebello, Quebec, Fox News
reporter Bret Baier asked if the SPP is a prelude to a NAU similar to the
European Union (EU), and if there are plans to build some kind of
superhighway connecting all 3 countries. President Bush replied: "If you've
been in politics as long as I have, you get used to that kind of technique
where you lay out a conspiracy and then force people to try to prove it
The truth, of course, is that the U.S., Canada and Mexico are being
connected by 4 Trade Corridors. On November 20, 2007, Lt. Governor John
Harvard of Manitoba delivered a "Speech From The Throne," in which he
revealed: "Manitoba has been working with the Canadian government and state
governments in the U.S. to protect and enhance our access to key trade
markets. In response to U.S. border and security measures, Manitoba will
begin offering an enhanced driver's license as an affordable and secure form
of identification for travelers. The new license will be available in the
Fall of 2008. Manitoba is also taking a major role in the development of a
Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, connecting our northern Port of Churchill with
trade markets throughout the central United States and Mexico. To advance
the concept, an alliance has been built with business leaders and state and
city governments spanning the entire length of the Corridor. When fully
developed, the trade route will incorporate an 'in-land port' in Winnipeg
with pre-clearance for international shipping."
The SPP is also an important part of the power elite's plan for a
techno-feudal fascist world government because it is a "partnership." For
years, the American people and their leaders have been conditioned to accept
educational and other partnerships as solutions to their problems. For
example, city governments strapped for funds are approached by corporations
or their related private foundations with plans and funds to improve
education, which the city leaders are only too glad to accept. This
conditions the people eventually to accept government/corporate rule. This
is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world
government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control. In
this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become
government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable
to certain transnational corporations (controlled by the power elite) and
unfavorable to any possible competition to those select corporations.
So why did President Bush ridicule Bret Baier's question, especially since
there are already 47 Mexican Consulates across the U.S.? Lou Dobbs in his
CNN commentary "Beware the Lame Duck" (October 17, 2007) wrote: "Although
many conservatives refuse to accept the reality, George W. Bush is a
one-world neo-liberal who drove budget and trade deficits to record
heights....President Bush has pressed hard for the Security and Prosperity
Partnership, the first step toward a North American Union that will threaten
our sovereignty. The administration has permitted American businesses to
hire illegal aliens, encouraged the invasion of 12 million to 20 million
illegal aliens and has given Mexico and corporate America dominion over our
borders and our immigration policy....The assault on our national
sovereignty continues....The president is urging the Senate to act favorably
on our accession to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea....The treaty
will submit the United States to international tribunals largely adverse to
our interests, and dispute resolution mechanisms are stacked against the
United States....The treaty would undermine our national sovereignty and act
as a back door for global environmental activists to direct U.S. policy."
Fortunately, in Congress, House Concurrent Resolution 40 states: "Expressing
the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the
construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and
If I could have followed up Bret Baier's question with one of my own, here's
what I would have asked: "So, President Bush, will the massive 10-lane toll
road TransTexas Corridor funded by Cintra of Spain and to be built by Zachry
Construction of Texas come to a screeching halt at Oklahoma's border?" What
are all the vehicles supposed to do---merge all of a sudden into a small
road? I don't think so ! And by the way, Cintra is legally represented in
Texas by leading Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani's law firm
Bracewell & Giuliani, which also just happens to have an office in Dubai
(remember Dubai Ports was about to take over operation of a number of
America's largest ports) ! Perhaps before President Bush was too critical of
people warning about a NAU, he should have read what Mexico's President
Vicente Fox said May 16, 2002 at Club 21 in Madrid: "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" (or as
Gorbachev refers to the EU, the "European Soviet").
I would also have asked President Bush at the press conference why on
September 6, 2007 at 9pm did he open all U.S. highways to Mexican trucks?
Earlier in the day, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio said President Bush was "_ _ _ _
bent" on getting Mexican trucks in the U.S. by stealth. Currently, the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration website lists 10 Mexican
carriers that are approved to transport goods throughout the U.S., and
nearly 40 more Mexican carriers will soon join them on the list.
Will all Mexican truck drivers be stopped at the border to see if they can
read road signs in English, if they have criminal backgrounds, and how long
they already have been driving that day (U.S. law prohibits more than 10
consecutive hours)? I doubt it, since no more than 2% of Mexican trucks
entering the U.S. today are inspected ! Many of these trucks will be a
danger to Americans' safety, and could be used for smuggling drugs, illegal
aliens, and terrorists into the U.S.
Many countries deliberately release their criminal elements into the U.S.,
often coming across the Mexican border. And if the criminals are caught, our
federal government releases them into American society if their own
countries refuse to take them back. Our government knows how to solve this
problem (e.g., stop issuing visas to people from those countries), but has
refused to take such action most of the time. Ask yourself why our
government would release murderers, rapists, arsonists, and other criminals
into our society to commit violent crimes against us. Think about it !
Returning to Bret Baier's question to President Bush about the SPP being a
prelude to a NAU similar to the EU, what would we get if we became like the
EU, which has certain characteristics of fascism? Mrs. Kitty Werthmann (a
survivor of Hitler's reign and Soviet rule afterward) recently returned to
Europe and interviewed many senior citizens. They informed her they were
told conversion to the Euro would bring prosperity via free trade, lower
prices for goods, etc. In reality, though, their money was devalued greatly,
and they're now living on welfare and food stamps. Unemployment in Europe is
high while guest workers are brought in, and the people are angry.
In terms of what is planned for Americans relevant to the EU and the Euro,
Vicente Fox on CNN's "Larry King Live" show October 8, 2007 explained that
what he and President Bush agreed to "is a trade union for all the
Americas," and he suggested that eventually there would be a regional
currency. He made similar comments on the "Daily Show" the same day. Earlier
in 2007, Bolivian President Evo Morales proposed a single currency for all
South American nations.
Concerning North American nations, in June 1991, Dallas Federal Reserve
publication no. 9115, "Free Trade and the Peso" by Darryl McLeod and John
Welch, analyzed the potential for a single North American currency. In 1999,
former Canadian parliament member Herbert Grubel published "The Case for the
Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Union," giving 2010 as
the possible date for introducing the "amero" as the new North American
currency. And in the Atlanta Federal Reserve's ECONOMIC REVIEW (4th quarter,
2000), Michael Chriszt (director of the Reserve's Latin America Research
Group) wrote "Perspectives on a Potential North American Monetary Union" in
which one reads that "the idea of a single currency for NAFTA is on the
table." In July 2000, Vicente Fox had already proposed a North American
common market with a continental monetary policy.
More recently, David Dodge, Governor of the
of Canada, in May 2007 said that a common currency with the U.S. is
definitely possible. What will happen is the power elite will cause the
dollar to be devalued to the point where Americans reluctantly will accept
the amero. As Bob Chapman in his December 2006 newsletter, INTERNATIONAL
FORECASTER, said: "(The amero) will be presented to the American public as
the administration's solution for dollar recovery."
On June 14, 2007 BankIntroductions.com told their clients that in the next
10-20 years, as the global economy moves toward regional trading blocs, the
amero or "North American Monetary Unit" (NAMU) will be introduced. The power
elite's plan is to form regional unions with their own currencies and then
link them into a world government with one global currency. Relevant to
this, Reuters reporter Emmanuel Jarry on October 23, 2007 wrote "Sarkozy
(French President) Calls for Mediterranean Union Launch in 2008." And the
African Union's African Central Bank plans to mint the "Gold Mandela" as a
single African currency by 2010 (the date the NAU is supposed to form).
If you look at the top of the website for the Single Global Currency
Association (SGCA), there is a quote by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul
Volcker, saying: "A global economy requires a global currency." The SGCA "is
dedicated to the goal of implementing a single global currency by
2025...managed by a single international central bank." I have already
indicated that on the cover of THE ECONOMIST (June 9, 1988) is a picture of
"The Phoenix," a global currency suggested for implementation in 2018.
Whatever the date of the global currency's introduction, it will be
advertised as facilitating world trade, which the power elite will control.
This will be like in the days of Solomon when he fortified Gezer, Hazor and
Megiddo (the Har, or Mount, of Megiddo would be called Armageddon). Through
this fortification, he controlled the Via Maris and world trade, thereby
controlling the world of his day. The power elite today plans to do
likewise, but in a Biblical sense their plan will lead to the Battle of
© 2007 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved, Reprinted with Permission