Must Read: Palast on The Secret American Competitiveness Council Meeting

[JDPriestly]

This April 21, 2008 article has already been posted, but since I missed it, I figure others may have too. Her it is (again?). DUers, this is a must-read. This puts the Hillary/Obama struggle in perspective.
***

While you Democrats are pounding each other to a pulp in Pennsylvania, the President has snuck back down to New Orleans for a meeting of the NAFTA Three: the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico.

You’re not supposed to know that – for two reasons:
First, the summit planned for the N.O. two years back was meant to showcase the rebuilt Big Easy, a monument to can-do Bush-o-nomics. Well, it is a monument to Bush’s leadership: The city still looks like Dresden 1946, with over half the original residents living in toxic trailers or wandering lost and broke in America.

The second reason Bush has kept this major summit a virtual secret is its real agenda - and the real agenda-makers. The names and faces of the guys who called the meeting must remain as far out of camera range as possible: The North American Competitiveness Council.

. . . .

http://www.gregpalast.com/jose-can-you-see-bush%e2%80%99s-trojan-taco/#more-1999

As always, I ask, where's Edwards. He was the only candidate I trusted on this issue. He was the oly candidate who seemed to really "get" this issue.

[acmavm]

1. Oh yeah, read about this before. And since I first read this article I've been

monitoring the MSM to see what they had to say about the real reasons behind this meeting in NO. And they sure as fuck didn't explain to the American people what it was all about. They didn't mention the fact that these three goons were in fact basically erasing the borders to our countries. In fact, there was no truth at all to their reporting.

But what does anyone expect? It was a give-away to corporate America and the 'ruling' classes of all three countries. At the expense of the lower and middle classes of all three countries, of course.

[PDJane]

2. It's a resources grab, particularly water.

[acmavm]

3. It's also a 'power grab'. Maybe even more so. They've already (according

to what I've read here)got the world's largest aquifer, the one down in Paraguay.

No, its money and power and control. They want to replicate the old Soviet Union. I wonder what they'll name it.

[Peace Patriot]

8. Leftist elected president of Paraguay last Sunday, ending 60 years of corrupt

U.S.-backed rule (including a long period of heinous dictatorship). Though he's been low-key about U.S.-Bushits, he opposes the U.S. air base in Paraguay, and, like all of the many new leftist countries, will stick up for Paraguay's sovereignty. Paraguay gets much of its revenue from hydroelectric power (its water), and the new President, Fernando Lugo (a former bishop, known as the "bishop of the poor") is already pressuring Brazil to change the unfair contracts that give Brazil's too much of the profits, and Paraguay too little. If the Bushits actually bought 100,000 acres on South America's major aquifer, in Paraguay (a rumor I have not seen any confirmation of), Lugo, will not like it at all, and will resist their plans. Also, one of the major issues he ran on was land reform. Most Paraguayans are extremely poor; a few rich people own all the land. Lugo will surely oppose rich Bushits buying up so much of Paraguay's land.

Local control of resources--and use of resources to benefit the poor majority--is THE issue driving the awesome, peaceful, democratic, leftist revolution that has swept South America. South Americans are fighting back against the grab of their resources with the strongest weapon on earth: their vote. Transparent elections. Grass roots organization. Think big! Those are the three lessons for us, which have worked well in South America. Leftist governments now in Paraguay (of all places!), Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Nicaragua, and a new progressive government in Guatemala (their first). Next election cycle will probably see Peru go leftist (now run by corrupt "free tradists").

In South America, that leaves only fascist, totally awful Colombia (recipient of $5.5 BILLION in Bush/U.S. military aid--our tax dollars--through Bushite fingers), but I have the feeling that Bush's boy Uribe isn't going to last much longer. 60 of his cohorts in the legislature under investigation for ties to rightwing paramilitary death squads; his cousin just arrested for it, and Uribe himself now under investigation--they've been carrying out murders of union leaders and others; that's why the Colombian "free trade" deal is in such trouble in Congress; Uribe is now an obstacle to that deal--not that I want to see it passed, but this may mean Uribe's demise, which will certainly be a positive for the region. The other countries (all the leftists) are working on a peace settlement of Colombia's 40+ year civil war (Colombian fascists' war on the poor). They badly need a new government.

Mexico almost elected a leftist last time round. He lost by only 0.05% of the vote, in what was probably a stolen election. Bush, Calderon trying to ram something through that at least 50%--and probably 60% or more--of the Mexican people oppose. I know Bush wants privatization of Mexico's oil. No surprise they're keeping their nefarious schemes a secret. The result may well be election of a leftist government in Mexico. That has been the pattern throughout South America--corrupt, U.S.-dominated "free trade," vast impoverishment and displacement, then they elect leftists, re-nationalize the resources, and start talking about an OAS and a Common Market without the U.S. as a member. "Free trade" out. U.S. out. "War on drugs" out. Regional integration; self-determination. South America is moving seriously in this direction. Central America is next.

[panAmerican]

10. wall-to-wall election cvrg = suppression of news of *'s power grab

This is why I hate when the media seizes on a story, ANY story, and sensationalizes it. They are covering for their dictatorial pals.

[mopinko]

5. great lakes water?

both sides have guarded it jealously. ??

[Donnachaidh]

4. think *either Dem candidate will STOP this? Better think again.

We're well and truly screwed if ANY of them get into the White House. Only John Edwards would have put a halt to this nonsense.

[SammyWinstonJack]

9. So many reason why Edwards WASN'T allowed to stay in the race, wasn't there?

x( We were played and yes we are well and truly screwed! And some won't wake up until it's way too late. x(

[gateley]

6. I've had my tinfoil hat firmly in place

for a while on this subject. Most people start with the eye rolling when I bring it up.

I remember seeing a woman - regular citizen - from England speaking about this happening when the EU thing was going down. On the surface, of course, it sounded ideal - let's all work together, have one currency. They didn't quite get that they would also be losing their sovereignty. That someone in Belgium (is that where it is?) would be the final decider for all things EU.

I don't understand why our representatives are allowing this to happen.

It's like Naomi Wolf's parallels to what transpired in Germany -- we just need to look to Europe to see the next step here.

It's really distressing to me that so many people I viewed as whack jobs -- are turning out to be right in their predictions.

And yet, I find myself going over and over "well, yeah, they've done this dastardly thing, but surely they won't ________" But they do.

:grr:

[Elspeth]

7. This makes the most sense:

"There will be other anti-SPP protesters in New Orleans as well, from America’s populist Right. They are concerned that the Summit is worse than the “NAFTA on steroids” that Barlow fears. The populists see in the SPP a nascent “North American Union,” and the elimination of the good old US of A.

They’re wrong, of course. The USA was eliminated years ago, at least economically. The globalizers, the Competitiveness Council members, are a multinational crew, with one shared set of country clubs, beach homes, art collections, union busters and lobbyists knowing no borders."

[snot]

11. K&R'd

[Joanne98]

12. Very important.

[Richard Steele]

13. K&R

[Karenina]

14. ttt...

[malaise]

15. So was McSameasBush at that meeting? n/t

[bluesmail]

16. Can Corporations get any more Unpatriotic?

Taxes? That's for our servants to pay. :mad: