Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Spingola
Articles:

Personal
Responsibility
& Conscience

Welcome to America, All Trespassers Will be Rewarded

 

More
Spingola
Articles:

 

Grants Pass

 

 

 

 

 

ECONOMIC WOES, A CONSEQUENCE OF FREE TRADE
PART 1 of 2

 

Deanna Spingola
October 9, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

The abolition of nationalism and borders under the guise of the free trade has been the ultimate Illuminati objective since the late 1700s, notably illustrated by Aaron H. Palmer who had a law office on Wall Street in the first half of the 19th century. He catered to individuals interested in transnational business and managed their commerce and paperwork with the European bankers who advocated trade. By February 1837 when the bankers and politicians shrunk the U.S. credit market, Palmer already had a working relationship with N M Rothschild & Sons, located in the City of London. Palmer supplied the Rothschilds with an account of all the financial failures, as many as 280, in the months just before the final crash.[1]

The products of the labor of its citizens determine a nation’s prosperity. A brisk manufacturing base is essential, augmented by the service industry. Nationalists believe in reasonable tariffs that protect the nation’s industry. Free trade is detrimental to a nation’s wealth. So-called “conservatives,” those Republican “nationalists” who claim to put the U.S. first have promoted and participated, along with the Democrats, in the legislation of all of the nation’s free trade agreements. One cannot claim to cherish both sovereignty and accept free trade, through “multinational trade organizations and global financial conglomerates.” Marx, a mouthpiece minion for the elite, advocated both the income tax and free trade. He said of free trade, “it breaks up old nationalities” and eliminates the “bourgeoisie” (small businessmen).[2] Free trade functions to equalize the masses while elevating the elite and their acquiescent political devotees.

President Woodrow Wilson, advocating the elite’s agenda, promoted the League of Nations as a global forum for the settlement of territorial disputes by arbitration, along with the power of aggressive military enforcement or through less aggressive sanctions and free global trade, as elucidated in his Fourteen Points, “equality of trade” and “removal ... of all economic barriers.”[3] On December 23, 1913, certain members of Congress instituted the Federal Reserve, a vital step to the ultimate globalization of currency. The elite established tax-free foundations to escape the income tax trap they set for the rest of American society. In October 1913, B'nai B'rith established the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) possibly to counter criticism of many of the individuals responsible for the Federal Reserve.

Proponents of the New World Order, the banker’s ultimate political monopoly, want the world’s citizens to abandon political and cultural nationalism in favor of internationalism. U.S. politicians, through their machinations, have rejected (in our behalf) the nationalism once espoused by Thomas Jefferson and others. Nations lose their self-sufficiency and independence through external military action and/or through the actions of corrupt political leaders. In the U.S. these are often the prominent leaders of each political party who dictate partisan policy which includes the decision to wage war. Banker-funded warfare opens a nation to free trade. After warfare, war-torn, devastated nations, no longer able to meet their own needs, must depend on other nations to supply essential needs – food, clothing and supplies to reconstruct the bombed-out infrastructure.

Swiss business journalist and author Gian Trepp said “War, a place where moneymen can gather, because money is stronger than nationalism. Even during the war the moneymen of different nations needed to keep in touch because when the war stops, you have to rebuild and you need free trade.”[4] Globalists have vilified the word “nationalist” in their battle to subtly convince us to accept world governance, a goal they hope to impose by 2025, according to their most recent 2010 publication, Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Juncture.

Our current economic woes began long before the elites installed Obama, their current presidential puppet to further implement global governance. By 1980, Dr. Mordechai E. Kreinin, Professor of Economics, along with Michael G. Plummer, an economics professor at Johns Hopkins University, evaluated the idea of North American economic integration. Kreinin, still pushing internationalism through free trade, compiled Building a Partnership, the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement, a series of papers presented by like-minded academics during the September 1998 conference at Michigan State University. He is the past president of the International Trade and Finance Association and has advised the UN, the State Department and the Commerce Department regarding trade relations.


Advertisement

In accordance with the exponents of internationalism, officials began negotiating the NAFTA in 1986 when Reagan was president. NAFTA was formally signed on December 17, 1992 under President George H.W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas. Bush had lost the November 1992 election and left the job of getting congressional approval of the agreement to his successor, Bill Clinton and his vice president, longtime elite internationalist, Albert Gore.

On July 18, 1993 Henry Kissinger (CFR, TC) allegedly wrote in The Los Angeles Times about NAFTA, “What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system…a first step toward a new world order.”

Gore approached Republican House Minority Whip (1989–1995), Newt Gingrich, just another internationalist still masquerading as a constitutionalist. He promised he could extract 132 votes for NAFTA, a treaty that author Ian Fletcher refers to as “a veritable case study in failure.”[5] Congressional bribery just for NAFTA, known as “pork barrel promises” totaled $50 billion, paid by the U.S. taxpayers. NAFTA cost the Democrats control of the House and Senate in 1994. Gingrich then became Speaker of the House in 1995. Voters automatically punish the party in power for the treasonous acts committed under their jurisdiction when in fact, congressional members of both parties act in concert. By 1997, due to NAFTA, U.S. job losses amounted to about 394,835, mostly women, Blacks and Hispanics. The figure increased to 600,000 by January 1, 1999. Wages in Mexico sank by 29%. Clinton and Gore, like typical politicians, engaged in orchestrated opposition. At the 1997 AFL-CIO Pittsburgh Convention, Clinton was pro-NAFTA, while Gore feigned an anti-NAFTA stance. This charade won the AFL-CIO’s endorsement of Gore in the 2000 elections.[6]

Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gotari had endorsed the NAFTA concept in 1990, making it a political possibility. The Mexican public was the treaty’s most formidable obstacle as it had a history of distancing itself from its northern neighbor. U.S. labor unions were very vocal about their opposition and their intent to retaliate against all legislators who voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. Those who supported the treaty included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. It passed the Senate by a vote of 61-38. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.[7] NAFTA added Mexico to the prior treaty, the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1988. NAFTA eliminated tariffs and the majority of non-tariff prohibitions between the three countries. Additionally, investors in the three countries were to enjoy the same treatment as domestic investors.[8]

NAFTA, promoted as a strategy to reduce US trade deficits, actually increased those deficits. In 1993, we had a $1.6 billion surplus in our trade with Mexico but by 2007, we had a $74.8 billion deficit. In 1994 we had an $8.1 billion yearly deficit with Canada, probably due to our oil importation despite our own adequate oil supply. NAFTA cost 525,000 US jobs between 1994 and 2002. Some figures state the total of jobs lost at 766,000, primarily among the non-college-educated population – the producers in the manufacturing segment. Mexico, as a US trading partner, is too poor, to be an export market for American goods.[9]

Pat Buchanan, referring to NAFTA, wrote, “Two years after NAFTA, the predictions of its opponents had all come true. The U.S. trade surplus with Mexico had vanished; a trade deficit of $15 billion had opened up. Trucks heading north out of Mexico were hauling more and more manufactured goods, while those going south carried machinery and equipment for the new factories going up, pointing to endless and deepening U.S. trade deficits. By 1997, 3,300 maquiladora factories were operating, employing 800,000 Mexican workers in jobs that not long ago would have gone to Americans.”[10]

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Over 80% of the American population opposed NAFTA. Despite massive objections against Trade Agreements, both Democrats and Republicans habitually cater to the banks and corporations. George H. W. Bush (CFR, TC) and George W. Bush personally promoted NAFTA. It weakened U.S. and Canadian environmental laws and increased the misery in Mexico and ultimately, in addition to faulty currency policies and manipulations, contributed to the crash of the peso, further impoverishing the regular citizens.[11] For part two click below.

Click here for part -----> 2,

Footnotes:

1, There is no Need for Anyone to go to America: Commercial Correspondence and Nineteenth Century Globalization from Papers found by Jessica Lepler, Assistant Professor of American History at the University of New Hampshire, during research into the 1837 financial crisis in the US.
2, The Judas Goats, the Enemy Within by Michael Collins Piper, American Free Press, Washington, DC, 2006, p. 30
3, Rockefeller Internationalism by Will Banyan, Part 1, Nexus Magazine Volume 10 - Number 3, (April-May 2003)
4, Hitler’s Secret Bankers, the Myth of Swiss Neutrality During the Holocaust by Adam LeBor, Birch Lane Press, New York, 1997, p. 73
5, Free Trade Doesn’t Work, What Should Replace It and Why by Ian Fletcher, U.S. Business & Industry Council, Washington, DC, 2010, pp. 158-159
6, Al Gore: A User’s Manual by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Verso 2000, pp. 160-171
7, Organized Labor’s Campaign Contributions after the NAFTA Vote: Rhetoric or Retribution? by Gretchen Anne Phillips and Edward Tower, p. 3
8, NAFTA, GATT Uruguay Round, and Fast Track 1998: a Brief Legislative History, Institute for International Economics, www.iie.com, p. 1
9, Free Trade Doesn’t Work, What Should Replace It and Why by Ian Fletcher, U.S. Business & Industry Council, Washington, DC, 2010, pp. 158-159
10, The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to the Gods of the Global Economy by Patrick J. Buchanan, Little, Brown, New York, p. 269
11, Al Gore: A User’s Manual by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Verso 2000, pp. 160-171
12, Texas and Mexico, Immediate Impact of the Mexican Crisis.
13, NAFTA and the Peso Collapse, Not Just a Coincidence by Robert A. Blecker, Economic Policy Institute, Briefing Paper.
14, Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Global Research, Center for Research on Globalization, Montreal, Quebec, 2007, pp. 216-247
15, Ibid, p. 217
16, Free Trade Doesn’t Work, What Should Replace It and Why by Ian Fletcher, U.S. Business & Industry Council, Washington, DC, 2010, pp. 20-21. This is a book that everyone interested in so-called free trade should read.
17, Ibid, pp. 23-24, 25
18, Ibid, pp. 48-49
19, Motorola's Cell-Phone Stumble in China, Telecom August 28, 2008
20, Robert Zoellick
21, Economic Policy Institute Briefing Paper, Washington, DC, Political Arithmetic of the NAFTA Vote by Lawrence Mishel and Ruy A. Teixeira, p. 12
22, Reuters, A small group of U.S. lawmakers unveiled legislation on Thursday to withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement in the latest sign of congressional disillusionment with free-trade deals.
23, Ibid
24, Free Trade Doesn’t Work, What Should Replace It and Why by Ian Fletcher

2010 Deanna Spingola - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale


Deanna Spingola has authored two books on quilt design, an activity that required methodical analysis and mathematical exactness. She has also engaged in extensive family history research through which she acquired an understanding of public and private records and an appreciation for accurate documentation and history. An understanding of our past is essential to our comprehension of contemporary events. She Investigates government and corporate corruption as it relates to the faltering liberties of American citizens and the war-targeted population of other countries. She is not afraid to address controversial issues. She is the author of When the Power Elite Rules, a Study in Imperialism, Genocide and Emancipation.

web site: www.spingola.com

email: deanna@spingola.com


 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

President Woodrow Wilson, advocating the elite’s agenda, promoted the League of Nations as a global forum for the settlement of territorial disputes by arbitration, along with the power of aggressive military enforcement or through less aggressive sanctions and free global trade...

 

 

Camp Fema