The Conservative Beacon

Uniting the Conservative Movement

  • Categories

  • Archives

Part 1 of our Interview with Dr. Jerome Corsi

Posted by Joshua Price on October 18, 2007

Here is the first part of our interview with World Net Daily writer and conservative author, Dr. Jerome Corsi. Look for Part 2 on Monday, October 22.

Dr. Corsi has written extensively on the subjects of immigration and the assault on American sovereignty. There were plenty of more questions I wanted to ask Dr. Corsi and we will have him back on before long for a more in-depth discussion.

Price: We are joined by Dr. Jerome Corsi, a writer for World Net Daily and the author of several books including Unfit for Command, and his latest, The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada.

Dr. Corsi, thank you for taking time to visit with The Conservative Beacon.

Dr. Corsi: Josh, it’s a real honor and pleasure to be with you. Thank you.

Price: I want to start by asking if you would give us some background on your new book, The Late Great USA?

Dr. Corsi: I begin with the question-we’re six years into a War on Terror and yet we have not secured the borders with Mexico and Canada, and I think that demands an explanation-especially when we know that terrorists have come across the border. There’s hard proof of that in the case of Mahmoud Kourani who was in Dearborn, Michigan. He bribed Mexican consular officials in Beirut [inaudible] brought them across the border with Mexico. He was sending money back to Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, and he is in federal prison today.

It’s not a good enough explanation that President Bush forgot. I think things in politics that happen demand an explanation from a point of view that what happened was intended to happen.

The wide-open borders are explained by the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America, which President Bush entered into on March 23, 2005 at the end of summit meeting in Waco, Texas with Vicente Fox-then president of Mexico-and Paul Martin who was then prime minister of Canada.

The agreement appears not to have been written, or certainly not brought to Congress as a law or treaty; it appears to be mostly just a handshake, a wink, a nod and a press conference. But out of the informal agreement we get the website created and some twenty working groups, which is a term from the European Union of bureaucrats from the three countries meeting together in closed-door sessions integrating and harmonizing our laws with Mexico and Canada.

On page 81 of the book, I got the organizational chart of the SPP working groups from a Freedom of Information Act request-with all of the little boxes, The North American Transportation working group, The North American Environmental working group, The North American Health working group. Each of the three countries report up to three cabinet officers: The United States Secretary of State Rice, Chertoff at Homeland Security, Gutierrez at Commerce. And then into the White House, the reporting goes into the Homeland Security Council, National Security Council, and finally, up to the Office of the President. There’s a similar structure in Canada and Mexico.

Now this organizational chart is not available anywhere at I can’t find it published anywhere by the government. You know, the government has a little myth vs. facts section at that says this is just a dialogue for competitiveness, global economy with three neighboring countries talking together. Well an organizational chart that is formal is a lot more than a dialogue-in a dialogue you pick up your phone and say hello to your neighbor. In a shadow government, which I’m maintaining this is, you produce an organizational chart with formal meetings and you decline to show it to the public in an open fashion.

I’m arguing that the Security and Prosperity Partnership is not only a “wink-wink” agreement to keep the borders open with Mexico and Canada, but that it’s the first step in a shadow government, coup d’etat to create a North American Union that will ultimately transplant the supremacy and security, and the prosperity of the United States of America.

Price: You make the point in a lot of your writing that European Union was not created overnight. It was created through a series of steps. You suggest that we may be experiencing a similar pattern here. Can elaborate on that?

Dr. Corsi: First of all, the EU was a stealth plan. That’s now been fully documented. I point to Christopher Booker and Richard North’s book The Great Deception. They outline, very carefully, how the intellectual elite and the multinational corporations in Europe began with a plan to enter into trade agreements that they knew would necessitate political arrangements, judicial structures and new laws at a regional level to solve trade disputes.

So you have some intellectual elite like Jean Monnet-we have his biography, which he wrote before he died, and in one of the last sentences in that biography he makes it clear that he believed even the European community was transitional to a one world government, which is where Jean Monnet was always headed. Monnet also makes clear that his intent from the very beginning of this fifty year project, beginning in 1957 with the coal and steel agreement-the Treaty of Rome-to get sovereignty out of the hands of the Germans. As a Frenchman, Monnet felt that Germany had won two World Wars, which France probably would have lost both if it had not been for the intervention and assistance from the United States-he did not want Germany rising up with another army.

If you start with coal and steel being under European control, in the beginning it would be harder for German’s nationalism to arise with another armed force.

The series of agreements that Europe was lead down were incremental. They accomplished some fait accomlis. They opened the borders to populations mixing. Then the populations did move for jobs. They created a European common market-the European Customs Union. They created various institutions. Through various times, when the public was allowed to vote, the fait accompli had already been accomplished. By the time the treaty in Maastricht was put into the European Union, Europe was so far down this road of integration it was hard to imagine how couldn’t codify these final steps of European parliament, European courts, European central agencies. By 2002 all the countries in Europe were beginning to adopt the euro and abandon their national currency.

So here in the United States we’re beginning with NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). We’re now moving down-you know, Vicente Fox talked about NAFTA Plus in 2000 and 2001. We’re formally into the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, again, with the slippery slope, incremental road. Our elite are talking about building a North American community-you’ve got the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) writing reports of that nature. Robert Pastor, one of the co-vice chairs of that CFR report, teacher at American University and writing for ten years, about a North American community. Pastor’s book is even titled Toward a North American Community, which I believe he published in 2003.

The institutions they’re calling for are an investment fund to help Mexico develop, more parliamentary structures-which would advance the parliamentary groups we already have meeting separately with Mexico and Canada, more court structures, and Robert Pastor very clearly identifies in his book that he endorses the concept of the amero-a common currency-and a central North American bank to administer the amero, a concept which was first developed and articulated by Herbert Grubel, a Canadian economist at the Fraser Institute. Since our elite are beginning to name our regional currency, we better take this incremental plan very seriously.

I also point to the fact that the incrementalism is happening. I mean, we now have–even the government’s low ball estimate of 12 million illegal aliens-the Bush Administration admits we’ve got 10% of Mexico’s population living in the United States. I didn’t vote to allow 10% of Mexico’s population in the United States.

The American public voted to create a fence. The Secure Fence Act was signed in October of 2006, and now Duncan Hunter is writing a letter to the president saying that only 18 miles of that fence has been built. I guess it was just a public relations move by the Republicans to try to impress voters prior to the November 2006 elections.

We’ve got 47 consular offices here to protect the civil rights of these Mexican nationals, and now even the president, in the case of this rapist, soddomist, murderer Jose Medellin on death row saying that-arguing besides Medellin’s lawyer arm and arm-to the Supreme Court that we ought to have the International Court of Justice at The Hague, a U.N. court, and the Mexican law through Mexican councils, trump Texas criminal law and Medellin ought to be released, or at least have a new trial-they’re probably going to throw out his confession and would end up maybe releasing him-all of this because we didn’t contact the Mexican council first when he was apprehended. The President of the United States is now arguing, again, the slippery slope of eliminating sovereignty-that we ought to place our states’ criminal courts under international law and subservient to the Mexican councils. I didn’t vote for that to happen.

That’s how people like Michael Medved ridicule this idea-they’re nonresponsive because Michael Medved says (paraphrasing), “Well you would have to have a vote of the people to change the Constitution to go with the North American Union.” No, not until the North American Union was already de facto in place, through a series of either irresponsible acts by the President, Congress-not doing their duty-or consciously the President, having agreed to a Security and Prosperity Partnership plan that he knew would end up in an amero and a North American Union, and he just didn’t have the courage to tell the people he was on that traitorous path.

Now we’ve got Vicente Fox, promoting his new book, admitting to Larry King Live that, in fact, there was a plan with George Bush to extend NAFTA through free trade all the way down to the tip of Argentina, and it was going to be followed by a regional currency-first going down the trade route path, which is exactly what I argued in my book.

Subscribe in a reader

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: