Thread: U.S. and EU Agree to Harmonize Regulatory Standards

ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:

The United States and the European Union have agreed to harmonize regulatory standards as part of a new transatlantic economic partnership.
Follow this link to the source article: "US and EU foresee 'single market'"

COMMENTARY:

The United States and the European Union have agreed at a Washington summit to launch a new transatlantic economic paartnership. As reported by the BCC earlier this week: "The pact is designed to boost trade and investment by harmonising regulatory standards, laying the basis for a US-EU single market."
The BBC continued: "The two sides agreed to set up an 'economic council' to push ahead with regulatory convergence in nearly 40 areas, including intellectual property, financial services, business takeovers and the motor industry."
The BBC did not explain, however, that this "regulatory convergence" between the U.S. and the EU is part of a broader agenda to achieve global government on the installment plan. That agenda was perhaps most clearly and succinctly articulated by Richard N. Gardner decades ago in an article entitled "The Hard Road to World Order." Writing in the April 1974 issue of Foreign Affairs, the flagship publication of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Gardner, who has held a number of State Department posts, argued against what he called "instant world government." Instead, he wrote, "the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."
Put simply, the architects of this emerging "house of world order" have come to recognize that Americans and others would resist "instant world government," and so they have instead pursued global governance step by step and through stealth. Some of the planks in this house of world order include the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the EU in Europe, the planned North American Union on our side of the Atlantic, and now an agreement for a new transatlantic economic partnership between the EU and the U.S.
And even as new planks are being added to the house of world order, already-existing planks are being strengthened or expanded — contributing to the appearance of the "booming, buzzing confusion." Consider, for instance, the European Union. It is now obvious to anyone following the news the EU has evolved into a super-national government for Europe, but that was not always the case. In fact, the EU, particularly in its earlier manifestations such as the Common Market, was sold to the unsuspecting peoples of Europe as a "free trade" deal. On this side of the Atlantic, NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) was also sold as a "free trade" deal when it was voted on by Congress more than a decade ago. Yet not only do NAFTA tribunals now issue rulings binding on America but NAFTA provides the foundation for an emerging North American Union modeled after the EU.
All of this is by design. Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski pointed to "regionalization" as the key for "globalization" in his address to Gorbechev's State of the World Forum in October 1995: "The precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units."
Brzezinski also sounded very much like Gardner when he acknowledged an all-important reality: "We cannot leap into world government in one quick step." But for those of us who want to preserve American independence, that reality is very good news indeed. Because instant world government is not achievable, the political and corporate elitists who want world government have no choice but to proceed slowly and in piecemeal fashion. If they were instead to attempt to move too fast or to make their final destination too widely known or too obvious, the ensuing firestorm of resistance would stop them in their tracks.
Yet, the closer they get to their destination, the more transparent their whole subversive scheme becomes. The new agreement to harmonize regulations between the U.S. and the EU is just one more piece of evidence pointing to that scheme. Those of us who want to preserve American independence can rouse our fellow citizens from their slumber simply by presenting them with the evidence. More and more, that entails not digging out obscure or suppressed information but simply pointing out to them what is now unfolding right in front of our very eyes.

Oh boy global markets based on communism...

CAFTA, THE EU & COMMUNITARIAN LAW
PART 1 of 2

By Niki Raapana
January 25, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

How both parties sold America down the river
After wading through all the publications and websites representing both support and opposition for the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-approved by the U.S. Congress July 2005), it's astonishing to realize how very few of them bother to explain the legal foundation for the agreement. CAFTA, like most international trade agreements, is based entirely in the supremacy of communitarian law.
This isn't Bush and Clinton quietly slipping in communitarian programs like Local Agenda 21 that bury communitarian laws deep inside hefty grants and incentives. The U.S. Congress has officially denounced their own Constitution as Supreme Law. When the United States Congress approved CAFTA they endorsed a regional trade agreement that places U.S. Constitutional Law below Communitarian Law. While communitarian law is without a doubt the most important legal topic in the world, American experts on both "sides" of the free trade arguments completely ignore it. Consequently, it's the rare American who has any concept of how prevalent or powerful this new system of justice is.
The European Court of Justice is occassionally referred to as the Communitarian Court of Justice. CAFTA officials openly discuss using the EU as their model for communitarian case law. Communitarian Regulations govern the archiving of EU legal documents. The term communitarian law is in hundreds of online law journals. It's taught in several foreign law schools and there are degreed law professors of Communitarian Law. The Jean Monet program sponsors symposiums on it at U.S. universities. The D.C. Communitarian Network sends out a communitarian law newsletter. It's a widely understood term in Europe, Central, and South America. Still, Communitarian Law is so unfamiliar to U.S. Americans (and their attorneys) that most have never once heard the terms used.
One reason for its obscurity comes from the fact that communitarian law is also called Community Law, community aquis, and aquis communitaire. But another reason for its obscurity is the simple fact that globalists don't want our people to know anything about it. The European Constitution was defeated at the polls by the Dutch and the French voters because of its supremacy of communitarian law. ...http://www.newswithviews.com/Raapana/niki.htm