North American Police State

Recently by Gary North: Earl Scruggs, R.I.P.



On Monday, April 2, the leaders of the United States, Mexico, and Canada will meet at what is billed as the North American Leaders Summit. Here is the agenda, as posted on the website of the White House.

On April 2, 2012, President Obama will host Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada and President Felipe Calderon of Mexico for the North American Leaders’ Summit (NALS) in Washington, DC. This meeting will build on wide-ranging and ongoing cooperation among the United States, Canada, and Mexico with a particular focus on economic growth and competitiveness, citizen security, energy, and climate change. The leaders will also discuss North America’s role in the Americas in anticipation of the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia later in April, as well as other global economic, political, and security issues.

Note: This summit is preliminary to a hemispheric summit to be held later in April. Note these words: citizen security, energy, and climate change. Allow me to translate: police state, rationing, and regulation.

If you think I am exaggerating, consider the following.


The Defense Department has posted a press release on steps leading up to this summit. A new system of multi-national defense has been created. It is called the North American Defence Ministry. Notice the way Defense is spelled: Oh, Canada! You can read the press release here.

According to the three Ministers of Defence, North America is facing threats so enormous that the three nations must work together to thwart them. But what nation is strong enough to offer such a threat? None is mentioned. Nevertheless, those threats are out there, the three ministers of defense assure us.

The first meeting of what they call “the trilateral collaboration” was held in Ottawa. Here is what they decided.

By virtue of our geography, our peoples, and our trading relationship, our three nations share many defense interests. Threats to North America and the hemisphere are increasingly complex and require non-traditional responses. Building upon the trilateral collaboration under the North American Leaders Summit process, we share a determination to enhance our common understanding of those threats and of the approaches needed to address them.

It would be helpful to know what these “increasingly complex” threats to North America are. It would be even more helpful to know which “non-traditional responses” are being contemplated.

Our countries are committed to working together to address challenges in the region. We know that transnational threats require transnational responses.

That word, “transnational,” needs clarification. What are some of these transnational threats? What nation might be planning transnational threats against Canada and Mexico, as well as the United States? What nation has identified these three nations as enemies? I have heard of none.

It turns out that the threats do not come from nations. They come from SPECTRE. You remember SPECTRE, the SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion. Sean Connery’s James Bond battled against SPECTRE. Well, maybe SPECTRE isn’t the threat it once was, but something like it is.

With this in mind, we have agreed to enhance our cooperation to support efforts to counter transnational criminal organizations and to respond to natural disasters in the hemisphere.

The trilateral collaboration is determined not to let these criminal organizations get the upper hand. Neither is nature: natural disasters in the hemisphere. We all remember what the hemisphere was almost wiped out by. . . . By. . . . By whatever it was. Back then. Never again!

Our meeting today has established the framework necessary to build North America’s resilience by pursuing a practical agenda built on sustained trilateral cooperation on issues related to defense. As part of our initial work plan, we intend to: Develop a joint trilateral defense threat assessment for North America to deepen our common understanding of the threats and challenges we face. Explore ways to improve our support to the efforts of civilian public security agencies in countering illicit activities in our respective countries and the hemisphere, such as narcotics trafficking.

If we are to believe this press release, the Mexican drug dealers are so well armed and pose such a threat that the defense departments of all three North American nations must now cooperate trilaterally.

But that’s not all. The defense ministers will also

Explore how we can collaborate to increase the speed and efficiency with which our armed forces support civilian-led responses to disasters.

The armed forces of the three nations must increase their response time and efficiency to support “civilian-led responses to disasters.”

I am curious. What disasters across all three borders are such a threat that it requires a new trilateral defense system to respond?

I can think of one: a joint operation to release airborne anthrax in three cities, for example: Washington, Ottawa, and Mexico City. But why, exactly, will it take joint military responses to deal with this? The terrorists will be long gone.

I can think of another: a joint operation of a suicide squad that has been infected with smallpox. Each of them flies to a different city. He or she then goes to the movies. Lots of movies. If you are curious about the likely effects, do a Google search for “Dark Winter” and “terrorism.” I did. Here are the results.

Conclusion: the targets of this trilateral planning are civilians, not terrorists. This is all about a cross-border system of martial law. This is stage one. There is stage two.

Continue to work together to strengthen hemispheric defence forums.

How long will this trilateral cooperation go on? Indefinitely.

We have agreed to meet on a regular basis in order to build on today’s historic meeting and continue our cooperation in addressing shared continental threats. We will pursue this trilateral agenda respectful of national sovereignty and in coordination with other agencies in our respective governments. The results of our meeting will be conveyed to our respective leaders in advance of the upcoming North American Leaders Summit.

Notice the phrase, “respectful of national sovereignty.” If you think NAFTA was a bad idea, sovereignty-wise, wait until you see what comes next.


In 2011, the Canadian government posted what it called an Economic Action Plan. This is a bilateral plan to integrate economically the USA and Canada.

What caught my eye is this. They are concerned about public resistance. Remember, this is Canada – good old stodgy Canada.

Coordinate and share research on how people become radicalized and turn to violence;Share best practices and tools for law enforcement and corrections partners to detect, prevent and respond to this threat;Develop a common messaging and strategic communications approach; andEmphasize community-based and community-driven efforts. This will include collaborating on how to engage with communities and build their resilience against violent extremists who seek to target specific communities in our respective countries, as well as coordinating community outreach.

Then there is CBNRE. Every problem needs an acronym. That is what CBRNE is.

Establish binational plans and capabilities for emergency management, with a focus on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosives (CBRNE) events.

In addition to this is the threat to the communications system.

Coordinate national-level emergency communications plans and strategies;Identify future trends and technologies related to communications interoperability;Promote the use of standards in emergency communications; Promote governance models and structures; andShare best practices and lessons learned.

All in all, the Canadian government pledges the following:

We build on the efforts of many partners – from police and other emergency workers to our armed forces – who continue to safeguard us from the complex threats we face.We also recognize that cooperation across air, land, and maritime domains, as well as in space and cyberspace, our enduring bi-national defence relationship, and military support for civilian authorities engaged in disaster response efforts and critical infrastructure protection, have all contributed significantly to the security of our populations.

This is being promoted to Canadian voters as an economic action plan. It is a great deal more than an economic action plan. This is not merely about freer trade. It is about cross-border martial law.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper up until now has pursued bilateralism: USA and Canada. That policy is about to go the way of all flesh. Trilateralism is the agenda of the North American Leaders Summit.

Harper’s government in February 2011 published a detailed outline of a system of bilateral government regulations on trade: transportation, agriculture, health products, and environmental safety. This sounded harmless to Canadians. But the extension of cross-border economic regulations is part of a much more comprehensive plan to integrate the economies of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. This, in turn, is preparatory for regional/hemispheric integration.

If all this sounds familiar, that’s because it is. When David Rockefeller created the Trilateral Commission in 1973, he had something like this in mind. Step by step, the program has extended. Think of this as the dream of the wonderful folks who gave us the euro.


For over two centuries, believers in political centralization have used a bait-and-switch strategy that has worked repeatedly.

First, they extol the benefits of free trade, meaning the elimination of sales taxes on imported goods. Their model: Adam Smith’s book, The Wealth of Nations (1776).

Second, they call for the creation of a joint free trade zone. They never recommend unilateral reductions of tariffs by one government on one side of a border. Always, there must be a negotiated free trade zone: joint sovereignty.

Third, they call for joint regulations making the judicial rules of production fair.

Fourth, they call for a common currency. This always turns into a call for a national central bank, then a common international central bank.

Fifth, they call for regional military defense.

Sixth, they call for political integration: the United States of Whatever.

This strategy was designed by James Madison. He attempted to get it passed at the Annapolis Convention of 1786. When that failed, he called for a closed-door convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787.

Delegates from several states were authorized to attend, but only on this basis: to lower tariffs, not to replace the Articles of Confederation. As soon as the closed-door session opened, four separate plans were submitted to replace the Articles of Confederation. (I wrote a book on this: Conspiracy in Philadelphia. It’s free.)

The Constitution denied the right of the states to issue currency. The federal government alone had this right,

Three years after ratification, Hamilton succeeded in getting Congress to adopt a central bank, privately owed.

In 1861, the Confederacy decided to set up its own free trade zone. The North invaded.

Throughout the 1930s, internationalists promoted the idea of a free trade zone under the League of Nations. Large multinational corporations would be licensed by the League to trade, immune from national tariffs, with the League taxing them for the privilege. The most famous advocate was New York lawyer John Foster Dulles.

In 1951, the European Coal and Steel Community was set up to conduct free trade in Western Europe. This led to the creation of the Common Market in 1957. This morphed into the European Union in 1992. This required the European Central Bank, which gave Europe the euro in 1999.

It is bait and switch.


Central planners cannot get the voters to accept internationally what the voters have long accepted nationally. So, they adopt a stealth program. It is a bait-and-switch strategy. Again and again, it has worked.

North America got NAFTA in 1994. Unless Congress stops the process, we will soon get a joint military system of domestic crowd control. The boundary markers for this system have been laid: milestones. Next will come the laying of the foundations.

Most voters know nothing of this. Of those who do know, most ignore it.

The trap is set with tax breaks: low tariffs. That is the bait. It is tasty bait. Then the trap is sprung.

Paraphrasing Patrick Henry in 1765, if that’s a conspiracy theory, make the most of it.

March 31, 2012

Gary North [send him mail] is the author of Mises on Money. Visit He is also the author of a free 20-volume series, An Economic Commentary on the Bible.

Copyright © 2012 Gary North