Funding socialism for Latin America: U.S. Insiders are proposing "a new Marshall Plan" to transfer tens of billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers to corrupt, socialist Latin American governments.

Most American taxpayers are completely unaware that the architects of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) are planning the most massive transfer of wealth in world history--from the U.S. middle class to Latin American socialist regimes. These planners do not think small; they are proposing sums in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Yes, hundreds of billions in direct transfers, through various foreign aid programs.

These direct government-to-government transfers are only part of the equation, but they are an absolutely essential part. They are essential to the next step of the equation: the transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars of private capital, as businesses close up shop in the U.S. and move south of the border, lured by U.S. trade, taxation and regulatory policies. Thousands of U.S. companies that can't or won't relocate to the low-cost, tax-subsidized FTAA business zones would simply go out of business, unable to compete with imports from our new FTAA neighbors. Millions more Americans would lose their jobs.

This is quite a different picture from the glowing FTAA testimonials presented by the Clinton and Bush administrations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Council on Foreign Relations and other cheerleaders of so-called "free trade." When appealing for support from middle America and the business community, the FTAA advocates speak in terms of "free markets" and the "free movement of capital, goods and services" that will open new export markets to U.S. producers and bring prosperity to all.

However, within the pages of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The Economist and other influential publications intended for like-minded internationalists, the organized one-worlders have been more open about the essentially socialist nature of the FTAA program. In these publications, and in their speeches at relatively closed conferences, they have been calling for new funding transfers for Latin America similar to the post-World War II Marshall Plan for Europe and the Kennedy-Johnson Alliance for Progress foreign aid program for Latin America.

Contrary to a widely held misconception, the Marshall Plan was not responsible for rebuilding Europe after World War II or for saving Western Europe from Communism. The reality is that the Marshall Plan was used to funnel billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers to socialist parties, politicians and political movements--including the European Movement--all of which aimed at destroying the independence of the countries of Europe and merging them into a socialist, centralized suprastate now known as the EU.

The Alliance for Progress was crafted by some of the same CFR brain trusters in the Kennedy administration who had earlier put together the Marshall Plan. Like the Marshall Plan in Europe, the Alliance for Progress transferred billions of dollars from the U.S. middle class to the wealthy leaders of Latin America and their friends among the U.S. corporate and banking elite.

Integrating with "Justice"

One of the most brazen calls for the new Latin American Marshall Plan came at the Summit of the Americas in Monterrey, Mexico, in January 2004. The call came from Nestor Kirchner, the new Marxist president of Argentina. President Kirchner was interviewed at Monterrey by Poder magazine, a U.S. Hispanic business journal. Here is an excerpt from the interview, which appeared in the February 2004 issue of Poder:

   Q. You spoke of a new Marshall Plan
   for Latin America. Isn't that a utopia?
   A. No, not at all. It is possible; why
   not? People talk about [economic] integration,
   but integration with injustice
   is impossible. The European Economic
   Community was built based on
   joint funds, structural funds for those
   who were in an unfavorable situation,
   seeking balance and economic development.
   Integration must include
   policies that will allow us to strengthen
   the region....

There are several important points of interest in President Kirchner's comment:

* He is campaigning for a massive foreign aid program for Latin America.

* He uses the Marxist claim that income inequality is an "injustice." For him, and others like him, "justice" will not be attained until U.S. incomes have been leveled down by transfers to Latin America.

* He appeals directly to the Common Market/European Union experience.

* As with the EU experience, he expects the U.S. aid to help "integrate" the countries of the Western Hemisphere into a supranational, regional entity.

In the Poder interview, Kirchner also reiterated his demand that 75 percent of Argentina's foreign debt be written off. Which is really another way of saying that U.S. taxpayers (primarily) should be saddled with paying off the loans that the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Inter-American Development Bank and large commercial banks had made to Argentina's previous socialist governments,

Mr. Kirchner is one of the newer members of Latin America's growing radical alliance, whose most prominent leaders are presidents Lula de Silva of Brazil and Chavez of Venezuela. Both are unabashed Marxist-Leninists.

It is not surprising that President Kirchner is making the demands that be is; those demands have been standard boilerplate for years in the Marxists' North-South, Rich-Poor revolutionary agenda. But what many Americans will find surprising is that the real muscle behind these Marxist campaigns comes from members of the U.S. business, financial and political Power Elite.

It's not just a coincidence that President Kirchner's Marshall Plan appeal at the Monterrey summit came so shortly after his September 25, 2003 meeting in New York City at Pratt House, headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR's Web site refers to the closed-door event simply as, "A Meeting With President Kirchner." The CFR is the most influential brain trust and the most visible command center of the organized movement for world government. It also provides the nexus for covert interaction between one-worlders in other private groups, public office and international organizations.

Typically, these events include top officers of the World Bank, IMK Inter-American Development Bank, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. State Department, David Rockefeller's Council of the Americas, and the major Wall Street creditors. Elected leaders soon realize, if they didn't know beforehand, that their bankrupt economies will be headed for the trash heap--along with their political careers --if they don't play ball with the CFR-led "new world order" crowd. Colombia's former president, Andres Pastrana, had his Pratt House meeting on September 7, 2000. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez had his the following day, September 8. Brazil's Lula da Silva met with the CFR luminaries on September 25, 2003.

Milking Billions More

Long before Kirchner was elected, the CFR Power Elite were prepping us for the new Marshall Plan gambit. President Bill Clinton (CFR) kicked it off in 1997 with the 50th anniversary celebration of the Marshall Plan at The Hague.

The Clinton administration's USAID came out with a glowing video production featuring historical film clips of former Secretary of State George C. Marshall (CFR) along with comments from then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (CFR) and other CFR members. Entitled, "Seeing The Victory Through: Fiftieth Anniversary Of The Marshall Plan," the video narration stated: "The Marshall Plan still serves as a model. Hundreds of successful development programs around the world demonstrate how aid helps economic growth ... promotes trade ... and preserves peace."

The Clinton administration's taxpayer-financed video (which can still be viewed on the Bush administration's USAID Web site) tells viewers: "The threats to American peace, freedom, and prosperity today lie in the growing tragedy of impoverished and underdeveloped nations of Africa, Latin America, and the Far East." President Clinton followed up on this with enthusiastic support for the UN Millennium Summit's Millennium Declaration and Millennium Development Goals, which call for huge new outlays of foreign aid.

This has been a major recurring theme of the CFR chorus. One of the voices in that chorus is provided by Emory University's Robert Pastor (CFR), former White House national security adviser to President Carter (CFR) and veteran activist with the Institute for Policy Studies. The IPS is a Marxist nerve center closely tied to the Russian KGB and Cuban DGI. With his CFR-IPS bona fides, it is not surprising that Pastor is one of those most responsible for some of our worst policy disasters in Latin America.

In an essay for the February 2, 2002 Emory Report entitled "Become a resident of North America," Pastor specifically cites the Marshall aid to Europe as the kind of model that we must employ to accomplish a similar political and economic "integration" of this hemisphere. He cites infrastructure and education as the key areas that must be targeted.

"The World Bank estimates Mexico needs $20 billion a year for 10 years just for infrastructure," Pastor wrote. That's $200 billion just for Mexico and just for infrastructure: roads, bridges, railroads, mass transit, electrical power plants and grids, water treatment and sewer systems, etc. How would this be financed? The U.S., Mexico and Canada, says Pastor, "should establish a North American Development Fund, whose priority would be to connect the border to central and southern Mexico." He also proposed that the three NAFTA countries form a North American Commission patterned after the European Commission, the unaccountable bureaucracy that has been a major vehicle for propelling Europe further and faster into its socialist morass.

Pastor also says there is "more that a North American Commission could propose--a continental plan for infrastructure and transportation, a plan for harmonizing regulatory policies, a customs union, [and] a common currency." "But the boldest accomplishment," he says, "would be a Development Fund." The U.S., Canada and Mexico "should not create a new bureaucracy; the World Bank and the Inter American Development Bank could administer it."

Since these institutions are already neck deep in promoting these very same objectives, Pastor's recommendation is predictable. However, Pastor notes, the new fund "will need an injection of funding comparable to the Alliance for Progress." Since his 2002 Emory Report essay, Professor Pastor and other "experts" have penned similar proposals for the CFR's journal, Foreign Affairs.

At the March 22, 2003 meeting of the Inter-American Development Bank, Prof. Raul Hinojosa Ojeda of the University of California at Los Angeles presented an even more extravagant proposal than Pastor's. Applying the EU formula by which wealth has been transferred to the EU's poorer members (Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland), Prof. Ojeda calculates that Mexico would receive around $110 billion annually in foreign aid from the U.S. taxpayers. Central America would receive $40 billion. The rest of the FTAA countries would rake in $390 billion.

The Insider institutions and organizations promoting the FTAA are pushing furiously for this new Marshall Plan spendathon. President Bush may not have officially adopted this terminology (yet), but he has already made it very clear that he is on board for whatever levels of aid are necessary to make the FTAA fly.