Here is a link to the HISTORY page captured from the World Customs Organization (WCO). Read the first two paragraphs for sure with attention to GATT and the OECD. (Note: The WCO website is now locked down and the history page is not even available in the internet archive.)
Picture the customs process in the 1980s. Customs documents were probably sent via fax machine or teletype. Between trading countries, there would be a constant flow of documents between the customs offices of the trading countries. Customs offices were at ports and international border crossings. Customs processes would include the checking goods arriving and departing, collecting customs duties, data entry of customs documents, etc.
Understand that a port jurisdiction is by definition international because it is the docking place of foreign ships and that maritime law is probably the oldest and most established international law. Because of that, ports were always governed separately from the domestic jurisdictions in which they are located. In other words, you have the city jurisdiction and the port jurisdiction.
In 1989, Australia, Japan and the U.S. establish the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation organization (APEC). APEC is the Pacific Rim counter-part for the OECD. APEC was established as a separate group because so many of the Pacific Rim countries are islands and OECD was established for European countries that are land-based and contiguous. Essentially, the OECD and APEC are two wings of the same bird.
1990 – George H.W. Bush kicks off the project to “redefine” our transportation system to be single rather than several systems (i.e. maritime, rail, roads, airports). He also kicked off the “Enterprise of the Americas” initiative which was the beginning of the process of establishing a “common market” – customs union. The following is from George’s speech given at the press conference announcing the initiative:
First, as we enter the final months of the current Uruguay round of the world trade talks, I pledge close cooperation with the nations of this hemisphere. The successful completion of the Uruguay round remains the most effective way of promoting long-term trade growth in Latin America and the increased integration of Latin nations into the overall global trading system. Our aim in the Uruguay round is free and fair trade, and through these talks we are seeking to strengthen existing trade rules and to expand them to areas
that do not now have agreed rules of fairplay. And to show our commitment to our neighbors in Latin America and the Caribbean, we will seek deeper tariff reductions in this round on products of special interest to them.
Second, we must build on the trend we see toward free markets and make our ultimate aim a free trade system that links all of the Americas: North, Central, and South. And we look forward to the day when not only are the Americas the first fully free, democratic
hemisphere but when all are equal partners in a free trade zone stretching from the port of Anchorage to the Tierra del Fuego.
Search on the word “customs” in this report: Building a North American Community.
That’s when the negotiations for a NAFTA agreement began. The U.S. already had a free trade agreement with Canada at that point. In 1993, the Congress voted for NAFTA. The approval of that agreement turned the U.S. into an international land bridge between Canada and Mexico which meant that Article 5 (Freedom of Transit) of GATT came into the picture.
As an aside, Oklahoma was the first landlocked state in the path of the plan for an international corridor from Mexico to the interior of the U.S. (See page 20) 1995, the federal Murrah building in Oklahoma City was blown up. The response to that was the idea for a network of fusion centers across to country allegedly to protect critical infrastructure but it was also a requirement for inland ports (customs territory) for international commerce. What that meant is that landlocked states needed to pass legislation to define port jurisdictions. In Idaho, over a period of three legislative sessions, the legislature passed into law, the language needed to inland port jurisdictions. They must have modeled the legislation on the New York/New Jersey Port Authority because the new port jurisdictions in Idaho were given the authority to buy and sell land and assets, to create debt, to have their own seal. Port jurisdictions inland are effectively two systems, one country. The EB-5 visa was the means by which foreign investors could invest in port jurisdictions. Keep in mind, a foreign trade zones (FTZ) are commercial zones located near airports and seaports – BUT… a foreign trade zone can have sub zones that are NOT CONTIGUOUS to the FTZ. So what that meant was that it gave our local officials the opportunity for corruption via the international economic development systems that coincides with international customs territory on the interior of the country. That’s why the communist chinese came to Meridian Idaho to look at “The Core” – which I determined was port jurisdiction under the Idaho law for Intermodal Commerce Zones.
1990 began the project for automation of the highways – facilitation of commercial shipping both international and domestic. Put that together with the requirements for the international customs system – World Customs Organization to facilitate international commerce that, by 1994 when NAFTA goes into effect, includes potentially every city and town in the U.S. as either a transit through or destination location for international commercial shipping.
Here is the Data Model and Diagrams for the World Customs Organization systems:
https://thetechnocratictyranny.com/PDFS/Jan_WCO_data_Model_08_sccp_swwg1_018.pdf
https://thetechnocratictyranny.com/PDFS/Jan_WCO_diagrams_08_sccp_swwg1_017.pdf
The military is involved in this as well. In fact, I think General John Shalikashvili brought the plan Joint Vision 2010 – Focused Logistics from NATO. He was the NATO Supreme Allied Commander before he was appointed by Clinton to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Look at the systems on the cover of that report and then look at the diagram on page 2 of this page capture. This is the military global transportation network – port annex. (See Thomas P.M. Barnett – Globalization Gets a Bodyguard.)
Read this – and watch the video on Myanmar – listening for port development and the economic development authority.
https://thetechnocratictyranny.com/PDFS/China_Belt_and_Road_Links.pdf
Read this – Zones of Insanity
In Idaho, the Coeur d’Alene area is the new target area.
