This was on http://www.nascocorridor.com/ before the site was revamped it. Just to add to the conversation...
Posted on 11/30/2007 12:41:43 PM PST by Starman417
From the CNN/YouTube GOP Debate Wednesday night:
YouTube question: Good evening, candidates. This is (inaudible) from Arlington, Texas, and this question is for Ron Paul.
I've met a lot of your supporters online, but I've noticed that a good number of them seem to buy into this conspiracy theory regarding the Council of Foreign Relations, and some plan to make a North American union by merging the United States with Canada and Mexico.
These supporters of yours seem to think that you also believe in this theory. So my question to you is: Do you really believe in all this, or are people just putting words in your mouth?
Cooper: Congressman Paul, 90 seconds.
Paul: Well, it all depends on what you mean by "all of this." the CFR exists, the Trilateral Commission exists. And it's a, quote, "conspiracy of ideas." This is an ideological battle. Some people believe in globalism. Others of us believe in national sovereignty.
And there is a move on toward a North American union, just like early on there was a move on for a European Union, and it eventually ended up. So we had NAFTA and moving toward a NAFTA highway. These are real things. It's not somebody made these up. It's not a conspiracy. They don't talk about it, and they might not admit about it, but there's been money spent on it. There was legislation passed in the Texas legislature unanimously to put a halt on it. They're planning on millions of acres taken by eminent domain for an international highway from Mexico to Canada, which is going to make the immigration problem that much worse.
So it's not so much a secretive conspiracy, it's a contest between ideologies, whether we believe in our institutions here, our national sovereignty, our Constitution, or are we going to further move into the direction of international government, more U.N.
You know, this country goes to war under U.N. resolutions. I don't like big government in Washington, so I don't like this trend toward international government. We have a WTO that wants to control our drug industry, our nutritional products. So, I'm against all that.
But it's not so much as a sinister conspiracy. It's just knowledge is out there. If we look for it, you'll realize that our national sovereignty is under threat.
Cooper: Congressman Paul, thank you.
(Applause)
Ok, I know some of my readers are also apprehensive about such things as a "North American Union". I would be too.....if it posed an actual threat in the real world. I'm sorry, but lefties aren't the only ones that fall victim to conspiratorial fear-monger. I think the North American Union is nothing more than a conspiracy for conservatives. There isn't a single politician I can think of who is pushing for an NAU. If you know of one, let me know.
Given how ArPee believes there is cause for concern, is it any wonder that he's attracted 9/11 Truthers and so many other conspiracy nutjobs to rally to his call?
John Hawkins offers some of the best antidote to the conspiracy. I suggest you read my links in this previous post (includes articles by Michael Medved). You might sleep better at night.
Responding to Emily's YouTube question on "three federal programs you would reduce in size in order to decrease..." the size of government, Ron Paul answers:
I would like to change Washington, and we could by cutting three programs, such as the Department of Education -- Ronald Reagan used to talk about that -- Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security is the biggest bureaucracy we ever had."Ronald Reagan used to talk about that".....*rolls eyes*(Applause)
And besides, what we can do is we can have a stronger national defense by changing our foreign policy. Our foreign policy is costing us a trillion dollars, and we can spend most of that or a lot of that money home if we would bring our troops home.As in all things, there is criticism to be made in regards to our foreign policy; but the kind of criticism Ron Paul levels at current U.S. foreign policy, shares much in common with the blame-America criticism of Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky. If Ron Paul thinks American interventionism is not doing more good than harm on behalf of the world (and in particular, on behalf of America) then I suggest he drop Imperial Hubris for a moment, and read the following books:
(Applause)
people have this image of the U.S. military going all over the world as a busybody, propping up dictatorships. It’s so false. In fact, the only regimes we prop up through training missions are of certified democracies, certified by Congress, which we have not imposed on them, that they’ve evolved organically on their own as democracies.
Far from being isolationist before World War II and the formation of NATO, America from the very beginning of the Republic intervened in a nearly continual series of civil wars, coups, and hostage rescues. Starting with attacks on the Barbary Coast pirates between 1801 and 1805, the nation has always interfered in other nations' business far from home.
Two generations of college students have been taught that all such "adventurism" is nothing but imperialism and running-dog capitalism--and Boot does not deny that states naturally send in their forces out of national interest rather than mere idealism. But he shows that the majority of the time the Marines intervened to stop the slaughter of civilians, to retaliate against the killing of Americans and destruction of their property, and to prevent chaos from spreading beyond a country's borders. While such incursions often served the local property-owning elites and corrupt grandees, such interventionists as Thomas Jefferson, Chester A. Arthur, and Teddy Roosevelt assumed that order and stable governments were usually preferable to mass uprisings, constant revolution, and mob rule.
Americans, in fact, have always defined their interests broadly to include the defense and promotion of the “universal” principles of liberalism and democracy enunciated in the Declaration of Independence. “The cause of America is the cause of all mankind,” Benjamin Franklin declared at the time of the American revolution, and as William Appleman Williams once commented, Americans believe their nation “has meaning . . . only as it realises natural right and reason throughout the universe”.
This is the real “traditional approach”: the conviction that American power and influence can and should serve the interests of humanity. It is what makes the US, in Bill Clinton’s words, the “indispensable nation”, or as Dean Acheson colourfully put it six decades ago, “the locomotive at the head of mankind”. Americans do pursue their selfish interests and ambitions, sometimes brutally, as other nations have throughout history. Nor are they innocent of hypocrisy, masking selfishness behind claims of virtue. But Americans have always had this unique spur to global involvement, an ideological righteousness that inclines them to meddle in the affairs of others, to seek change, to insist on imposing their avowed “universal principles” usually through peaceful pressures but sometimes through war.
Read more at Flopping Aces
The RuPaul conspiracy nuts think it will go to Canada and it isn’t.
Read my post number #4.
I forgot to give you the context of the map.
http://www.nascocorridor.com/naipn/pages/participants.html
“There is no such superhighway like the one he’s talking about,” said Ian Grossman, a spokesman with the Federal Highway Administration. “It doesn’t exist, in plans or anywhere else.”
“It’s complete fiction,” said Tiffany Melvin, executive director of NASCO, a consortium of transportation agencies and business interests caught in the cross hairs of anti-highway activists. “This is the work of fringe groups that have wrapped a couple of separate projects together into one big paranoid fantasy.”
RuPaul and Alex (9/11 was an inside job) Jones must have been twins separated at birth.
Trying to get an anti-Ron Paul ping list going. If you don’t want to be included, FReepMail me. Apologies for any annoyance.
Well then, are you saying the NASCO does not exist? or just that Tiffany said that? Do you believe her?
You’re right, must be a conspiracy.
9/11 was an inside job!
“NAFTA Superhighway” confirmed by Manitoba government
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1934120/posts
You think Manitoba is going to spend that money in the United States? LOL!!! To build "the" superhighway? BWAHAHAHAAAAA!
Those roads already exist so yes there is ALREADY a "superhighway" that is maintained by the federal government. LOL!!!!
RuPaul said " They're planning on millions of acres taken by eminent domain for an international highway ". That is a conspiracy theory from him and all the other kooks that believe that.
But you may be right! There could be a conspiracy between NASCO and the Federal Highway Administration. Wait a minute, that means there's a conspiracy between NASCO, the Federal Highway Administration AND the LA TIMES!
OH NO! You're right!
9/11 was an inside job!!!!!
There is no conspiracy, unless you see one. Fact is, there is a NASCO and on their site they call it a superhighway. I don’t know about the other stuff you are ranking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.