Posted on 06/07/2006 10:00:09 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
This is very disturbing if true.
This is not good, not good at all.
You said -- "I sighed heavily when I saw the headline, but after reading, and considering the incongruity of the war on terror and our open borders, it certainly made me take pause..."
It definitely does not sound good for the United States. I just don't know what is happening these days in government.
Regards,
Star Traveler
I doubt GWB is planning any such thing, but if he is it wouldn't be surprising if he planned to do so without holding a referendum, as we have never held a national referendum on ANY subject, and have no mechanism to do so.
The evidence fits....
Oye veh...
Trade is good. That's all Bush is trying to do. Nobody is suggesting we allow Mexico or Canada to have a say in what our military does, how or who we tax, etc. This article is sensational rubbish.
Ok, I'm off the soap box now.
This CFR scenario has been gossiped about for a LONG time...
If we are not agressive in our trade with S. America guess who will fill the vacuum? China.
We don't want China to take over the hemisphere.
Some people don't like Mexico. China's a whole lot worse.
Mr. Corsi ... will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project.Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders
My first reaction.
Maybe a little presumptuous and not thinking this thru.
Naw, after carelful consideration and reflection (3 seconds) I'm sticking to it!!
As an aside, is this Constitutionally legal?
We live on a continent whose three countries possess the assets to make it the strongest, most prosperous and self-sufficient area on Earth. Within the borders of this North American continent are the food, resources, technology and undeveloped territory which, properly managed, could dramatically improve the quality of life of all its inhabitants.It is no accident that this unmatched potential for progress and prosperity exists in three countries with such long-standing heritages of free government. A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico and the United States--a North American accord--would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them--strong as they are--could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation. In fact, the key to our own future security may lie in both Mexico and Canada becoming much stronger countries than they are today.
The US Dollar becomes the "The Americas Dollar"; devaluated, it reaches to the hands of Pedro and Maria south of the boarder.... Of course, NAFTA is the regional trade zone, following the EU model with a regional currency. There will be 5 to 7 EU-NAFTA type free trade zones when the globalization completes the phase of economic integration. Like the new colored money from the US Mints & Dept of Treasury? Of course, for Pedro and Maria to accept "dollars" it has to be colored!
Pastor also advocated the creation of a new currency, the "Amero," to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso, much as the Euro replaced the currencies of the individual participating countries.Here's a link to a related article (May 22) written by Jerome Corsi:
What is the upside to a NAU for the US? If the primary goal is to secure our borders, that’s idiotic. Only the terrorists in Mexico and Canada will gain easy access to NYCity. Does anyone think that Canada or Mexico will police its countries the way the US does?
I have a suggestion. Let’s make up the US of NA. We can take over Mexico and Canada by force if necessary. Then maybe the water and oil up north and the rehabilitation of a beautiful country to our south will benefit Americans. I’m sure liberals and libertarians will love that idea! (sarcasm)
Like we can’t buy oil from Canada unless we have a NAU?
We now have a new definition for the “trilateral commission”. But one just as clandestine as the last. The conspiracy kooks will jump right on this article.
The only argument that these new conspiratorists have is that the US has not “secured” its borders. Is it not obvious to anyone that the only way to “secure our borders” is to bomb the life out of any terrorist nation? But that’s not going to happen as long as the NY Times can help prevent it. There has not been a prison built that can keep inmates in and we are talking about a very small confined area.
I’m not with you conservatives who think that putting up a fence will keep terrorists out. Even if you devote hundreds of millions of tax dollars to patrolling the borders it’s not going to work. Don’t bother getting on my case about this unless you have something new to say that is not a personal attack.
As a conservative I would be very sad to find out that this is true, because impeachment may be in order if it is true.
You said -- "Loosen up your tinfoil hat."
Is that the same tinfoil hat that the Democrats said this author had on, back when he wrote about the Swift Vets? Just wondering...
Regards,
Star Traveler
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.