I did a search and did not see this posted. 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... I don't vouch for the credibility of CIEPAC, but it certainly sounds like they're on to something.
To: Rutles4Ever
Swift Boat author bump.
This is very disturbing if true.
To: Rutles4Ever
Loosen up your tinfoil hat. It seems it has cut off the blood flow to your brain. If Bush could not get his way on the Dubai Port deal because of the Hysteric Paranoia of the Know Nothings, this mythical fantasy would never survive Congress's wrath ones it was announced.
3 posted on
06/07/2006 10:08:42 AM PDT by
MNJohnnie
(I would rather be an Iraqi in a Hidatha guarded by Marines, then a subject of Al-Qeda anywhere.)
To: Rutles4Ever
This is not good, not good at all.
To: Rutles4Ever
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
To: Rutles4Ever
President Bush has decided to support the creation of a North American Union through a process of governmental regulations, never having to bring the issue before the American people for a clear referendum or vote.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.
6 posted on
06/07/2006 10:13:54 AM PDT by
Restorer
To: Rutles4Ever
7 posted on
06/07/2006 10:15:00 AM PDT by
dmanLA
To: Rutles4Ever
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.
8 posted on
06/07/2006 10:15:06 AM PDT by
Tulane
To: Rutles4Ever
11 posted on
06/07/2006 10:23:03 AM PDT by
Old Seadog
(Inside every old person is a young person saying "WTF happened?".)
To: Rutles4Ever
To: Rutles4Ever
OVER MY DEAD BODY!!
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?
13 posted on
06/07/2006 10:29:39 AM PDT by
namvet66
(Beam me up Scotty!!)
To: Rutles4Ever
Let's play Name the President!
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.
14 posted on
06/07/2006 10:29:49 AM PDT by
1rudeboy
To: Rutles4Ever
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!
15 posted on
06/07/2006 10:31:06 AM PDT by
Jumper
To: Rutles4Ever
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:
The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'
To: Rutles4Ever
What is the upside to a NAU for the US? If the primary goal is to secure our borders, thats 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. Lets 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. Im sure liberals and libertarians will love that idea! (sarcasm)
Like we cant 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 thats 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.
Im 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 its not going to work. Dont bother getting on my case about this unless you have something new to say that is not a personal attack.
18 posted on
06/07/2006 10:35:06 AM PDT by
street_lawyer
(Conservative Defender of the Faith)
To: Rutles4Ever
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.
19 posted on
06/07/2006 10:55:50 AM PDT by
Mogollon
To: All
This is part of the advancing NEW WORLD ORDER. Read
None Dare Call it Conspiracy to read about the regions that will be set up.
Mexico, America & Canada have already been designated as a region.
To: Rutles4Ever; All
If accurate, this is distrubing:
http://sixthcolumn.blogspot.com/2006/06/trans-texas-corridor-of-north-american.html
Check out this WND report by Jerome Corsi that describes the route for the 12-lane highway that is a part of the North American Union...The NAFTA Super Corridor will be constructed largely by private companies that intend to operate the new I-35 as a toll road. North America's SuperCorridor Coalition Inc., or NASCO...
23 posted on
06/07/2006 12:45:35 PM PDT by
backhoe
(Just an Old Keyboard Cowboy, Ridin' the Trakball into the Dawn of Information)
To: Rutles4Ever
This analysis has been advanced by economist Miguel Pickard at the Center for Economic and Political Research for Community Action (CIEPAC) in Chiapas, Mexico. Doing the tinfoil analysis Americans are too sane to do.
26 posted on
06/07/2006 1:33:03 PM PDT by
You Dirty Rats
(I Love Free Republic!!!)
To: Rutles4Ever
Contrary to NAFTA, whose tenets were laid out in a single negotiated treaty subjected to at least cursory review by the legislatures of the participating countries Nope, NAFTA was written as a 'trade agreement', rather than a treaty, and only needed 50% + 1 votes in both houses to pass. It passed in the Senate with 61 votes and in the House 234-200. A treaty requires 2/3 agreement in the Senate.
27 posted on
06/07/2006 1:47:54 PM PDT by
savedbygrace
(SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson