Let's see what Mr. Medved has to say, shall we?
Concerning the feds, the entire horror story about “North American Union” is based upon the “Security and Prosperity Partnership,” an utterly innocuous, open, above-board, well-advertised and widely publicized initiative to promote inter-governmental cooperation . . . .Who's limiting discourse now, using the techniques that hedgetrimmer correctly identifies, yet incorrectly applies?
Thank you clarifying Mr. Medved's position, you are right - and I remember that indeed he did acknowledge SPP. I was remiss in not adding "in the works as anything like that which is described by the 'nuts'". But nevertheless..
Truth is far better that my ego. This is refreshing -- and helps zero-in on real issues.
Let's bracket the target some more by asking about the use of the word innocuous.
I read the North American Community proposal. It shunned an EU-type arrangement, it claimed that it was not an attempt to dismantle sovereignty, and it (most important for me) acknowledged the Mexican problems of corruption and trustworthiness.
As I understood it, it would allow free flow among the sovereign countries of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. The borders would be better enforced by concentrating on North America as an entity, it claimed. Inventive, unprecedented cooperation among the three countries would be required.
Not even Medved denies that agencies in all three governments are talking and planning. It did propose a 2010 date to effect some or all proposals, I believe.
Here is where I fire another round, stepping closer to a target, at least I believe so. I am not aware that Mr. Corsi or anyone generally recognized as a "player" has ever said that the U.S. of A. as a sovereign country will cease to exist. This is one of those issues that is not the "issue;" it is a faux issue and serves only as an excuse to attack, attack, attack.
Fire for effect: I am totally against any "Community" that includes Mexico until that government-created cesspool becomes a real country. That ain't innocuous IMO.
Yeah, what hedgetrimmer said.
I would not however say, "Treason abounds and Mr. Medved supports it!"
Now on to my thoughts, not directly related to SPP.
These "hot button" issues threads -- appear to be all economics-related issues; specifically "cheap" labor with its "threat" to sovereignty to some degree or other, IMO.
To wit, migrant labor (mislabeled as immigration), labor arbitrage, technology-enabled cross-border business functions.
There's no question that there are direct economic benefits for some and indirect benefits (yards get cut cheap, Wal Mart) for others.
So even without SPP there's "guest workers" and "globalization".
We need lawful immigration and free, fair trade but do we really need a massive "guest workers" program and "globalization" as they appear to be evolving?