Posted on 08/22/2007 7:28:41 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
MONTEBELLO, Quebec President Bush today sidestepped a direct question about whether he'd be willing to categorically deny there is a plan to create the North American Union.
Instead, he ridiculed those who believe that is taking place as conspiracy theorists.
The exchange came at a news conference held by Bush, Mexico's President Felipe Calderon, and Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who met at a resort in the rural woods outside of Ottawa, Quebec, to discuss their latest work on the Security and Prosperity Partnership.
After the trio presented their prepared statement about the SPP, several reporters who had been selected in advance were allowed to ask questions.
When it came time for a question from a Fox News reporter, Bush was asked if he would be willing to categorically deny that there is a plan to create a North American Union, or that there are plans to create NAFTA Superhighways.
"As you three leaders meet here, there are a growing number of people in each of your countries who have expressed concern about the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is addressed to all three of you. Can you say today that this is not a prelude to a North American Union, similar to a European Union? Are there plans to build some kind of superhighway connecting all three countries? And do you believe all of these theories about a possible erosion of national identity stem from a lack of transparency from this partnership?" was the question, according to a White House transcript.
Reporters at the news conference said he sidestepped, instead adopting the tactic that those who are arguing the European Union model of integrating nations into a larger continental union is being used in North America should be ridiculed.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Your point is valid. I think we are going to see some interesting things with respect to ‘Giant’ corporations.
Rumor has it a ‘Giant’ as in major US bank will declare bankruptcy within the next few days. That was pointed out somewhere here on FR, and it appeared in a London paper yesterday.
Pan Am was a GIANT airline and it collapsed. Scale is a bummer sometimes. So many obligations, and so many mouths to feed. Giant is great when you are winning, and a millstone when you are losing.
The phrase ‘Too big to fail’ has always amused me. I think that sentiment is testament to the power of brands. Rome, at one time, had this kind of brand power. Even the US did at one time - where you didn’t want to threaten the US because they would ruin your day somewhere. Reagan and GHWB helped restore the power of that brand to a large extent, but Clinton did a number on it.
Look what happened on 9/11. Conspiracy?
http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/2006/73727.htm
Now where in Brooklyn is that bridge?
You on the other hand, keep repeating the same debunked crap over and over as if repeating it somehow makes it true. All of the links that I have been provided on this supposed SPP conspiracy only show that the promoters lack reading comprehension skills and logic and have a serious case of BDS.
Most of the divestees seem happier and better off.
You mean the same way they are trying to do it here? *gasps* whodda thunk?
My problem with politicians is believing in them when they have a proven track record of talking out of both sides of their mouth and outright lying when it suits the occasion.
My problem with their die hard worshipers is their insistence that everyone else be as gullible as they are.
Here's a few examples. "Islam is a religion of peace". It isn't, never has been, never will be.
"The Saudis are our good friends and allies". They aren't and never have been.
"This is not an amnesty bill". That is exactly what it is.
"Israel is our friend and ally". This hasn't been true in the past and it is not true now. We have never come to their aid in any of the attacks they have been subjected to since they became a state, we only show up to pressure them to give back their gains from these unprovoked attacks.
We have been and still are sending aid and military equipment to the neighboring states and people whose government and people are sworn to the total destruction of Israel.
People who have and still do indiscriminately target these men women and children for no reason other than they are Jews and they hate Jews.
Now our President pressures Israel to give up land that is rightfully theirs and to establish a terrorist state full of these while rockets fall on Israeli citizens from the last land they gave them under pressure from his state department.
Now people like you want people like us to believe that this statement, which starts off with a glaring untruth, is true.
Here's how it starts." We each respect each others sovereignty".
There are two of the three who do not respect the established borders of the U.S.therefore they cannot respect the "sovereignty of the United States".
Now using the language/tongue of that great world wide race/tribe known as politicians, the language that came about to meet the peculiar needs of the tribe ie:to avoid a straight answer, to have plausible deniability, to mislead in order to gain the support of whomever they have to be addressing at the moment, I will not name which two are lying and have no respect for our borders.However I will say I only think of the three that the Canadian might.
If you have read my posts as you say you have, you know that I clearly stated many times that I try to stay off of the immigration threads unless I catch someone twisting facts...kind of like how you do. I do that because people get childish when someone challenges them with facts and accuse them of being an open borders Bushbot...kind of like how you do. I believe in facts and truth, it’s that simple. Get it?
Without taking sides in a back-and-forth I haven’t followed, neat pic.
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.