Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Realistic is a North American Currency?
Minyanville ^ | 28 Jan 2009 | Todd Harrison

Posted on 01/28/2009 9:41:00 AM PST by BGHater

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

1 posted on 01/28/2009 9:41:00 AM PST by BGHater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BGHater

How about we just take over Canada and Mexico?


2 posted on 01/28/2009 9:43:52 AM PST by Sundog (Atlas Shrugged needs to be required reading . . . Which character are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

We ALREADY have a North American currency. It’s called the U.S. Dollar.


3 posted on 01/28/2009 9:45:38 AM PST by BuffaloJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

“New World Order”

Apparently they’re perfectly happy with that branding, and see no need to change it. Arrogant.


4 posted on 01/28/2009 9:45:40 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
Our sovereignty is under attack from about 7 different directions. There are people -- here and abroad -- who want us to crease to exist as a powerful nation state.

And I'm pretty sure they're going to succeed in their efforts, one way or another.

5 posted on 01/28/2009 9:49:54 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack

Right.

Who here wants to trade their USdollars for pesos? (crickets)

OK, who wants to trade their USdollars for Canadian money? (crickets)

but just google amero March 2008 - the die may already have been cast


6 posted on 01/28/2009 9:58:34 AM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Once the sovereignity of the US is gone, anyone who swore an oath to the US Constitution is no longer bound to defend it. At that point, anything goes.


7 posted on 01/28/2009 10:13:22 AM PST by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: fanfan; AuntB; RedRedRose; SatinDoll; bastantebueno55; SisterK; Kimberly GG; ronnyquest; Cvengr; ...

SPP ping!


8 posted on 01/28/2009 11:11:33 AM PST by SwinneySwitch (Liberalism is a mental disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
Here's one of the *Invisable Hands* you speak of. (Now Sec Of the Treasury)

Geithner was a senior fellow in the Economics Department of the Council on Foreign Relations and director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund. After obtaining an M.A. in International Economics and East Asian Studies from Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in 1985, Geithner went to work for Kissinger and Associates. In 1988, he joined the International Affairs division of the U.S. Treasury Department and was named president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 2003. He is also a member of the Rockefeller “financial advisory body,” the Group of Thirty, an organization comprised of members from the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Federal Reserve, Citicorp and Citibank, the China Construction Bank, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase, in short the very heart of the international banking elite.

In June, Gary Weiss wrote that Geithner was a “central figure” in the “drama” that was J.P. Morgan Chase acquisition of Bear Stearns. “It was Geithner’s Federal Reserve bank, not the Treasury, that came up with the $29 billion loan that made the deal possible or, more precisely, acceptable to J.P. Morgan.” In other words, Geithner was taking orders directly from the international bankers. He is also cozy with AIG, Lehman, and Goldman Sachs.

http://www.zimbio.com/Timothy+Geithner/articles/12/Obama+Picks+CFR+Insider+Head+Treasury

This, my FRiends, is no tin-foil hat theory.

9 posted on 01/28/2009 11:30:57 AM PST by wolfcreek (There is no 2 party system only arrogant Pols and their handlers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

I can’t decide if the Senate confirmation of Geithner is more like the refusal of the Roman Senate to demand enforcement of the Agrarian Laws or its refusal to try the assassins of the Gracchi.

Either way, Spengler was right—this is the dawning of the Age of Caesars


10 posted on 01/28/2009 11:37:30 AM PST by Philo-Junius (One precedent creates another. They soon accumulate and constitute law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Its intentions

The late Carroll Quigley (Bill Clinton’s mentor), Professor of History at Georgetown University, member of the CFR, stated in his book, “Tragedy & Hope”:

“The CFR is the American Branch of a society which originated in England, and which believes that national boundaries should be obliterated, and a one-world rule established.”

Rear Admiral Chester Ward, a former member of the Cfr for 16 years, warned the American people of the organization’s intentions:

“The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common — they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereingty of the national independence of the United States. A second clique of international members in the CFR comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government.”

And Dan Smoot, a former member of the FBI Headquarters staff in Washington, D.C., summarized the organization’s purpose as follows:

“The ultimate aim of the CFR is to create a one-world socialist system, and to make the U.S. an official part of it.”

In other words, the CFR’s activities are treasonous to the U.S. Constitution. Their goal is to put an end to the United States of America, and to make the country a part of their global government scheme.

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/cfr.html

Wake up America. The Commies are here.


11 posted on 01/28/2009 11:41:07 AM PST by wolfcreek (There is no 2 party system only arrogant Pols and their handlers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

No doubt in my mind anymore. We had some great FReepers who have disappeared who I used to discuss this with. The naysayers drove them away by treating them as tin foilers.

Just a matter of time.


12 posted on 01/28/2009 11:46:11 AM PST by dforest (life is now good again....he has been inaugurated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Philo-Junius

The fact that Geithner father, Peter worked with Obama
s mother through the Ford Foundation boggles the mind but, explains alot.

there seems to be a tie between the Geithner family and the Obama family that goes back more than 20 years ago. Apparently, Timothy Geithner’s father, Peter Giethner, is the Director of the Ford Foundation’s Asian program, a role he has been involved in for years. In the 1980’s, Peter Geithner oversaw Ford Foundation’s microfinance programs in the Indonesia region. These programs were being developed by Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro…… Barack Obama’s mother! It certainly is a very small world, or was Obama reaching back to make a special thank you to someone who worked with his mother.

http://james4america.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/geithners-confirmation-marred-by-tax-problems-geithner-appointment-another-thank-you-to-obama-family-associate/


13 posted on 01/28/2009 11:48:18 AM PST by wolfcreek (There is no 2 party system only arrogant Pols and their handlers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

.....”There was a moment early in the Fox and Bush administrations when North American leaders appeared to grasp the essence of such a vision. In February 2001, Fox and Bush jointly endorsed the Guanajuato Proposal, which read, “After consultation with our Canadian partners, we will strive to consolidate a North American economic community whose benefits reach the lesser-developed areas of the region and extend to the most vulnerable social groups in our countries.” Unfortunately, they never translated that sentiment into policy (with the exception of the symbolic but substantively trivial $40 million Partnership for Prosperity).

All three governments share the blame for this failure. President Bush’s primary goal seemed at first to open the Mexican oil sector to U.S. investors, while then-Canadian Prime Minister Chrétien showed no interest in working with Mexico. President Fox, for his part, put forth too ambitious an agenda with too much emphasis on radical reform of U.S. immigration policy. Bush’s initial response was polite, but he soon realized he could not deliver and postponed consideration. The illegal immigration issue remains thorny and unsolved. Ultimately, however, it is more symptom than cause: the way to reduce illegal immigration is to make Mexico’s economy grow faster than that of the U.S.

The Council on Foreign Relations Task Force Report spells out such a vision. Let me summarize and amplify some of its recommendations.”.....

...”At the same time, our Task Force recommends that all three governments define and defend a continental perimeter. “...

http://www.cfr.org/publication/8173/north_american_community_approach_to_security.html


14 posted on 01/28/2009 11:52:34 AM PST by Kimberly GG (Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda been HUNTER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

“He is also a member of the Rockefeller “financial advisory body,” the Group of Thirty, an organization comprised of members from the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Federal Reserve, Citicorp and Citibank, the China Construction Bank, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase, in short the very heart of the international banking elite.”

Ahhh, the “Powers that Be”. IMO, ANY president is but a puppet on their strings and it always seems, just beneath the surface, always the name Rockefeller.


15 posted on 01/28/2009 11:56:15 AM PST by Kimberly GG (Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda been HUNTER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

Yes...the naysayers will be along any moment to remind us that the CFR is merely a “think tank”.


16 posted on 01/28/2009 11:59:33 AM PST by Kimberly GG (Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda been HUNTER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

Obama exposing Geithner to the Senate in the light of his tax-evasion would not be a “thank-you” unless Geithner and those backing him had sufficient influence to ensure his nomination was approved.

If Obama had been the sole or even primary decision-maker here he certainly could have nominated someone without the baggage.

This being the case, I think most people misunderstand who patronises whom in the relationship between the interests Obama represents and those Geithner represents.

Geithner is not there to serve Obama, he’s there to manage him.


17 posted on 01/28/2009 12:00:45 PM PST by Philo-Junius (One precedent creates another. They soon accumulate and constitute law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
I suspect that many of those accusing people of being tinfoilers have been on the payroll of the executive department of Federal government, neo-conservative activists, and the Republican Party. The Democrats now control the executive department and neo-conservative organizations and the GOP are hard up financially and have less time to patrol conservative websites to denounce libertarian, paleoconservative, and conspiracist dissent. Last year's meltdown of the financial markets and the 2006 and 2008 election debacles have been major losses of face for the neo-conservatives and Republican moderates.
18 posted on 01/28/2009 12:03:13 PM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
I am convinced also. There are too many *coincidences* and relationships to over look.

I have had several FReepers tell me this was all studied and found to be nothing more than fiction. I have since realized they have fallen victim to the propaganda from these various groups and have been sidetracked by our supposed 2 party system. All the while the forces of Socialism reeking the benefits.

Obviously there are still many who believe this to be fiction, conspiracy, whatever. (judging from the lack of replies I receive on the subject vs how much material I post) I can't convince those who don't wish to listen. (but I'll keep trying)

19 posted on 01/28/2009 12:10:01 PM PST by wolfcreek (There is no 2 party system only arrogant Pols and their handlers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

They are not going to believe it until they are living it. Even then they will deny it.

Oh well.


20 posted on 01/28/2009 12:13:03 PM PST by dforest (life is now good again....he has been inaugurated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson