Posted on 08/07/2005 6:58:15 AM PDT by antisocial
NAFTA and GATT have already been signed into law, if FTAA is ever signed it will be too late.
You are right about the oath being forever! However as Ben said "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately" This has allready been done those inclined to liberty are fractured in various splinters
You have the Libs vs The Repubs,ect all! Time is on the tyrants side as the patriots can be picked off one by one while the ones doing the picking get to release the "facts" to the eager press that gobble up any info that is given to them that fits their beliefs.
If anyone in this thred has not yet read EFAD (http://matthewbracken.web.aplus.net/) you should it is a virtual blueprint of the tactics and motiviations that the North Amercian Union Folks will use
Nice try. I find it very illuminating that those who cannot refute an argument with facts, always fall back on their liberal tricks of of attempting to ridicule the idea.
You didn't answer my question are you a real Texan or a yankee import?
Is this some sort of a "liberal trick?"
No, in his case,I was just curious:>)
I couldn't get the link to work.
Got it. Former Rep. Portman is a dissembler because he works for the government. Some yob named Henry Lamb is incontrovertible because he writes for WorldNetDaily.
Still waiting for an example of "unelected international bureaucrats mak[ing] decisions that our government cannot overrule." Anyone? How about you, Mr. Lamb?
[crickets]
Bookmark
The CAFTA reobligates the US to the WTO. The WTO allows countries to use "offers" and "requests" to get around our immigration laws and increase or eliminate caps on certain visas
Your argument is that CAFTA doesn't explicitly say that it changes US rights to regulate, but being law student with a Pell grant from a leftist University, I am quite sure you are aware that language from our government that
talks about "legitimate standards" --who decides what these are?
"must be non-discriminatory and transparent", so we cannot discriminate against DR sugar plantations that do not meet our health standards, because we would be discriminating against them for having lower health standards,
"disguised barriers to trade" oh boy is this a wide-open way for foreign countries to impose their will on the American people. Any and every attempt at maintain our standards can be declared a "barrier to trade"
These assertions by the USTR with a vested interested passing these "free trade" agreements cannot be substantiated, but there is mounting evidence that claims of "barriers to trade" and discrimination, have resulted in the will of the American people being ignored.
"Still waiting for an example of "unelected international bureaucrats mak[ing] decisions that our government cannot overrule." Anyone? How about you, Mr. Lamb?"
Post#30 gave the specific example did you read it?
By the way, Henry Lamb is chairman of Sovereignty International their website is http://www. soverignty.net
Sorry I don't know why that link didn't post right
http://www.soverignty.net
I don't think it will be a numbers game. Santa knows best.
Forget about free trade etc., American tech education is three years behind the rest of the industrialized world, and high tech jobs are growing abroad, not here. If we want jobs in finance and services, this is the place to be, but money can go abroad easily and the jobs can go with it. We can make a living for the time being running restaurants and cleaning people's houses, but all that is a bubble without basic and high tech manufacture. They say the industrial sector is strong, but what is the nature of this manufacturing?
If you are going to be carrying water for the democrats, you better be reading off the same page as Hillary.
Bush's Justice Dept has to administer the law.
Their track record on immigration seems make that a rather questionable absolute.
Or, maybe you are one of those who thinks Bush should write new immigration laws and ues his own money to implement them.
Every illegal immigrant that got amnesty was a failure to administer an immigrtion law. Are you telling me the Justice Department has no discretion as to which cases they chose to prosecute?
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.