North American Union to Replace USA? ("is this the plan?" alert!)

HumanEventsOnline.com ^ | 5/19/2006 | Jerome R. Corsi

[TigersEye]

That terrible President promised that there would be "no U.S. troops in Kosovo/Serbia (whatever) a year from now." That was what? ten years ago? He hasn't even been President for nearly five and a half years. The worst of it is that national sovereignty is meaningless. The precedent was set that NATO troops can be used to quell internal disputes.

[Rokke]

Hedgetrimmer, what you posted in post #443 is nothing more than a series of excerpts from the CFR document I've been begging you (or anyone) to discuss. I know you didn't read the original CFR document, but did you actually read what you posted in #443? Or are you actually posting support for the CFR document that half the people in this thread believes is a "secret" plan to turn dissolve the sovereignty of this country?

[hedgetrimmer]

Good catch!

[Czar]

"I've got loads."

Well, we know what "loads" you've got, but we're interested in just the facts.

We can review them whenever you're ready.

[TigersEye]

It's going to take a voter revolution at the polls and either the DEM or the GOP is gonna have to go.

Or both.

[Rokke]

"Are you now or have you ever been a member of the CFR?"

Nope.

"Have you ever been employed by the Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration, or the GWBush Administration for any purpose?"

I've served in the military under all of them, so they have all been my ultimate boss.

"Has your organization ever been granted money by the Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration, or the GWBush Administration?"

The military? Yes. Although not much during the Clinton Administration.

Now, answer a question for me...is this what you consider a factual discussion of the CFR document titled, "Building a North American Community"?

[Rokke]

"The day after 9/11 it was secured. BY MEXICO!"

Wrong. Mexico has never sealed our Southern border. Not even for a day.

[The_Reader_David]

Yeah, and the Trilateral Commission.

[hedgetrimmer]

When the United States lowers our own trade barriers, it pursues a free trade agenda

Yes it does. And it is an anti- free enterprise agenda, free enterprise being the system that empowers the INDIVIDUAL and guarantees the protection of INDIVDIUAL RIGHTS.

Do any of the phrases in capitals mean anything to you?

[hedgetrimmer]

How did the panel that developed this plan get chosen? Is it a secret?

[Rokke]

"The demographic change the "free traders" inspired didn't actually start to happen until after the 1986 amnesty."

The Immigration and Reform Control Act of 1986 provided a blanket amnesty for almost 3 million illegal aliens in this country. That would equate to "millions" of illegals who poured over our border before 1986.

[hedgetrimmer]

Why do you think Reagan gave them amnesty in 1986

The act he signed was supposed to STOP illegal immigration. But because it had no enforcement, it didn't. It was to give amnesty only to 1 million, but congress changed that and gave amnesty to 3 million and allowed for chain immigration. Why do you think he signed the act? Why did congress take the teeth out of it? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice......

[hedgetrimmer]

I concurr.

[Rokke]

"That terrible President promised that there would be "no U.S. troops in Kosovo/Serbia (whatever) a year from now." That was what? ten years ago? He hasn't even been President for nearly five and a half years. The worst of it is that national sovereignty is meaningless. The precedent was set that NATO troops can be used to quell internal disputes."

Yes. And as I've already said...it was a stupid decision. Do you know how many American troops we have there now (and why)? Would you care to guess?

[TigersEye]

It is blindly utopian, and some thought Bush's dream of democracy for Iraq was blindly utopian, but guess what...we're over there fighting a war.

In light of your other posts I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. The two situations seem like apples and oranges to me for the most part. I don't think we went to war in Iraq to bring them democracy. I think we'll have to wait and see if democracy really takes root and survives there as well. It is a somewhat utopian hope but we toppled Hussein and terrorists moved into the vacuum so we needed to hang in and support some kind of stability there. If forced to fight off barbarians while the locals struggle to get on their feet it only makes sense to encourage a form of government that we feel has stability giving properties.

On the other hand; there is no crisis of those proportions in North America so the need to unite Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in a borderless economic/security cooperative doesn't exist.

Let's hope the crocodiles of denial are right and the CFR is just a club for cigar officianados or recipe swappers. A real attempt to create a borderless union of the three will result in warfare and chaos that will awe the most stalwart Arab feudalist.

[Rokke]

"We can review them whenever you're ready."

Pick a topic related to something in this thread. I'll throw one out for you...The CFR is a secret organization that makes policy recommendations to the US Government. Do you believe that is a fact?

[TigersEye]

I have no interest in guessing how many are there now.
If you think you have a reason why then let's hear it.

[TigersEye]

But your original statement slams Bush for not securing the border in a time of war. He joins a long and distinguished list of Presidents in that regard.

Name one.

[mjolnir]

Nafta was not created to stop illegal immigration, and was not sold as doing so.

The ministeries you're talking about are simply members of the executive branches of the countries involved such as Elaine Chao.

Some treaties, such as the Law of the Sea treaty I mentioned, are threats to our soverignty-- some are not.

Politicians are people just like you or me. They do not constitute a separate class of NWO members bent only on seeking power.

What you call "being a free trader" is just part of being a conservative. Was President Reagan a socialist? Was the protectionist economist Frederick List a conservative?

[Rokke]

"How did the panel that developed this plan get chosen? Is it a secret?"

First, let me say this is a positive development. We're starting a dialog on the document you wanted to discuss. Now, my answer based on factual data taken from the document itself... No. The document lists each member of the panel (page V) and explains how and why panel members were chosen several times in its opening pages.