Posted on 05/19/2006 6:56:03 AM PDT by Dark Skies
You wait and see how many illegals cross the border when this happens.
Free trade has made communism more entrenched in China? Surely you don't believe that. China's growing middle class may be our best hope of changing that government. Certainly trade sctions have not made Castro less communist.
There is no good thing about the road toward destruction in which America is headed.
List some.
"The document tells the story of merging Canada, the US and Mexico, with one common parameter border, which of course is exactly what is happening."
In what way.
"The evidence that Bush is working from the plan is that this process started before the Bush administration."
If you can support your previous two statements this one might make a little more sense.
That would be me except I'm a major in the National Guard and work for Fedex. But he sounds like a smart guy. I suppose he's another CFR member plotting to end American sovereignty.
Great. I'm glad you've read the whole document. Then you must realize why several of your questions make no sense (like...."How can a US based nongovernmental organization claim for a goal of a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America? Surely that is out of their realm of influence as US citizens".)
BTW, you have yet to address the fact that attacking America's sovereignty, as well as Canada's, is part and parcel of NAFTA's goals.
A relation of yours?
Ok now, have you read the document?
I don't know him and never read his book. Perhaps you can explain what concerns you about his book.
FYI... Pukin will win this war.
He's got more power than the rest.
Avoid him - if you want to stay a FReeper.
Yet you offer nothing to back up your claims that the goal of the CFR is "to weaken national sovereignty and push towards the establishment of a North American superstate." Instead, you say "I came away with the distinct impression that what they stand for is exactly what I stated before." Give some specifics of what gave you that impression? You have already questioned why a very broad cross section of some of the most accomplished experts on United States foreign affairs would retain their membership in such an organization. You simply haven't offered any evidence to support the CFR is what you say it is, and among the best evidence to say it isn't is that it retains the members it does.
Yes. And just one more reason why I know what I'm talking about when I describe the motives and loyalties of many of the members of the CFR. I've worked for or have known several of them. Every single one of them men who have dedicated (and in many cases risked) their lives to preserving American sovereignty.
Why don't you show us where the CFR upholds the sovereignty of the United States and the authority of the US citizen to direct their government and government policy as opposed to an NGO like the CFR and their "task forces"?
I have never given any indication that suggests I haven't. Instead, I have given you direct quotes from the document referenced with page numbers. And instead of asking questions about the document whose answers are clearly found within its first pages, I have been forced to copy and paste the answers for you after you asked questions that revealed either zero reading comprehension ability, or the fact that you hadn't read the document in the first place.
If you have really read the whole document now, I expect you won't be asking many of the same questions you asked earlier in this thread, because you already know the answers.
Why didn't you say so when I asked you if you had any affiliations with the CFR?
It is an organization whose members are free to quit whenever they want. It is an organization who allows its members to practice the great American right of freedom of speech. Since you read the document we used to be talking about, you must have noticed that after 33 pages of analysis and recommendations, there were 7 pages of dissent and additions provided by individual CFR members.
And it baffles we why you think any organization in this nation has a binding authority over the policies of this government. There are THOUSANDS of privately run organizations operating in this country, all publishing papers and recommendations. Again, that is part of the free speech we enjoy as American citizens. Are you suggesting that the members of the CFR should not be allowed to participate in a Council whose focus is something they all share a mutual interest and expertise in? Would you also like to get rid of the NRA?
I don't. I've got a gay cousin living in New York, a liberal artist sister in Portland, and a neurosurgeon sister-in-law living in Georgia. But I don't have any affiliation with the organizations they belong to either.
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.